Hello! My name is MJ, and I have made significant changes to the Structuration page. I saw that you have previously contributed to the page, I am looking for contributions and comments on some of the changes I have made! I would appreciate your comments, suggestions, and contributions! I look forward to discussing the page on the Talk page. Mjscheer ( talk) 18:48, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
your fast action at Willem de Kooning. The odd thing is that he is not even on my watchlist, I got to the article for Bronze sculpture - where he was listed with a funky link, but did not ( opinion) belong. So I fixed the link, went there and found that mess. Thanks again, Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 15:20, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
That's a good idea. Usually the Undo button is enough, but in this case it was not. I am not really a computer person and find that other options often just confuse me. However it is also good to get some different synapses firing every now and again, and this might be one of those times. I still have not been able to do the one edit that I planned before work today. Life. What a place to live. Carptrash ( talk) 15:32, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
For dealing with Yourname sock. Andrew Kurish ( talk) 00:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
Would there please be an edit filter to stop things like what happened here? All it would need is to check if the user is blocked and is reverting like crazy. Jasper Deng (talk) 01:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
-- DQ (t) (e) 12:55, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
DeltaQuad's Sectional Dedication Award |
Given to members of the community who take on huge backlogs several times, or maintaining a large part of a project. -- DQ (t) (e) |
You have been nominated by User:DeltaQuad for this award for your constant contribution to the open proxy project. Thanks for picking things up while I took a cycle away from the board :). Thank you for your constant dedication to the project. -- DQ (t) (e) 01:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Repeat offender, or a one off? -- GraemeL (talk) 14:15, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
...I've update the UKBlock template. I have also checked whether this affected the block message (as for all I know it is subst'd during the block) and it has updated. Hope this is fine? Cheers, Egg Centric 20:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
No edits since you lifted the block. Maybe BT have undone whatever was forcing connections to WP through the proxy. -- GraemeL (talk) 13:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
I wondering how we can justify blocking a whole /16 as a proxy, it seems a bit extreme. Our policy seems to me to relate to Open/Anonymizing Proxies, and these do not necessarily fall into the category. Am I missing something in the policy? — billinghurst sDrewth 14:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
You have contributed to article The Really Big Show (formerly Rizzo on the Radio). This article is currently being considered for deletion. Please consider providing input at the article's discussion page: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Really_Big_Show. Levdr1lostpassword ( talk) 22:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear zzuuzz,
My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at [email protected] (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at [email protected]. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC) Young June Sah -- Yjune.sah ( talk) 22:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
See User talk:209.175.28.130. They've lately been mauling the article on erbium. S B H arris 20:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 22:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
...for keeping an eye on things ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
TheGeneralUser ( talk) 14:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
TheGeneralUser ( talk) 14:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Last year it was OK to nominate the Google article for deletion. Don't see why we're bound on this day, which is after all less than one percent of our time here. Jasper Deng (talk) 03:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:158.165.16.111
S B H arris 19:45, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Zzuuzz. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click
HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
On MediaWiki.org, I've blocked this IP for a year as an open proxy because I saw your own block of it on this wiki as an open proxy. However, it does not appear to be accessible from my place.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 05:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. It had come up as blocked when I checked the contribs. Daniel Case ( talk) 16:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
You might want to keep half an eye on this subject. Looks like the link was placed by a number of IPs - I must have bumped into it somewhere else to have requested the report. Cheers -- Herby talk thyme 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi.. Any objection to removing the 2010 block on Special:Contributions/203.52.130.138? I have a seemingly legitimate request via the unblock system - seems like the IP landed on an editor who actually might be productive. Rjd0060 ( talk) 16:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes I would like the bock on both my account and my IP address lifted (I'm not sure if this is where to ask). I think I have a strong case for review, given that there is not a single instance of spammer or illicit activity in the Contributions list of either my account or my IP address. A family member's laptop was infected with a virus and we use the same wifi, but my laptop was not (we had them checked, they are fine). There is nothing wrong with my IP address now, and there is no evidence that it did anything to wikipedia even before we got that other computer fixed. i'd rather not wait two months, particularly given that no damage was done.-- Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici ( talk) 17:42, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
The article MTAB has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Stuartyeates (
talk) 06:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
With this irritating server lag I couldn't figure out what else this cat had done--I figured it was no good but only saw the first edit, on ANI. No doubt this is someone we know. Thanks for blocking, Drmies ( talk) 15:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I've got an unblock request from an editor on this range. It looks like the proxy block is a few years old, and on a significant range, could you please confirm if it's still necessary? Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
This is not reasonably vandalism. What am I missing? Nobody Ent 13:08, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Please remove the semi-protect status from my talk page immediately. Thanks. Leontopodium alpinum ( talk) 17:19, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Dear Author/Zzuuzz
My name is Nuša Farič and I am a Health Psychology MSc student at the University College London (UCL). I am currently running a quantitative study entitled Who edits health-related Wikipedia pages and why? I am interested in the editorial experience of people who edit health-related Wikipedia pages. I am interested to learn more about the authors of health-related pages on Wikipedia and what motivations they have for doing so. I am currently contacting the authors of randomly selected articles and I noticed that someone at this address recently edited an article on 2007 Bernard Matthews H5N1 outbreak. I would like to ask you a few questions about you and your experience of editing the above mentioned article and or other health-related articles. If you would like more information about the project, please visit my user page ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hydra_Rain) and if interested, please reply via my talk page or e-mail me on [email protected]. Also, others interested in the study may contact me! If I do not hear back from you I will not contact this account again. Thank you very much in advance. Hydra Rain ( talk) 12:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 19:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
(I am copying the following from User talk:189.148.186.149 This is an unblock request. I am the editor at this IP address who has been blocked, as well as the subject of the entry being discussed: Douglas Anthony Cooper.)
NOTE: this issue is of crucial importance to the animal welfare community. I know that this fact has been contested, but the argument demonstrating this fact has also been erased. In short: having been both blocked *and* censored, I am in no position to make my case. I am happy to do this privately, via email, if that helps. It is important that this be judged by a completely independent and neutral Wikipedia editor: NOT JohnDopp or Qworty. In fact, as Zzuuzz has been involved in my efforts to remove this entry in the past, I'd like him/her involved. (Note that Zzuuzz has never in fact supported my request, or taken my side in any way, but I have been impressed by the editor's neutrality.) Furthermore, when this discussion has concluded -- whether or not the entry is removed -- I would like all of these public conversations to be purged. Many of them constitute slander. (And I note that JohnDopp has succeeded in having all conversations regarding himself purged. Which is entirely appropriate. I am simply requesting the same courtesy.)
This discussion will be entirely civilized and neutral, I assure you. This situation is very serious, however: it is profoundly contrary to the ethos of Wikipedia to a) denounce someone publicly and b) then block him, and censor his efforts to defend himself. Especially when it concerns a profound political issue.
189.148.161.27 ( talk) 22:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
The discussion continues here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Edits_Made_by_JohnDopp_in_Re:_Douglas_Anthony_Cooper
(Re: 4 -- please insure that ALL of Dopp/Qworty's slander is erased, including all of the libel on the COI page, "peacock" slurs in the edit history, etc. Thanks...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.148.181.165 ( talk) 03:30, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thank you for blocking that IP that was vandalizing stuff, including my talk page! Anonymouse321 ( talk) 08:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC) |
Hi, I'm confused by the link ( http://87.97.157.121) you provided in your comment at WP:AN. When I click on it, it takes me here, I have no idea why; nor do I see anything informative about the IP address at the Piwik website. Assume I know next to nothing in your response. :-) -- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:22, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
First, I understand you are an admin. I am not. That means you have the technical capability to see things (deleted stuff and all) that I cannot. I've been engaged in the douglas Anthony Cooper controversy. At the SPI, you recommended dismissing without action. At ANI, you said you observed "little wrong, or unusual at this time," despite reports of everything from personal attacks and harrassment to meatpuppetry and socking. Was there something you can see that I cannot that influenced your opinion? (If you did see something, I'm not asking what you observed.) Your comments seemed somewhat odd to me, so I wanted to ask. -- No unique names 06:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Apologies, Zzuuzz: as I say, I consider you a neutral editor. That said, even the most neutral editor can be blind. I genuinely hoped you'd be able to deal with JohnDopp within the context of Wikipedia, but since you've failed to get your house in order, I've had to intervene. If you're incapable of understanding this editor's appalling conflict of interest, even after reading this, then I have little hope for Wikipedia: http://huff.to/SRMXth "Wikipedia Cuts on the Bias"
Yes, this has spilled over into the real world. And it will grow. I understand you may feel the urge to ban me for life: I'll live. Meanwhile, your lifetime ban of Larkin Vonalt is pretty much the most repulsive abuse of process I've encountered, here or anywhere: it's the sort of thing I associate with a kangaroo court in Guantanamo. You should be ashamed.
In fact, this entire process has been a disgrace, from start to finish.
189.148.198.86 ( talk) 21:22, 10 October 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
One last issue, and I'll happily lay this to rest. You note that, "it's what you do with it that counts." What JohnDopp/Qworty has managed to "do with it", apart from successfully having his enemies banned, is to carefully sew slander in the article history, the COI page, the deletion talk, etc. All while having comments about him successfully erased. Please remove the libel.
189.151.10.1 ( talk) 21:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Douglas Anthony Cooper
Look: Qworty and JohnDopp have worked in tandem throughout this -- whether or not they are the same person. (There's every reason to believe that they are -- note that Qworty has disappeared.)
Regarding the comment: "the link includes backhanded praise from someone else who didn't really understand all that went on, nor why." The praise is not backhanded: it's full-throated support for Wikipedia. Read it again. (Nouniquenames: that you of all people should talk about a lack of understanding is comical.)
Meanwhile, Zzuuzz, please deal with this. You insist you've been one step ahead of JohnDopp/Qworty from the start, but the fact is that as long as his slander remains in the talk pages of Wikipedia, he's a good three steps ahead of you. To recap: he's managed to have every negative remark about himself redacted or removed. He's managed to have a perfectly innocent editor banned from Wikipedia for life, for the crime of demonstrating JohnDopp's flagrant COI (and no, I sense she's not going to get on her knees to beg her way back in). He's managed to insert slanderous statements into various talk pages, with impunity.
"You lot were all sized up the second disruption started." This is clearly not the case. JohnDopp/Qworty has in fact played you like a violin.
I am asking yet again: please remove all of the lies about "self-promotion", "peacocking" etc.
189.148.171.180 ( talk) 01:01, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
And if you think this has no bearing on the quality of Wikipedia, I urge you to check the edit history for the article on the "Humane Society of the United States". JohnDopp has edited that one article 41 times. Despite insisting that this isn't, you know, his area. So, yes: this COI matters. Deeply.
189.148.171.180 ( talk) 03:27, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
Where would you like me to send the collected slander? Perhaps I should email it? The comments will fill at least a couple of pages, and it would be counterproductive to post them here (needless to say). As for JohnDopp's COI: I'm glad someone is finally looking into this matter.
189.148.171.180 ( talk) 06:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
Okay, done: I've posted the collected slander/insinuation where you suggested. 189.148.245.39 ( talk) 22:20, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
I foolishly neglected to include the most serious slander: from the deletion discussion itself. Now added. 189.148.179.35 ( talk) 17:07, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Douglas Anthony Cooper
Thanks for taking the bold step but leaving the stuff on practicalities and history. If more revision is needed to the actual text or structure of the entry, please add to the talk page. In fact, if you could help by archiving some or all of the contents of the talk page, that would be great. Ca3tki ( talk) 16:16, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello Zzuuzz, I noticed you RevDel'd a revision on the Main Page talk. You hid both the content and the username. You also hid SineBot's revision which added content. SineBot also says the name of the user in it's edit summary however. Could you please hide SineBot's edit summary as well? Thank you! Vacation nine 21:46, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi zzuuzz, there is a request for unprotection for Template:Recentism ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) which you indef full protected in 2008. Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 04:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Zzuuzz - could I trouble you for your input here? Cheers,-- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 23:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
TheGeneralUser
(talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hello Zzuuzz! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 12:57, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you placing protection on my user page and for identifying the troll as Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Richard Daft/Archive. As I am now a target for this person, can I ask you to protect my talk page too? I am perfectly happy to converse with genuine editors about anything and I welcome constructive criticism which helps me to learn, but I will not tolerate trolls. -- Old Lanky ( talk) 15:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Zzuuzz. After reviewing a UTRS request and consulting with User:X!, I've unblocked the range 89.238.153.0/24; apparently there are no longer any proxies there. Just mentioning this to you in case you want to double check, since it was originally your block. Cheers, Yunshui 雲 水 06:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, you have blocked from creating accounts the entire IP for a school of over 2000 students. While I understand there was vandalism coming from this address, I was in the midst of beginning a Wikipedia project in which four classes (about 100 students) were going to become editors to add to their high school's page. I appealed the block, but the appeal was closed, and I was not given the opportunity to respond. Is there some alternative to blocking the entire IP and preventing the rest of the school population from engaging in a collaborative editing learning experience? Is there a way for me to see the type and extent of vandalism coming from our school so that we can better monitor from our end? Jcarney 77 ( talk) 16:39, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Jcarney77
The block is on 165.138.230.3 Jcarney 77 ( talk) 18:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)Jcarney77
I've discovered a website [removed] has placed on their front page "We are at war.. with no other then Monsanto.. Help us bring their corruption down by defacing their Wikipedia page which is LIES! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto"
I noticed you have rvv'd a few times on the page today, so a semi-protect might be in order. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 21:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Zzuuzz, I just wanted to thank you for the help. Like the rest of the technical experts on the project, your expertise is very beneficial to the community and I thank you for volunteering to keep things running smoothly here at Wikipedia. I've marked the WP:FALSEPOS as resolved and don't think you need to do anything with the filter. Thanks very much for the help. 64.40.54.205 ( talk) 13:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Zzuuzz; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 00:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
An RfC that may interest you has been opened at MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#Restricted-use media list, so please come and include your opinion. – PAINE ELLSWORTH CLIMAX! 09:48, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Fine by me. Sorry for the overlap! Yunshui 雲 水 11:23, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Zzuuzz .. I had already "supported" the unblock, or I would have done so myself. Much appreciated. — Ched : ? 11:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for unblocking my account and taking the time to review my appeal. Evangp ( talk) 11:31, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Please note that Evangp ( talk · contribs), after being unblocked, has started doing exactly the same thing that led to the block - creating short articles with weak references. I've tried to explain, [3]. 88.104.27.2 ( talk) 20:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
See User_talk:Ched#Evangp (just to avoid having similar discussions in two places) 88.104.27.2 ( talk) 20:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, this is kind of random, but I see that you just edited the "Administrator intervention against vandalism" page, so maybe you will have an idea what is going on with this. About 10 minutes ago I posted a request for a block of an IP that continues to vandalize an article despite repeated warnings. It appears that a bot removed my request from the page, but it doesn't look like any block has been put into place and I'm confused about what is going on. Can you clarify this for me? Thanks, Terence7 ( talk) 21:27, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Are you referring to the bare reference links or the reference itself? I'm having a hard time finding good references for my articles. Now that I know how hard this is I really appreciate the work done by others. Please reply on my talk page. Evangp ( talk) 17:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)