User talk:Zzuuzz/Archive 29

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

User talk:95.49.104.120 (please reply on my talk page)

Why did you delete my talk pages?
95.49.104.120 (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Block FYI

Just FYI, I blocked this IP's /64 for 3 months without talk because they've been vandalizing with it for some time, and figured I might as well prevent them from continuing when they get the next address. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 15:44, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RefDesk Troll

I saw you just blocked the last account, I want to sleep all night might want to be on your radar, doing the same thing in their sandbox. RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:16, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

wp:blp

Hi ZZ. Just want you to be aware that there are additional BLP concerns with the recent contributions of the same editor [[1]] - editors response was again to just blank the comment, they then deleted the disputed cats without any comment at all. I don't think looking at this users edits that they have a good understanding of policy and they are creating a lot of content. Govindaharihari (talk) 19:53, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Following the Walter thing, at this time I relay these concerns, which I share, to Kelly and HJ. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:01, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of the history until just now, and some research showed there was a topic ban on Gamergate-related topics (broadly construed), which they seem to have violated with BLP-related edits to Sad Puppies and people related to that movement. I've asked the admin who imposed the topic ban whether it still applies.[2] If so, this may need to go back to WP:AE, which imposed a block previously. Kelly ^hi! 20:51, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Response

No — Preceding unsigned comment added by XX99oddXx (talk • contribs) 17:55, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Telegram

Hello, Zzuuzz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 12:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas R. Docker

Hi Zzuuzz. I noticed you are helping police this page. I attempted discussion with a disruptive editor User:Janthana on the talk page, but he/she failed to respond meaningfully, and has now started making unilateral edits without appropriate discussion. I'm not sure if this is something that should taken to the ANI, but I would like try to improve that page without constant fear of an edit war with this user. If you could point me to someplace/someone that could help resolve this issue I would appreciate it. Thank you! AFJP FAN 420 (talk) 18:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm going to try and keep a relatively middle ground, as I'm more interested in calming down the libelous trolls, and didn't find the previous version too outrageous. With regards to COI, please click and look closely at the photo, however, I strongly encourage you, as I did before, to remain absolutely focused on the content and content policies. This genre is going to be far more familiar to you than me. Perhaps you could edit it further? And outside opinions are always helpful. Focusing on specific content issues, WP:CONTENTDISPUTE might be a useful link (ANI will not be, IMO). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) *sigh* Just saying, there were many issues and legal threats regarding D.R.D. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 19:18, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And the more it is calmed down the better, with settled policy-compliant content and no trolls. Did anyone mention how much Wikipedians dislike off-site disputes? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recovery of page deleated by you

Hello, You recently deleted a Page named pratik bavi. I agree it was not perfectly created ie. Birth year was missing but it not deals to deleat page. He is recognized politician from India. Deletion of page will result in defamation of his personalty which is un acceptable from Wikipedia. I request to recover it soon. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack bit (talk • contribs)

Please see WP:POLITICIAN. In order to undelete this article I will require at least two independent reliable sources suggesting significant coverage. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, You are wright that atleast two reliable source should be there and there are many. You can check newspapers which are recognized and certified by government added article about them. Also he is office bearer. So you should recover the following page. ~Jack bit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack bit (talk • contribs) 19:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot to mention the references. Personally, I do not think the requirements of WP:BIO are met. We intentionally do not hold articles on every office bearer. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you! My account was indeed bruteforced, despite a fairly strong password. Thank you for the quick response. I am now back in control of it, with a new and even stronger password. Ijon (talk) 04:58, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I have since learned that it was not bruteforced, but leaked through a failure on some other site, because I had re-used that password on other sites. My new password is both stronger and unique to Wikimedia. Ijon (talk) 16:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update Ijon. Welcome back :) -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Hanoi Vandal

Can you semi-protect pages: I Don't Want to Miss a Thing, Love of a Lifetime (FireHouse song), Carrie (Europe song), Superstitious (song), When I See You Smile, When I Look Into Your Eyes, I Live My Life for You, I Want to Know What Love Is, In My Defence, I'll Be Alright Without You, How Does It Feel (song), List of soft rock artists and songs, Two Less Lonely People in the World, Lonely Is the Night (Air Supply song) and others. Because IPs from Hanoi Vandal still disruptive. 123.136.106.19 (talk) 19:02, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let me do some light reading first as we've never met. Some kind of power ballad obsessive, right? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK my anonymous friend, I've semi'd all the above and some others for three months. Feel free to return here if there's more. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Someone unblock

Zzuuzz has yet again been blocked by those stupid hackers who compromised an inactive admin's account. Can an admin please unblock? Thanks Class455 (talk) 19:29, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BethNaught! Zzuuzz, you can now enable two factor authentication for additional security. I'd recommend you do that if you haven't done so already in case your account is next. Class455 (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks zzuuzz for all the crap you've ben putting up with. I appreciate your work. Ckoerner (talk) 22:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi Zzuuzz.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry about this. I was reverting vandalism. I have no idea how your edit was reverted instead.- Mr X 21:53, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

:) -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:53, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:83.193.134.54 (please reply on my talk page)

"SSPX Resistance" violates the copyrights of the Society of Saint Pius X. "SSPX" is a registered trademark of the religious organization Society of Saint Pius X. The self-proclaimed "SSPX Resistance" is a different organization that is using this SSPX trademark and logo without permission from the Society of Saint Pius X to create confusion among the faithful. SSPX is a USPTO trademark Reg.No. 4,869,277 registered on 15th December 2015 and and Circle crown logo is USPTO trademark Reg.No. 4,857,708 registered on 24th November 2015 both in the name of the Society of Saint Pius X. They are being illegally misappropriated by the self-proclaimed "SSPX Resistance" organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.193.134.54 (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zzuuzz. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

210.234.22.166

Just letting you know, this is a network sharing center. Pyrusca (talk) 20:18, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It seems to be more of a dynamic zombie, and not so easy to block long time. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Judas1230

Since AIV is protected, I thought that I'd ask you to take a look at the vandalism-only account. Thanks. 73.96.113.87 (talk) 22:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They stopped editing after the second warning. I would prefer to wait. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:43, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Short Term Memory

The template was created by a good faith editor. The page was not edited by anybody else. That's why I didn't nominate this for deletion. --Marvellous Spider-Man 02:34, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation Marvellous Spider-Man. I'm lacking some context though, right page right admin? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 10:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

history of chemistry
reply on my talk page

is my link goood or spam ?ps. it not my website.
95.49.111.218 (talk)

Your description is highly questionable. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peaches Geldof

Please could you semi this article as someone with a 2602 IP address keeps on removing her death.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did a rangeblock not too long ago. I'll continue looking into it further. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:06, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but it's an IPv6 address. I tend to think that it is hard to block IP vandalism from this type of address, so semi or pending changes would be better.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it makes it easy. However they're using another, IPv4 range, so I've semi'd for a month. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

176.31.0.0/16

176.31.0.0/16 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial))

Just recently came across this IP range that you blocked a long while back. It's about to expire and is still an OVH SAS server. Regards. 2601:1C0:106:D787:98CD:C151:9395:5EC1 (talk) 03:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

School block of Special:Contributions/97.78.143.100

Hello. They immediately returned as Special:Contributions/97.78.143.96, and a check turned up a few more obviously related IPs with the same editing habits. A range block of 97.78.143.0/24 will cover both of the mentioned IPs plus a few more that obviously belong to the same school, with no collateral damage. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 14:58, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've taken a look and due to the lack of excessive information about the rest of the range I'll not be blocking it at this time. I expect these two blocks will cover the worst of it. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They'll be back. Special:Contributions/97.78.143.201, another of their IPs (see the IP's talk page), made this test edit less than an hour ago to see if it was blocked, or could be used for further activities... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 21:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep a medium-term eye on it. It's unusual for Time Warner to assign a whole /24, so I'm a bit hesitant to cast a net on it. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the block since I've kept an eye on them to. Thanks. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 23:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/79.68.238.73

Can you block him/her to persistent genre warring. 115.164.91.192 (talk) 16:11, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's not vandalism so would default to 'content dispute'. Can you highlight specific problems? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:34, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

Our friend is back as user:קאקאיריבקאקאיריבקאקאיריבקאקאיריבקאקא. CLCStudent (talk) 23:08, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My normal response in this situation would be to report it to wp:spi, but Ponyo has already come across the vandal, and as a checkuser she would probably know what to do. CLCStudent (talk) 23:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Their hewiki account details can be found in my recent user talk page posts. They've left a fairly good IP trail today, but range blocking doesn't appear to be a realistic option at this time. Moar RBI... -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I found a couple more from today: Special:Contributions/ברהראלערקברהראלערקברהראלערקברהראלערק, Special:Contributions/חרא.לריב.חרא.לריב, and Special:Contributions/חירבה.חרא.תריב. Sro23 (talk) 18:45, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's all we need is is another LTA sockpuppeteer on those articles. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 18:58, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

187.188.115.43

187.188.115.43 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)

I just wanted to inform you that you have blocked this IP for 24 hours, but it looks like the previous block for this IP was for 3 months. Just wanted to let you know in case if this was unintentional. 2601:1C0:101:1F6D:49D5:61DC:BFD2:B660 (talk) 00:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks, fully intentional. I'd be happy to elaborate. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice on my problem

But won't the link be broken if I edit it? Will a broken link be allowed? Thanks.

HumbleInfoFarmer (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's free advice. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hi zzuuzz

i had urgent work with you can you help me? John CS (talk) 10:57, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult to say, based on the currently available information. Please explain. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 10:58, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

my friend do you have facebook id? i wanna talk with you on facebook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John CS (talk • contribs) 11:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:02, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

will you delete a page for me please this page Alessandro Momo this page was created by a sock two years ago.John CS (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:08, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ping my esteemed colleagues @Favonian: and @DoRD: who might know something about it, as I'm not currently familiar. It doesn't look very good but is there any other specific reason to delete the article? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:15, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was handled before I even started my first cup of coffee. —DoRD (talk) 12:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

yes, delete this article. this person is not famous he only appeared in some films.John CS (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC) @Favonian:, @DoRD: please give attention here. John CS (talk)[reply]

Well, that was exciting and ably handled by my CU-endowed colleagues. Back to my popcorn. Favonian (talk) 18:53, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you so much for responding... that explained a lot.

Red Panda 25 20:50, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

86.128.163.247

Needs talk page access disabled. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit in Advertising article

I reverted a recent edit made by User 42.110.151.11 (who has no user page, nor talk page)in the article on Advertising. In the edit summary this user claimed that the edit was a "special edit" accepted by Zzuuzz. However, I cannot see any discussion between you and this user on this subject matter. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Advertising&diff=prev&oldid=753696680 for details)

The edit involved a change of a heading from "Types of media" to "Types of advertising". However, the edit made no sense since the content of the section involved a discussion or list of different types of media platforms including traditional media (print, broadcast,etc) and other media including flyers, street furniture, murals etc. The proposed change would have resulted in a misleading heading that failed to reflect the content of the section.

Different types of advertising (which are not actually discussed anywhere in the article) would refer to such things as comparative advertisements, unique selling proposition, lifestyle advertisements, informative ads, emotional appeals, rational/ scientific appeals etc. If the section discussed these types of advertising executions or creative strategies then the heading "types of advertising" might be appropriate. BronHiggs (talk) 22:57, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. The page is currently under PC protection, which means that an IP editor made an edit, there was no obvious reason to hide it from the public, and then you reverted the IP editor. It may have been wrong, but it wasn't vandalism, obviously inappropriate or related to the reason for page protection, which is why it got reviewed. It's as if the IP made the edit directly, which of course they did. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Open proxies

Hi Mr., why did you reverted my edits? Did I do something wrong? Bests, Cathexis1349 (talk) 19:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your removal had no obvious explanation or purpose. Older entries are typically archived. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but it was not old. Cathexis1349 (talk) 19:45, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have restored the reports, without the removal you made at the same time. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Additionally, I am dealing with an ip-jumping sockpuppet. It would be nice, if you take a look at here. Cheers. Cathexis1349 (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have previously taken a quick look so far. Regarding your proposal, I give you this link. Regarding the Swiss IP ranges, they look a bit tricky to range block (and I'm not seeing much sign that the two IPs are open proxies). I can just about get what you're trying to get at, but IP-jumping sockpuppet is not directly a policy violation; I would suggest more elaboration of the alleged abuse is provided. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:21, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that useful link. I wanna open a RFC to bann ip contributions on Wikipedia. Where should i open it? Cathexis1349 (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would very strongly advise against it, I'm hesitant to even provide this link, however if you want to be truly shot down in flames, the appropriate venue would be WP:VPR. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again. I understand you but enough is enough. Wikipedia has became a vandal/sock garden and propaganda arena and current wp policies are not sufficient enough to prevent it. I explained my arguments on my talk page. Bests, Cathexis1349 (talk) 21:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again...I wanna create a sandbox for the SPI case. How can I do that? Thanks. Cathexis1349 (talk) 14:38, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Click here: User:Cathexis1349/sandbox. Add stuff. Click "Save". -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 15:03, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I feel like idiot now. Thank you for your quick feedbacks, kind regards... Cathexis1349 (talk) 20:46, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit to Data Protection Act 1998

Thanks for the help editing DPA 1998. Your edit improved the standard of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.17.166 (talk) 12:52, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.. more to do methinks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Socks?

Do you think Fantasma_de_Fidel_Castro and Neitirirí might be socks, much as Democraticfreethinker? And who is the sock master? – Muboshgu (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The IP who originated the edit looks like the 'master'. I've left open the option to stick to one account (excepting the latest account). -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. You might want to be aware of the fishy happenings at Talk:Andrew_Breitbart#Death_section. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So close to 100k

You can do it! Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 17:03, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You know how long I've been stuck in the high 90k's? Like, years. I was wondering if something had broken. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits on the English Wikipedia!

You are now a proud owner of the {{User 100,000 edits}} userbox. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 22:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for cleaning up my talk page!

What did I do to him anyway? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.. I never did figure that out. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Roadblock: End of the Line

Thank you for the PP on the above referenced page. Looks like there is some sort of vandal bandwagon happening tonight. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes, quite prolific. As it's happening tomorrow, I've put it down to the usual WWE over-excitement. Hopefully it will be saner when it's over. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:28, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Hello Zzuuzz: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Class455 (Merry Christmas!) 17:48, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~

Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!

Hello, Zzuuzz! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Linguist If you reply to me here, please add {{ping|Linguist111}} to the start of your message 21:42, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Increase in IP block length

I just wanted to let you know that I increased the block length for an IP you just blocked (1 week instead of 3 hours). There have been several edits today reflecting serious harassment (see the edit summaries), and the risk of collateral damage is minimal given that the IP has no edits ever before today. I hope this is all right. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, however with the ability to switch IPs throughout the ISP within minutes, a few hours is appropriate. Instead I've been rangeblocking the whole of neostrada. See blocking log. @Favonian: -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:02, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick reply. I know little about rangeblocks so I'll leave you to it. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:03, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Excellent! The little so-and-so seems to be upping the ante, and so shall we. Favonian (talk) 22:04, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perennial problems indeed from that ISP, though I still haven't figured out how many trolls are on that range. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:14, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Jimmy Wales

Thanks for applying DENY but you missed the edit summary from the eager Sinebot—see history. Johnuniq (talk) 00:37, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

User_talk:RickinBaltimore#Time_for_a_Range_Block --JustBerry (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that. It seems to be quite a huge range, so semi- might be the best option. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:21, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, makes sense. Just added a few more comments to the convo linked above (summary: IP-hopper probably abusing Amazon trial servers to run their own vandalizing scripts). --JustBerry (talk) 20:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please unprotect CSPI's page immediately!

The protection on the page for CSPI is for way too long for the reason why it was protected (to stop someone from placing the organization's real agenda on the page). Please do one of the following three things immediately:

1. Unprotect the page 2. Add the real agenda 3. Shorten the protection period — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B11D:9C44:1D50:1D13:D473:8FB0 (talk) 00:35, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I'm gonna guess that's gonna be a no. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for you to advocate your political views on, it's just a summary of professionally published mainstream sources. If you don't like it, use a different site. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly "ironic" that someone complaining about the removal of an agenda would try to silence those who disagree with him. Just in case the messages are not getting through to the IP editor: as long as you are blocked, you as a person are not welcome on this site. The harder you "fight," the less likely we are to listen to you and the more likely we are to regard your position as nothing but vandalism and trolling. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:05, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let me guess, the organisation is anti free speech and freedom-hating, and the real agenda is to create a nanny state and take away Americans' rights. And you're going to edit-war until the article says it. That'll be a no then. Please refer to core policies. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But they are; click http://www.alcoholfacts.org/MichaelJacobson.html to see for yourself! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B10B:62DB:F401:39EC:56AF:2946 (talk • contribs)

It seems you're wandering into the NOR problem. That site doesn't say that the organisation is pro nanny state. It doesn't mention a demented focus or that it published a demented report. It doesn't mention anti-free speech, and definitely doesn't say that it aims to shut down any website which criticizes it. A neutral description (for the lede) is what it advocates; further criticism belongs in the criticism section. I'd suggest that you reconsider what you're trying to achieve in terms of an encyclopaedia, using peer-reviewed sources, and then raise a consensus on the article's talk page. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:25, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Merry

Season's Greetings, Zzuuzz!
At this wonderful time of year, I would like to give season’s greetings to all the fellow Wikipedians I have interacted with in the past! May you have a wonderful holiday season! MarnetteD|Talk 19:50, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Zzuuzz: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 17:42, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

FYI...part 2

I know you told me to wait to see if the vandal will return, then contact you, but I found this little warning. Since we know it's coming, wouldn't it be best to shut it down before it began?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:25, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've opened up a sockpuppet investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hamish Ross because apparently Hamish Ross is the sockmaster. —MRD2014 (Merry Christmas!) 14:28, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and happy holidays!

Hello Zzuuzz: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Doug Weller talk 15:23, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Single Purpose Simon

You might want to delete one of his edit summaries as well. I'm thinking of the first one he made, which contains offensive language, but can't link to the diff now. This is Paul (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spambot IP's

Hey,

You blocked 5.228.4.208 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) as a spambot, but it looks like they're back at 5.228.6.87 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Just a heads up. Thanks. 2601:1C0:103:1F00:AC10:5A6:DFCE:8EE6 (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they tend to hop around a lot. Hopefully, because of the filter, they should never be able to actually make an edit. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:05, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they're using 188.254.126.4 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 31.28.200.153 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) now, though at the time that I'm posting these IP's haven't been very active just yet, but their attempts at editing seem to be very similar. Cheers. 73.96.113.113 (talk) 20:32, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible proxy

Hey again,

You blocked 126.47.244.254 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) as a proxy, and it looks like 61.115.211.226 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) showed up doing the same exact thing. Could you look into this. Thanks. 73.96.113.21 (talk) 04:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yes it's likely, but it's not currently a great block candidate so I'll let them have an implied warning on this occasion. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

110.140.212.220

A few weeks ago you blocked this IP. It's become active again recently, and it looks to be a static IP address. Sro23 (talk) 14:35, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Zzuuzz!

Happy New Year!

Zzuuzz,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Class455 (talk | stand clear of the doors!) 18:36, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Zzuuzz!

Happy New Year!

Zzuuzz,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 04:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.