Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:45, 30 June 2012

Beware! This user is a known talk page stalker.

Zzuuzz is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages

User talk:Zzuuzz/Archive 24/header

Comments on Structuration theory welcomed!

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)

Hello, zzuuzz! Thank you for your kind words! If you know of anyone else who might be interested in looking over the Structuration page, please let me (or them) know! Thank you! Mjscheer (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate

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)

No problem. I find the 'Undo' link is helpful in only very limited circumstances. You might want to review the other options available at Help:Reverting. -- zzuuzz 15:24, 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)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For dealing with Yourname sock. Andrew Kurish (talk) 00:05, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

TP blanking edit filter

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)

The edit filter is unable to detect if a user is blocked or if the page they are editing belongs to a user who is blocked. Most of the edits were by an unblocked IP. However it has given me another idea which I'll look into. A word of advice: absolutely the best thing to do is not revert as fast. It only excites and encourages them. There is a better variation of RBI called WP:BRI. Don't forget the 'I' on the end. -- zzuuzz 03:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to let SineBot get in the way.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

SineBot is easy to work around, especially after the block. -- zzuuzz 04:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

-- DQ (t) (e) 12:55, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Sectional Dedication Award

	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)

BroadNarrow

Repeat offender, or a one off? --GraemeL 14:15, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Since the secure server is not affected...

...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)

Looks good for now. The template is used as the block message for all the 'clean' proxies affected last time which includes most major ISPs, but since they're mostly currently blocked we don't know if they currently get to see it, or if they'll be affected soon. -- zzuuzz 21:16, 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 13:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Good to hear. -- zzuuzz 14:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

this block

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)

It's not uncommon and not outwith policy. See Misplaced Pages:Database_reports/Range blocks for plenty more. It's like this: all the IPs in that range are servers located in a data centre in Texas, registered to "Rackspace Hosting", and used as proxies. Most are web servers, many are fully open proxies, others are just anonymising proxies. All are voluntarily and optionally used as proxies; users on unblocked IPs have a choice not to use them. Of all the IPs editing in that range, all I can see is a spambot, a proxy-using BLP troll, and a dental spammer. In fact I have also blocked 50.57/16 under the same policy and for almost exactly the same reasons. I don't make blocks like that without careful consideration, and any genuine unblock requests will always be given good consideration. If you have an example of an IP in that range that is not being used as an anonymising proxy, I'm willing to hear about it. -- zzuuzz 14:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

That first referred page is a results page, not a policy page. If it is becoming our common practice, then we should be updating the policy to reflect the practice, not having undocumented policy/practice drift. The stated reasoning is in your head, and not available to others. Maybe we can get some special documentation in your user space to support those sorts of blocks and then wikilink to it. Such a practice gives some more rigour, and robustness to the process, and then if there are any exceptions then we are better placed to discuss, have a reasonable evidence base, and then also to annotate exceptions. Then we probably need to get the practice aligned with policy, or approval to broaden the policy to align with the practice. If such server farms are that problematic, then maybe it should be handled at the WMF level and get the stewards to block and annotate the ranges that you identify. Thanks for your consideration. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I would maintain that this block and the others I've pointed to have been established practice and documented at both the blocking policy and the open proxies policy for years: "Open or anonymous proxies may be blocked". I don't see the WMF or stewards doing anything useful about it. The block templates provides a reasonable enough explanation. -- zzuuzz 16:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

If there is a proxy on that range that is being used abusively, and no collateral damage from blocking the range, then this would be fine. That seems to be the case here. Prodego 17:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

They've requested an unblock as they say they are not an open proxy. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_on_open_proxies/Requests#50.56.0.0.2F16Secretlondon (talk) 20:42, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Input request

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: Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/The_Really_Big_Show.  Levdr1lostpassword  (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

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 Misplaced Pages 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:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

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 obar@msu.edu (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 obar@msu.edu. 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)

A lovely candidate for a schoolblock

See User talk:209.175.28.130. They've lately been mauling the article on erbium. SBHarris 20:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

PCHS-NJROTC 22:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :-)

...for keeping an eye on things (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

TheGeneralUser (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

TheGeneralUser (talk) 14:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

April Fool's Day

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)

There's a difference between disrupting readers' experience while joking around, and joking around. →Στc. 03:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

not much to add, there's also a huge difference between XfD and speedy deletion. -- zzuuzz 03:45, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

How about a nice school soft block?

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:158.165.16.111

SBHarris 19:45, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Zzuuzz. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Misplaced Pages, 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. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. 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 02:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

94.158.107.76

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)

Trying to sell a car, or limousine rental, no? I am currently blocking a rampant spambot or two, which this appears to be part of - so it is more of a zombie, or generally bad IP than a typical open proxy. This can be said of many of my recent blocks - some as proxies, some as anonblocks. Some may want blocking on other wikis - many do not. -- zzuuzz 05:53, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it was posting spam in Russian on MediaWiki.org, and did deserve that global block.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

207.28.45.254

Thanks. It had come up as blocked when I checked the contribs. Daniel Case (talk) 16:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

On a similar subject

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 08:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Old block

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)

Hi. Technically it is not my block as I was just adding a template :) If it was mine I'd suggest allowing account creation. -- zzuuzz 16:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Ha, funny - Sorry about that. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

IP block

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)

Proposed deletion of MTAB

The article MTAB has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable software tagged for notability since January 2008.

While all contributions to Misplaced Pages 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)

Fjad-Mdjs-SAYCHEESE

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)

Proxy block on 88.198.0.0/16

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 05:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

?

This is not reasonably vandalism. What am I missing? Nobody Ent 13:08, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for not being clearer. It's obvious from the list of contribs before the request on Dave's page. -- zzuuzz 13:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

So trolling -- are you thinking sock? Nobody Ent 13:16, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

There appears to be several socks and open proxies involved in the complaint. Yes, this is not a new user. -- zzuuzz 13:19, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

throw-away account. you have any idea how many public online video game parlours there are in Singapura? ten thousand, easy. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 13:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I am not really interested in that, Jack. -- zzuuzz 13:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It's best to remove, not strike, indef/banned users comments, so I've done so on ANI. Nobody Ent 13:37, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you for noticing that, I didn't want to reply to the that troll for the same reason ZZuuzz did after I checked out his edit history when he came to ask me for help and discover that he is most likely a throw-a-away Single-Purpose-Account for trolling and only trolling. Best to ignore and that's exactly what I did. --Dave 00:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

• You're welcome. Nobody Ent 02:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)