Open main menu


Precious anniversaryEdit

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Rand PaulEdit

Any reason why you deleted the fact that the judge who sentenced Paul's attacker to 30 days in prison, rather than the prosecutors' requested 21 month prison sentence, is a Bill Clinton appointee? Don't tell me it's irrelevant because that is nonsense. Quis separabit? 04:21, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

It's not mentioned in the ref, so it's WP:OR. zzz (talk) 04:42, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

2018 North Korea–United States summitEdit

Hello, I recovered the contents regarding the actual international reaction, and I also updated reference of example to international reaction. Please don't remove the facts along with WP:NPOV
  Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

Goodtiming8871 (talk) 01:07, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

@Goodtiming8871: WP:NOR is a WP:policy. zzz (talk) 01:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello @Zzz:

WP:NPOV is one of the crucial WP:POLICYs, if you remove the international reaction because of your belief or personal preference, and empathise the contrary opinion on the top front side of reaction part, it would be violation of WP:NPOV. Before getting advice from WP:3O, I will response your query on the talk page of the subject. Goodtiming8871 (talk) 03:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Edit on Gerald NyeEdit

Hello, I see that you have been warned about making disruptive edits. Please don't remove the facts along with WP:NPOV.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

@Suite1408: Continue falsifying sources and you will no doubt end up getting blocked. zzz (talk) 06:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
@Signedzzz: It is not my intention to falsify sources, it is my intention to make sure there is balance and compromise. Sorry if you don't care for my edits but don't try to start an edit war and please... try to find some common ground with other fellow Wikipedians and resolve conflicts civilly or you will no doubt end up getting blocked. Suite1408 (talk) 06:21, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Incompetence is not a valid defence in Wikipedia. See WP:CIR. zzz (talk) 17:38, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Possible renaming of "Sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic dioceses of Pennsylvania"Edit

Signedzzz, I reverted your edits to the lede of Sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic dioceses of Pennsylvania, because your revised lede would indicate that this page focuses entirely on the six-diocese grand jury investigation. The title of the page is more general than that; it covers all of Pennsylvania. So -- as it now stands -- the lede needs to be more general.

However, after thinking about your edits, I'm wondering if the page should focus solely on the six-diocese investigation. I've started a section about this on the article's talk page, in case you want to weigh in. Thanks!! — Lawrence King (talk) 02:31, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Effort for BarnstarEdit

  The Original Barnstar
Your efforts show enough to get a Barnstar. Kurt R. (Zirukurt01) 03:12, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit warringEdit


You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Stop using the sources on Magic (supernatural) that you can't even access. 1100 BCE is a WP:FRINGE date for Zoroaster. Orientls (talk) 04:17, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter messageEdit

 Hello, Signedzzz. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

United States of America v. Joaquín Guzmán LoeraEdit

Hello, thanks for your recent updates at United States of America v. Joaquín Guzmán Loera. BTW, I re-added El Chapo's reaction when the verdict was made. Found a source from the NYT that mentions he was stunned when the verdict was read (the title of the article mentions it, and it is currently at the NYT's main page). Feel free to make the appropriate changes. MX () 03:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

User:MX Thanks for the note. The NYT does say he looked "vaguely stunned"; my reservation is that he cannot be looking both "stunned" and "resigned" (per AP) simultaneously, hence why I think it is better to simply not comment on any interpretations of his facial expression. Frankly, I suspect some kind of schadenfreud is infecting some of the reporting here. I think I'll probably leave it, though, if no one else sees a problem. zzz (talk) 04:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

RFC RequestEdit

Dear Fellow Wikipedian

I would like to invite you to my RFC request on  the page One America News Networks. I am reaching out to you to include your expert opinion and your solution to this problem in the RFC request. Please also invite more editors so that we can have a fair discussion that will improve the page.

Kind Regards

Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 11:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussionEdit

  Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. –Sanglahi86 (talk) 15:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC) –

Now at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Signedzzz reported by User:Sanglahi86 (Result: ). Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:14, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

April 2019Edit

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Philippine Drug War. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Standard notice about American PoliticsEdit

 This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

JFG talk 11:13, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

  Please read this notice carefully.

You are receiving this notice because you recently edited one or more pages relating to blockchain or cryptocurrencies topics. You have not done anything wrong. We just want to alert you that "general" sanctions are authorized for certain types of edits to those pages.

A community decision has authorized the use of general sanctions for pages related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after the editor has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Return to the user page of "Signedzzz".