User talk:Gfzh

Non-English articles

Just a reminder that, as a general rule, pages which are written in a language other than English are kept for 14 days. After that period, if nobody has made an attempt at translating them, they can be deleted. If you can translate some of an article and are able to see that it's a nonsense page or otherwise not useful here, then you should indicate that when you make the AfD nomination, so that everyone else can tell as well. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

me indicated and all AfD accepted Gfzh 00:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul nico acode

I've removed the Speedy Deletion tag on the article above, as there's no indication that you have Tagalog, in which case it may well not be an attack page. You're welcome to contribute at this page if you want to help out getting rid of non-English articles. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

was attack, now deleted not notable Gfzh 17:03, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may well have been an attack page, but the only way anyone can be sure is if a Tagalog-speaking user has a look at it. If you speak Tagalog, you'd probably do well to indicate it when you add the speedy deletion tag, so that I know that you've actually established what it was about. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 01:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you not understand article but remove speedy tags? silly - leave judgement people who can read article Gfzh 10:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, which languages do you speak well enough to understand articles? So far, I've counted German, Persian, Tagalog, Portuguese and Spanish. Are there any others? That way, I'll be able to tell whether or not your addition of a tag is based on the fact that you've understood the article, rather than anything else. Without that information, all that I can tell is that you're trying to short-circuit the workings of WP:PNT, which isn't a good idea. Additionally, don't call me "silly". I was following process and working based on my knowledge of your activities. You're most welcome to clarify your activities, but until you do I can only make the judgements I can make. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

personal information is holy, not request people reveal it Gfzh 13:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to that opinion. However, in this particular case it's very relevant. If you do speak a given language well enough to judge that an article is non-notable or an attack page or whatever, that's relevant for me as an admin to know when you tag an article for Speedy Deletion. If I don't know this, I can only judge that you are unaware of the appropriate process. Once again, following the process at WP:PNT, an article must be listed there for two weeks before it is listed at AfD, unless it's obviously an attack page or anything else. If you don't want to demonstrate that you're following the appropriate process, then I will be forced to assume that you are not doing so. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Voodoo Zombies

Do you speak Spanish as well? BigHaz - Schreit mich an 01:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

understand enough for seeing not notable Gfzh 10:31, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense Tags

I'm concerned with a pattern of db-nonsense tags that I've seen. Can you explain why you believe Changhua Plain to be nonsense, for instance? I'm declining that speedy, pending some sort of explanation on it - I'm happy to reconsider, but I need more information. Thank you. - Philippe | Talk 23:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

article considered readable english? Gfzh 23:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the definition of "nonsense" in this sense, see this page. A good number of the pages you marked as "db-nonsense" were substantially more comprehensible than the one cited, by the way. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further, rather than deleting pages that may have issues, we normally try to fix them, if possible. If the English is bad, fix it, or tag it for cleanup, not for speedy deletion. Thanks... - Philippe | Talk 23:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

article no sources, article not good english, and BigHaz would claim I not speak language when finding and using nonenglish sources Gfzh 23:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If sources don't exist, add them. If the English of the article isn't great, fix it. I have no objection to you or anyone else using sources in any language. What I do object to, though, is your constant disruptive editing. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I've blocked you for 24 hours, due to your disruptive editing. When you return, I hope that you will be a valuable contributor to Wikipedia. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Gfzh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

BigHaz complain because Gfzh propose deletion nonenglish content not worth - all 6 Gfzh AfD success, BigHaz block Gfzh after Gfzh show in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Changhua Plain BigHaz add false information to wikipedia, BigHaz abuse adminitrator block for silence Gfzh

Decline reason:

Your editing was, in fact, disruptive. This is not about AfDs or anything else - it's about the fact that your editing was disruptive and despite some very patient attempts to address the issues, you continued your disruptive pattern. — - Philippe | Talk 00:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Gfzh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

BigHaz block Gfzh, Gfzh explain block wrong, BigHaz ask Philippe to reject unblock, Philippe reject unblock, please neutral person review block - not person asked from BigHaz Gfzh 01:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I endorse Philippe's rejection of the above unblock request. Given you added no new reasons to be unblocked in this template, that's the only thing I can go on, and I believe Philippe got it right. As BigHaz says, there is no cabal. Daniel 01:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I did not ask Philippe or anyone else to reject the unblock. Kindly refrain from conspiracy theories. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 01:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Gfzh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

BigHaz tell Philippe to look after Gfzh, BigHaz threaten Gfzh with block for showing BigHaz introduce false information in wikipedia (article Changhua Plain so bad even big BigHaz not understand correctly, so BigHaz introduce false information when edit), BigHaz block Gfzh, Philippe reject unblock Gfzh 16:49, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Incomprehensible request. — jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 18:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Once again, the block was applied for disruptive editing. Your comments during that AfD demonstrate quite clearly that you were editing disruptively. I did not "tell Philippe to look after [you]", either. When I noticed that he was interacting with you, I merely informed him that I had been concerned about your behaviour for some time. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 21:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]