Contents

User talk:Zorglub

I have deleted Categories:Wikipedia:Userboxes/Location. If it was to be a category then it should start with Category:. But its content was clearly inappropriate for a cat. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Zorglub-PRV. I have removed this category tag from your userpage as due to the all encompassing nature of the category it has been decided that it should be used only to store subcategories and a few directly highly relevant project-space pages. Icewedge (talk) 01:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zorglub, could you please check the discussion about a possible merge with the battle of Diu? Regards --Kimdime (talk) 13:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zorglub-PRV

Dear Zorglub-PRV

So you claim you can speak Portuguese, English, Spanish, French and Russian. Me Thinks you are not a person but a Communist Paid Cell. I have been watching you and your Communist Propaganda on Wikipedia. We urge you to STOP messing around, and to STOP making Political Communist Propaganda!!!--Gabirro (talk) 17:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. A bureaucrat or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. Noom (t) 13:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring, as you did at Kizomba. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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. Rami R 08:03, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zorglub! could you reply? thanks

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).

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

Request reason:

The block was inappropriate because the argument for it is wrong. I asked for the protection of the article Kizomba after several times trying to argue with the user Pintade about it and have come to the conclusion that an agreement was impossible. What you should have done was to protect the article on the stable version, and not block those involved, and if the administrator involved was so worried about it, should he, after protecting the article, try to find a workaround, for it is clear that blocking or not, the problem will continue as the editor in question has received several warnings through similar situations and continues to insist on their point of view without proofs, based solely on "I know it's so." Zorglub-PRV (talk) 14:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were edit warring on that article. It's quite unambiguous; it doesn't matter at all that you think you were right. --jpgordon^::==(o) 14:35, 18 September 2012 (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.

WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if you'll be able to answer on the talk page any time soon -- get to it when you can. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kizomba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Merengue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Stop vandalizing the Isabel dos Santos article or you get reported. Cruks (talk) 14:44, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, enough is enough, and for the response it's you the wrong party, not me. Zorglub (talk) 16:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kizomba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Merengue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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]

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]