User talk:Zumoarirodoka

Archives

Bevanism

Please look at Bevanism and remove the tag if it has enough inline citations.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for adding some extra citations

Unfortunately, I still think the article is severely lacking in inline citations, but I still appreciate the help you're giving immensely. – Zumoarirodoka_(talk)^(email) 14:57, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I will add some more. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:33, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Panama Papers

Hi, you keep on reinstating a big paragraph into the Russia subsection of the 'Reactions' section. Please stop! Please note that the People section is where detailed allegations are going and so what you are doing is duplicating info, in the main. I wrote some of what you keep reinstating, so I hope you can accept that I don't want it to be excluded. But it isn't! Somehow someone else stuck it into the Russia subsection and it really shouldn't be there. I'm having great fun trying to explain to some others on the article Talk page that the stuff we have about Putin is not too much stuff, so when you add to the stuff about him in the Russia subsection it makes it doubly hard. All the very best to you. Boscaswell talk 21:38, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Boscaswell: I only re-added the content once, as far as I'm aware, but thank you for explaining the situation. Sorry to be a nuisance, and I wasn't attempting to edit war or anything like that. – Zumoarirodoka_(talk)^(email) 21:43, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Zumo. Someone else has been doing it, then, as I've deleted it I think x3 today. Not as reversions, so I'm "safe", but...well...whatever. :-) All the best! Boscaswell talk 21:47, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Zumoarirodoka: pls don't edit the UK section for 10 minutes as I've been working on it to cleanup for hours and its doing my head in and I have to finish and i couldn't as you just had done an edit. Ta. Boscaswell talk 16:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Boscaswell: Fair enough. Sorry for any hassle caused. – Zumoarirodoka_(talk)^(email) 16:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Zumoarirodoka: no worries. You weren't to know. I finished what I wanted to do, thank goodness. Yay! Boscaswell talk 17:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Your addition to Panama Papers has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa (talk) 00:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zion in Age book

Ta for these edits. I have thus added it to my ever-growing non-PC bits reading list, due to the criticism it received ;). Zezen (talk) 04:03, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome, just glad I could be of help :P

And briefly looking at the PDF myself, the book certainly does look interesting and as controversial as it has been described. Hope it lives up to your expectations ;) – Zumoarirodoka_(talk)^(email) 15:07, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Diannaa (talk) 19:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~:@Diannaa: Which edits of mine are you referring to? – Zumoarirodoka_(talk)^(email) 19:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)~~[reply]

Never mind; I know which ones you mean know.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I disagree that the edits in question constitute copyvio; in any case, no attempt was given to discussion of contested content with me. The Panama Papers article in particular is a contentious one, and there have been many other editors on there who have added much more contentious material and have gone unpunished. – Zumoarirodoka_(talk)^(email) 19:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I disagree that the edits in question  constitute copyvio; in any case, no attempt was given to discussion of contested content with me. The [[Panama Papers]] article in particular is a contentious one, and there have been many other editors on there who have added much more contentious material and have gone unpunished. – [[User:Zumoarirodoka|Zumoarirodoka]]<sub>'''[[User talk:Zumoarirodoka|(talk)]]'''</sub><sup>[[Special:EmailUser/Zumoarirodoka|(email)]]</sup> 19:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I disagree that the edits in question  constitute copyvio; in any case, no attempt was given to discussion of contested content with me. The [[Panama Papers]] article in particular is a contentious one, and there have been many other editors on there who have added much more contentious material and have gone unpunished. – [[User:Zumoarirodoka|Zumoarirodoka]]<sub>'''[[User talk:Zumoarirodoka|(talk)]]'''</sub><sup>[[Special:EmailUser/Zumoarirodoka|(email)]]</sup> 19:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I disagree that the edits in question  constitute copyvio; in any case, no attempt was given to discussion of contested content with me. The [[Panama Papers]] article in particular is a contentious one, and there have been many other editors on there who have added much more contentious material and have gone unpunished. – [[User:Zumoarirodoka|Zumoarirodoka]]<sub>'''[[User talk:Zumoarirodoka|(talk)]]'''</sub><sup>[[Special:EmailUser/Zumoarirodoka|(email)]]</sup> 19:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}