Yes, I'm related to DanS.

Random thought: Good thing about wikipedia is that vandals may buzz around like flies, but the admins can easily take care of them with a simple page protect, especially if they hide behind anonymous IPs;D

Hello, Zhanzhao. You have new messages at WP:ANI.
Message added 01:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The IP editor who has filed this ANI report has requested I ask you for your input, as you were involved in the last ANI against Lgdp. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 01:48, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi on Tony Tan Keng Yam I didn't get your reason for the removal of the cited remarks from the Library of Congress Country Studies; I believe that it's good to clarify for readers (who would not know) the background behind labor relations in Singapore. Did you mean to take away something else? elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (be free) 01:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have copied your question to the article page and answered it there. Zhanzhao (talk) 16:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zhanzhao. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/La goutte de pluie.
Message added 05:27, 20 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

OpenInfoForAll (talk) 05:27, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Astroturfing on Singaporean politics and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks,

Posted on behalf of filing party User:La goutte de pluie by Arbitration Committee clerk Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ~~Ebe123~~ (+) ^talk
_Contribs 21:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#User:La goutte de pluie and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for Arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks,OpenInfoForAll (talk) 22:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i am autistic woman with grammer problmes by --Sunuraju (talk) 12:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to hear that. No offense, but your previous edit was really not making sense, and for the benefit of Wikipedia users, I had to revert to the last known edit that made more sense. Zhanzhao (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zhanzhao, I have recently rewritten parts of the article mentioned above. I see that you were involved in discussions about the article earlier. I would like to understand the context of the dispute in the section listed under:

• Talk:Vivian Balakrishnan#language of the whole video affair.

I would appreciate your help with expanding the articles on Vivian Balakrishnan and Grace Fu. Thanks. — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 11:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick, I am not as active as I used to be but I'll see what I can do. Cheers Zhanzhao (talk) 01:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am rather surprised by the proposal for deletion. A High Court judge (which is what she is), under the constitution, and basically under any conception of separation of powers, is to the judiciary what a minister is to the executive/legislature. One could say the article is stubby, to denounce notability is absurd. Moreover, the notability guideline is rather clear on this. Chensiyuan (talk) 10:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The way see it is that although the post is important, the subject is not, nor notable. Based on the content of the article, there is barely any writeup on the subject in in respect to her post. I hope you see where I am coming from. Zhanzhao (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll beef it up. Chensiyuan (talk) 10:23, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wee Shu Min elitism controversy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wee Shu Min elitism controversy until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Just who is the banned user who posted Joy Tong's study on the article page of CHC? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 11:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can see it from the Page analysis function, a user called La goutte de pluie. As identified by DanS76 in the CHC talk page. In fact her last act, the one that got her banned, was to stalk another editor that got into an arguement with her and twist that guy's edit. Even more glaring when you realize LGDP only edits Singapore or science articles, and the CHC article was the only exception during that time frame. Basically the CHC article became collatoral damage for her disagreements with me. Zhanzhao (talk) 14:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The study was added and pushed by her around Aug 27, 2011. Around that time, she was involved in this [[1]]. And to give more context, she used to be an admin with questionable COI issues and I was the first to raise it in ANI[[2]] so I can understand why she was stalking me. i was not the first one she "stalked", nor was this the 1st article she tried to "punish" whitewashing i.e. see the Vivan Balakrishnan article and talk page. Zhanzhao (talk) 15:09, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Now that explains everything, thanks. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 19:48, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

Hi Zhanzhao, I'm just curious. Why didn't you warn the vandal who vandalised Singapore national football team? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arctic Kangaroo (talk • contribs) 04:49, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was an IP editor, based on past experience most of the time it does not work. Zhanzhao (talk) 05:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well...I see. New thing that I learned from you today. :) Arctic Kangaroo (talk) 06:37, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zhanzhao. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk.
Message added 04:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry, I completely missed your reply at the AfC help desk. The short of it: I expect the draft will pass the next review, but I'd try and find a substitute for the press release. Good work! Huon (talk) 04:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions and assist! Zhanzhao (talk) 05:39, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny Island Productions, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DanS76 (talk) 06:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zhanzhao. You have new messages at Darkness Shines's talk page.
Message added 13:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Darkness Shines (talk) 13:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes I'm afraid my research was highly insufficient in this case. [[3]] The above link shows clearly his involvement in the SEA Games 2007. As for the rest of his page, it was been littered with countless of, shall we call them, snarky comments that were not meant to libel. However, certain pieces of information there do not have any relevant links, most return a 404, hence I feel should be deleted, as well as certain sections that seem more opinionated than factual, which should be the point of an article. I do hope you will be able to help me in looking through his article and cross referencing information that can be seen as relevant and opinion based, as well as removing those without any factual backings or evidence, as any further edits by me will be seen as vandalism, as well they should be, and I'll probably started commenting on his hair more than anything else. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam93man (talk • contribs) 07:19, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2013 film Norigae is based of Jang Ja-yeon case here by --Sunuraju (talk) 13:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zhanzhao, I have left you a message on the discussion page of Najib Razak. I noticed that you reverted me again without waiting or attempting to discuss the issue on the talk page even after I clearly pointed out that there are severe and glaring BLP issues with the assertions that you have included in the article. Please stop immediately with the edit-warring and start discussing the points raised on the talk page. On Wikipedia, we have to be particularly sensitive about biographies of living persons as a matter of rule, so please assume good faith when an established editor and administrator reverts you citing BLP. Reporting by Reuters or any other reliable source does not preclude an assertion or theory from being fringe, I would ask you to please review Wikipedia's content guideline on fringe theories. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 06:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did reply you on your page that my input was not to include the content as a fact/statement, but to include it as how the allegations were causing a controversy and how the subject and the government is reacting to the allegations. I have a more detailed reply in the talk page. Zhanzhao (talk) 06:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to your comments on the talk page. Please separate your comments from mine as they render them confusing and unusable for other interested users. I note that you have added a similar paragraph on Abdul Razak Baginda with matters of opinion masquerading as facts. You are advised to remove the section pending the resolution of the discussion on Talk:Najib Razak. Also it is poor form to include capitalized text such as "Bribery and Murder Allegations" in addition to misrepresenting sources after the individual has been acquitted. Please remember that BLP is a policy that is strictly enforced on Wikipedia. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 07:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the title on the Abdul Razak Baginda page, I just cut and pasted it, will tweak it accordingly. As for removing the section about the murder wholesale, the whole murder accusation/acquital and submarine acquisition irregularity is what makes the subject notable in the first place.... (google "Razak Baginda") and just scroll through the hits. That's as good/bad as excluding the content about Meredith Kercher from the Amanda Knox article even though she was acquitted. Zhanzhao (talk) 08:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Workers' Party of Singapore, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Palmer (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) 11:41, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at noticeboard of discussion regarding Response to comments. The thread is Death of Shane Todd.The discussion is about the topic Topic. Thank you. —Theinsidefacts (talk) 11:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, you undo my changes regarding the WP page. In your theory, I'm should be allowed to add the AIM issue, Palmer's reasons for resignation into PAP's page? For some reason, it's stated in WP's page but not in PAP's.

I stand by it that they should be a distinction between the party itself and town council matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee480 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

with regards to there being a separation of WP and TC, the quoted source itself makes a point of pointing out WP's importance in the story. With regards to the other points you raised, there should be no reason those are not included on wikipedia as well, so long as the edits follow wikipedia's policies. My suggestion would be in fact to have a detailed writeup at the TC pagea, then wikilink it in the WP article. In fact, I am surprised there isn't much more written AIM and the other big news of note, the hawker center cleaning muck-up (pun intended) hasn't been mentioned anywhere here, though I suspect that its quite hard to tackle it neutrally makes it difficult to approach. Zhanzhao (talk) 13:10, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for keeping watch on my talk page. If you're interested, I listed the article itself up for discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kleargear (2nd nomination). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. Been there, which is why my page has semi-protected status, so I literally understand how annoying this gets. Zhanzhao (talk) 22:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 18:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you put a note on your user page than DanS76 is your brother (and he put one on his). NE Ent 19:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks. Didn't know this was supposed to be such an issue. Ironically now that I realised my bro's activity is practically none existant these days. Thanks! Zhanzhao (talk) 19:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per our policy on WP:FAMILY, "When editing the same articles, participating in the same community discussion, or supporting each other in any sort of dispute, closely related accounts should disclose the connection and observe relevant policies such as edit warring as if they were a single account. If they do not wish to disclose the connection, they should avoid editing in the same areas, particularly on controversial topics." -- you and your brother must both to add {{User shared IP address}} to both of your user pages, OR stop editing the same topic areas altogether; otherwise both accounts will be considered in violation of our policies on the use of accounts and will be blocked until you agree to comply. I will give you a few days to respond. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per DanS's last post on the SPI page, I think he's quitting wikipedia. Zhanzhao (talk) 23:29, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since he said he would retire the account, I've applied a "retired" and "shared IP" template to his user page for the sake of transparency. From this point on you should be the only active account in your household so everything should be fine. If he does come back to editing (especially in the same area as you), you will have to add the "shared IP" template to your own user page also. Thank you for your understanding! ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:50, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently a IP, TCKTKtool, Zhanzhao(You), and I are all the same person? At least that is what OccultZone is accusing people that disagree with him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zhanzhao I see you already replied but added a part to the others talk pages so they know. Resaltador (talk) 18:08, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]