User talk:Pedro/Archive 2

left a comment

I left a comment under King's "I Have a Dream" speech. It turns out it was an act of vandalism, and not as serious as I had once thought. I am new to Wikipedia and was curious if this comment could now be deleted. I didn't see any way to do that myself. At any rate, I'm happy it was so quickly corrected.

I have replied on your talk page. Pedro | Chat 12:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:Main Page Article

Thankyou. I am indeed proud to have it there. I didn't expect any compliments ontop of having an article on the main page, so thanks again. :) James086^{Talk | Email} 08:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. I never realised that I'd used the American word, I guess I've seen too many American films. James086^{Talk | Email} 08:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Pedro | Chat 08:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

Thank you, Pedro, for your constructive comments in my recent RFA, which passed with 86 support, 8 oppose, and 5 neutral !votes. I will keep in mind all your suggestions and/or concerns, and will try to live up to your standards. Please, if you have any comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page, and I will respond as soon as I possibly can, without frying my brain, of course.
Thank you once more,
· AndonicO ^Talk

The Outrageous and Ridiculous Demand

You suggested that the demand by one editor of another (for funds, in the amount of $10,000.00, to be placed in an escrow account as a precondition for the former filing for mediation) was most likely not serious and that it was probably made "in the heat of the moment". While that speculation might seem plausible to someone who is not familiar with the situation, it is flatly contradicted by what Akliman Akliman (talk · contribs) wrote on his own user talk page and on the talk pages of J.smith J.smith (talk · contribs) and MrMacMan MrMacMan (talk · contribs). In all cases, he defended what he wrote. In blanking the offending paragraph, he was unrepentant and said that he was "compelled" to do so "under threat" of blocking. This is clearly not an acceptable resolution of the issue. Watchdog07 14:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix Arts Centre Article

This article was written as a excersise for a school web design project, i still have copies of teh original site should you want proof.

I DO NOT give my permission for this article to exsist on wikipedia, and wish it to be removed immediatly

Too late. You have already given it under WP:GFDL. I'm really sorry but you should not have placed it here if you were not prepared for the rationale of that license. Pedro | Chat 19:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i have found the article discussion page

deletion

please dont delete the speedy deletion tag thingy. If you think the page should still be there then type hangon thingy on the page.

That's not how WP:SD works. Sorry.Pedro | Chat 19:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

If there's an issue with 3RR, report it to WP:AN3, not to WP:AIV. =D Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 20:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for the thanxs! I took a look at the case and it seems to be a case of major edit warring. I counted 12 reverts by User: 88.108.223.14. That's almost unheard of. I would have report the user to WP:AN3 immediately after 3RR was passed. Good job in how you handled the situation by keeping a cool head and staying reasonable! =) Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 20:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun editing too! Looks like User: 88.108.223.14 is evading his block by finding more IP addresses. I hate it when that happens. Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 21:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix Arts Centre

Hi. Just noticed all the activity on the Phoenix Arts Centre article, which is still on my (far-too-big) watchlist from when I categorized it. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but the original article referred to a theatre in Leicester, while the current article refers to a different theatre in Hastings. Just a thought, but doesn;t a revert to the original article solve everything? Flowerpotman talk|contribs 20:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(reply) I reverted and I stuck something up on the Incidents noticeboard, just in case. (I also managed to kick my computers plug and knocked off the power, so this all took a bit longer than planned ;O) Flowerpotman talk|contribs 21:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dont worry, be happy

Dont worry, i dont blame you for getting me blocked, it took me 4 click to come back. For you i can afford that kinda effort.

Hope it only takes you another 4 in a moment then. Pedro | Chat 21:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It did, i am trying to discuss the matter with people

as was pointed out above, the article was actually written about another theatre first, This lot would be all be solved if we reverted back to that entry

And with your web talents you felt unable to do that; instead you used inappropriate tags, got IP's blocked and generally mucked a lot of people around... The solution seems crystal clear here......Pedro | Chat 21:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt realise untill it was said that there was any other copy. I dint intend to muck alot of people around, The tag was to draw admin attention then the matter could be discussed with them, somehow you decided to bring up war by just removing the tags. Fair enough, i respect that your trying to keep wikipedia tidy, good, but next time, how about leaving the tag there and waiting untill the matter is sorted before reediting the article.

Hmmm....in the end its been good, i have actually learnt alot about how different parts of wiki operates so therefore not all is lost. One question, how do you find those pages e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents

i assume there is a list of them somewhere, and maybe that would help me solve any future issues

another question, how does one learn how to use all the wikipedia functions?

I have replied on your talk page.Pedro | Chat 21:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

! [[User:Pedro|Pedro]] | [[User_talk:Pedro| Chat ]]
I don't want to rain on your parade too much, but complex and especially lengthy signatures like this are rather consistently discouraged. There's even a guideline for such, though I'm not one to go lawyerish on others.
More to the point, on a medium large (or larger Font like (re: Pedro | Chat ) us old folks sometimes use to read easily) on IE7, the above:

Looks way out of wack-- the box is shifted and cuts through words preceding and part of the signature itself--at 100% it looks;
It's alignment was so bad, to get here by clicking on chat, I ended up on your user page.
At the very least, suggest you trim the box border entirely, or better yet, drop the background and box entirely.
At smaller fonts, (90%) it's even worse.
In either case, it intrudes and pushes the line above and below away from normal spacing.
BTW-span doesn't work well in signatures for some reason, and you'd be better off with a simple: Pedro Chat. Ooops! IE7 doesn't like that background either. Shifts the same as the box above--which looks a little better with the border reduced to 1px.

FYI, Good luck! // FrankB 02:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC) (And no I don't work much in IE7, but I do check display effects on it Almost religiously lately--these days I check such on five different browsers including a MAC, as snooping my talk (the last two weeks should do it) will amplify and explain why. Cheers! // FrankB 02:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rude and unwarranted deletion of a serious article

I am placing on the record my complaint regarding your capricious, ignorant and high handed deletion of an article about an industry of major importance to South Australia.

Kindly refrain from interfering with this article, otherwise I will take appropriate action.Fitzpatrickjm 11:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to WP:CIVIL. A previous editor had already redirected the article, and another had pointed out the blatant POV. Your comment of "I will take appropriate action" looks like a personal attack. Please keep your comments friendly and we might be able to resolve the issue. Thanks. Pedro | Chat 11:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for the comments you left regarding my RfA. I understand a big concern was my lack of edits, which i do plan to work on in the near future. When I do send in my second nomination down the road, I hope to have these concerns alleviated. Wildthing61476 12:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I presume that you are intending to withdraw your current RfA? You are doing a great job on RC Patrol, something I also do. Notwithstanding WP:CANVASS I would be delighted to review and potentialy support you in a future RfA and would be oblidged if you would notify me as and when this occurs. Very best, and Happy editing. Pedro | Chat 13:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I'm going to let the process finalize and see what happens. I'm honestly not trying to canvass, rather I wanted to thank those who commented, seeing as I think it's the right thing to do. Anyway, thanks again for your comments and when/if I do re-nominate myself I will let you know! Wildthing61476 13:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know you're not canvassing now, and I look forward to your re-nom (better yet a nomination by someone else!). That's not a bad idea letting it run - RfA comments tend to be from experienced editors and really help IMHO. Hope to see you round the 'pedia.Pedro | Chat 13:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned

Whoops, that indeed was an oversight. My apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanky (talk • contribs)

My RFA

I assume you mean tools and promotion - I'm not sure what tools and demotion would be? I become an admin and get blocked? Anyhow, you may be right that I'm too sparse in my use of edit summaries - I often forget, it's true. WilyD 19:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I meant demotion. See here. Pedro | Chat 19:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's still kind of strange language - I wouldn't say demotion unless I lost my ability to be an editor/author. The implication in what I said about promotion isn't that I see adminship as a promotion, but that I inferred you see it that way. Regards WilyD 19:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair comment, but I'm still of the opinion that gettng some extra tools is not a promotion. I got a spanky new laptop at work recently, with no change of job title, grade or salary. I have a new tool but no "promotion". That's why I've moved to oppose, as I really think admins should not see themselves as "better" than other editors, and your comments would indicate you feel otherwise. Sorry, and I'm sure / hope your RfA will do well without me, and if you pass you will use the tools wisely. Pedro | Chat

I am a bit curious where you get that I thought of adminship as a promotion - I implied (and I believe this) that it's not a demotion - after all, you still have all the powers of a (non-admin) editor. Much more like a second job in parallel. Not better, but not worse either (which is what you seem to be implying). But in the end, I definitely don't believe it's a demotion. Maybe amotion is the best term. WilyD 20:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again a very fair answer. I got the idea that you though it was promotion as opposed to anything else from your comments just up the page - where you said "I assume you mean tools and promotion". Don't take this the wrong way but that is kind of pretty clear. Sorry, but you did say that, and as such I feel that you belive an admin is a cut above other editors here and hence my oppose. Nevertheless my repeated best wishes. Pedro | Chat 20:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP Vandal 68.33.169.36

Kinda had a feeling that vandal would strike again...—Gaff ^ταλκ 20:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You will never Stop the Real Napster.

Mass Vandalism/Colbert Vandalism

I have started a discussion on this topic at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#How_to_handle_mass_vandalism. Seems the sort of thing you may find interesting. —Gaff ^ταλκ 20:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Transhumanist

I strongly believe you owe The Transhumanist an apology for using his failed RfA as an example in a current RfA. This user has actually been present in the current !voting process, and I applaud that as he is not taking a much deserved break. To opine at the expense of another is wrong in so many ways. the_undertow ^talk 10:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry if I've caused any offence, but surely we reflect on previous consensus or disagreement all the time on Wikipedia, using it to define policies and procedures. By citing a previous RfA within another I can only see this as valid and useful to a discussion, even if others view it the other way. I therefore feel unable to apologise for anything. I'm sorry if you, The Transhumanist or anyone else has construed this as offensive. Pedro | Chat 10:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro, I understand your reluctance to apologize. I really do. I was not demanding it. I only wanted to assert that reflection on an existing consensus is not what I use, as each case is unique. Like with AfD's, precedent is not a reason to oppose. As I do not have a relationship with TH, I was not acting as his friend, but as a concerned editor, just like yourself. Seeing the Transhumanist, after a failed RfA, !voting in the same process, and using him as an example made me remember why we don't use precedence as a precursor to opine. I would not want him, nor any editor to be discouraged. Everything here is unique, and is the reason why consensus is gathered each and every time. It is unusual, because our normal politics rely on past events. Here, it's different. And with that, I will respect the fact that you threw out an opinion that I considered 'out of the norm.' There are no hard feelings - ever. the_undertow ^talk 09:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your considered reply. I hope to see you round the 'pedia again, and in the meantime Happy Editing.! Pedro | Chat 09:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro, it's all good. I will see you around, and I DO look forward to it. If a similar opinion were to arise during your RfA, I would defend you as well. the_undertow ^talk 09:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for oversight

Could I respectfully request you use WP:RFO (see WP:OVER), rather than ANI? It's a) more likely to be answered quickly on their list, and b) drawing less attention to it doing it via email compared to ANI. Cheers, Daniel 10:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Posted simultaneously, it seems :) Cheers, Daniel 10:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archive in mainspace

Hello Pedro, you've archived your talk in mainspoace - see your contribs! Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 20:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am an arse. Thank you for letting me know :) !!Pedro | Chat 20:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Acid Rain & Editting in General

When you aim to make a series of edits, just edit the whole page and do it in one go if at all possible. By saving and then editing again, it means that patrolling people who are looking to clean-up mark-up etc can cause and edit conflict. Obviously we all miss stuff, but try to do everything in one go (use the whole article tag, rather than section edits to sort it out). Thanks for your help Philipwhiuk 16:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, I normally do, but on this occasion the markup was blasted and I missed it when I saved the page - I actually had to undo my contribution and do it again, hence the three edits to the article. Cheers!Pedro | Chat 11:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YechielMan's RFA

Thank you for participating in either of my unsuccessful requests for adminship. Although the experience was frustrating, it showed me some mistakes I was making, and I hope to learn from those mistakes.

Please take a few minutes to read User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review and advise me how to proceed. Best regards. Yechiel Man 21:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:User:Benjaminoooo

Don't mention it - anything I can do to fight vandals!--Diniz (talk) 11:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you're right - take a look at User:Lorance, who has just appeared and vandalised the same page as Benjaminoooo.--Diniz (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever it is, they appear to have stopped - what a shame! Happy editing.--Diniz (talk) 11:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 06:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Niggle

Just a tiny comment, Pedro - the word is "grammar" not "grammer". It just looks odd when you're making grammatical corrections and putting a spelling mistake in the edit summary! Cheers, Waggers 09:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tahts wyh I fcous on gramer nad ont spleing I geuss! Cheers :)Pedro | Chat 09:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rfa

Just dropping by to say "thank you" for supporting me in my recent my RfA. I passed the vote, and am now an admin. It will take me some getting used to with the new tools, but I thank you again for the trust. Have a good one, and, as always, happy editing! Jmlk 1 7 05:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thanks

		Thanks...
	Thank you for showing your support in my recent RfA. Unfortunately, consensus was not really going my way, so I decided to withdraw my self-nomination last night. The final vote tally was (15/7/10). Your support does mean a lot to me, and I will certainly let you know when I go for my next RfA, most likely in a few month's time. Thank you again, and happy editing! Hersfold ^(talk/work) 17:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Hello, Pedro/Archive 2, and thank you so much for your support in my recent RFA, which passed 59/0/0. I will try very hard to live up to your expectations – please let me know if I can help you in any way, but first take your cookie! Thanks again! KrakatoaKatie 00:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: I'm not very creative, so I adopted this from RyanGerbil10 who swiped it from Misza13, from whom I have swiped many, many things. Chocolate chip cookies sold separately. Batteries not included. Offer not valid with other coupons or promotions. May contain peanuts, strawberries, or eggs. Keep out of the reach of small children, may present a choking hazard to children under the age of 3 and an electrical hazard to small farm animals. Do not take with alcohol or grapefruit juice. This notice has a blue background and may disappear into thin air. The recipient of this message, hereafter referred to as "Barnum's latest sucker", relinquishes all rights and abilities to file a lawsuit, to jump on a pogostick while standing on his head, and to leap out in front of moving trains. KrakatoaKatie, Jimbo Wales, and the states of Arkansas, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma are not liable for any lost or stolen items or damage from errant shopping carts or unlicensed drivers such as Paris Hilton.

RE

I've replied on the RfA page. Sorry if I didn't explain my meaning properly in the original post. Walton ^Assistance! 20:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your accusation of borderline trolling at this discussion page

Please try and read my comments, and the edit summary, before accusing me of trolling. I have made a comment at the talk page above. Best Wishes. Pedro | Chat 21:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate it if you would pause, breathe, and realise I'm here to help. I found your accusation rather upsetting, coming as it does from an experienced editor like yourself. Pedro | Chat

If you're here to help, then stop being sarcastic. It's not helpful. --W.marsh 21:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please have the decency to reply on my talk page as well. I guess that my ironic - not sarcastic comment was not understood. I'm sorry about that, but you will note that on that discussion page there was a thread right before that went the same line in terms of sarcasm and humour. Sorry to have crossed swords here, but I assure you of my best intent. Pedro | Chat 21:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about that, but you really should have read my initial comment correctly - it didn't need the edit summary to be clearly ironic, not sarcastic. I think we are in agreement in terms of self noms at it goes. I'm really sorry that you felt there was a situation to difuse, as IMHO there wasn't one till you created it by accusing me of borderline trolling. Shall we move on? Cheers and best wishes Pedro | Chat 22:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe tiresome not the right word...

I've seen you around as well and you seem to be doing good things. Sorry if the tiresome comment didn't sit well...It just seemed like you were acting kind of pouting and threatening to bail on Wikipedia over something kind of trivial. (I'm going to strike it as unhelpful). BTW, I'm not clear at all how your initial statement was "trolling," so you have my support on that. Cheers.—Gaff ^ταλκ 22:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gaff. It's all a bit silly, just my humour not working, which I agree is my fault. I appreciate your support and comments. Pedro | Chat 22:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who?

Why do you suspect me of someone called benjaminooo? I dont know this person so why accuse me? ive have take this to heart and cried for almost a week, you should be ashamed...

It walks, talks and may well have feathers, nevertheless I'm going to WP:AGF and have struck out the comment on the talk page. Pedro | Chat 10:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald Reagan

Everything looks good! Thanks for helping out. Happyme22 22:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UP revert

Cheers! The Rambling Man 16:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, well if I'm about you can always ask me to lend an administrating hand...! The Rambling Man 16:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's good to have admins with friendly ears who I can run to!! Backlog has dropped now. Best regards Pedro | Chat 16:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No bother. I don't often head to WP:AIV, I'm usually on more active new page patrol. So, if there's ever a backlog there and you can find me, let me know. All the best... The Rambling Man 16:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Landrum

I am not sure why the page David Landrum was deleted. Everything on it was used with permission. There are several students working an author report and this is helpful to them. What needs to be done to make it more up to standards. I personally know the author. Thanks