User talk:PeterSymonds

edit count | edit summary usage

Guterman protection

Dear Peter, Thank you for evaluating the Gerald Guterman semi-protect nomination. Yet again, after your decision, a new editor appeared to remove almost all critical information (from the NY Times and an academic economics text). I find it very suspicious that every day a brand new editor comes along who wants to remove anything which points to difficulties Mr. Guterman has suffered. It reeks of self-interest and sock puppetry. I ask again that you look at the edits. Thank you for your time, Smilo Don (talk) 02:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi,

I have contributed to an article, which has since been amended, deleted and edited countless times by other parties. The articles i have put in are true and give an accurate reflection of the specific industry. This seems to bother other players in this industry which is perhaps why they edit it etc.

Because they kept deleting it i kept reverting it back to my earlier post, and i now notice that you have sent me a message asking me to stop changing things. However, as i said, i am merely changing things back because of the deletion and editing all these other people have done.

I do admit that i had a link on there and i was not aware that i could not do so. I am therefore going to try and edit things again, in a much clearer, better manner, and i would ask that you please check this that it is ok, and if yes,then please note that this is the correct format and changes made to it by others are the problem you need to combat - not my posts!

Sorry, but I don't know who you are. According to your talk page, I've never sent you any warnings...Can you provide a link please? Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

template deletion

Thanks for taking care of this.--Rockfang (talk) 21:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

RFR Will Thompson

Okay, I will use the undo function to revert vandalism, poor edits, etc. And I will always assume good faith, in about two weeks, I shall reapply. Will Thompson (talk) 23:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Psychiatry vs. anti-psychiatry

There has been an anonymous user that has been blanking the section on anti-psychiatry in the article on Psychiatry. I and another user reverted the edits before the ananymous user blanked the section again. His/her reason was that there is already a standalone article on anti-psychiatry. To make things worse, the anonymous user mocked my message to him/her and called my edits "page-adding." What is your take on this??? Willking1979 (talk) 20:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

SSP case

You blocked a few socks at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Diamond Joe Quimby a little over a week ago. It appears that this user is socking again with TexasPolitician (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Would you take a look and decide whether the main account (now called PoliticianTexas) should be blocked for sockpuppetry? Thanks, Metros (talk) 20:55, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

^_^

Good meeting you today! Thanks for the advice on pulmonary contusion, hope I see you around soon. Peace, delldot talk 21:28, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Archiving WP:RFR

You don't need to manually archive  Not done RFR's. But the last edit needs to be marked as notdone - i.e. if there is further input the bot will not archive - just add another notdone tag at the very end and it will be sorted! Pedro :  Chat  21:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake - hadn't realised the bot was not working. I'm not implying deleting declined requests - they should be archived as well - bad communication on my part - I thought you were wondering why not dones wern't going and that has been an issue historically. Pedro :  Chat  21:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Catherine Deneuve (part three)

As you may or may not know, the RfC for Catherine Deneuve was recently removed by the RFC bot (talk). Shortly afterwards, user M06ff1 (talk) made edits that in part dealt with the dispute at hand. I thought that maybe that meant it was OK for me to start editing the page again, which I recently did. Now that I think about it, though, I should have probably consulted with you on that; so, I apologize in advance. I just came by to let you know about that. Also, in regards to the RfC, no one responded to my last RfC comment, which in a way has to do with one of the edits that M06ff1 (talk) made. I'm not saying that the lack of responses means that my suggestion should be accepted, but if you have strong disagreements on the matter, please let me know. I'm simply implementing the same standards that have been used on featured articles of actors/actresses.

Anyway, thanks again for your input on this matter, and as always, you can respond to my post here on your talk page. In fact, I would probably recommend that, just in case others who are editing the Catherine Deneueve article stop by, given that you've seemingly been the most recent administrator dealing with the article. -- Luke4545 (talk) 00:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Luke. I have no objections to you editing the article again, providing you don't play with any of the info in the RfC, because it hasn't been resolved yet. But yeah, editing the article for other things is fine with me. Furthermore, I don't have any disagreements with the argument you placed on the talk page, but so far the only outside comments have come from Jeremy McCracken, who has objected to them. Therefore I suggest waiting, say, another week for more opinions, and if none have come in, edit with your preferences. And if someone objects later on, another discussion can be held. :) Hope that helps. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 08:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Almamy (singer)

Thank you Peter, it was really helpful.

Bech86 (talk) 09:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

rollback request denied

not a problem.

My intention was to use it purely for vandalism patrol, but I have been blocked a couple of times, so being turned down came as no suprise.

thanks for dealing with it so quickly Sennen goroshi (talk) 12:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)