User talk:Pedro: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:30, 13 August 2010

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Request for Rollback permission

Two days ago, on WP:PERM/R, I requested Rollback permission. I see that some other requests there, before and after mine, have been processed. Did I perhaps make my request in an incorrect manner that caused it not to be visible in whatever queue the administrators use? Thanks. Peter Chastain (talk) 02:45, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done I'm sorry it was not sooner - the request must have been overlooked as you formatted it all fine. Sorry about that. Pedro : Chat 07:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Peter Chastain (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My page was deleted and I was hoping you could tell me why and where can I find all of the writing that I did. Thank you.

RfA answer

You withdrew your question 4 (I think), but here's an answer in any case. Cheers!

A: Technical affinity: I changed careers in 1/2003 from a software development and engineering background, so I do think I pick up some technical things quickly--I can only wish I did so more quickly. It's hard for me to say why Wikipedia wasn't front-and-center in my interests for the first few years I was here. In part, I was starting my new career. In part, I don't think I had found my "place" here yet, there were few places where it seemed like I could have fun and be constructive. Connection with a group of other editors working on the same task adds to the fun of WP and probably brings me back more, too.

Accounts: This is the only account I've had, and I haven't edited here here via IP, save for the odd accidental logged-out edit or three early on. --j⚛e decker ^talk 22:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your time in responding. I was mistaken in thinking you first few edits involved intimate WP markup (I noticed after asking you had over 200 edits, hence my revert). I'm pleased to support your request, good luck and happy ediitng. Pedro : Chat 22:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most welcome! --j⚛e decker ^talk 23:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

For the user page edit, it put a real smile on my face! (PS: regarding your advice re: CSDs, I agree with you entirely... that's not an area I'm ready to move into, and if I did I'd have signficantly more to learn. Thanks!) --j⚛e decker ^talk 21:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisdom

You know the one about patience, serenity, and wisdom, right? I'd appreciate your wisdom on what to do about this. In particular, look at the (currently) three bottom threads: "Smelling pistake", "For crying out loud!", and "Disruption". In truth, a block is already due but I'm so involved I don't want to be the one to do it. At some point, I'll ask for further advice from somewhere, but I dislike the dramaboard route. If you need background, holler, but I think you're familiar with the situation. Frank | talk 21:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC) PS: Cheers, hope you and yours are well![reply]

Blocked for 6 months (wow!) by Beeblebrox. I agree the block was needed but 6 months seems a little heavy! Resolved the issue I guess... Pedro : Chat 21:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just came back to report never mind. We'll see how it turns out. Frank | talk 21:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A heavy-handed block for incompetence no less. Which policy demands competence? The incompetence is not where Beeblebrox thinks it is though. Malleus Fatuorum 21:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked the question. Frank | talk 22:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to

thank you for the time taken to review my request. Now, I am more than ready to help around here. Andreasm ^{just talk to me} 22:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome. Pedro : Chat 06:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't mind sir...

...but I edited through your protection here - I think it's one of those occasions where it was the right thing to do and I'm sure you'll agree. I think it can stay up for a week or so then it can be reverted. Hope you're well - you still need to get that backside of yours to Manchester for a pint! Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 23:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not! Thanks for posting that Ryan - appreciated. One of these days I'll get my sorry backside up North for a beer - just have to convince the wife that she's got to look after the kids all weekend on her won! Pedro : Chat 06:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An observation

I remember a few years ago that French lorry drivers lobbied against a tightening of the drink-driving laws in France on the basis that they drove far more miles (kilometres I suppose) than the average driver, and were therefore more likely to get caught, hence the proposed new law would have discriminated against them. So far as I recall, they won the argument, but of course that was France, where all sorts of whacky things happen.

What's occurred to me though after looking through some of the recent discussions at RfA, and a few recent RfAs, is that in a different context those lorry drivers may have had a point. It's rather easy, for instance, not to get blocked if you only make 50 edits a month to wikipedia, somewhat less easy if you make a thousand or more, as there's always someone looking to take offence. Perhaps a better measure is the ratio of blocks to postings. I'm not at all trying to excuse my own block log, that can be explained in many ways, just musing over a few things. Malleus Fatuorum 22:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of all the various rambling at WT:RFA recently this probably hit the nail on the head. A perticularly perceptive remark that sums up a lot of what's wrong around here. It's a fact that admins are given far greater latitude than non-admins, and no mater how much Jimbo bangs on that admins should be held to "higher standards" the reality is that they are not. Disapointing - yes. Wrong - yes. But it's true. Pedro : Chat 07:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

from the shadows

Hello there Mr. Pedro! Just popping through my watchlist, waxing nostalgic. How've you been? Keeper | 76 02:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greeting my friend! It's all good I suppose! My activity on WP is not what it was, but I'm still slavishly addicted to popping in on a regular basis. How are you and yours? Pedro : Chat 07:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Family is good, work is good, life is good. I have no complaints other than trivial ones about how my legs don't work like they did in my youth and observations in passing about the random strange looking mole (is it growing? is that one still brown, honey, or is it turning red?), and other such commonalities of becoming "that" generation that scowls at loud music and shakes his head unapprovingly. I still edit quite a bit around here, but almost exclusively as an IP so I'm not tempted to get admin-y, which I've determined, having been quiet and reflective for almost 2 years, is what drove me to leave. I was pleasantly surprised to see you near the top of my very small watchlist, editing. Stay well, good sir! Keeper | 76 15:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I spend a lot of time reading now, too little editing. Funnily enough I was going through my RFA nominations the other day and it was suprising the number of editors I remember well whose name you just never see any more. Still, most people grow weary of their hobby at times I guess. Delighted you and yours are well and I feel your pain in the age related stakes. BTW - two years since Jeffpw passed on ..... that's a jolt. Pedro : Chat 19:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it really has been two years. That's like 14 years for dogs and MMPORGs. I hope his family continues to heal, he was a hell of a guy, from whatever you can learn of someone on an anonymous website... On the other note, you got me curious, and I rambled down my list of admin nominees too. Most are here - some renamed, some long silent. Probably the most active nominee of mine, and the most productive in terms of improving this little project unselfishly and boldly, is dear Malleus, who luckily didn't pass RFA. I think that is very telling. Keeper | 76 02:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kibbitz

Re [1], of course you'd have to find a time when there is actually ice at the spot, and since the ice does tend to move around a lot, it would be tricky... :) (Google Earth behaves very strangely at that point: try flying the airplane underwater there.) Antandrus (talk) 23:15, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall hit the flight sim on that to see! Cheers! Pedro : Chat 23:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidestruction

Yes. If you could tell me how on Earth I managed to do it, I would be grateful. At least I did not blank the main page or block Jimbo! --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:17, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guess it was one too many tabs open, or a wrong click of the finger. As for blocking Jimbo - well that's been done a fair few times. And deleting the main page is now not visibly do-able via a CSS hack (but it is actually possible using the direct URL assuming it's still under 5,000 revisions - however WP:BEANS and all). Happy editing kind sir. Pedro : Chat 21:21, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Can you imagine how it feels when you are happily ploughing through a list of nominated articles, you call up WP:CSD and you find that it has unexpectedly been deleted and you have done it?? --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:30, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Put it this way - I can feel your pain [2] :) Pedro : Chat 21:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear!! I missed that - out of the country. But you were quicker to revert than I was.--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:31, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page Deletion

My page "Keeping Up With The Guptas" was deleted and I was looking for some help. I am on the Marketing Team for Keeping Up With The Guptas and I was hoping that you could tell me why my page was deleted and where can I find all the text that I put onto the page. And how can I use the text from my website on Wikipedia legally? Thanks

Mvayder (talk) 17:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mvayder. I'd suggest you look at some of the links (in blue) that follow and I hope they give you some hints to editing Wikipedia. Firstly you clearly have a conflict of interest. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - so please remember that not everything that exists needs to be in it - only things that are worth of an enyclopedia. Secondly, to be included in an encyclopedia something must be notable - which I'm afraid from the description of the article this show is not. Thirdly, we require references from third party reliable sources to verify claims that a subject is notable. Fundamentally, this home-brew show (as it was depicted in the article) does not match up to a number of our core policies, and thus I deleted it. I can e-mail you a copy of the deleted text if you wish. In respect of using the text from your website here, that's fine as long as you agree to release the content of your website under this licence. Bear in mind that this will have serious repercussions for your website if you have any copyright marks on it. Hope that helps. Pedro : Chat 21:09, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So does that mean that I cannot have the page up on Wikipedia yet since it is not well known? And yes that would be great if you could email me the text.

00:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvayder (talk • contribs)

Done Deleted revision e-mailed. Pedro : Chat 11:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Hey there. I was thinking of throwing my name into the ring in a few months, and wondered what you thought? Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 21:58, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're mad? Heh! Seriously, it's a touch late my time, so can I come back to you tomorrow on this after a review? Pedro : Chat 22:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just one thing - didn't you get involved with the password sharing thing with Peter Symonds (not a "deal breaker" just to give me notice) Pedro : Chat 22:03, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I did, see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Steve Crossin. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah -my memory is not as bad as I thought! You might need to address Alison's oppose (No. 9) very directly. Perhaps you can help me out by elaborating on what she meant there. Pedro : Chat 22:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Me and Alison were quite good friends beforehand, and hated me after I told her that I'd been using another admin's account. As for problems on other wikis, I'm really not sure what she meant, I figured she was just very upset/angry at me, and I don't blame her for it. I really screwed up back then, but there's not much I can do except try and move forward. I think I've got a better head on my shoulders (I'm going to be a dad soon as well) and it looks like we need the help around here, but yeah, I dunno whether I could or whether it's worth a go or what my chances are or what to do next. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:15, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll take a shufty tomorrow. Congrats on the fatherhood thing! That will be an.... experience (as a father of two I know darn well!) You don't want to buy a cot do you? :P Pedro : Chat 22:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A shufty? What's that. Re: the cot - Will you pay shipping to Australia? :P Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[3] - And I think the shipping may outweigh th evalue ;-) Pedro : Chat 22:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I love urban dictionary. I'm a bit outdated policywise (WTF did they do with WP:USER) so I'll need a few tips to get me going but like always, I'd love to help out). Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 22:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've elected to use the #3 definition when reading Pedro's comment. Pedro - don't you know that will make you go blind? –xeno^talk 20:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ha Ha! I didn't even see that! Xeno - you should read Viz - I think they sell it over the pond! Anyhow I'm married, so naturally masturbation is ~~a regular occurence~~ completely irrelvant to me. Pedro : Chat 20:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lolol. So true. –xeno^talk 20:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is kind of an awkward thing to stumble upon. 174.52.141.138 (talk) 22:00, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Steve, I've given this some thought now. Essentially let's play the "password incident" thing never happened. You'd pass RFA easily. I'm not a big fan of the odd swear word in your edit summaries but that's pretty minor. You've done all the stuff that clearly indicates you would use the extra tools wisely and well. So, we need to take a step back. If the misjudgement in password sharing had not occured you'd already have the tools and be helping out. But it did occur. At your RFA there were several strong opinions, and in particular regarding the lone IP edit that caused added confusion. However I stand by my comment at your RFA that you did the honest thing. You didn't sock, didn't RTV, didn't give up on the place. You took the 6 month ban and then resumed editing. I think that speaks volumes.

I'm normally a good judge of RFA outcomes (well, I flatter myself that I am) even if I've been known to have ~~pretty~~ very rotten judgement on who to support at times and who to oppose.

I think you might well pass, assuming the community has a sense of forgiveness and assuming they look to your recent actions and your good grace in owning your mistakes. I'll nominate if you wish. Pedro : Chat 20:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(You missed this). Wait, you mean now? Don't you think my somewhat recent inactivity will work against me? I don't want to over rush it, but I think now or soon is a good time. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 10:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I never looked at the activity count as I wasn't looking at number of edits (I rarely bother when nominating as editcountitis ain't my thing!). I suppose the hole of the last two months is a possible sticking issue for some. Maybe get this month over with and go in September? Pedro : Chat 10:42, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You think that my last 500 edits going back to November won't cause major issues? I'm keen to give RFA another go, but be honest, how long do you think I should wait, and what else do you think I need to do/iron out/resolve before I give RFA another go, because I wouldn't want to run unless I've a rather good chance of passing. Keep in mind that I don't have an enormous amount of time, so writing a FA is pretty much out of it for a long time. My time is better used clearing backlogs and mitigating disputes. But yeah, be honest. I respect your opinion. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 10:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's one of those things really - there's no point writing an FA just to try and bolster your chances of adminship. You write because you want to write. You already have featured content, dyk's etc. It's really just a question of does password sharing + relative inactivity = no admin buttons or does the overall contribution history = admin buttons. I don't honestly know, but in the current climate of active admin levels declining maybe it's worth a shot. Having said that I'd think another month of moderate activitiy would be beneficial and give a greater level of recent edits for people to review. Pedro : Chat 11:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I trust your judgment either way. If you'd like to write a nom now then I'd accept, if you think I should wait I will. It's your call. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 11:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ponder and I'll come back to you. Pedro : Chat 11:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 11:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The current climate, as you put it, is difficult at best. There seems to be an attitude of "if I can't have it, nobody can". Waiting a month or two won't hurt. Frank | talk 11:28, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wisdom89's next RfA

Made you look! I'd rather roll around in excrement : ) Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 04:54, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got me! Pedro : Chat 06:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As Pedro's talk page is the only thing on my watchlist now, I'm having to keep myself amused with things on his page so thought I'd chime in here! To be honest Wisdom, I'd put in a nom if I was you - you've come on a lot over the years and I reckon you'd have a good chance of getting the tools - you'd certainly have my support. Put some thought into it - I'd be pleased to see you hitting those buttons. If you want a nom (I'd have to remember how to write one!), let me know. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 18:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The man said it Wisdom. Personally I'd ask for the bits - you know I'd be delighted with a co-nom for you. (and Ryan - dude you picked a dull old page to watchlist! Heh! )Pedro : Chat 20:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ryan and Pedro. I know I'd have the support of many people. It's especially encouraging hearing this from Ryan given his previous uncertainty with my being an Admin. Still, I'm just sure there'd be a pile for something. Maybe my terse bluntness at times, who knows. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 20:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do. And so do you. Just look at what's unfolding at Nev1's RfA. Malleus Fatuorum 22:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd come out of retirement to support you. 174.52.141.138 (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Some of that makes sense. However, a self professed "weak" rationale is a completely different situation to a self professed "strong" one. Regards, --W F C-- 15:37, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some if it made sense largely because of my horrid typos :) Heh. Agreed however that the qualifier can imply the argument itself is weak or strong. Pedro : Chat 20:05, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and farewell

I just wanted to thank the only person here whose efforts I will remember with pleasure and respect; I'm packing it in. I know there is a kernel of utility here, but between the onslaught of crap and the incredible rudeness and sense of entitlement of the children who feel compelled to keep shoveling it on, I just can't contribute to it any more. You weren't wrong to lead me to administrative status, and I will always respect your contributions here and be grateful for your assistance over the years, but I cannot continue. My very best regards and wishes for your future and your family. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 131: / Line 131: @@
 Some of that makes sense. However, a self professed "weak" rationale is a completely different situation to a self professed "strong" one. Regards, --[[User:WFCforLife|W]][[User talk:WFCforLife|F]][[Special:Contributions/WFCforLife|C]]-- 15:37, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 :Some if it made sense largely because of my horrid typos :) Heh. Agreed however that the qualifier can imply the argument itself is weak or strong. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">[[User:Pedro|<b>Pedro</b>]] : [[User_talk:Pedro|<font style="color:#accC10;background:#0000fa;">&nbsp;Chat&nbsp;</font>]] </span></small> 20:05, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
+==Thanks, and farewell==
+I just wanted to thank the only person here whose efforts I will remember with pleasure and respect; I'm packing it in.  I know there is a kernel of utility here, but between the onslaught of crap and the incredible rudeness and sense of entitlement of the children who feel compelled to keep shoveling it on, I just can't contribute to it any more.  You weren't wrong to lead me to administrative status, and I will always respect your contributions here and be grateful for your assistance over the years, but I cannot continue.  My very best regards and wishes for your future and your family.  [[User:Accounting4Taste|Accounting4Taste]]:<small>[[User talk:Accounting4Taste|talk]]</small> 16:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)