User talk:PeterSymonds

This is PeterSymonds's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to PeterSymonds.

User:Mixwell/scrolling

You deleted my image from Wikipedia

What exactly do I need to do to put the image from Robert Owen's website on his Wikipedia page. I have permission from him to place it on Wikipedia.

SOURCE: http://owens2008.com/home/about-robert/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Owens —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitacore (talk • contribs) 15:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:OTRS for more information. The owner should contact Wikipedia to indicate they have given the license, because copyright is taken very seriously. We simply cannot rely on your word for it, even though I have no doubts you're being honest. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block

I hate to trouble you, but I'm in a bit of a rush. I can't remember where to go to suggest someone be blocked. But this editor has had their last warning, and continues to vandalize: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jigsaw1819 Thank you.

He's already been blocked, but for future reference, see WP:AIV. :) Thanks for the report. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While we're on the subject... Is there a template or something to use to tell editors to stop vandalizing, etc.? Are they restricted to administrators? Sorry, I am a constructive editor, but I have trouble with all the little things, I can't read everything under the sun. Belasted (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We do indeed. See WP:UTM for a full list. Alternatively, there's a tool for firefox called Twinkle, which is a slightly easier and more automated way to warn vandals and/or report them to AIV. It has other functionalities listed on that page too. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

article

would you take a look at the graphic on Solar power in Romania. At first I thought it was a prank cause it just looks like a fish - but I don't know. thanks — Ched (talk) 18:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

never mind ... I found this on the Romania page - must be time for me to take a break. ;)— Ched (talk) 18:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 20:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering how do you apply to become a rollback. Thanks- TDI19 (talk) 00:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done (for future reference, see WP:PERM). Enjoy! Please remember to use it for vandalism only. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shakira

Thank you for the semi-protection. Her article needed it. :) Acalamari 19:44, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 19:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lafayette Morehouse entry

Hi Peter,

We've noticed your comments in the discussion page on the Lafayette Morehouse wikipedia entry, and wondered if you could give us some advice. We are members of the community that is discussed on that page - we've created Wikipedia user accounts that disclose our status so that our "conflict of interest" is public.

The entry about our community was written by others - largely by Zoticogrillo who identifies himself as not a member of our community. Although the article is overall positive, it contains a very large number of errors both favorable and critical. We would like to revise it in a wholesale fashion to correct those, and to try and do this in a balanced fashion. Not all of the subject matter under discussion has secondary / citable sources, so we are unsure how to document each point, the one scholarly paper published about the community contains many footnotes of the type "conversations with <person name>, on date" - is this allowable as a reference?

Since wikipedia is a community effort, in a certain sense no one is "in charge" so we aren't sure how to proceed.

We've posted two questions in the discussion page - you'll find a comment from MoreOceana and myself (80guy), no one has responded.

We've read some of the many FAQ - the one about biographies of living persons, the one about "article subjects" (ie the subject of the article is us)

You advice in this matter is appreciated.

Thanks 80Guy --80 Guy (George) (talk) 22:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80 guy (talk • contribs) 02:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smratlik

Smratlik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Good block. The Pioneer Courthouse stuff aside, he was quickly proving to be a contentious user and probably would have been nailed in the near future just for that. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the more interesting things he did was to play a variation of the game he tried the last time, the "straw man" game. Note this complaint to Poter99, the previous sock: [1] The user who posted it was Yourmanstan. Smratlik then went out of his way to kiss up to Yourmanstan: [2] That's in contrast to the insults he leveled at everyone else, including his usual complaints about me being rude to him. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. I have to admit I was doubtful when I came across the case yesterday. The behaviour was obviously similar but the technical difference (as explained to me by checkuser Coren) was sufficiently great for the case to be marked inconclusive. However, when that happens, the behaviour must be taken into account, and in this case, they quacked rather loudly. So I decided to go with my gut on this one. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He can always request an unblock, if he cares to. Then he'll have some 'splainin' to do as regards his general behavior. If the case were still open, I would probably add the game-playing about Yourmanstan. Ironically, one of Oregon's symbols is the duck. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, as is typical for socks, they always return to the "scene of the crime" and give themselves away pretty quickly, assuming they even care about whether they get caught or not. But if they do, it becomes more difficult each time, as their pattern becomes better documented. Some alert user caught on to both him and his previous sock editing the marriage license article. Without that factor, it would have been more difficult to pin him down. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 21:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks so much for tossing me the rollback feature. Not sure how I got nominated, but I greatly appreciate it. Going to give Huggle a shot so hopefully I can be of even more help. Thanks again! Gnowor (talk) 21:59, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. :) I'd seen your edits and when I looked further, it was clear you had a need for the tool. Good luck and thanks for your work, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cena Jr

Cena Jr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I'm almost certain you blocked him because you thought he was a sock of someone else... but you may want to see this. I think AGF may be needed for an unblock. Thoughts? D.M.N. (talk) 17:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh,

Done. Just goes to show that WP:DUCK is meaningless at times. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup Newsletter

18:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 18:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

article

hey Peter, could I talk you into putting Larry Sanger on your watchlist for a little while? — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 20:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done This should be interesting. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. If it weren't an important BLP with ties to Wikipedia itself, I just wouldn't bother, but geesh - it's one of the ones we should get right! But, other than the calmtalk tag, I'm sitting this round out! I've never met anyone I couldn't talk to on some level before, but when I looked at history and block log, arbcom, and all - I guess I'm not the only one ;) — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 21:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's an interestingly controversial page, stemming from the great "founder co-founder" debate. I've never had much time for the debate, personally, but another admin's eye on a controversial BLP would be beneficial in any case. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rvcx has clearly made four reverts which is a violation of 3RR.[3][4][5][6] QuackGuru (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm impressed, the work on the Sanger article is coming along very nicely. Seems I was worried over nothing. He's actually put some very hard work and good improvements into it. I was wrong, and I'll "Man Up" and admit it! — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 21:40, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Project Chanology

It takes me 2 minutes or more to save a page. 2 minutes to get a diff engine to respond. The bulk of my edits you reverted was cleaning out the empty spacings in template that bloated the large size of the article entirely and you blindly reverted all my edits without looking at them. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 22:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, not so. I very rarely get involved in these things, but I take NOR quite seriously, so when I see it, I revert it. It was hardly a blind revert. I'd ask you again to justify the additions on the talk page, rather than simply reverting. I'm not bothered about the whitespace, just the sourcing you introduce. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You looked at the wrong revision I made. I changed back to Cirt's version right after what I was doing. I then made some template cleanups. You never looked, you just used your script to revert. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 22:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstate

Please reinstate my tools and undelete my userpage and any other things I requested to be deleted under RTV. Rgoodermote 23:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Welcome back. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and glad to be back. Could you do one more thing? Please undelete Rgoodermote/u? Rgoodermote 23:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which I forgot was a redirect. XD; Rgoodermote 23:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) Thank you very much! Rgoodermote 23:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope you didn't miss a thing. Thank you very much! Look forward to getting back to editing. Rgoodermote 23:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 23:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting FS

Thanks for supporting FS.Hope it will pass it.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Pardon me? PeterSymonds (talk) 08:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I remember now. Featured sound. You're welcome, and good luck with it. PeterSymonds (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

To confirm I'm Msgj on IRC ;) Martin^msgj 10:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Access set by MZMcBride (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thanks for helping out with the DYK update a few hours ago! You gave me the biggest laugh I've had in a while :) Shubinator (talk) 01:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, oops indeed! You're welcome, though Kanonkas did most of it. ;) PeterSymonds (talk) 10:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just learning how to edit...

This page is not being vandalized man, I just made a few formatting errors, be patient. I got this one covered boss.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronald Jose Carlos (talk • contribs) 03:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I don't understand what situation you're talking about. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted my picture.

Why did you do this? (Isagrand (talk) 15:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Book covers are usually the intellectual property of the artist or the publisher. Therefore it is a copyright violation, as it was released under a {{GFDL}} license with no evidence that you own the copyright. If it meets the non-free content criteria, you can upload under fair-use with {{Non-free book cover}}, but you will have to justify the image's place in the article. If you are the cover designer or the publisher, you will need to verify this through OTRS. This is an email system to privately send proof that you are the copyright owner, and after an OTRS volunteer has verified this, the image will be tagged as such. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:57, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Markbeirut/Archive

From Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Markbeirut/Archive, what about the fact that these contributions altered edits of other users in the AfD? Is there something else I should have done? The actions of the editor clearly seem to be against policies in some way. *breath* I know it's not a big deal, but I would like to know what the best course of action, given the circumstances, would be. Belasted (talk) 00:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In this particular case, a sockpuppet investigation wasn't needed. The IP and the account were clearly the same person. However, I see no evidence that that they logged in with the intent to be deceptive. Changing comments is not appropriate, but a revert and a note to the user should solve this. S/he appears to be a genuine good-faith editor, so it should work. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I should be a little bit less anxious to make editors into villains. Thank you. Belasted (talk) 01:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist (again)

would you want to watchlist this user in case he goes after a less tolerant user? — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 05:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Peter, belated post holiday thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed by an embarrassingly wide margin. There's also a full glitzy Oscar style version of my acceptance speech here. PS I see your in the UK, perhaps we'll meet at a pub meet sometime? Were Spiel Chequers 22:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By some small coincidence I'm in London on Sunday, so I'll see what I can do. I have a lot to do up there, however, so I can't promise anything. If I do attend, it'll be for the lunch only, because I probably won't be able to stay very long. But nonetheless, I'll see what I can do. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I'm in Northants most of the weekend but if everything goes to plan I should be back in London in time for lunch. Were Spiel Chequers 16:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I won't be able to make it; I've come over with fever, so I've had to cancel my trip completely. Maybe next time. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 09:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you sir!

Ju'st t'o b'e diff'ic'ult, O m'ight r'espond. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kevin7557/Archive

Hello. I have added a list of IPs to the case who I think are this user (I did this on the investigation's page, even though it was archived, sorry! Didn't see the 'archive' bit until after my edit). They are still editing pages in the same manner, simply waiting for any semi-protection to expire (example here). Geoff B (talk) 15:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the ANI I just filed after spending some time chasing this around blocking and protecting today. Mfield (talk) 01:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need help

Need help at TDA article. Please, refer to section at User talk:Bbhinton15 (talk discussion area) for more info. Thank you.--Halls452 (talk) 03:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 09:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was just wondering if you could check (and help out) the Total Drama Action page again. The vandalism went wild yesterday (and seems to starting to go wild again today. Thanks.--Halls452 (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFD applies to userspace?

I was told that AFD applies to userspace, in which case, User: Charm School 3, is a recreation of deleted material (a copy of) the article Charm School Gives Back and Charm School: Gives Back. I tried tagging it as a userpage, but the user deletes the tag. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 18:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly does. Deleted. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK update

Would you be willing to do a DYK update? None of the regular admins are around. I'll do credits and archiving, and I can give instructions if you need. Shubinator (talk) 00:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Let me know when you've cleared the credits and I'll refresh the queue. :) Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've finished credits. Can you upload and protect the picture too? I would do it myself, but I keep getting an error message saying that the same pic is on Commons, and I can't get around it - maybe only admins can? Shubinator (talk) 00:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Well, just upload I guess, since cascading protection will take care of the protection part) Shubinator (talk) 00:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The picture was kindly protected at Commons by Rjd0060 (talk · contribs). I hate uploading the image while it's live - just in case it goes wrong! :) Thanks for your help with the credits and the archiving. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 00:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. Hopefully you'll be able to do the same in a few days. Again, thanks! Feel free to grab a drink at WT:DYK! :) Shubinator (talk) 00:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK's due for another update, from T:DYK/Q2. I asked Victuallers before the edit outage, but I don't know if he's still here. By the way, do you know what happened? It was pretty funny seeing you on "Recent Changes". Shubinator (talk) 20:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you might want to upload the pic first. Shubinator (talk) 20:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've finished with credits and archiving, so the queue can be cleared. It would be great if you could look at next update and next next update and promote them to queues 1 and 2 if they're good. Shubinator (talk) 20:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Did I do that right? Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Thanks! By the way, you should consider adding yourself to the DYK admins list. Shubinator (talk) 21:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

174.34.161.xx is a proxy

The IP's are proxies [7] please block the range in def since it's being used by a vandal how is harassing User:WWGB. Bidgee (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And: thank you Peter. Spitfire^Tally-ho! 08:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Special:contributions/88.191.222.18 but oh noes! Spitfire^Tally-ho! 08:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see this is going to be fun. @Bidgee, thanks, I've verified that via nmap and blocked the range for a year. @Spitfire, looks like this particular user is feeding off IP ranges searched for on Google. If we get a second IP, I'll look into checking another range. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 08:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that Peter. Bidgee (talk) 09:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well, looks like the userpage has been protected now and there hasn't been any edits from that person since, cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 09:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I requested protection since it was getting ridiculous to keep reverting and reporting only for them to go to a different IP. Bidgee (talk) 09:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

Dear Peter,
I just realized I have been acused of sockpuppetry, for creating users Askatu, Elorza and UrkoB. This fact has been used against me in a deletion discussion that has slowly turned into (in my opinion) a personal attack and persecution for supporting Arnaiz-Villena's theories (actually, I'm not supporting his theories, but proved facts that have nothing to do with him).

I SWEAR TO GOD I haven't created those users.
I do not have the slightest idea of who might have created them, or for what purpose.
I would love to know how in the world it has been decided that they are my sockpuppets.

I am fairly new to Wikipedia, and I'm not familiarized with some techniques used. I would greatly appreciate if you could:

Delete the three mentioned users
Explain how sockpuppetry is detected. I'm quite curious about that point. If it is about IPs, let me just point out that I work in a huge institution, so it could have been any one (even though, I have the feeling it wasn't done from here).

Thank you, Peter. Regards. --Iberomesornix (talk) 16:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In order for me to help you, could you point me in the direction of the page that labels you a sockpuppet, please? Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It started as a rumor and it went up to the Arbitration Commitee (2.1.1.5) --Ibx (talk) 19:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Sockpuppetry

Thanks for unblocking my talk page. I too have been accused of Sockpuppetry, and I can’t retire unless my name is cleared from something I did not do. I have one question: is there a way to check the IP an account logs in from? - Rockyobody (talk) 18:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is. A small group of trusted users called checkusers have the ability to check the underlying IP address(es) that an account uses. However, please be aware that, according to the checkuser policy, it cannot be used to prove one's own innocence. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

M10 Tank Destroyer

Hello, I am just curious why you renamed the M10 Tank Destroyer article to M10 Wolverine? The page was renamed M10 tank destroyer Aug 22 08 after what I consider a good discussion. There was no opposition; there was no strong citation for the wolverine name. I can't see where any discussion of putting the old, inaccurate name back might have taken place. I can't think of any reason why the article shouldn't be called "M10 Tank Destroyer" but I welcome your thoughts. Regards, DMorpheus (talk) 19:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I requested hte move at WP:RM. WIll discuss on talk page.--Patton^t/c 19:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Odd that the change would happen against the consensus of the talk page. DMorpheus (talk) 19:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request

I see you deleted all my requests at JC's page. Since he's on vaca, mind doing a couple more? There's all FPs that I'm transferring to Commons, and will replace the WP templates once deleted (see here for more more info, if you're not sure). Thanks. ~ ωαdεstεr16_♣T^C♣ 21:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this
this

Request

Could you protect my talk page? I am retiring, and I would not want anyone to vandil my page. And could I also request protection for User:96.245.84.175, User:71.185.180.70, and User:71.175.27.49, until it is cleared that I am not a sock puppet? - Rockyobody (talk) 20:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charm School 3

I don't understand, Why are you deleting my page?