User talk:PeterSymonds

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

M.O.V.E

Excuse me, but why did you delete the redirect M.o.v.e to make way for a move, despite the consensus name at the talk page being Move (Japanese band)? --Prosperosity (talk) 23:20, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, it was an uncontroversial move request; the only reason Ryulong couldn't perform the move himself was because of a bot edit that got in the way. I don't have an opinion about the move. PeterSymonds (talk) 07:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

FYI

An SPI where you previously commented has been reopened. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nableezy. Sincerely, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Onelifefreak2007

• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Onelifefreak2007/Archive

I would appreciate it, if you could take another look at this. Compare Razzinator (talk · contribs) with Razzfan (talk · contribs). Similar usernames, and both make unsourced changes to "Razzie" Awards pages. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, there just isn't enough behavioural evidence for me to take any action here. I don't think this is a sock issue. The fact that similar usernames edit an article with a similar name and introduce unsourced edits over a year apart is not strong enough. I think this now needs to be addressed as a content issue; if the edits are problematic, feel free to bring them up on the applicable noticeboard. With a few fairly obvious differences in behaviour, I don't feel comfortable with labelling this user as a sockpuppet. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Coincidentally, User talk:Razzfan has been blocked repeatedly for that same behavior pattern. So you are correct, in that if it keeps up, the account will likely face escalating blocks. -- Cirt (talk) 15:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine if he's blocked; I'm not defending his behaviour, and I haven't particularly studied it. What I have studied are his behavioural patterns from a sockpuppet investigation point of view. I would just rather not see him blocked as a sockpuppet without sufficient evidence and, while convincing, there just isn't enough in my view. Another clerk may disagree before the case is archived. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The case has already been archived. No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 15:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Can you take a look at this? Same exact articles, similar usernames, same pattern of adding unsourced info, articles include List of Total Drama series characters and List of General Hospital cast members and Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Supporting Actress, etc. This is not simply coincidence. How can I appeal this sock investigation finding? Can you please have another look at the contribs of Razzinator (talk · contribs) with Razzfan (talk · contribs) ? -- Cirt (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Update - more evidence connecting Razzinator to Razzfan

Compare [1] with [2]. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

PeterSymonds, have you had a chance to compare these two diffs? This really is a case of WP:DUCK. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 03:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

PeterSymonds, I see you were able to address me, here [3]. Perhaps you can please respond to my query, in this thread on your user talk page? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 18:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought it was a little redundant considering Fastily blocked him for unrelated reasons on September 8, so I considered the matter resolved. Was there something else you needed me to look at? Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I had not realized that. A response to my repeated queries to your talk page would have been nice. I was starting to get under the impression that you were ignoring me. :( -- Cirt (talk) 18:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Nah, I'd actually missed the thread responses until fairly recently, so I wasn't sure whether you were still wanting a follow-up. Sorry about that. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh. Alright. Well - I had posted three followup requests in the interim... Oh well. Thank you for the response today. :) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 18:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Nableezy SPI

I believe you closed the case prematurely. The new accusations are behaviorally based, not technically based, and the previous findings do not shed light on the behavior. I agree that a new CU check will not be helpful, but an experienced admin should review the behavioral suggestions and comment on their strength or weakness. Therefore, I reopened the case and put it into the non-CU section. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

With respect, I'm well aware that checkuser is not the only form of evidence, and while my comment may not have been clear enough, I'm still not convinced that the behavioural evidence is adequate to suggest sockpuppetry. It was comprehensive but circumstantial at best. I read through everything before making my closing comment, and I'll read through it again, but I was not convinced. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, if you read it through and decide that the behavioral evidence is insufficient, please note that. Thanks! -- Avi (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help!

Thank you for your help, I talked with you on #wikipedia-en-help as Loki, and you helped me in marking my CI as edit=sysop as requested (Protection Log). Again, thank you for your help. --»Wolfnix« 23:21, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

SPI clerking

Hello, I am interested in becoming a clerk at SPI. You were on the list of clerks and didn't have a trainee so I decided to contact you. I have Rollback and am familiar with the allowed uses of alt. accounts and am a fairly well established/ trusted editor. I know I'm knew but that doesn't mean that I don't understand the policies. I understand them and follow them. Mr. R00t ^Talk 19:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi; thanks for your interest. At the moment our backlog is almost exclusively centred around the administration of cases (primarily blocking users). We have enough clerks to deal with the other bits, but we'll let you know if we need more. Thanks again. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't it make sense for you to be training new clerks for when you have a backlog of new cases? Mr. R00t ^Talk 19:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but we're really in need of more people who can take care of them by blocking users and making admin judgements based on things like deleted content and contributions. DeltaQuad and Spitfire (among others) adequately cover the non-admin side of things, but we're only after admins to train at the moment. Sorry. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright, please contact me when you need clerks again. Mr. R00t ^Talk 19:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Fabstoflops sockpuppetry block

I'm missing what in the contributions points to User:Fabstoflops being a sock of anyone listed here. What in their contributions points to this?--Chaser (talk) 03:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. The page Pete Burgess after tagging it for deletion for being created by a blocked user. The other socks of Googler459 started reverting vandalism in a similar way (using the same manual summaries for warning. It's also interesting, although probably not very relevant, that this user falsifies rollback and Igloo summaries when reverting edits. It was mainly a block based on the page and similar reversions; the user denying knowledge of Bonkers189 seems odd considering the page he tagged as being created by a "blocked user" was clearly tagged as Bonkers189. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 06:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Gay Nigger Association of America up for Deletion Review

Hello! Since you participated in The MfD, you might be interested in participating in the Deletion Review, as well.

LiteralKa (talk) 04:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

A question

1st question: Hello, I have a question regarding talk pages. On English wiki we should use English language when we talk? Right? The use of other languages is not allowed?

2nd: About the warning I received[4] on the false request of User:Nmate, it is important to be retracted[5] because if another "report"[6] (where the result was case not valid) like this appear I could be banned for no apparent reason. Since the Admin who issued this warning is on indefinite Wikibreak I would like to ask you for the possibility of retracting this warning. Thank you. Adrian (talk) 12:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Palestinian leaders are habitual liars" Wikifan12345 is messing up the Hamas page.

"Palestinian leaders are habitual liars" is one of his comments from the talk page, where you can get an excellent impression of him. Anyway, I will be patient, but thought you should know he seems on a sometimes incoherent campaign to exclude all my (bloat-cutting) edits and to grow an already 140,000 plus bytes article with his 'even more bad stuff about Hamas'.Haberstr (talk) 21:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

X3D edit again

Please take a look at the history of your talk section to see the discussion of X3D edits started by me and vandalized by others. The issues have been resolved, but you should see what my original comments sparked. 138.88.65.145 (talk) 20:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

That's OK, but

That's OK you undid my revision, because the one, who this edit was addressed to read it already, but you do not know the whole story to decide what is and what is not appropriate. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, you leaved me also curious. Why was it not appropriate? Iyow2 (talk) 21:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually I am much more curious why a confirmed sock of a banned user is not blocked, and continuing wikihounding me from page to page.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Notice that the last post is not after you but asking something to the owner of this talk page that did something unexpected in mine. Iyow2 (talk) 22:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Duplicate warnings from Indexerbot

I noted some duplicate warnings with the HBC Archive Indexerbot configs you have setup. I'm fixing these for you. The Indexerbot code snippet should only be placed in one place. In your situation I did left the code snippet in /Archive 1. --Kslotte (talk) 22:13, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

An example of the code snippet removal. --Kslotte (talk) 22:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

That's a bit odd. Thanks for fixing it! PeterSymonds (talk) 07:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Block of User:Sourcedinfo on hold

I'm not sure I get this one Peter. Looking at the uploads he was making just before being blocked, he did identify where he was getting them from and filled out the required fields on the FUR. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The main issue here was uploading replaceable non-free files, the first batch I deleted. I sent the user an e-mail as it seemed more appropriate given some of the claims, explaining what the problems were, but they were reuploaded. The user then sent me an e-mail requesting clarification, explaining that some of them were owned outright, but this seemed highly improbable. But I gave a link to the OTRS e-mail address in case he wanted to declare them. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I thought I had at least a halfway decent understanding of our policies in this area but I'm still not sure I get where you are coming from here. They were album covers, were labeled as such, and seemed to have proper FURs. If he was claiming on the file description page that he owned the images I could see it, but they were clearly tagged as non-free album covers downloaded from IMDB. I'm sorry if I'm being dense here, I'm just trying to see exactly how this is blockable. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, he was uploading album covers and claiming them as his own; I deleted them and sent an e-mail explaining why I deleted them and why he couldn't use them on that article (as fair-use album covers should really be limited to articles about the album or song). He then re-uploaded them with the same rationale for the same article. That prompted the block, as I've so far had no acknowledgement of my e-mail or the follow-up. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your patience with my thick head, I think I got you now. I've declined the unblock. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Rollback proposal

WikiTome · (talk · contribs · deleted · cross-wiki · wikichecker · count · pages created · logs · block log · lu · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3) (assign permissions)

I have been working on Wikipedia to revert vandalism for a while now, although I took a break recently because it was too time consuming. Now I find myself with more time, and would like to continue by using Huggle so I can clean things up faster. As I need rollback privileges to use Huggle, I would be really grateful if you could assign them to me. Thanks so much. WikiTome ^Talk 17:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Moot Already handled at WP: RFP/R. —Soap— 19:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Explanation of John P. Costas (business) edit

Hi - can you explain your cryptic edit summary relating to the following edit to John P. Costas (business). Further, are you supporting removal of this text? I think it would be a stretch to make a case that there is a WP:BLP issue - this is directly from a Bloomberg article and it is couched as UBS's reporting of their own losses. This is not a comment about the Costas himself but rather a loss-making division of UBS that was shuttered during the financial crisis. This editor is a major WP:COI issue as an admitted former Dillon Read Capital Management trader. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 14:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

There were several reasons why I asked you to e-mail me as it's not something I'm prepared to discuss publicly. I'll send you an e-mail. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually I can't, since you don't have it enabled. Is there any chance you can enable it? Thanks. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

• I have enabled a new separate e-mail account as I feel uncomfortable having to do this outside of wikipedia. Please let me know when you have e-mailed so I can go check this account. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 18:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

You have mail. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Padguy = Peter David

You said you already confirmed his identity. [7] Someone tried to delete something he gave permission to use. I added the link to the OST ticket you mentioned, but the automatic template doesn't say its confirmed. [8] Can you please confirm his identity there, and replace it with whatever template is necessary? The talk page has more evidence of his identity and he gives permission to publish the article there. He also did it in an email he sent me, that I forwarded to you guys. Will someone with access read both emails to confirm his identity, and that he did give permission to this? Dream Focus 17:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm bringing this up again since someone just nominated that page for deletion a second time. Can you confirm that you have read the email and confirmed it? How do I update the template to show that? You didn't answer last time, you gone for awhile, and no one else apparently handling these sorts of things. Dream Focus 16:31, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I had quite forgotten! I will look into the ticket and confirm it this evening. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, more technical issues. Erm, I think there is a little confusion here. I confirmed a ticket which identified the username to the real name, as that was a point of discussion and in need of clarification. This, however, is a totally different ticket, from somebody else, claiming that "he [Peter David] said it was fine". That is not appropriate and needs to be from the subject himself. As such, I cannot say the ticket is valid, because Peter David was not the one who sent the e-mail about that image. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:21, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

If you have confirmed that Padguy = Peter David, then when Padguy says on his talk page that he is writing an article about the issue, and that anyone can use it, then doesn't that count as proof? [9] He mentions it'll be in his "But I Digress" article, and will concern the deletionists and be about the article of that actor, which in fact it was, and that anyone could publish it freely. And the email I forwarded was from Peter David, I asking specifically to upload it onto Wikipedia in that format, and he consenting. If there is no doubt whatsoever that permission was given, just by my discussion with him on his talk page alone, is that enough to keep the image? Dream Focus 17:56, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Here you go

PeterSymonds has been made a member of the Order of the Mop, for their work as an admin and is entitled to display this award for being such a great admin, Kind regards and happy editing, —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 9:43pm • 11:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

For a userbox version go here.

For your great content work, and helpful RfA criticisms, comments and votes :) Regards, —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 9:43pm • 11:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Not sure this is entirely deserved, but thanks! :-) PeterSymonds (talk) 18:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Everyone who was given the award has done something to contribute to the encyclopedia :) I believe you have too. Regards, —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 10:14pm • 11:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed unblock of User:Iaaasi

Just to let you know that I have proposed an unblock of User:Iaaasi at WP:AN if you wish to comment, having been one of the admins who blocked him. Regards, –MuZemike 14:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I am perfectly okay with that, Mike. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

RFC on vandalism sandboxes

As someone who previously participated in the discussion to adopt policy verbiage that is being used as a rationale to delete "vandalism sandboxes", your input would be appreciated on the matter: Wikipedia talk:User pages#Userspace Vandalism Sandboxes. Gigs (talk) 15:09, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Protector of Wiki

I thought I'd draw your attention to the post-block discussion on the user's talk page, where the user is simply continuing to type all in caps and refer to admins as "mods" to further irk other users, and has indicated that they have no intention of complying with the community's request. They don't seem interested in filing an unblock request either, so it might be time to withdraw their talk page access. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 08:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

"Thank you for explaining your unsolicited opinions on this block. Leave it up to the mods." Well, this "mod" agrees completely with GW. If I'd kept assuming good faith for too much longer I was going to end up getting hit with another one of these. I don't care too much about being called a "mod", I don't care too much about the ALL CAPS, I don't care too much about POW's attitude... but taken together it's become obvious that this editor isn't here to get along with other editors, and is going to continue to use their talkpage to continue their game. TFOWR 08:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I have revoked the talk page access, and referred the editor to the mailing list should they wish to put in an unblock request -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I see, but isn't he allowed to e-mail an administrator and request an unblock that way? Should his e-mail access through his account also be blocked(, which by the way forces PoW to e-mail the unblock requests mailing list)? HeyMid (contributions) 14:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I didn't do that because as far as I am aware, he hasn't abused the email system. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

OK, then I of course understand why. HeyMid (contributions) 15:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I've had technical issues. Thanks for dealing with that. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean? HeyMid (contributions) 13:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Presumably he was talking to Steve :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 13:55, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

^ PeterSymonds (talk) 15:27, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Lalo Alcaraz

Good afternoon. I personally disagree with the deletion of this person's article. I find him to be notable, and unless there's a compelling reason for the "courtesy deletion", I will likely request undeletion Purplebackpack89 22:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

If that is the case, I would much prefer you to rewrite the article from scratch. There were a few privacy concerns which prompted this deletion. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

The project tag? Purplebackpack89 22:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the question. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:41, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Tom Joyce

i notice you deleted this blp. while i normally am deferential to the subject of article, i must take issue with the statement that a MacArthur Fellows Program winner is "marginally notable". it seems he is a public figure. Accotink2 talk 01:13, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Query regarding responses

PeterSymonds, if, in the future, for whatever reasons, one finds it difficult to get a response from you after requests, [10] [11] [12], what is a good way that you would suggest to get ahold of you, or a next step to take? Just curious because it did involved legitimate disruption to the project by a user that was subsequently indef-blocked. Would like to know what users should do if this type of situation crops up again. Post a new subsection to your talk page instead of posting to an older thread higher up on the page? File a repeat SPI investigation for the same user, but with the newly-discovered evidence? Email you? Would appreciate your advice. Thank you for your time. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 18:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I have already apologised. As you can see from my talk page, it's not like I routinely ignore comments posted there. Sometimes comments in an older thread get overlooked, because issues that I think are resolved get restarted. If it's an old(ish), and you haven't got a follow-up, just poke me again or start a new section. Once I see it, I'll respond. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Alright, in the future will try starting a new subsection at the bottom of your usertalk page, if it occurs again. Thank you for the advice. It is most appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The Kitchen

Hello,

I'm wondering why you, and user jpgordon, have undone the recent edits I made to The Kitchen page? I work for the organization and we are in the process of updating it so it is accurate and consistent. Please let me know.

Thank you,

Justin Neal Justinbneal (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Justin. Unfortunately your edit was a blatant advertisement of your company, which is specifically disallowed on this site. All edits must be entirely neutral in tone, and they also must be sourced. Take a look at a few other articles to get an impression of the tone expected on Wikipedia. Let me know if you need any further assistance. :-) Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Unprotection

Hey there. Could you unprotect Template:Editor-review/editintro? I need to make some updates to it and test it in general to make it clearer and easier to understand. I think changing the protection to edit=autoconfirmed is sufficient, as this template is quite hard to find. Netalarm^talk 21:50, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Why not. Done. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Bigfoot page possible discrepancy

Hi Peter, I see that you lock the Bigfoot page to prevent vandalism. I read an article on the BFRO webpage about one of the references cited in the article, currently footnote 66 which references a Swedish book, "Berömda Vidunder". The artcle is: http://www.bfro.net/REF/wikipedia_edit.asp Could you take their arguments and research into account on the statement and reference used. They are saying that the book used is not a scientific journal, which should preclude it from the "View among the scientific community" section. Thank you for looking at this, Mike Mikek2003 (talk) 02:59, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Section headers(AfD)

Sorry about the 'Some housekeeping items' header I placed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Cote (film director). The creator of the article is inserting his comments within others' posts and it was getting messy (and has gotten messy again). I was trying to keep my comments separate from the consensus-building but attached to the AfD since there are new/one-subject editors posting there. Shearonink (talk) 14:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. :-) PeterSymonds (talk) 19:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Ray Vander Laan page

Why was the Ray Vander Laan page deleted? Did Ray request this deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.177.54 (talk) 19:30, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Herb Sandler article

Hi, you protected the Herb Sandler article which basically removed the following text [[13]]:

Begin Quote Sandler and his wife have throughout their public life denounced predatory lenders and the poor underwriting practices of other lenders. However, the actual practices of their firm especially in the 2000s, undermined their conservative lending principles and reputations, especially in the wake of the housing crash in 2008.[4]

The Sandlers are credited with the invention of the "Pick-A-Pay" mortgage that allowed borrowers to pay less than the interest due on their loan each month -- which increased the total amount owed by the borrower. Analysts place the blame on the near failure of Wachovia in the fall of 2008 on the "Pick-A-Pay" mortgage portfolio they acquired from the Sandler's firm.[5]

Martin Eakes, the director of the Center for Responsible Lending, said that prepayment penalties would make it hard for cash-poor borrowers to refinance a loan for one with more manageable terms, and helped to get a law passed in North Carolina prohibiting such charges. The Sandlers supported prepayment penalties, acknowledging that lenders used the penalties to lock borrowers into “absolutely awful” loans, but saying that his firm used the penalties to fend off unethical brokers who enticed borrowers with low-interest-rate loans that often had hidden fees. Sandler described independent brokers as "the whores of the world”, nonetheless by 2006 independent brokers generated 60 percent of World Savings' loan business, and he claimed that he was compelled to do so because of brokers were a dominant force in the mortgage industry. World Savings was suppose to telephone applicants to ensure that they understood the terms of their loan, as a check on the representations that brokers made to borrowers, but these calls reached only about half of the borrowers. [6] End Quote

I cannot understand what precisely the BLP concerns are? The information may be negative, but it is well sourced (mostly the New York Times). Please explain.

Thanks,

LN

Mick

I'm no fan of Mick (and have been the target of his invective a few times) and as usual his response was OTT, but he was baited unreasonably there. I suppose the ban from his talk page was bound to happen, but I think if left alone he might have thought better in the cold light of day. Not a complaint by the way, just a note. I have reverted the offensive point per WP:BAIT as don't think Mick's use of obscenities justifies the use against him even if the intent was ironic. --Snowded ^TALK 21:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, your block modification has been undone and this is now being discussed at WP:ANI.  Sandstein  22:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I was apparently under the mistaken impression that actions such as these should be discussed with those who issued them. :-) Clearly I was wrong. I can't say I'm that bothered about it though. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Clerk Trainee

I was wondering since I have seen you on the IRC, if you would consider taking me on as your SPI clerk trainee. I truly would like to assist with SPI requests. I have read all the clerk information and agree to abide by those policies and know when and when not to endorse a request for a CU. Thank you.  JoeGazz  ▲  12:25, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Update?  JoeGazz  ▲  00:59, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, PeterSymonds. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

via donatewikimedia.org ǝɥʇM0N0 23:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know how to interpret that response. However, I've forwarded your appeal to Deniz, who is organising the appeals drive. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 09:15, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

McMarkerly

Be a pal and stuff a cork in him, please? HalfShadow 09:22, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. Probably a sock. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 09:23, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

James A. Forsythe

Hi, I'd like to finish the article. Thanks. Lionel (talk) 02:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

You have mail. PeterSymonds (talk) 09:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks! Lionel (talk) 23:20, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Old Skull article

Sadly, a member of the band Old Skull died this week and as news is trickling in, it's being added to the page. Unfortunately, there's a person using an anonymous IP address to delete sourced info only to replace it with misspelled words and tribute stile verbage. Please take a look. I have no desire to break the 3 revert rule and this is already getting out of hand. You've helped me in similar situations before. Hopefully you can do so again. Thanks! NJZombie (talk) 22:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Ionuţ Caragea page

Hello, Peter. I was istructed to speak with you. (1.discuss the matter with the deleting administrator and try to resolve it with him or her first. If you and the admin cannot work out a satisfactory solution, only then should you bring the matter before Deletion review.) Can you help me with this?[14]

Thank you very much--Danielconstantin (talk) 13:18, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ionuţ Caragea

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ionuţ Caragea. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Danielconstantin (talk) 13:38, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

BS

		The Original Barnstar
		Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Another

Thank you for defending Wikipedia!--MONGO 04:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Check this out...

What do you think of these edits here? Are they vandalism? It's just because some IP here is threatening me to be reported to you guys on my talk page. Thanks.--Mr. Berty ^talk/_stalk 16:01, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Who says editing can't be fun?

ZAPPO! HalfShadow 17:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

While I'm sure your intentions were fun, that simply is not appropriate. Please avoid that in future. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Awyernofunatall... HalfShadow 18:15, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

#wikipedia-en-admins

I see from meta:IRC/wikipedia-en-admins/User list that you are an operator of the channel. Would you be able to grant me access to it? Regards, Jujutacular ^talk 02:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Hiya; done. You'll need to type /msg ChanServ invite #wikipedia-en-admins to enter the channel (make sure you're logged into freenode before you type that). If you get a cloak, you'll be able to join automatically. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

That worked, thank you! Jujutacular ^talk 12:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Great! You're welcome. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your support at my RfA last week. I'll do everything I can to live up to your expectations and trust. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Very best of luck. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Special Const. Melanie Morris

I am wondering why this article was deleted and how may I make it better so it doesn't get deleted again. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enagik609 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC)