User talk:Pedro/Archive 36

Well
... if nothing else Pedro, I guess nobody will ever accuse me of "playing it safe". ;) — Ched : ?  23:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh! Pedro : Chat  23:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Somebody asked me if I had copied your style for the nom statement, I hadn't realized it, but I guess that subconsciously, I did. They do say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ... ;) — Ched :  ?  23:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Odd External Link
What was this about? The Onion is a well known satirical site. Seems an odd action for someone as clued up as your good self? Pedro : Chat  23:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The Onion is a popular satirical observer of American culture, including the moon landing hoax. I should have provided an explanation of that with the link, but I thought it would be self-evident.  By the way, a newspaper in Bangladesh accidentally reprinted the story as credible news . Cla68 (talk) 23:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've read the online version of The Onion for several years - which I was I thought it odd to be added as a useful link to that article - or to be honest to any article except those dealing with The Onion itself. I'm not clear how it would be useful to the readership to add a link to a spoof in the "external links". No biggie, just suprised a bit. Pedro : Chat  23:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy Labor Day!
Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 05:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

RFA chat
Actually, now you mention it...I think Ched mentioned this to you way back. Perhaps we could discuss this...idk. I'm not as active as I used to be, but I'd like to give it a go one day. :) Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 22:56, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was indeed Ched. My apologies for my lack of effort. Need to do some rattle regarding the password sharing thing I believe? Old history now. Let me find some time, if, of course, you'd like to run. Current need of admins - backlogs - RFA empty - no big deal et. al. would I hope persuade you that it would be a good thing. Pedro : Chat  22:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that's always worried me. I'd always give RFA a go, as I see things, I have nothing to lose. I've not done much article work lately, actually, I haven't done much at all lately. I always have been, at heart, a metapedian, but I am capable of article work. I just have a perfectionist attituide to article work, and struggle to write an article unless I can complete it first time around. There is a need of admins, no doubt, and I do still think I know how to do adminy stuff. It's proving it to the community - and the community can be rough. That's the dilemma. What would you suggest? Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 23:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest a quality nominator. However, as luck would have it you've got me instead ... heh heh heh! :). I'm off to bed now, but I will reply tomorrow or over the weekend at the latest to address your concerns. Pedro : Chat  23:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh. No rush, reply when you can. Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 23:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent) There's also this guy... (I saw your comment on the RFA talk page and it jogged my memory to the point that I had to spend 20 mins hunting this diff down... I need a life...) Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  01:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ched watches this thread with great interest! — Ched : ?  04:27, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and per this thread. Pedro, could you please forward an application for my super-sekrit decoder ring. ;) — Ched :  ?  06:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You have mail. Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 15:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look now. Pedro : Chat  15:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, poke me when possible. Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 04:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I came across...
...as trying to justify my actions in some weird way. My communication skills are useless, it seems, around certain editors. Other times, I think I do pretty well. I was really just trying to articulate that everyone's got issues, so I wasn't taking a swipe at anyone's "mental health". I don't pretend to "justify" anything I do by citing some "condition". I take full responsibility for every time I hit "save". Just wanted to clarify that. Thanks for listening. -GTBacchus(talk) 06:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I came of wrong on that thread - I wasn't trying to accuse anyone of "justifying" things - I was jujst concerned that there seemed to be a needlesly heated discussion between to editors I respect and it is always painful to see two of the "good guys" in disagreement with each other. Pedro : Chat  07:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries. I'm glad we're a varied bunch, so even when personalities clash, everyone has got others they can work with. I just live and learn, live and learn... :) -GTBacchus(talk) 10:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Note
You've got mail ... well, of the "electronic" sort at least. :) — Ched : ?  11:40, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Pedro, due to real life time issues that Steve Crossin has expressed to me, I have created a RfA for him. I do apologize if I am overstepping my bounds here, and if you wish to redo, refactor, or co-nom .. the RfA is at: Requests for adminship/Steve Crossin. Thank you. — Ched :  ?  01:57, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah ! No probs - ploease ignore my last email. Doesn't look to promising so far :( Pedro : Chat  06:59, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It's still only early days. We'll soon see if I can weather the storm that is RFA. I'm a bit suprised by the lack of questions (I'll probably wake up tomorrow and have like 50 though). Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 07:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well - good luck my man - I've added my vocal support. Pedro : Chat  07:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Returning the favour
-. :) Kanonkas : Talk  16:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh! An impressive collection as well sir! Pedro : Chat  19:49, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: my RfA.
Hi Pedro, I wanted to take this opportunity to show my sincere gratitude in response to your support on my RfA nomination. Thanks you from the bottom of my heart - I hope we can build a friendship upon this. Kindest regards; Gareth aka Pr3st0n (talk)

ANI
I've undone your close. You are blatantly partial and should not have closed that thread William M. Connolley (talk) 20:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Errrr - you have not, in fact undone my second closure? So now I am very confused. Pedro : Chat  20:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * William M. Connolley (talk) 20:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So wots the history with you and WMC? I cannot quite work out if its entirely flippant or there is some genuine irritation. --BozMo talk 20:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, to be honest it's all done now. Suffice to say that to revert a closure of a thread - a thread that is actually against you - and then ask someone else to do it just because of a perception of bias by the person closing it is, well, bizarre. Since his desysop I think WMC is going all out to troll the place in the hope of a block. Still, I'm bored with his bullying and all is well in the world. Pedro : Chat  06:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Despite your block
User: 75.52.186.148 is back to mass vandalism - would you have a look? Thanks -- Snowded  TALK  10:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Blocked again, and some optimistic "apology" form the "actuall computer owner" on their talk. Hmmmm - I've got the watchlisted in case of further issues. Ta! Pedro : Chat  10:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll believe that apology when I don;t see the IP again! -- Snowded  TALK  20:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh! Yes, on the probability scale it is kind of up there with the sky spontaneously turning green at the same time I grow a third leg. Ah..... good old AGF :) Pedro : Chat  20:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

ping
You have an e-mail. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * My thanks for the heads up. I have not the slightest concern whatsoever. Pedro : Chat  08:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

please restore
I was just looking at the Inside the Forbidden City (1963 film) page which seems to have just been deleted by you. I think the page had been around for a long time (at least since Jan 2008 since there was a comment in the talk page since that time) and is not a "blatant" hoax in that there really is a movie by that name. Can you please restore it so that it can be investigated further? Thanks, Shymian (talk) 08:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I don't know if I'm supposed to reply here or not... Thanks for restoring and for your comments. I do agree that the correct year should be 1965 and not 1963.  The "blatant hoax" tag misled me into thinking that the article itself was bad, not that it was either a duplicate or had the incorrect year.  You can re-delete it at your leisure :-)  Thanks, Shymian (talk) 09:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to review and make sure! Appreciated. Pedro : Chat  09:26, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

ISD's RfA
Sorry, I had been misreading your comment and thinking you were complaining about question-frenzy. Now that I look again at what you said, I think we're actually in total agreement :) r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 19:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No problems and thank you for the note and kind words. Pedro : Chat  20:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Me too
I agree but don't want to muddy the waters by chiming in. The even more important thing, in my view, is that serious effort has been made with content, which is why we're here. Cheers, and thanks for your level-headedness. Frank |  talk  15:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

spam
I know that you've been interested in these issues in the past. WikiProject Administrator

You've told me "when in doubt .. don't" ... I'm not sure how this will work, and I hope you're not disappointed in me - but I have to try Pedro. I have to be true to who I am, and I have to be honest to my soul. If you are disappointed in my actions of late, I hope that you will at least be forgiving. If I'm making huge mistakes, it's only because I am trying. All my best. — Ched : ?  06:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I love your comments
at the BN. Seriously, you're reminding me of myself more and more : )  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 17:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Given the recent sock puppetry dramaz we could be the same person you know ! :) Pedro : Chat  18:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. – xeno talk  18:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It was my little brother what done it - honest - all he does is poop ............. :) Pedro : Chat  19:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Poops in socks? That's gross! – xeno talk  19:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * A 144 poops in a sock! That's big footwear! Pedro : Chat  19:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have also blocked Pedro89, just to be sure. Useight (talk) 19:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd block Jimbo to make 100% certain :) Pedro : Chat  19:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Odd stuff
I just came back, went to wikipedia and the main page has everything in german (not the articles - but the links / tabs etc) Anyone else get that? Pedro : Chat  19:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope, I not got that, its all in English at this end (or should that be... Seines alle auf Englisch an diesem Ende) lol. Pr3st0n (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything looks fine here. FireFox 3 and XP Pro. Useight (talk) 20:28, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Really odd - it was just the tabs and the watchlist / preferences etc links at top right. It cleared after I went to another page. Probably me! Thanks for the sanity check gents. Pedro : Chat  21:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Rapulu
Hi Pedro, why is Phil Bridger so hard on me? Even if he didn't find my submission worthy of Wikipedia, shouldn't he have been nice in telling me? I'm new here and was hoping to get some help if I make mistakes, but he attacked me as if I just entered a lions den. He had edited most of his insults and attacks so you didn't get to see them. Is this how Wikipedia is supposed to be working? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapulu (talk • contribs) 20:47, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Ping
I replied again, in case you didn't see that.  ceran  thor 20:46, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No probs - got it, but will need some time to review - and wiki time currently limited by ANi debate on my gross misconduct .... or something. Pedro : Chat  20:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

My talk page
Hi Pedro, thanks for trying to protect me by reverting the talk from User:24.138.75.74 on my talk page, however just for future FYI, I prefer to leave those comments there. I may be in the minority, but unless comments are blatant attacks or filled with profanity, I see no reason to convince other users that they're being "silenced" by removing their talk from my talk page. Accordingly, I undid your revert and responded to the comment. But thanks though, and keep up the great work. --Shirik (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Pedro. I would also like to thank you for dealing with Pedro by blocking him. I had no idea users on here could send messages like that, and now my daughter has read the foul things he wrote when she tried to access Wikipedia. He should remain blocked permanently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.46.71 (talk) 02:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thanks
MrKIA11 (talk) 12:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Practice What You Preach (disambiguation)
Comments like this are unwarrantable if you want to tell people to stop swearing or using other forms of offensive language on here. I don't endorse the actions of User:RMHED at all but saying that you'll "fuck off now" is not practicing what you preach at all. If you don't want someone foul mouthing, do not foul mouth yourself in your edits either because doing so only promotes bad language to continue. An unacceptable comment on your part, no matter how you wish to justify yourself.-- Sky Attacker    the legend reborn...  02:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * For fuck's sake. From the best of my knowledge, Pedro has never asked anyone to stop "foul mouthing", swearing, or otherwise stop using some form of offensive language simply for the sake of it. We're not fucking censored. "Bad language" is something your mommy taught you, not something that needs to be preached against here. Tan   &#124;   39  05:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sky Attacker are you fucking kidding me? Fucking Pedro would be one of the last fucking people to tell people to stop fucking swearing. It was all in context of the thread. Secondly, if RHMED had an issue with it they would be more than capable of fucking saying so.  « l | Promethean ™ | l »   (talk) 06:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tan and Promethan. Sky Attacker, I'm afraid you seriously didn't read the context of that thread did you? Pedro : Chat  12:15, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Lara ☁ 21:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Most welcome. Whatever our past issues, I have no doubt about your abilty to use the extra tools on this website, and indeed I opposed and still oppose the removal of them as detrimental to Wikipedia. Pedro : Chat  20:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Yo ho ho


 Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Huggle Bot Acc
Hi, I was just wondering, because I'm not to keen on my Huggle edits clogging up my Contribs, and I want to use another account, would I be allowed to create a account called LcawteBot I for example to use for Huggle? And what process' other than creating the account and getting rollback would I have to go through, if any? --Lcawte (talk) 16:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't use the word "bot" in any alternate account as that's reserved for accounts that are actually bots. Choose something like "Lcawte Alternate" or whatever. If you create the account and link it to your main one (log in to you main account and post to confirm) then I can grant rollback to the alternate account and you can install huggle into your css. Pedro : Chat  16:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, so I'm going for LcawteHuggle... --Lcawte (talk) 16:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

What about for bot accounts for AWB and Pywikipedia? --Lcawte (talk) 16:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't know what py. have as a policy so can't comment I'm afraid. For AWB - if the account is being operated by a human for the purposes of making changes on WP avoid the word "bot". If it's automated (even using AWB as the vehicle) then that's fine to have as a bot name - but don't forget it should have a bot flag (see WP:BRFA) Pedro : Chat  16:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah - confusion reigns! If written in pywikipedia see above - WP:BRFA! Pedro : Chat  16:44, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

LcawteHuggle has been created: Log --Lcawte (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Edit: Your Bcrat/Sysop right? So you can see Deleted Contribs, could you look up when my first edit day is for Lcawte and WebCoder11, thanks! --Lcawte (talk) 19:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added rollback to for you. What do you mean by "first edit day" ? Unless your first edits were deleted then anyone can see them.. ? Pedro :  Chat  20:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, first edit day in first edit I made, the day it was on. I'm not too sure what my first edit was as my account has been around a while and it may be that I edited a page that has been deleted since. Oh and hows the Account Creation thing on the Toolserver going? Need more users for it or are you on top of everything? --Lcawte (talk) 20:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The first edit you made that has been deleted was only in May 2009 from your main account so likely your earliest edits still show from your contribution history without needing to see deleted ones. Pedro : Chat  21:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * And your only delted edit with the Webcoder account was Novemeber! Pedro : Chat  21:01, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Help Desk response about legal advice
Hi, I don't know if you knew it, but there is a Help Desk Template about legal advice:, which gives:

We cannot offer legal advice. Please see the legal disclaimer. Contact your lawyer.

Regards, --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No I didn't - thanks for the heads up! Pedro : Chat  10:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays


Ret.Prof (talk) 13:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to your friends' talk pages.

Pedro is a Fagggot (sic)
. Alas, I'm afraid I am not a rather tender and tasty meatball. Oh, and as it goes, I'm not gay, not Spanish and not overly liberal. But I do suck lolly pops if it helps. Pedro : Chat  20:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I do believe sic is meant to appear in [square brackets]. – xeno talk  20:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia, only if you wish it to link to something?. Pedro : Chat  20:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No I mean [sic] instead of (sic) ... Just trying to be an annoying pedant, you see. – xeno talk  20:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * So now, if I ever quote Pedro on this, I should say "Pedro is a Fagggot (sic) [sic]"? --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * oOo. Good one. – xeno talk  20:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * What's a "spick"? --Malleus Fatuorum 20:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It's "spick [sic]". --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Piers Anthonys "Bio of a space tyrant" had much on this as I recall. And a good, although hardly taxing, read the books are. Which is more than can be said for the IP's comments that assume my username means I'm Spanish. On that basis Malleus is an Italian dead by some 1,500 years, Xeno is likely an ancient Greek and Floquenbeam needs to stop his or her fog lamps from glaring :) Pedro : Chat  20:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am ὁ ξένος (a foreigner) – xeno talk  20:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Aye :) Pedro : Chat  20:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Someone with the username "Pedro" has to be Mexican/Spanish. Makes sense to me, as I did in fact die 1,500 years ago. Then again 936 years ago ... and then ... --Malleus Fatuorum 21:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually ...
Actually, only about half of the headline number of admins are nominally active, which I think is a step in the right direction. Perhaps one day there will be the Nirvanah of no active admins, if the project can ever develop a more adult style of governance. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 21:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Reminds me of some words from a guy who was considered either a genius or a traitor: "Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise..." Tan   &#124;   39  03:46, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Barring
Would i get barred by you if I was rude about you personally? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bledmeister (talk • contribs) 12:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Pedro does not hold grudges and no, he would probably not block you if you caused him even mild discomfort. However, if your goal is merely to troll users on Wikipedia, please move it elsewhere since you will be block by someone for certain.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 15:15, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * ^ What Wisdom said. Pedro : Chat  08:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Speaking only from personal experience, I'd say say that Pedro was a rational adult who would not deploy his banhammer for a simple case of rudeness. Sadly the same can't be said of all his comprades though, so one of them may well descend on you for using a naughty word. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Of all the admin tools that I (rarely) use BLOCK is the one I take most care of. Rudeness, incivilty, attacks - water of a ducks back. Blatant vandlaism, SPA's and trolling - it happens and one deals with it. However I think M just made my Xmas - rational adult?! Mind you I'm knackered from wrapping up a half-hundred weight of presents from *santa* so rational likely not, adult - sadly yes.. Pedro : Chat  00:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


A NobodyMy talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 19:58, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * And I add my wishes as well...Merry Christmas!


 * Me too! Enjoy your family!   Keeper  |  76  21:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Lulz...! The Rambling Man (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!
  

 Set Sail  For The   Seven Seas    34° 52' 30" NET    02:19, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Reminder about an offer you made a while ago
Hi Pedro,

You might recall your offer back in September to co-nominate me at RFA once I had clawed my way out of the WP:NOTNOW hole. I've been a bit more active recently, and I believe an RFA has at least a fighting chance of being successful now. If the offer still stands, I'd be honored. I've pinged Majorly too.

Before you agree, there's one wrinkle you should know about. I previously edited under another name. I retired that account for privacy reasons, so I don't want to publicly disclose its name. I've asked Alison to review the old account's edits, and verify on-wiki that I'm not hiding any blocks, bans, warnings, edit warring, POV pushing, or any other skeletons in the closet. I've also asked her to review my "privacy reasons", to verify it's a legitimate concern, and not a smoke screen. Her comments, once she's finished her review, will be here: Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Floquenbeam.

I plan to basically say what I just said above in the RFA, and link to her comments. I'm convinced having privacy issues with an old account shouldn't preclude future adminship, and I'm being up front with it at RFA, so I don't think this will torpedo anything. But I'm not sure how you feel about this kind of thing, so I didn't want to spring any surprises on you. In any case, I certainly understand you'll probably want to wait to see her review before going forward. Let me know if you have any problems with this. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * You've got email. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:27, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Email received, will reply after maddnes of Xmas and sall children - but for on wiki confirmation I think your actions are entirely correct. Pedro : Chat  21:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed, madness and small children come first in Casa Floquenbeam too. No rush, hoping to get this started in the next week or two, not today or anything crazy like that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Pedro, I notice you haven't been onwiki much; is real life still taking almost all of your time? Alison has done her bit; I'm ready whenever you and Majorly are. If real life is still keeping you too busy, I'm happy to wait a week or two more. And if there's no end in sight, perhaps I'll forge ahead with one nom? Let me know. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the kind nom. FYI, I anticipate starting this either today, early tomorrow, or next Tuesday, depending on how my real life schedule goes today and how Majorly's schedule works out.  I don't edit much on Thursdays and weekends due to real life commitments, so I don't want to start an RFA  on Wednesday afternoon and then more or less disappear for a day while the questions pile up.  Now, I'm off to read WP:BANBLOCKDIFF, WP:COOLDOWN, and WP:CSD so it looks like I know what the hell I'm doing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries - and good luck. Pedro : Chat  13:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

yo!
I will vote for you, pedro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Editpowah (talk • contribs) 21:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't however. There in lies the problem. Pedro : Chat  21:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Not that it matters
But the editor of the indented vote is not an "ip." His name just mimics one. Best.Bali ultimate (talk) 22:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops - it does matter - thank you sir! Pedro : Chat  22:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Technically
the indent was for the pointiness, but that can be done by the closing admin. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Bureaucrats close these types of RFA's not admins, but yep. Pedro : Chat  22:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * By the closing beauracrat. But, yeah. If he does it again, I'll leave it, as the RfA won't go anywhere. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Birthday (The Beatles song)
(you'll have to hum it yourself, I can't link to youtube from this computer)

Per this: Happy Birthday! "For he's a jolly good fellow..." --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:07, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
I was wondering if you could grant me rollback permissions? I'd really like to use Huggle and it would make is so much easier to revert vandalism. Thanks!-- iBendiscuss 04:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Err, sorry, but why do you revert my contributions all the time? --217.23.9.4 (talk) 23:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Edit summary
Oops. Guess there's a backstory here I wasn't aware of. :0 Happy New Year, Kafka Liz (talk) 23:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Yo
Hope your holidays were wonderful, mine were pretty darn good. As for the RfA, I think I've decided on a date, which would be in 3-4 months. Email me if you have any questions; I certainly have some for you.  ceran  thor 17:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries - will do. Pedro : Chat  17:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I think I've decided on a date as well, Pedro. How does November 16, 2013 sound?  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 20:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I've decided on a date too. The next anniversary of Hell freezing over. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's November 16, 2013!  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 20:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Should I dust off my tinfoil hat for November 16, 2012? Tan   &#124;   39  21:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Gents, no point apparently. Tan might just get his Tin foil hat for a month but that's it :) Pedro : Chat  21:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your comments on my post for Nancy
Hi Pedro, to save you looking I'll repeat my comments from my reply to your post on Nancy's page.
 * I welcome all shoving of noses!! I've just gone back and looked again at the Aidan article, and am now in two minds. He does seem to have been mentioned or discussed in a context beyond BGT (redirect pointed to series 3 article previously), but I'm now a bit concerned that the majority of refs are either a local newspaper (bias?) and Aidan's personal website. Although there is one that seems to be in Turkish.. I'm thinking that this classes that article as WP:BLP1E, and I definitely think Jessica's article fits that description.

My main intent with that post wasn't about the articles I gave as examples, but more to highlight to Nancy that despite repeated warnings and subsequent promises here that user appears to be continuing along the same path.

Thanks for your input - it's made me look into the articles a bit more and confirm to myself that my original post stands. Bertcocaine (talk) 22:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * My appologies Bertcocaine for not looking into that element. I think that it's important to judge the articles and not the editor behind them, although if an editor has had repeated problems in the past obviously one tends to look harder! Certainly you were right to flag the issue for admin attention but always remember that you can be bold in addressing most issues with an editor, short of blocking, your self. Sorry I didn't look further. Pedro : Chat  23:16, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

No need for apologies! I quite agree that the articles are the important bit. I came across that trail during the recent excitement over the Rage Against The Machine article, and those related, as the user in question had made quite a few edits to Joe McElderry and that led me to Nancy's comments. After a couple of years of dabbling I'm starting to find more of my time taken up with this Wikipedia thing! Also finding the different styles of the various Admins amusing.. such as the comedy replies by yourself and others on this very page. BTW, I'm usually quite bold (see my edits to RATM!!) but in those cases felt a little uninformed on the topics to start changing the articles he's been amending.

Hopefully we'll cross paths again in the future. :-) Bertcocaine (talk) 23:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

IShadowed
You're very right in that their oppose is valid, but I still find it shallow and perhaps lacking an adequate rationale. My intention wasn't to badger IShadowed, but instead to ask if she had any further rationale for opposing if for nothing else than my own knowledge. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 23:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I find that reasoning to be consistent with (bromidic as it may be nowadays) badgering, JC. If you were confused, or saw something wrong, then by all means, ask for clarification. Just because you find it "shallow", though, isn't a reason to stick your nose in. Disclaimer: I'm sure I've been guilty of this at some point or another. Tan   &#124;   39  23:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I continue to find it amusing and instructive that administrators hold themelves to far lower standards of behaviour than they hold regular editors to. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You're probably right. Back to the mainspace with me. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

RfA
Good nomination, imo, User:Floquenbeam. I really like his/her editing style, and think this user would make a good example for adminship on wikipedia. -- IP69.226.103.13 |  Talk about me.  02:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I lost my crystal ball a little while ago. Where do you buy yours from? --Malleus Fatuorum 03:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Doris Stokes ???

Typo
Happy to fix it. (Your statement didn't make any sense to me when the date was "5th January".) --Orlady (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

RFA
He clearly asked that the Rfa be allowed to run for the full seven days. I opposed, but still, why deny that request?  D u s t i SPEAK!! 22:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

RFA Explanation
Please elaborate on your decision to close my nomination for adminship. It was far from WP:POINT, and it was a serious attempt at gaining admin rights. Please explain what my current attitude is, and what is wrong with it. My previous attitude, that which I showed yesterday, is not my current attitude. In addition, I would appreciate knowing what exactly it was a disruption to.

I am not trolling, rather I am making a much more serious attempt at gaining the position I desire. Your response is appreciated. Alex (talk) 22:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your response. Alex (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback...
Hi Pedro, I think I'm a bit lost. I'd already read all of those discussions. My current stance is that I'm looking for a bureaucrat to confirm that the statements made by Allison are correct and that there are no major issues with the person's previous account or overlapping use of accounts. Apparently one bureaucrat has gotten that information, so I'm waiting... Until I see that, or something similar, my intent is to remain opposed. I strongly suspect it won't matter either way in the result of course, but I think if we are going to pass these kinds of things, there should be a standard scheme for doing so. Traditionally bureaucrats are entrusted with all things RfA, so that seems like the right way to go. Hobit (talk) 01:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Once Flo's RFA is done I'm wikibreaking - for a while
The fucking idiocy, revenge, petty point scoring, hypocrisy and lack of basic clue coupled with the bureaucratic fuck wits out there have done me in. I need a break - I'm not enjoying this site at the moment - actually I hate the stress which is not good for a hobby. I've made a lot of fucks ups and some exceptionaly bad edits myself, and Flo's RFA just shows what an utter bunch of aresholes there are amongst some exceptionally fine people. Problem is the arseholes are winning. Pedro : Chat  20:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Just sent you an email, my friend. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No doubt the blackberry will ping in a moment :) Pedro : Chat  20:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep. I'm walking away now. You're right. Pedro : Chat  20:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The only thing between you and a free beer, my friend, is the Atlantic Ocean. Just a website. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, he may become an admin yet. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The outcome of this particular RfA shouldn't really dictate Pedro's decision. A break maybe forthcoming. His call.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 12:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Pedro, I am confident that Floquenbeam will pass. If you're gone, I should probably wait for you to come back before an RfA, you're the best nom around (still going strong). :) Plus, I doubt anybody on wiki knows me as well as you.  ceran  thor 13:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I hope you enjoy your break, of course. Seems the save didn't quite keep that.  ceran  thor 17:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your nomination, and for your support. I hadn't really thought this through enough to realize that your honesty was going to be called into question, and I regret that. You have my deepest appreciation. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Despite the fact that I opposed, I want to say good luck. Also, Pedro, your nominations are always spectacular. They don't always do the job though : )  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 16:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The right outcome for WP. And it's about time you got round to number 5 Wisdom! Pedro : Chat  17:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, I just don't see it happening my friend. Make sure your Wikirespite lets you alleviated your jadedness.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 17:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Wisdom, I'm only one guy, but you'd have my support. Useight (talk) 21:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Wait, what happened to you, Pedro? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RyanRetroWickawack (talk • contribs) 16:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC) lulz pedro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.4.4 (talk) 23:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
-- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 20:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
-- &#47; MWOAP &#124; Notify Me &#92; 21:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Your advice
I do not consider my block ill-advised, let alone unresearched and "total gross abuse". Malleus and Roux' longstanding squabbles have spanned at least three venues concurrently in recent days. If their Godzilla vs. Mothra posturing is so noticeable that I see it, you know it's bad. If someone can explain how constant personal attacks, unfounded accusations and thread derailing by both parties is helping the encyclopedia, I'd like to hear that explanation... It doesn't matter who's in the right here—both are acting to a degree that no one in the real world would tolerate and we shouldn't, either; WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA and WP:BATTLE, in particular, are being flagrantly disregarded to the detriment of good productive work. I'll continue preventing their disruption as appropriate; if you feel I'm abusing my powers, by all means start an RfC or file an ANI report. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 00:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If you carry on with that attitude then I'll see you desyoped. I've just about had it with sanctimonious twats like you. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * In the meantime I'll no doubt get blocked again, because it's OK for you to sit in judgement on me, but not OK for me to call you a sanctimonious twat for doing so and not even bothering to get your facts straight. This place sickens me more by the day. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you come off with this "abusing my powers" shit but you seriously need an attitude readjustment if you think that's an acceptable comment David. Your signature says enough about your over inflated opinion of your "status" without banging on about your perceived "powers" to be honest. A bit of humility costs nothing. Pedro : Chat  22:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no clue as to what you find so unacceptable about my comment. You have accused me of making a bad block; if it's really that egregious, I invite you to start an RfC—my point was that I do not agree with your assertion that I abused my admin tools. I'm unsure of where pomposity came into this equation, or what evidence my signature (beside my enjoyment of Bach) provides to that. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 22:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Bluntly, you act like a four your old child David - something I have a lot of experience in. If you have no clue as to why "admin powers" is a pompous overly self-important comment then it is not worth debating. It's your character flaw not mine. I consider this conversation over, and I'd ask you not to post on my talk page again unless it is unrelated to this thread or as an acknowledgment of this reply.  Pedro :  Chat  22:41, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Boromir123

 * Boromir123 · (talk · contribs · deleted · · count · · [ logs] · [ block log] · [ lu] · rfar · rfc · rfcu · ssp · spi · search an, ani, cn, an3 ) ( assign permissions )
 * I have been a member of Wikipedia for over 2.5 years and I am committed to fight vandalism. Having rollback rights would aid me in reverting vandalism type edits. I truly appreciate your consideration. Boromir123 (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ No worries. Pedro : Chat  15:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you:) Boromir123 (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey
I hope everything's going well for you and the kids; for me, there's snow galore! I want to stop by to say hi, to make sure everything's going well, and also to ask a question. Are you still active around these bits? I know we chatted about running an RfA: I was planning on running in later spring, ideally April or, if I have to, late March. Are you still interested in discussing this with me? I know real life's killer busy, so don't worry about it if you don't have the time. I'm in no hurry to run for the mop and, seeing as you were my original teacher 'round these pars, I want to decide on something with you first. Regards,  ceran  thor 01:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm still about checking in, just real real busy IRL. But I can certainly make time to have a chat and no doubt rustle up a nomination!! Pedro : Chat  09:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, if you could email me or give me a shout when you're free to chat, I'll try to find time for it, too!  ceran  thor 14:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Just a thank you for a mature attitude
Hi, I've just read the response to the rollback message. Though I am disappointed, considering that the edits quoted (as to why I had the rights removed) were at times, nothing to do with rollback (see my talk page), I am glad that someone did it with maturity and the ability to see that an admin was being unprofessional. Thank you for that. Paralympiakos (talk) 23:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

HalfShadow
I never thought I'd defend Halfshadow, but that post was in relation to an exchange at ANI where someone mistook him for an admin. I believe you missed the context.--Cube lurker (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

HalfShadow and Bish were joking, I think...
See, after the new editor mistook HalfShadow for an admin.

I don't think it was anything more than a small shared joke. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

At least you admitted you made a mistake.
I respect that. Half Shadow  23:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyway, shouldn't you be asleep? It's gotta be midnight where you are. I assume you're in the UK due to the terminology you use. Half  Shadow  00:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point. And the likely 6:45 am start from my young lady sees like bad news :) Good night. Pedro : Chat  00:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I lol'ed
This comment made me laugh. I'm impressed by your humour and willingness to admit a mistake. Just thought I would tell you directly. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Your message
I find your messages concerning, Given that I do tend to read image descriptions, when found the image was lacking information, so the appropriate tag was issued, as the Image page itself indicated.

The information that it was to be removed in a couple of days was only mentioned when the image information was updated as a result of the notification issued it seems.

I expect an apology, for your accusation I need to take more care. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Notification of proposed topic/interaction ban on Tbsdy
See here for the proposal. Based on some recent interaction you may have had with the user(s) I thought you might want to know. Thanks. Equazcion ( talk ) 23:49, 14 Feb 2010 (UTC)