User talk:Pedro/Archive 46

Inactive 'crats
My response to your deleted post:


 * Eh? Well perhaps we need an inactive 'crats policy/guideline just as we do with inactive admins.  No reason why not.  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:21, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Propose it, I'm sure we'll sign up for it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:21, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 'Twould appear it was proposed and agreed some time back judging by the thread! Pedro : Chat  11:21, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Request for permissions/Rollback#Vanischenu
Thank you! ···V ani s che nu (alt) 06:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Markup
Howdy Pedro! Because I saw this, and because I spent about a dozen fruitful attempts doing something similar closing another discussion, I thought I'd share the secret I learned: instead of {{!xt|{ {archive top{{!}}Something}}, try this: {{xt|{ {archive top{{!}}1{{=}}Something}} and Bob's your uncle. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you mean fruitless in the above :) Thank you, 28bytes for the secrets of arcane wisdom (a.k.a. template using markup) and Fannie is now my Aunt! Pedro : Chat  22:00, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha, so I did. Either that or fruitbat. 28bytes (talk) 22:03, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You could go down the line of fruity. However alongside Bob's your Uncle it could end up at How's Your Father. Lol. Hope you're well. Pedro : Chat  22:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I am well, thanks. It's good to see your distinctive signature popping up a little more this month. 28bytes (talk) 23:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Always good to that sig around, particularly with elections just around the corner. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 23:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Would like to aim for adminship
Hello Pedro,

I see you have a fair chunk of experience within the world of RfA and related. I've recently returned from a self imposed Wikibreak while I was focusing on my studies. I've been refamiliarising myself with policy and the lay-of-the-land of late and thinking how I could best contribute to Wikipedia. It's always been something of a backburner goal that I would like to aim for adminship at some point. Currently I'm mainly bouncing around project pages offering my opinion from time to time as I rejoin the flow of the community as a whole. If at all possible, I'd like the thoughts of an outside editor with experience in adminship and RfA on how I can best work towards this goal over the next few months. Cheers, Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 17:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Cabe6403. Apologies, but I'm very inactive at the moment and up to my eyeballs in real life work. Could I suggest someone like User:Dennis Brown - he's been very active at RFA recently and will give you some honest feedback and input. Pedro : Chat  20:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for responding. Good luck with your RL work, I know the feeling Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 21:30, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


cyber power 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. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. As one of my wikifriends, I would like to wish you a Merry Christmas. I hope you had a great one.— cyber power Online Merry Christmas  02:07, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year
A random reference to the "Pedro Cabal" reminded me I hadn't said hi in a while. So, "hi". Hope all is well IRL, and the Pedro clan is happy and healthy. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * ^^^ what he said. :-) — Ched : ?  05:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nobody expects the Pedro Cabal! Not even Pedro. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  Join WER 16:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe a "yo" is in order.  ceran  thor 23:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * YO! In technicolor! Hope you're okay Ceranthor. Pedro : Chat  23:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Belated Happy New Year with a Toast!


~ TheGeneralUser  (talk)  — is wishing you a Happy New Year! 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 Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A Very Happy (belated) New Year to you Pedro! Enjoy the Whisky ~ TheGeneralUser   (talk)  23:44, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Administration Nomination
Hello, My Name is Johnathan M. I would really love to become an admin because I am great at copyright and editing. I was actually an editor until earlier this year. Please leave any comments on my talk page. Thanks. martjoh (talk) 13:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * With your block as a SOCK and my good standing in the community this looks like a winning candidacy to me .... :-) Pedro :  Chat  23:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I could overlook the indef block, but a good word from Pedro would be the kiss of death. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Given the sockpupetry a good word from me is likely a plague on both his houses :-) Pedro :  Chat  23:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Lol. Technically, all three of his houses. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Requests for RfA
Hello, I have been an editor on Wikipedia for a few years now and I have always desired to become an admin. I was wondering if you would be willing to nominate me? Thanks--Cssiitcic (talk) 16:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Cssiitcic. Thanks for dropping by. I see you're a long tenured Wikipedian and you obviously know your stuff. I'm afraid that at present there's no chance you'd pass RFA. You have just over 2,000 edits and whilst I personally have railed agianst WP:EDITCOUNT at RFA that's going to be a massive stumbling block. As an example I found this edit, which was only c. 800 edits ago (albeit 2009). Putting that kind of hidden comment is just not right - if you think an article is likely to be speedied then you fix it before you create it. The fact that The Sound and the Fury (Smith) has had a notability tag sat there since 2009 and you haven't addressed that on an article you started is also going to be a concern. I appreciate that this is stuff from years back, but it's also recent in terms of your edit history - that's the problem. Whilst I don't agree with it RFA people are going to look for around 5,000 edits (sadly at minimum) and consistency - 300 / 400 a month type level. What I do see is good (no blocks, sensible user page, lots of mainspace editing) but you just haven't got the demonstrable evidence through weight of edits. I'm afraid any RFA would be WP:NOTNOW'ed. Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings, and again my thanks for your hard work on the encyclopedia. Pedro : Chat  20:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

TParis
G'day Pedro. TParis has you listed as an editor from whom he will accept a nudge that he might not be acting as an admin in the right way. I have been involved with him in a conflict for the past couple of weeks that he is prosecuting way too personally. The latest incident is particularly disappointing as it was essentially an attempt by him to restart the conflict after it had fallen into a lull (diff), and an attempt by two other editors on either side of the divide to approach a resolution (see Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Epeefleche until TParis' attempt to close down the discussion, which was shortly followed by the diff above).

At the moment, I'd like to ask that you talk with TParis about the above diff, which was a clear attempt to restart the drama machine and probably WP:BAITING, and ask for him to back off. If he does not, then I'll leave it to your consideration as to whether this is now grounds for recall, but, personally, I have a high expectations of behaviour for admins, and, on top of everything else, WP:BAITING is a clear breach of that.

In terms of TParis' criteria:
 * 1) I have previously discussed the issue with him at his talkpage at User_talk:TParis/Archive_9 and User_talk:TParis/Archive_9.
 * 2) The issues at hand have been extensively discussed at ANI, where TParis proposed a onesided interaction ban, which I view essentially as an attempt to silence me.
 * 3) There has been time to cool down since the issue started, but TParis can not let go.
 * 4) In terms of actions as an administrator, TParis closed my initial complaint against ANI with poor wording, that has been discussed at User_talk:TParis/Archive_9, where I repeatedly reject what I read as a suggestion that I follow Epeefleche around and fix his problems. I have since had to keep repeatedly saying that I'm not interesting in doing that at, for example, Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Epeefleche. The ANI made by TParis at ANI was also made from an administrative perspective.
 * 5) The key policy issue here is WP:CIVIL.

As I said, I'm leaving any decisions about whether TParis' behaviour is not what is expected of an admin in your hands. However, I would ask that you suggest that he consider stopping.

I am also posting this message to the other admins on TParis' recall list. Also, I am scaling back my involvement with wikipedia, so I might not see replies very quickly. If you have something you want me to respond to, I'd like to ask that you e-mail me at Cheers. &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 14:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That's quite a lot to review. I haven't gone to TParis' talk yet or clicked any links. I shall do so now. I've removed your email address but that's just a standard procedure of mine and is not to say I won't email you. Pedro : Chat  20:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've had a quick review, albeit hopefully diligently. I think there is some frustration (on all sides) and perhaps a bit more deconfliction would have helped. Having said that, I can't see any tool misuse whatsoever. I think BAITING is a very strongly loaded concept, and what may appear to be baiting to an agrieved party would not appear so to others.
 * I would thank you for your detailed and measured post. I'd also take the opportunity to congratulate you and your wife on your recent wonderful news about your new family member! As a father of two young children I can only assure you the love never stops but the pain level of having kids increases :).
 * In a nutshell, I think there's been some heat, perhaps people could have acted a bit better, but I can't support any form of recall of TParis based on what has been presented. Perhaps an easy way forward is a bit of "agree to disagree". Best. Pedro : Chat  20:56, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Pedro for your consideration. Yeah, I know re: pain. Childcare started last week (because wife and I had to go back to work), and that was a uniquely terrible experience. &tilde;danjel [ talk &#124; contribs ] 22:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!
~ TheGeneralUser  (talk)  11:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Project for RfA nominators
Hi -- I notice you've been active in nominating at RfA over the past year, and would like to invite you to join the WikiProject for Nominators, which aims to support editors interested in nominating there. We'd be glad of your expertise in getting this new project off the ground. Apologies for the talk-page spamming if you've already seen this message a dozen times. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Article deleted – Jin Rong
Hi Pedro,

I was wondering why the page, of which the link is found below, was deleted? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jin_Rong_(Miss_Earth_China_2012)&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevesports (talk • contribs) 00:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Stevesports. The page was the talk page of an Articles For creation request declined by User:Kanuk. As the request was declined the talk page was basically redundant so was cleaned up as housekeeping. If you think the subject is notable then maybe discuss with that user or follow the guidelines at WP:AFC on resubmission (which I believe is basically chatting it over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation although there may be a better venue). Pedro : Chat  11:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Always good to see you Pedro. Hope that you, Mrs. Pedro, and all the little Pedros are doing well. — Ched :  ?  12:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * And good to see your name sir. I'm still around, lurking, but various things (incluidng time) prevent much activity. Plenty of reading though both in the mainspace and elsewhere! Yes, family is fine, thank you for asking, and I trust all is well with you and yours. Pedro : Chat  17:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I shouldn't complain (every day above ground is a good thing). The grandkids are growing so fast, and doing well in school.  My daughter turned out to be an amazing woman in spite of being raised by a clueless single dad.  I could rattle on about my private life, but that would be for email consumption rather than on wiki.
 * OH ... I have to tell you this Pedro. There's a new project about "noming" folks for RfA.  It made me think of something I saw a while back.  There was a conversation about people that had a high rate of successful nomination rates as far as RfA.  I mentioned "don't forget about Pedro".  The reply was something like "A nom from Pedro isn't a nom .. it's a MANDATE"  I literally laughed out loud.  I don't know how much you read or what you read, but I do have to say this.  Outside of myself (although I am trying to learn and grow into it), I think you would be very VERY proud of your noms.  28, Dennis, Floq, Zippy, Ceranthor, ... all really top notch folks.  In fact, 28bytes is even a 'crat now .. pretty impressive huh?  Dennis continues to amaze on a daily basis as far as the NYB approach and never loosing his cool. (I've failed miserably at times in that respect).  Anyway .. it's so very good to touch base with you again, and don't ever hesitate to chew me out when I mess up, or just drop a line to say hi.  All my best. — Ched :  ?  21:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah - sorry you peaked my curiosity! That's very kind. Yes, I'm very pleased to have nominated some of the best (all credit to them, not me) including one who is now a 'crat and one a steward. Doesn't make up for the shameful lack of actually writing, but there you go! Pedro :  Chat  10:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's piqued! Sorry, had to point it out. :)  Enigma msg  21:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No, no - it had peaked. ...and was piqued. Good catch Enigma. Pedro : Chat  21:27, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Damn.
So today ranks high on the "stuff I didn't wanna do as a bureaucrat" list. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 21:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I was about to save you the trouble, but you're too darn fast...... :) Pedro : Chat  21:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Ain't no grey at all
Hi Pedro,

Hope real life is going well. Sorry to see your BN request, but I think I might understand where it's coming from; it's hard to care about something yet have no time to really try to effect change; all that's left is finding that everything pisses you off.

Or maybe I'm projecting.

Anyway, hope you'll still drop by occasionally, even if you're no longer one of the Chosen. I still have a few guest passes, so I can get you into the Admin lounge for a drink. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Boo. Was not happy to see this. Hope you'll reconsider (FWIW I've been thinking of throwing my hat in the ring again...) Steven   Zhang  Help resolve disputes! 21:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, just me throwing the toys out the pram, but EVula got to it before I could reverse it, once I'd seen some diffs and Thumperwad had explained. Funnily enough, because of the thread at the top of this page, I was thinking about another nomination for you soon. Pedro : Chat  21:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I admit a degree of sadness over the last year, being your last nominee and that RfA or perhaps something I did that served as a last straw of sorts. I had been looking forward to actually working with you in some area, but it hasn't happened as you have been scarce.  The frustration I understand.  I try to not express it too frequently as it bums out the troops, but the last year has been an interesting mix of joy, depression, frustration, education and facepalming.  My one year mark is Thursday.  Again, I appreciate the trust you put in me then, and if you ever want to work on an article together, just pick the topic and I will be there.  Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 21:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thumperward could've avoided the ummm no and he did edit it soon after. But the truth is, you two were basically agreeing on the point over there (how it is should be discounted, etc.). Sad to see you go Pedro, hope you return.  Enigma msg  21:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Um, appreciate the fine comments from all, but I've not slapped a prissy little deep black retirement template over my page, and indeed was about to revert my post at WP:BN per WP:MISUNDERSTANDING, WP:DIALOGUE and WP:DON'T_THROW_YOUR_TOYS_OUT_THE_PRAM_NUMBNUT Pedro : Chat  21:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait. What the ...  I get busy in real life for a couple days and ..  OK - hang on, I can get a complete sentence out.  Do I need to go yell at anyone?  (sigh - more reading for Ched it seems.) — Ched :  ?  21:56, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not much reading. Argument at RFA swiftly reverted by another admin, but as I swapped from my Nexus to a PC I didn't see the rework. BN request done as I was about to revert the request. I'm so tempted to shove in a resysop request just to see the policy wonks go nuts that it will need 24hrs. Pedro :  Chat  22:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * So I guess I was projecting. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * At what point did I blame you for being clever Floq? :) Pedro : Chat  22:47, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

So the real problem here, as I'm interpreting it, is that I'm too good at my job. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 22:56, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Which bit of WP:TOOFAST and WP:OVER_EFFICENT did you not get? :)))) Pedro : Chat  23:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * @ Pedro. OK .. think I got it, and rather than risk getting blocked for NPA .. I'll just say "consider the source". :)   So are you now of have you ever been an administrator?  I'd be happy to nom you at RfA .... LOL. :) — Ched :  ?  23:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Once I co-nom, the crats would likely skip the voting process and promote him to crat/founder. You're welcome. the_undertow   talk  03:05, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Steven  Zhang  Help resolve disputes! 01:34, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello
Greetings Pedro. It's been a while; too long really. I just wanted to say hello and wish you all the best. Feel free to call on me at anytime, if you feel a need. I am in your corner; always. My76Strat (talk) 04:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

You are a Golden Editor!
— Ched : ?  19:14, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes I like this too. My76Strat (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I do remember Pedro's work from all those years ago and I agree with this award and its message. :) Acalamari 22:10, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Spaces in your sig
I would recommend changing the spaces between "Pedro" and "Chat" to non-breaking spaces in your signature. It would avoid the possibility of "Pedro" and "Chat" being on separate lines. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  02:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I have included a brace of the finest non breaking spaces known to man on your recommendation. Not the cheap non breaking spaces mind, proper decent ones. Much obliged! Pedro : Chat  20:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * That is a good idea, I just did the same in my sig which had seven spaces. I used the cheaper, off the shelf non-breaking spaces.  I don't make as much per block as Pedro does. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  21:09, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I was just concerned that cheap non-breaking spaces could, in the long run, ummmmm break.:) Pedro : Chat  22:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * So, when do we propose automatically converting spaces in sigs to non-breaking spaces? ;) :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  22:05, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1. Add a line in WP:SIGNATURE that says you must use non-breaking spaces in sigs.
 * 2. Start blocking everyone for non-compliance, collecting your admin bonus for each block.
 * 3. Profit!
 * Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  22:12, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * So, at £25 / $20 a block I think I can pay off my mortgage in months! However at the current rate of bugger all pounds and zero pence I guess I might be waiting a while. darn. Pedro : Chat  22:38, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * *shrugs* This is the most I can motivate myself to do at the moment. :) · Salvidrim!  ·  &#9993;  23:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll never become an abusive admin if you go about things so mamby pamby. You should always be using absolutes, and of course, never admit a mistake. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  23:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the rollback
It happens sometimes. When my browser loads my watchlist, it does a sudden jump down a line or two. If an entry is very long, it wraps and the "rollback" option sits among the left side. Just as I click a "diff" on an item, the page jumps and I accidentally click "rollback" on another item. It happens every month or so. A thousand pardons. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I can assure you that it does indeed happen sometimes ! Not a problem at all. Pedro :  Chat  22:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Holy cow Pedro, that is certainly a question. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  22:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't hand out support lightly, nor do I oppose lightly. It's an honest question, and (I feel) a good one to get my impression of Anna (which is positive) cemented. I'm trusting it won't cause issues - it's relevant and unprejudiced and will tease out a thoughtful response I hope. Pedro : Chat  22:42, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't question your sincerity or the integrity of the question, but if she is not familiar with the whole back story (which itself is a tome) then that is a lot of research. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  22:47, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Um, exactly. Plenty of admins seemed to throw themselves in at the link I gave at the RFA (KWs topic ban). They did, or did not, do their research. I'm interested in Anna's take on it; whilst I acknowledge any admin can ignore or not be aware of any issue that requires admin attention I would like to see what comments she would have added (none being an acceptable(ish) answer) and what her opinion is. Pedro : Chat  22:56, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  22:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that it probably wasn't the answer you were looking for. I wasn't trying to be evasive. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The question was reminiscent of the Kobayashi Maru. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  13:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * That is true Dennis. Anna, I'm sorry it moved KW to oppose; however as his opposition seems to be just an opportunity to use personal attacks (that he claims to despise) against myself and The Rambling Man I doubt it will be given much weight. Given the current state of your RFA it matters little. Good, considerate answer and many thanks. Pedro : Chat  19:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * She was called a "schoolmarm" by KW, who called me a Jr. High principal at my RfA, so I guess I'm in good company. At least he didn't call her lunch lady Doris. ;-)  I don't hold any ill will against Kiefer, but I don't pretend to understand his motivations, nor a fair share of his comments.  Eric has been instrumental in getting this old country boy up to speed on proper English. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  19:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to respond to KW at the RFA because 1) he can't add to threaded conversations at RFA so it's not fair and 2) he seems incapable of resisting making his own personal attacks whilst accusing all and sundry of attacking him; which is slightly nauseating. Best of luck to Anna, and I'm going back to gnoming around as an IP for a while. Pedro :  Chat  20:21, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * (ec) She didn't have the good sense to reply "This is a case where, following community discussions, my silence is appropriate", but instead she played the affable administrator and wasted the community's time with clichéd blather---apart from avowing a cost-benefit criterion incompatible with WP:Block. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk • contribs)
 * KW, you've seen enough RfAs to know a candidate can't punt on a question like that. It wasn't my favorite since the event was very recent, but she had no choice but to provide some answer. The fact that she didn't jump to a side should be reassuring to you.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  20:34, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, it could come over as unfair as it was recent, but that also made it more relevant - and considering the volume of community input it was a useful "case study" (I apologise in advance for that phrase - I hope it will not become one - darn near every RfB I've ever seen always cites the ^demon RFA as a "case study" and I imagine s/he must be sick of having that dragged up time and again). I'm sad Keifer thinks it's trolling, but there you go. Pedro : Chat  21:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Link please
Hey Pedro.

Could you please link me to the block discussion you mention in the post on my talk page?

Or did i misinterpret your message.

Thanks!  ★ ★ RetroLord★ ★  11:40, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

My mistake. :P. Thanks  ★ ★ RetroLord★ ★  11:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No probs. Pedro : Chat  11:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

ANI, Streisand
Since this is somewhat off topic, I thought I'd bring it here. I found out about the protection through RFPP. Since both that venue, and the article talk page at the time were producing nothing but stonewalling, and not having received a reply at the administrator's talk-page, I was unsure what else to do (besides bring it to ANI)? Regards, Crazynast 22:23, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * it was perfectly acceptable to bring it to ANI. However, as I've intimated, Streisand effect is not the initial concern, it's the follow up. Frankly the whole thing regarding Streisand is a red herring as to be honest it's more to do with KW throwing his toys out of the pram .... Again Pedro : Chat  22:37, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks for the clarification... Crazynast 08:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry
I clearly misread the thread there (wait for it, because this sentence is going to be a corker) I read it that you thought the block was only 48h, so I thought that you had misread the block time, but clearly you hadn't (as I now realise) so my reply is completely irrelevant, as you'd been referring to the length of the block as you saw it. And now I've confused myself. I seem to be doing that a lot recently, perhaps I should stop posting when I get home from a shitty day at work. Apologies. Black Kite (talk) 23:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've just read your reply at AN. What "utter hatred" of you?  What are you on about?  I seriously have no idea whatsoever.  I've always considered you a good admin, to be honest.  I'm completely confused now. Black Kite (talk) 23:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe I have you confused with another user, in which case I offer up my apologies. Pedro : Chat  07:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

?
Was that an endorsement? Kiefer .Wolfowitz  14:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ! Ha! - Not as such, I was going to add something, thought on it, deleted it, clicked save by accident and then had to undo the signature I'd left there. Apologies. Fat fingers. Pedro : Chat  14:07, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait a second. Do I understand you correctly?
 * After I write something, I don't have to hit save? I can just leave the thought to myself, or think about it later, before publishing it?
 * Wow! That technique could have come in handy if I'd thought of it earlier. ;)
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz  19:54, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ha ha. :-). Incredibly it is, occasionally, possible! Pedro :  Chat  20:48, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

A modest request
Hi there Pedro, if you get a moment I'd like to make a request that you take a look over my contributions to Wikipedia with a view towards a potential RfA in the future 6-8 months. I've been on Wikipedia since 2005, I took two fairly long Wikibreaks while I was at University due to focussing on my studies and also having a job/other commitments leaving little time online. I appreciate that I don't have quite as many edits as some (just under 8500) however I'd like to think I maintain a certain quality/quantity ratio as opposed to simply gunning for a higher number.

In terms of what I do here, well content writing isn't my strongest attribute as a Wikipedian (although I am proud of Giffnock and my GA reviews) so I focus on helping out where I can. I've dabbled in the technical side when I created WikiProject Spirits and Swiss rail color along with a few other templates here and there. A chunk of my time is on new page patrol (My CSD log) and the dispute resolution noticeboard where (I'd like to think) my ability to remain calm and respectful has helped resolve a number of disputes.

My reasons for considering adminship are to enable me to continue to help Wikipedia as a whole, I envisage I would spend time assisting with the CSD backlogs as well as UAA. That said, I would like to assist around the project wherever is necessary at the time and not limit myself to a few areas. I believe I have a good understanding of my strengths and weaknesses and that I would be a net positive on the project. That said, ones own view of oneself does not necessarily reflect the view of others which is why I am here. You have a great history in this area and I trust you would be able to give some great feedback on my direction. I ask this, of course, as a favour so please don't feel obligated to do this but I would ask that, if you can't spare the time, you request someone else to review my request and consider guidance.

It's worth noting that I welcome any comments or feedback from talk page watchers who may also see this, especially from Dennis Brown whom I approached for guidance prematurely eight months previously Cheers, Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 09:03, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Cabe640; of course I'd be delighted to - although it may be a day or so before I have time to properly review. Leave it with me. Pedro : Chat  09:11, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Much obliged, take your time Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 10:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Cabe640. Apologies for the delay in replying. I've had a chance to review. Certainly everything seems in order in terms of editing, with a good balance of patrol work (CSD/AIV) to writing. All the standard things that should be in place are - sensible user page (although I'm not a big fan of guest books, but that's just me), good use of talk pages, sensible signature, clean block log etc. The CSD stuff is very strong, not withstanding the note on your talk page about the wrong rational recently.
 * I see your work at DRN which is all good and a few comments at ANI (always good to keep that board at arms length!)
 * I see that you put in a request to Clerk for ARBCOM, which got knocked back. As that was March I don't see that being an issue, but the points made at the time where valid.
 * The fact that you have dipped in and out of the project isn't a deal breaker to me - many editors like long tenure - but I also think you'd need to demonstrate that you're current return is going to continue.
 * At 7,300 or so live edits I think you're probably at the low end of expectations at RFA. In particular if your take away from that nearly a thousand edits to User pages (e.g. your CSD log) that brings it down to c. 6,500.
 * I'd be nervous that right now you'd prbably be a tad borderline for a succesful RFA. Of course four years ago you'd have easily passed, but that's just the culture these days, sadly. My honest advice would be to keep on doing what you're doing, make sure you keep up the article work and don't get too bogged down in patrol stuff. As mentioned when you made your clerk request, just a bit more "seasoning" I think is needed. Give it a couple of months (say end October) and if your activity has kept up then it may well be worth a punt.
 * Hope this helps - feel free to ask away if you think I can help further at the moment. Pedro : Chat  12:05, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the honest feedback, your points are valid and noted. I'll keep on keeping on in the meantime. I'm in no real rush so 'not now' is not a big deal for me. It's good to get some feedback that you're at least heading in the right direction. I appreciate the time you took to have a good look through my contributions. Would you be happy if I contacted you again in a couple of months? Cabe  6403  (Talk•Sign) 12:57, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and please do feel free to ask for a refresher review with an eye to a nomination in a couple of months - no problem. Pedro : Chat  13:02, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Jetson2012
Hello. I was just going to ask you something that is important, could you please watch over User Jetson2012? I heard you blocked him before for vandalism and unsourced content on various articles. Since his block was up, he started vandalizing and putting unsourced content on the article Family Guy (season 12). I was the only one who noticed the edit, so I undid two edits that he made, then putted a caution notice on his talk page. I was afraid that he would do the same thing on other articles, again, that's why I am asking you to watch over his edits. --  Blurred   Lines   23:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I will keep an eye when I can - please feel free to use WP:AIV if the editor continues and it's a current problem. If there's issues that aren't immediate (i.e. they've stopped editing for a while) but extend their ongoing problematic pattern it might be worth going to WP:ANI. Pedro : Chat  12:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Named party at Chelsea Manning RfArb
It doesn't look like you're a named party. --  tariq abjotu  18:02, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I realized that just before you did :) Pedro :  Chat  18:16, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Possibility of Future RfA
Hi there, I noticed at WP:RRN that you are prepared to consider nominating users for adminship. While I am not yet considering this, it would be something I would look at in the not to distant future (perhaps in the new year) and I was wondering, if you have the time, if you could give me some feedback regarding how close to this I am. Also, I recieved a block on my first day for edit warring - mainly due to a lack of understanding of policy. I have since learned from this and haven't been blocked since but I was wondering if you think this would effect my chances of becoming an admin, even if I openly declared it on my RfA when the time comes.

Thanks, Oddbodz (talk) 22:06, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Oddbodz. I'm a touch up against it at the moment (moving house ............ argghhhhhh!) but will be pleased to offer you some feedback; however it is likely that it won't be for several days. As a quick note, regarding the block - if time has passed that is not a barrier to a successful RFA at all - there are many candidates who have passed despite historical blocks. As for "openly declaring it" - you would have no choice. Not only would it be immediately obvious to anyone with even the most cursory review (your block log would be linked from your RFA as part of the template), but a failure to address it and the reasons behind it in your statement or answers to the questions would seriously impact your credibility and support.
 * I'll come back as soon as I can - when I've finished moving boxes, painting and generally being Mrs. Pedro's one man home moving team :) Pedro : Chat  18:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, good luck with moving! Oddbodz (talk) 18:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Look, it's Mr. Happiness J. Sunshine!
Heh. Hi Pedro, very very long time no see. Hope all is well with you. Grumpy as ever, I see. I still appreciate the support. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Meh :) Good on you for runnning - you've got my support in the election. Pedro : Chat  11:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

hey
How you doin' Pedro? I probably owe you an "I'm sorry". I know you're the guy that that got me the admin. thing - and I have kind of been a real pain in the ass over the last year. I haven't done any article work in ages, and all I've done is bad mouth the powers that be. You put a lot of faith in me, and I'm sorry to have failed you and Huntster. All I can say is that I really am glad that Wikipedia gave me the chance to meet you and so many wonderful folks. I'm sorry I've been a jerk - and I hope it never reflects on you personally - you are a great guy. I hope the Mrs. and the younguns are doing well. All my best always —  Ched  ZILLA  12:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * My friend, you don't owe me an apology for anything; I probably ought to be offering up apologies to my nominators (if most of them hadn't long left the project!). You certainly haven't failed anyone or anything. I'm almost entirely inactive, but just occasionaly edit or use the tools - like a lot of others I often don't log in and just make little fixes as an IP (before anyone moans I always sign in to make talk page comments though!!)
 * Moaning at the powers that be seems to be an output of this place, and something I indluge in too. Maybe it's rose coloured hindsight, but back when I got the bits the place seemed so much more fun. Sigh.
 * Best wishes to you and yours. Pedro : Chat  12:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


 * To say the same as Pedro, you certainly don't owe an apology. I've found my primary outlet on Commons, because I like the pretty pictures and organising them. I rarely do any administrative work on en.wiki these days, most involving the transferring of images from here to Commons. But occasionally I find a fun article to delve into, such rewriting the articles Tersicoccus phoenicis and NEE-01 Pegaso, and helping a grad student with his project at Seyfert galaxies. It's all about finding the projects that you find interesting and avoiding those situations which cause drama. There's an element of editors here that thrive on the drama, and I strive daily to avoid them like the plague. Ched, if you still find fun things to do here, then your challenge must be to isolate yourself from those negative elements. Take all the noticeboards and such off your watchlist and never re-add them, no matter the temptation. I think you'll find your experience improves dramatically. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

NOTNOW
Yay! You've posted! :D Don't worry, I know you're not the owner of the page, but I felt (I think it was me who mentioned you first) that it was necessary to note your reasons for creating it in the first place. I have always been a supporter of your excellent essay, which was meant to encourage and guide newcomers who found RfA; I'm just disappointed that some people seem to misapply it. I hope you're well. :) Acalamari 23:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, good to hear from you! Yes, it was your ping that notified me - thank you for that. I've added hopefully some comments of value. I'm pretty inactive these days, but occasionally have a little blast at CSD with the tools and I'm still haunting the place reading if not commenting. I hope you and yours are well. Best. Pedro : Chat  08:42, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm just glad you're still around, regardless of how active you are. :) It's quite saddening that most of my friends and other people I knew from 2007 are either hardly editing (less active than you are) or have left. :( Acalamari 17:13, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote
Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis

Re: big pimpin'
Sorry you don't agree with me that referring to [added Andrevan@ 03:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)] sex trafficking of women is offensive, but it is. For a project whose sexism is discussed and a serious problem, we need to be sensitive to the idea of users walking around declaring themselves pimps. You'll note that I warned this user that his username was inappropriate and he ignored me, see User talk:JamesMoose. I was the second person to warn him and be ignored. Andrevan@ 02:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose I can see how some people see "pimpin'" as a problem, and some don't, but saying "Sorry you don't agree with me that sex trafficking of women is offensive" is an outrageous personal attack, you asshole. Much worse, for example, than telling you that you're being an asshole. Anyone so steeped in Wiki-culture that thinks I just made the worse personal attack is a moron.  Someone so smug and pompous and holier-than-thou as to write that sentence should, like my grandmother would say, go away three times and come back twice. If I wasn't so exhausted with so many idiots solving all the encyclopedia's problems with the block button, you'd be blocked for a personal attack.  Now man up and apologize, if you're capable. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:47, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That's the literal definition of "pimping," and the primary definition. I agree it is perhaps a ham-handed reductio ad absurdum, intended to demonstrate that of course, since we find referring to [added Andrevan@ 03:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)] sex trafficking offensive, we should also rename Pimps. Andrevan@ 02:59, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, FWIW, regarding your (Pedro) comments on the RFA, there's nothing offensive to me about Bongs or High in BC, but under the policy if you are reasonably offended by these illegal drug references we could probably make a case for a rename there under the policy. The fact that I didn't block BigPimpinBrah was because he was a good faith user, but that doesn't mean I can't oppose his RFA. To me, prostitution and objectification of women are a lot worse than making reference to getting high. Luckily the username was changed voluntarily making it a moot point. Andrevan@ 03:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly Andrevan - there's nothing offensive to me about drug references in user names either. Complex stuff, clearly. Your straw man that I don't find "sex trafficking of women is offensive" is really rather pathetic isn't it? What a very nasty little shit person you are, making that kind of baseless accusation. Now please crawl back under your rock. You disgust me. Pedro : Chat  12:06, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess my point with that was - I don't actually find illegal drug use or referring to it to be a problem. Classic victimless crime. Whereas referring to the heinous crime of sex trafficking is to me offensive - and I did mean "referring to it" as the straw man and not the act itself. Andrevan@ 14:12, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Good for you Andrevan, good for you. I still don't approve of sex trafficking despite your (un removed) assertion above, so do me a favour and fuck off you self righteous sanctimonious little prick. Seasons greetings. Pedro : Chat  16:33, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and you might want to check the history of this page for a revert by a member of this community regarding your "victimless crime" crap. Just sayin'. Pedro : Chat  16:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I've tried to clarify that in fact I know nothing about you, TParis, or anyone else and I am not commenting on your personal tendencies in any way. You can choose to interpret this as a slur if you wish, and you clearly do. In fact I have nothing against you at all and I am simply offended by the defense of "pimping" in a username. Andrevan@ 23:59, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * But you've done nothing to remove your allegations and suspicions have you? I don't, as an argument, know whether or not you rape six year olds User:Andrevan. I don't imagine you do, but apparently you think it's acceptable to speculate as to whether I'm a mysoginist. On that basis I can speculate you are peadophile. Do please get a grip, resign and leave wikipedia. Pedro : Chat  00:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

By the way, don't lie about not commenting on personal tendencies. I just posted the diffon your talk where you did. Are you an habitual liar Andrevan? You can get help for that. Pedro : Chat  00:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I note that you are listed as eligible for recall. Please stop your continued barrage of personal attacks. As I have explained several times, I was only talking about the use of "pimping" in a username. Apparently, based on your comments, you do not find this reference to sex trafficking offensive. I never meant to refer to the act of sex trafficking itself. As I said, I have no idea what if any opinion you or anyone else has about actual sex trafficking. I assume you don't support it but we weren't discussing it! We were talking about the use of a word in a username. Andrevan@ 00:12, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Not really. You're poisoning the well, in extremis. If you want me to lay of the personal attacks redact yours, in particular the filth one I diffed on your talk page about "not knowing if [they] are mysognistic". You really are a nasty aren't you. Please crack on and resign. Pedro : Chat  00:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * In what way is saying that I do not know if you are misogynistic a personal attack? The intent of that statement is to show that I was not trying to accuse you of misogyny, I was merely discussing the use of the word pimping, which itself is a misogynistic concept. The point is that I know nothing about your views at all, and I never intended to comment on them. I assume per AGF that you are not misogynistic. I do however think that we should not refer to a misogynistic practice in a username. This is the only subject on which I was intending to comment. Andrevan@ 00:22, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * In that case its still perfectly fine for me to say that I do not know whether the user who goes by the name of Andrevan on Wikipedia (revised by Floq per Pedro's comment below) insert some bad thing here. Because by your depraved and libellous logic that's all fine. Pedro : Chat  00:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Pedro, I get your point - and I remain surprised Andrevan doesn't - but really that's not on either. Just pick something less outrageous, like "I do not know whether the user who goes by the name of Andrevan on Wikipedia is a tax cheat", or something; the point will still be made, but I have a feeling the outrageousness of your example is going to overwhelm the possible teaching moment. I get you're pissed, I am too, but you just out-Andrevan'ed him; that's not a good. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're right Floq. It's too harsh. I'll strike it tomorrow when I'm on my laptop not a tablet. Pedro : Chat  00:46, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The text referenced in my above was redacted by Floq, and I'm more than happy with that. Pedro : Chat  08:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It's all about context. This has been about a specific issue - the username policy - and that is the only issue on which my comments should be read and interpreted. As I've stated many times now, I have nothing against you nor do I have any opinion or information about your feelings toward misogyny or related issues. I am very sorry that you feel that I was implying anything along these lines about you, it should be clear in context that this is not at all what I was doing. Your continued unwillingness to modulate your discourse or accept my apology and explanation is rapidly becoming tiresome. Let's drop this so we don't have to escalate things anymore, OK? Andrevan@ 00:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * rephrasing of my comment to eliminate ambiguity. Andrevan@ 00:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, no, the proper way to reword would be "I know Pedro and TParis are not a misogynists", but I think things might be spiraling out of control and perhaps everyone should walk away. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Not ideal. Andre, you're some 18 year old kid dealing with crotchety old men. You have a lot to learn son; please don't try and learn it on my talk page. Wize up, read the above, read your comments on other pages and then think. I'm not being needlessly provocative. You've made some pretty stupid accusations and when you get older these kind of things can haunt you. Cheers. Pedro : Chat  00:42, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
Merry Christmas buddy ... I hope you and the family have a great one. —  Ched  ZILLA  00:27, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas from Cyberpower678


— cyber power Online Merry Christmas  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. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. — cyber power Online Merry Christmas  22:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Best Wishes for 2014
Thanks to all above dropping Xmas messages, and my very best wishes to all editors and their families for a prosperous 2014. Pedro : Chat  17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * While I wasn't one of the above editors, Happy New Year to you, too, Pedro! :) Acalamari 18:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy 2014 from Cyberpower678


— cyberpower Online <sup style="margin-left:-6.1ex;color:olive;font-family:arnprior">Happy 2014  — is wishing you a Happy New Year! 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 Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

— cyberpower <sub style="color:olive;font-family:arnprior">Online <sup style="margin-left:-6.1ex;color:olive;font-family:arnprior">Happy 2014  00:07, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Feedback requested
Hi Pedro! I've been considering running for admin and found your name listed at WP:RRN stating that you are available to review the work history of individuals, followed with a possible nomination. Are you available to review my work and offer some feedback? I certainly appreciate your time and consideration. Best regards, Cindy  ( talk ) 16:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Cindy. Of course. Leave it with me; I'll take a look tonight and come back to you tomorrow with some feedback. Pedro : Chat  23:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

E-mail
Hi Pedro, sent you an e-mail. Thanks. ~ TheGeneralUser  (talk)  22:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi TGU. I'm traveling this week, but will review on my return. Pedro : Chat  22:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem. ~ TheGeneralUser  (talk)  22:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Pedro, It's been well over a week and I'm still waiting for your response. I kindly request you to reply as soon as possible so that I can proceed forward. Regards. - TheGeneralUser  (talk)  17:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

A hand-typed thank you
Hi Pedro, thank you for both your support on my RfB and for citing our positive interactions over the years. I remember you being an early supporter of my successful RfA, so I'm grateful for your long-term confidence and am glad that I haven't disappointed you. While I know that you have no intention of running for the position yourself, I still hold the opinion that I think you'd be a good bureaucrat; I seem to recall telling you this before, but I can't remember when. Thank you, as always, and I look forward to our future interactions. :) Best. Acalamari 12:14, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi . Many thanks for your kind note, and congrats on the RFB. Wield those new tools with your usual discretion! Best. Pedro : Chat  15:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

BN thread
By all means do comment on that thread, all I did was to recuse. I guess we had a bit of a disagreement earlier, but it'd be hardly relevant even if I hadn't. -- Pakaran 00:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I for one am always interest to have your input. Tell me, in a circumstance such as that of your friend of a friend, how does one know whether or not someone who has admirably judged they are no longer fit to hold a gun licence is once again fit to hold a gun licence again? Applying that to this environment, where I can hardly refer Secret for a psychiatric assessment, what is the prudent course? I suspect our policies give little choice but to restore the bit, but I remain uneasy. If someone says their personal circumstances are such that they cannot be trusted with admin rights and has them removed, can they still ask for them back the next day? A week later? A month? Am I worrying about this too much? <strong style="font-variant:small-caps">WJBscribe (talk) 01:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your words, but I wasn't removing my comment based on previous interaction; it edit conflicted and I was on my tablet which makes it hard to cut and paste between the edit Windows. I clearly stand by my thoughts, but it was easier to revert to ensure no offence by deleting yours.
 * - it looks moot, and as I said in the diff above it is an extreme example. The answer is, of course, that no-one can judge fitment based on certain events but they can gain an impression. More pertinent is the outcome. Man holds shotgun licence. Shoots birds. Gives up shotgun licence. Does not shoot birds. Regains licence. Shoots birds.
 * Editor has admin bits, blocks disruptive vandals and deletes articles properly....Gives up admin bits.... you get my drift. Pedro : Chat  20:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Bishopstoke Beach.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 13:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you little bot type program. The irony that "Bishopstoke Beach" is currently under three feet of flood water will sadly be missed by you, as an automated script :)

Comments at Bureaucrats' noticeboard
Hi Pedro. I was reading the thread at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard about Kaldari, and noticed the three comments you left there where you criticise others: and. If you have such concerns, is it not best to raise them on the talk page of the editors concerned rather than degrading the tone of the discussion at the noticeboard? As you said to Roger there "you're not actually giving any useful input whatsoever". The same applies to the comments you made. If you want to make a general point about whether such discussions are useful, there are better ways to make your point without personalising things. Carcharoth (talk) 09:06, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

April Fools
Hard to believe this was 5 years ago. I don't even remember what page this thread was on before it was moved to where it is now. But it's still good for a laugh or two.  Gloss •  talk  22:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * *Cough!. Acalamari 22:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Fond memories of when this place took itself a lot less seriously! Pedro : Chat  13:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Admin
Hello. I would like to be upgraded to an admin please. Thanks. user:DoviKap
 * Hi DoviKap, and thanks for stopping by. I'm afraid that at present you've very unlikely to pass the process for becoming an administrator Typically you'll be expected to have made several thousand edits (you've made a few hundred) and been around for at least 8-12 months. Don't be discouraged - just enjoy editing Wikipedia! You might find some useful information at WP:ADMIN; also read WP:NOTNOW for a discussion on why less experienced editors shouldn't pursue adminship. Very best wishes. Pedro : Chat  07:31, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer RfC case opened
You were recently recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 26, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Media Viewer RfC/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. Before adding evidence please review the scope of the case. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Pedro, I hope you're well - it's been a long time! I just saw your evidence on the above RFC, in which your final line was:
 * "Allowing Eloquence to continue to have advanced permissions on .en sends the message that we permit Stewards to arbitrarily desysop our admins without any community input."


 * I just thought I'd let you know that Erik is not a Steward as he removed his steward user right back in 2006 and stewards now go through a community confirmation annually. Erik is instead a member of the global Staff user group (given to some WMF staff based on a need), a right he was given in November 2008. The  helpful  one  01:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Erik is not or has ever been a steward, as you can easily verify on Steward. Your statements shows a misunderstanding of the Steward and the Staff role, and should likely be withdrawn in its entirety. I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that Stewards are in any shape or form involved. Eloquence is the deputy director of the Wikimedia Foundation for Engineering and holds the staff flag. He made it quite clear that his statement was made in his staff role, so that even if he was a Steward, which is and always has been (with the exception of User:Jimbo Wales holding the steward flag until his founder flag was created) a volunteer role, that role would have been completely unrelated to his action as a staff member.  Snowolf How can I help? 01:21, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, while stewards are allowed to desysop in emergency situations, it would be either at the direction of ArbCom, or would be in situations like a compromised admin account causing severe damage. I don't think we have emergency desysopped on our own initiative since the last decade; our last emergency desysop on ArbCom's request was Centrx in 2012. (We being the stewards in general; as stewards are not generally allowed to act on their home wikis, it would most likely not be an enwiki steward making that decision). --Rschen7754 06:50, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The fact that we have staff bullying volunteers is, of course, actually worse. However as I don't really care (to the extent that Pete was apologized to) I'll just delete the whole thing. Pedro : Chat  07:15, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer RfC draft principles & findings
Hello. This is a courtesy note that the draft findings and principles in the Media Viewer RfC case have now been posted. The drafters of the proposed decision anticipate a final version of the PD will be posted after 11 August. You are welcome to give feedback on the workshop page. For the Committee, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks (and something for your amusement)
Hi Pedro! Yes, I'm well and I hope you are, too. Thank you for removing the trolling on AN/I; I was about to remove it myself when I saw that you had already done so. I appreciate that very much!

By the way, at changing usernames last night, I noticed the return of an admirer of yours. ;) Acalamari 08:28, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah - the signature of doom :) Ha Ha!! Pedro : Chat  09:26, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Brian Everlasting (talk) 23:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

ANI
– S. Rich (talk) 02:10, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

- One is not enough. No personal attacks is not just a rule, it is a good idea. <b style="vertical-align:20%;text-shadow:0px 0px 4px blue;font-size:60%;color:DarkRed">Chillum</b> 04:53, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No chips? :) Trouting accepted. Pedro : Chat  09:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

A trout is not enough
I'm just shaking my head. Carrite comment on Jimbo's page was mildly inappropriate, but hardly worthy of any comment, much less your over the top reaction.

Surely you know that admins are expected to set an example?

Surely you know there are many, many editors who think admins get special treatment, and actions that would get ordinary editors blocked are swept under the rug when committed by admins. Thanks for giving them more ammunition.

If I'm more than a little bit incensed, it is because when I first started editing, and started to learn who was who, and who had a clue, yours was one of the first names to register as belonging to the group with a clue. I don't like being wrong.

I don't think just ignoring it is the right course. It is too late to justify a preventative block, and we aren't supposed to do punitive blocks. Do you have a suggestion?-- S Philbrick (Talk)  16:27, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer RfC arbitration case - extension of closure dates
Hello, you are receiving this message because you have commented on the Media Viewer RfC arbitration case. This is a courtesy message to inform you that the closure date for the submission of evidence has been extended to 17 August 2014 and the closure date for workshop proposals has been extended to 22 August 2014, as has the expected date of the proposed decision being posted. The closure dates have been changed to allow for recent developments to be included in the case. If you wish to comment, please review the evidence guidance. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Media Viewer RfC arbitration case - motion to suspend case
You are receiving this message as you have either commented on a case page or are named as a party to the case. A motion has been proposed to suspend the Media Viewer RfC arbitration case for a maximum of 60 days due to recent developments. If you wish to comment regarding the motion there is a section on the proposed decision talk page for this. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs). Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 02:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

RfA advice/help requested!
Hi, Pedro,

I've been a Wikipedia Rollbacker for years, and I was wondering if you had any advice for me to take the next step up the ladder as a Sysop. It's a short and sweet message, but I hope to hear back from you soon. Frozen4322 : Chat  13:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Frozen. Nice signature :) - no problem - I'll be happy to give some input - will likely be tomorrow (UK time) if that's okay. Pedro : Chat  16:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Pedro, I remember setting it as part of an April Fool's celebration a while back. :) Yes, whenever you're able to would be amazing, there's no rush. Frozen4322 : Chat  19:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I've had a look, and whilst you're on the right track I think you're probably at least 6 - 8 months away from an RFA. Where you've recently come back to editing there is a c. two year gap in editing which will certainly cause commentators at RFA concerns. You need to show some consistency; and recent activity also helps to show that you are "up to speed" on current processes and community norms. My other concern is that in the past you've done a fair amount of article work but nothing very focused. Rather than using tools for vandalism I'd suggest you get in touch with one of the wikiprojects (I see you're a memeber of some) and get engaged in some GA or FA work.
 * RFA standards, have sadly gone up considerably; whilst your very long tenure at WP is great I wouldn't think about asking for the syspp tools for a while.
 * Hope that helps! Pedro : Chat  10:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the advice! I'll see if I can devote more time to editing, and possibly get in touch with some Wikiprojects. I'll look back at myself in about 6 months time and ask myself if I'm ready.
 * Thanks once again, Pedro! :) Frozen4322 : Chat  18:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem - happy editing. Pedro : Chat  15:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

English South Coast Meetup
Hi Pedro, you are hereby invited to the South Coast Meetup.

Kind Regards -- Marek  . 69  talk 23:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi Pedro, thank you for attending the meetup yesterday. It was a pleasure to meet you. :-) Marek  . 69  talk 20:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Marek - thanks again for the invite. Do let me know if we do another in Eastleigh or nearby - hopefully I'll be able to stay longer next time. Pedro : Chat  11:01, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Unclear
Hi Pedro, I'm not sure I understand what you meant posting on my talk page today. Please do treat me with the same courtesy you would give any other user, and we will get along fine. There was a past disagreement between us, but I'd rather not continue it. Thanks. Jehochman Talk 03:40, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I reverted it, as it is not really Wikipedia related; it's unfair of me to use Wikipedia for off-wiki issues and for that I apologise. Best. Pedro : Chat  13:07, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of any off wiki issues, but it's easy to find me off wiki and you are welcome to contact me about anything. Peace, Jehochman Talk 13:28, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

email sorted
email should be sorted and working again. thanks for the heads up.  <b style="color:#F50">Az</b><b style="color:#600">x</b><b style="color:#000">2</b>  10:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Next meetups in North England
Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in: If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!
 * Leeds on 12th April 2015
 * Manchester on 26th April 2015
 * Liverpool on 24th May 2015

If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Refactoring your comment on ANI.
I've moved your comment inline on ANI. I'm going to remove your reply (it was irrelevant - I wasn't replying to you) and my reply to that, and move my comment down away from yours, due to the misunderstanding - this doesn't affect any of the points you've made, just makes it clear that my argument is not in reply to anyone.

Regards. -- Aronzak (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Self-proclaimed bullying and accusations of dishonesty
There's no excuse for those comments, particularly not for an Admin. You know about NPA. Doug Weller (talk) 04:57, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Really? No excuse at all? Other than a member of Arbcom openly stating that they send an "abrasive and draconian" message to over 100 editors? I think I've been very restrained frankly. And I've described the editors actions as bullying. You, Weller, have described me as a bully . You know about WP:NPA as well, right? Pedro : Chat  08:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I thought you were describing yourself as a bully, even if only in specific circumstances, when you wrote "I've found that the only way to treat people who act like bullies is to be a bully. It's not a happy position to find myself in." You shouldn't say things like that if you don't mean them. I read "be a bully" as your saying that you were being a bully, and responded that you seemed to enjoy being a bully. If I've misunderstood you then I apologise. Doug Weller (talk) 11:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, it's one thing to describe oneself negatively, and quite another to describe someone else negatively. However, I respect your position and as I have noted below I am dropping the baton and walking away from the dead equine. Cheers. Pedro : Chat  12:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Pedro, can I please ask you to dial it down a bit, please? I understand that the way was phrased has annoyed you and I apologise for any offence given, it was not our intention. We simply wanted to prevent the situation from deteriorating further and we thought we needed to act quickly; for that, we passed something which we thought would get the job done. Now that we can act more calmly, we are now trying to fix our mistake. This case has the potential to become very contentious and, if it does, there will be no hope of clarifying the policy, whose lack of clarity was the reason this entire case became necessary, and for that we need all participants to be on their best behaviour. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm NOT PARTICIPATING in the f'ing case Salvio - that's the point. I, and over a hundred others, are effectively under ARBCOM sanctions for making a couple of comments at WP:AN. I'm dismayed you can't see this, and that Davies has specifically and categorically stated that the warning was "abrasive and draconian" - and could have been more so. Nevertheless, you're also one of the good guys so I shall do more than turn down the rhetoric - I shall be ignoring everything about this torrid saga. Perhaps someone from ARBCOM will tell me when I'm allowed to fart again. Pedro : Chat  11:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I most certainly did not "specifically and categorically state[d] that the warning was 'abrasive and draconian' ". My remark was altogether more nuanced, addressing how it might have been perceived.  Roger Davies  talk 11:25, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know which bit of "I shall be ignoring this torrid saga" you missed Davies; just come here to bait I assume? What poor form. Anyway, since you're here "but it would have been much more abrasive, much more draconian, and much more widely-cast, if a couple of my colleagues had had their way." (emphasis mine) . I really can't parse that any other way than the message sent was both abrasive and draconian. Now, perhaps you'd like to stop stirring hoping I'll bite so you can block / desysop me. Good day to you. Pedro : Chat  11:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Comment
Pedro, I'm coming to this whole situation with fresh eyes - I don't edit during the weekend, so I missed the heat of the situation. That means that everything I get is in retrospect. Now, I accept that things can be said in the heat of the moment, but your comments at the arbcom case talk page are over the line. There was a lot of poor behaviour by numerous admins over the weekend and it appears arbcom felt the need to put in a firebreak - it was clearly not personal and of course it could have been better handled if timing was not clearly such an important factor. Singling out a single arbitrator for that action and making accusations against their character is simply not on. I've been on the other side of that fence, I know what it's like to try and find the middle ground. Let the committee do its job - it's a shit enough job as it is. <b style="text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD; color:#000;">Worm</b>TT(<b style="color:#060;">talk</b>) 09:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * As this comes from you Dave, I'll respect it; you're one of the best. Okay, I'll drop the stick. There's no point anyway, is there? Pedro : Chat  11:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Cheers Pedro, I appreciate both the compliment and the action. <b style="text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD; color:#000;">Worm</b>TT(<b style="color:#060;">talk</b>) 12:04, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

You have mail!
Well, template fail. I guess you now know. Steven  Zhang  <sup style="color:#D67F0F;">Help resolve disputes!  12:17, 30 June 2015 (UTC)  Steven   Zhang  <sup style="color:#D67F0F;">Help resolve disputes!  12:17, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Admin nomination
Hi, Pedro! I noticed that you were on the list of editors willing to be asked for a nomination. I was wondering if you'd consider nominating me for a mop. I feel like I'd be of assistance with both technical matters as well as content areas, like AfD. APerson (talk!) 21:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * - Hi! I'm really sorry but I'm going to be heavily committed in RL for the next month so I think I'm going to struggle to give any nomination justice and to be on hand for the RFA; if you're thinking later in the year no problem but I won't be free until around the start of September to be honest. Pedro : Chat  08:47, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to have a look if you like though? I'm also on the list - hell, I created it! <b style="text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD; color:#000;">Worm</b>TT(<b style="color:#060;">talk</b>) 08:58, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd certainly vouch for Worm as one of our most seasoned and experienced editors at RFA - if he says yes then all should be well! Pedro : Chat  09:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * , sure, I'd love it if you considered nominating me. APerson (talk!) 17:55, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Moving this discussion to WTT's talk page, as he's agreed to have a look. APerson (talk!) 15:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I am kylenator21 I am interested in the vandalism prevention aspect of wikipedia, I will be a very active user and be on almost every day Pleaser consider my nomination Sincerely Kyle 00:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylenator21 (talk • contribs)

Surprise
I have returned - kinda :)  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 19:58, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well Hello sir - that's good news! How are you? Pedro : Chat  08:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I am well, thank you. I've been lurking about anonymously for sometime, but never really got the courage to sign back in and commit to some serious editing. I also brought up the recent RFAs and became immediately sick to my stomach ;) And good sir, how are you?  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 16:31, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Hi Pedro. I'm not sure what's going on and it brings me no joy to lecture you about this. But your recent spate of personal attacks is absolutely beyond the pale and I would have already blocked over those comments in most situations. You know full well this isn't a place where it's okay to attack other editors, no matter the reason, no matter the location, no matter the context. I'm hoping you'll take kindly to a friendly reminder instead&mdash;you're still an administrator, and are expected by the community to uphold a higher standard of conduct than that, and you're better than that anyways. Please try to set a better example as a prominent, longstanding and respected member of the community. S warm  ♠  08:50, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and it brings me no pleasure to advise you that you clearly don't understand WP:NPA (do you need it blue linked? > WP:NPA). One expects a higher standard and all that. Do, please, get over yourself. Sheesh. Pedro : Chat  22:53, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The "I'd have already blocked you" comment is overlooked, because, um, well ....... I think that way madness lies Swarmy Warmy. Anyway, do please never, ever comment here again unless in regard to admin actions. Thanks in advance. Pedro : Chat  22:56, 23 December 2015 (UTC)