User talk:Pedro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Today is Tuesday, 10 June 2008, and the current time is 04:05 (UTC/GMT). There are currently 2,406,668 articles.

Please leave new comments at the bottom of the page. Please sign you name if you'd be so kind by typing four tildes i.e. ~~~~ at the end of your message.
Hi, please leave a message.

[edit] Possible admin coaching?

Hello Pedro

I have been pointed in your direction from another editor, and I am asking if you would consider Admin Coaching me? I would be very gratful. Many thanks, yours. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 14:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi - give me a bit of time to review and I'll come back to you asap. Pedro : Chat 14:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks alot. Appreciated. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 14:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hiya, I've had a chance to look through now, so some feedback. I'm moving away from "admin coaching" as there has been a lot of recent debate at WT:RFA and WP:RFA that it is less than desirable. The key, as I and some others see it, is that there is a strong difference between coaching someone on how to become an administrator (read - how to pass RFA) and how to be a good and effective administrator. To this end a few of us are working on a project at User:Pedro/Mentoring which may or may not succede. I'd encourage you to review that page and participate there. With regard to your work so far, two (hopefully helpful) pointers;

Engage "force an edit summary" in your preferences - communication is vital
STOP doing things like this [1]. Of about 3,900 contributions 538 are to you user page - almost 14%. If you must count your edits do it every 1,000 (minimum!)

You're clearly on the right track, no question. Also, ask yourself the following question, and feel free to reply to me here or at the mentoring page - "Why do you want to be an admin"? Pedro : Chat 09:24, 4 June

2008 (UTC)

Thank you =] Also I did do that check box in the preferences about me being reminded to do an edit summary.

I would like to be an admin because I have been heavily involved in editing the English Wiki on subjects I am interested in, but also with this I would like to be a wider part of the community and even help it best I can. Helping Wikipedia is an ambition for me because when I edit/search pages I come across a fair amount of vandalism, I would like to play my part in helping cease the bad things such as that. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 14:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Incivility?

My first bout at the latest RfA. I see nothing wrong with my neutral stance. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 07:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let me have a look. Pedro : Chat 07:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with your neutral stance, in that at RfA everyone has their own "standards" (wether codified in an essay or whatever) or "expectations" before offering a support. I do feel that Majorly's reply was out of line, and not at all what I expect from an experienced editor. I'll explain why, before I get a barrage of abuse. If an editor with 600 edits opposes a candidate with 2,000 edits for not having enough experience I would not expect their oppose to be challenged in the same way Majorly has done here - this is an ad hominum argument. The fact that you've had RFA's yourself seems immaterial in this instance. Having said that I don't think your comments Epbr's edits are perfunctory, mechanical, robotic, thoughtless, and seem to have nothing more to say rather than "I want my edit count as high as possible" are ideal at all. You'd have done yourself more favours without that comment I'm afraid, and to be honest in light of the evidence posted further down I'd be inclined to consider striking that part. Pedro : Chat 07:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that much of Majorly's behaviour has been out of line recently, so if I were you Wisdom I'd just shrug it off. You're perfectly entitled to state your opinion; there are aspects of this nomination that I'm not entirely comfortable with either, but time will tell. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:18, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I was pretty surprised by the whole stance. The "thoughtless" comment was especially eye-widening. Not that it's really a big deal, I suppose - just out of character, at least in my opinion. Aliquando et insanire iucundum est, maybe? ;-). Tan | 39 21:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

My ire peaked when Majorly decided to use a veiled immature comment to call me a hypocrite, so perhaps that's where it came from. I was a little ticked to see two respected users (who barely give any thought in RfA anyway - Majorly just makes lightly barbed comments, and Naeri signs his name, sorry guys) take exception to my opinion, which was completely justified. That's all. I've explained my position. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 22:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Well you asked for my thoughts and you got them :). Whilst I understand very much how you'd be more than irritated by the comments made (which were poor) it's still best to rise above them - difficult I know, but it seems to me you went a bit OTT against the candidate due to your ire with Majorly and Naeri - which was not the candidates fault. Pedro : Chat 22:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, the "thoughtless" (pun intended) comment shouldn't have been made, which was almost certainly due to frustration. It is not the candidate's fault. Still, I maintain my initial position that such reversions using Huggle are mechanical. I asked, Pedro because I already knew the answer. It was uncivil, and I wanted to bring it to your attention (partially) for you to just flat out tell me : ) Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 22:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

In case you don't see it on the rollback request page, thanks for giving me access :-) CultureDrone (talk) 09:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm - adminship is a big step. Although it's something I've considered, most of my edits (as I'm sure you've seen) have been small ones - fixing red links, reverting obvious vandalism, categorising etc., with the occasional Prod/AfD/CSD thrown in. It's only in the last month or so that I've expanded my horizons to participate more in the 'wider Wikipedia world' in terms of warning users about deletions/vandalism, AfD discussions, major changes to pages and so on. At the moment then, I don't consider that the majority of contributions I make require admin functions, I still have issues deciding if articles meet WP:N or not (so I need to improve there), and I'd want to get more into the AfD/anti-vandalism areas before I seriously considered applying (and would probably ask for admin coaching at that point). I think that's a reasonable statement of my current WP state :-) CultureDrone (talk) 09:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DHMO rfa

You said:

Thank you EVula. Mr Connolley, I hope that answers your auxillary question, and I'd appreciate it if you'd note that courtesy has historically also extended to not editing through another administrators page protection without discussion. Pedro : Chat 07:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not Mr Connolley. You don't own pages you've protected. If you're going to protect them in a misleading state, you can expect them to be corrected. I find it somewhat odd that you deleted this thread without leaving me time to read it. If thats because you find this all distateful, then feel free to delete this again William M. Connolley (talk) 18:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. One tends to assume that user names such as your own are real names not pseudonyms. Also, apologies for archiving early (not deleting - I confess I can't understand why you think this was deleted when you self evidently found my reply) - I tried to note all active threads but missed yours. As to the main point, please review the situation fully;

DHMO blanked the page up and put up a note. [2]
You changed it.[3]
DHMO changed it again [4]
I protected it per his request [5]
I requested a change to the note, as I felt it to be rather dramatic [6]

Your defenition of "misleading" is yours, but I actually made efforts to make the statement neutral and not misleading. I hope you can see this. Pedro : Chat 20:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether its worth beating this one to death, but: its not a pseudonym. You have the right edit, but must have missed the edit comment: this page has *not* been courtesy blanked; its been blanked by DHMO, and it should say that at least. I don't see how omitting the name of the blanker makes it any more neutral; to me it seems misleading by omission. But checking the diffs, I see it was DHMO that did that. As I said, I'm still quite unsure why he has behaved like this William M. Connolley (talk) 21:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Again, apologies for the "Mr." bit. I'm really not sure what you want from this - are you acknowledging that you made an error and had assumed it was I that made the original blanking or other posts? That's what I read from But checking the diffs, I see it was DHMO that did that. I didn't miss the edit summary, I assure you. I simply strived for a neutral and, perhaps more importantly (in this one case), a more drama free note on the blanked page. Pedro : Chat 21:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

Hey, i understand that you reverted the changes I made to BiteFight. I understand the part about the links, but you also reverted much valuable information about hunting, stats, and shadow-lord(member/premmy etc...). I have much experience in this game, and i think that you should let these important edits stay... THEDEFLEDONE (talk) 22:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC) Thanks! THEDEFLEDONE (talk) 22:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied on user talk. Reinserted some deleted text with apologies. Pedro : Chat 22:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:B-Wing

Hi. I don't know if you noticed. But Alt Gr and B-Wing are sockpuppets by the same user. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] oh the irony

I just edit conflicted with your advice on edit conflicts but as your text was almost word for word identical to mine I didn't need to follow the instructions. nancy ^(talk) 11:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hah - now that is ironic!! :) Pedro : Chat 11:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Watching"

Sorry for the possibly newbish question but is there an easy way to watch a user? xenocidic (talk) 13:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I've been just taking 'er easy, anything I'm not sure about I'll either comment or let another admin take action so I can see what others thought appropriate. Yes, that does help. Too bad you can't RSS a user's contribs or something. xenocidic (talk) 13:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I noticed. /shrug. Know of any admins that have a nice admin dashboard? I'm trying to improve mine, particularly looking for a way to add CSD in there. xenocidic (talk) 13:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that's helpful, I'll ~~pilfer~~ borrow some elements from there. Unfortunately that category track isn't being updated anymore as far as I know. But I think I might be able to pimp it out using the {{pagesincategory}} thingee I learned about a while back. xenocidic (talk) 13:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Accounts that have degenerated into vandalism only

Wasn't quite sure what to do about this user, some constructive edits in the past, but pretty much vandalism only these days. I dropped a 24 hour, as they've not been blocked in the past. xenocidic (talk) 14:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, 24 hoursd is fine, and just watchlist there talk or something and indef. if they do it after their return. There as been some talk recently about not leaping in with indef. even for clear bad faith accounts - but no guideline came from the discussion IIRC. Pedro : Chat 15:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A request for some help

Hi Pedro - I've seen you around a lot, and you've commented at things like my RfA (thanks for the support, etc.!) and I actually value you opinion. I am convinced that you could assess a discussion for consensus impartially and let me know what the response is. Unless you've managed to miss it, a discussion has boiled over on the topic of FritzpollBot. The discussion appears to now be winding down, but there is no formal mechanism by which I can determine consensus. As the bot's operator, and holding particular views on the matter, I should not be allowed to, and thus will not judge what should happen.

I wondered if you, possibly, as someone who has not commented on it, could possibly assess the discussion for me at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/FritzpollBot? If you feel that you can't, no problem - and sorry for the dry tone of this message, I've attempted to eradicate all bias from it! Fritzpoll (talk) 13:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll go take a look right now. Pedro : Chat 13:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Goodness me, that's fun isn't it. I'll do some off-line working weighing the nature of the major arguments each way and see what it looks like. Might be a while.... Pedro : Chat 13:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

That's ok - I appreciate you taking the time Fritzpoll (talk) 13:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh God Fritz, I feel pretty guilty for approving you and pushing you into all this. "OMG no moar stubs" seems to be the catchcry, which is just lame. My advice is to utilise these pages. ;) giggy _(:O) 13:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Congrats, Giggy, you just openly tried to bias what was supposed to be a completely neutral admin arbitrating the consensus of a highly-contested page. Well done... :( Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 14:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I very much doubt that Pedro, a much better arbitrator than myself, would be biased by comments I've made here which I've repeated in the discussion anyway. giggy _(:O) 14:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Girolamo, if it eases your mind, I promise I can be totally neutral on this, as firstly I haven't participated (although I was aware of it) and secondly I really have no strong feelings one way or other (hence my lack of participation!!) Pedro : Chat 15:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This is going to require considerable time. There are both strong and weak arguments made on either side, a variety of diffrent argument, and a number of sub threads that need to be considered as well. Allthough a first glance indicates some clear lines to follow, consensus is not immediately self evident. I will be pleased to work on this over the weekend as time allows. Pedro : Chat 15:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

If you can, please do, and I look forward to your conclusions. A result of "no consensus" is also acceptable. To make life easier, I'm going to remove this from the watchlist template now Fritzpoll (talk) 15:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What do you make of this?

User talk:Nancy#Reviewing edits one has made - I'm concerned that someone is trying to derail our efforts. nancy ^(talk) 14:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I just read that too. Seems rather suspicious that an IP would come complaining about CG to you directly (of course your name (Nancy) is all over CG's talkpage, I suppose IP could just as easily come to my talk or Pedros...)Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, the confusion is the article mentioned hasn't been editied by either or them. I'm looking. Pedro : Chat 15:24, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

All explained now - was entirely genuine & he didn't realise he wasn't logged in. I haven't actually asked but I'm guessing that Keeper is right that he picked up my name from CG's talk (not the only one it seems, I am now the official CG complaints department). Feeling quite guilty about thinking it might be trolling now. nancy ^(talk) 19:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

this edit was made by this user, and CG "warned" him. CG never edited teh Shell article directly, or reverted. (And the diff doesn't have spelling errors anyway). I'm willing to bet that this user (about 50 edits since January, so consistent), is the IP. Still baffling why CG would "warn" him, but not actually change the article. Hmm. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Keeper you need to go forward one edit on the link that you have provided that is why I have warned the user for it as it was a spelling mistake on King William not the edit that you have found. Chemistrygeek (talk) 15:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The "spelling" mistake on King william wasn't made by that user though. You warned the wrong user in that case. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Below is what I found on the history of the page feel free to comment about it but I believe that I have warned the correct user. If I havent then I will go to the userpage an appologise for the adding of the warning and remove it. Chemistrygeek (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:04, June 5, 2008 (edit)

Wikiuser100 (Talk | contribs)

m (→Diversification)

← Older edit

Royal Dutch Petroleum Company was a Dutch company founded in 1890 by Jean Baptiste August Kessler, along with Henri Deterding and Hugo Loudon, when a Royal charter was granted by Dutch king Willem III to a small oil exploration company known as "Royal Dutch Company for the Exploration of Petroleum Wells in the Dutch Indies" (now Indonesia).

[edit] Kizzy

Thanks for revising that article, it took me a while to realize what it was all about. I still think it needs work but at least it's readable now! Thanks, Shoombooly (talk) 20:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Pedro : Chat 20:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Monthly(ish) evaluation

Checking in for my every-so-often evaluation. RC-0722 ^361.0/1 21:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

No probs my man - as ever because I'm useless it may be a day or so. (Going to a christening tomorrow so unlikely to be on WP as I'm going to be a Godfather) Pedro : Chat 21:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

No hurry. So who's gonna be your hitman? :P

Heh Heh! Yeah, my big Mafiso day out! Got an empty violin case handy? Pedro : Chat 22:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

No, but will a tuba case do? Also, can I interest you in a nice pair of shoes? I'll even throw in a free bag of cement! RC-0722 ^361.0/1 22:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Glug, glug, glug .................. :) Pedro : Chat 22:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:FritzpollBot

Hi - can't help but smile when you go from impartial to supportive just reading the proposal. Thanks for the help though - I'm sure we'll meet on Keeper's talk page! Fritzpoll (talk) 08:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Rfa

Thanks, Pedro, for participating in my recent RfA, which recently passed with 81 support and 1 neutral !votes. I appreciate all the support and constructive criticism offered in my RfA and I thank you for taking the time to !vote in my nomination. I feel so honoured to be trusted by so many of you and please, if you have any advice, comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page.

I would also like to thank Acalamari, Rlevse and Nishkid64, for their nomination statements.
Thank you again.
AngelOfSadness talk 23:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] School notability

Hi again ! Well, you did say ask if I had any questions..... Can you have a quick look at my recent contributions - you'll see I've changed a lot of US school articles to redirects per WP:SCHOOL - i.e. the schools have failed to establish any notability per the guidelines given, and are basically just articles with an address and infobox. Having done so many, my nerve is failing, and I'd like an opinion as to whether I'm following guidelines, in case I have to justify my actions to the author. Thanks. :-) CultureDrone (talk) 10:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ACC

Hey there. I was told I need to ask an admin for Account Creator privledgesSince you gave me rollback I thought I'd ask you. I was already approved for SQL's tool and signed up to the mailing list as well. Thanks! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 19:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You

Thank you for the comments you left me on my RFA. Adminship is definitely something one wouldn't want to dive into. I used the expression, "What does this button do?" on someone elses talk page and I wholeheartedly agree with it. Whether it's a red button that destroys the world or a white button that blocks a user, they both can have consequences :). <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 21:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your help please...

The record shows you recently deleted the redirect Tina M. Foster, because it did not point at an existing article. Could you please tell me where it redirected to?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 22:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but I think Pedro may be fast asleep (or he should be...) That redirect pointed to Tina Monshipour Foster, which was also speedy deleted (by CSD G12; copyright infringement). If there is another "Tina M. Foster" that should have an article, by all means, recreate! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:25, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

What a talk page stalker. :) Useight (talk) 22:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Pot/kettle/black. :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Gotta keep it fun sometimes. Useight (talk) 22:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mina Aoe

Please let me see the deleted version of this article. A quick Google search has convinced me that the deletion was premature. I discovered that the user that created it seems to create articles in good faith and with knowledge of Japanese culture but doesn't understand the aggressive, overeager patrolling and tagging that is done too often. Also, are you able to see the list of articles that this user created that were deleted? If so, I'd like to see it. --C S (talk) 02:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Categories: Wikipedia administrators