User talk:PeterSymonds/Archive 25

This is an archive of past discussions with User:PeterSymonds. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

→

OTRS confirmation verification request

According to this talk, Hughes has confirmed that File:Vanishing-venice.jpg has indeed been released by him, but the file description doesn't mention anything. Also, there should be a corresponding confirmation for File:Leaningrainbow.jpg, especially since the uploader is clearly not the artist. Paradoctor (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Catherine Ashton

Hello,

I notice you closed the RM on Catherine Ashton as no consensus. In this case, though, the current name was the name that the article was protected to after the move war, not the previous consensus version - that's why I did the the RM in that order. Obviously, protection does not imply an endorsement of the protected version.

Per these move logs: Catherine Ashton, Catherine Ashton, Baroness of Upholland, the most recent version that had consensus was Catherine Ashton, Baroness of Upholland. If there is no consensus, then surely the previous consensus name should be kept? Pfainuk talk 21:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry; I hadn't noticed that. As I mentioned before, consensus seems to be in favour of keeping the name at Catherine Ashton, without the suffix, so I have tweaked my closing statement accordingly. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Pfainuk talk 21:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

DYKadminBot

DYKadminBot hasn't updated in the past two days and seems to be down. In the past you could jumpstart the bot; do you still have access? Shubinator (talk) 01:59, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Hm, I totally forgot I had that. I've visited the URL to jumpstart it, and the text said the bot has logged in, so we'll see I suppose. The login page displayed the correct queue for next update (6), which is due at 02:08, so I'll hang around to see what happens then. If it does anything stupid, please let me know immediately so I can take action (I'm watching too, but two eyes can't hurt). Thanks for the reminder. PeterSymonds (talk) 02:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure, will do. Thank you! Shubinator (talk) 02:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Queue count was allright at any stage, even when the bot didn't work. "The problem" was with DYK timer. For some reasons, it had to be 6 hrs off, but setting it 6 hrs back didn't help. Materialscientist (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Working again now. :-) PeterSymonds (talk) 02:51, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Ucucha 02:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. Sorry for bothering you with naive questions - I'm gradually learning DYK operation from scratch thanks to comments of experienced people like yourself. There are several steps in the DYKbot operation which are yet unclear. For example, apparently the bot stops updating when there is a problem with the toolserver. This is not meant to use you as a manual - just in case you know a possible reason. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 04:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Haha, trust me, it's fine. On my first day as an admin, I missed a noinclude tag when updating the template, causing a mountain of code to screw up the main page for about 40 seconds! :-) The Toolserver is generally quite reliable, so it shouldn't cause too many problems with the bot. But yeah, feel free to ask me, I don't mind! I won't be able to help with code issues, and I don't have any access to its internal features or settings, but I remember most of its scheduled processes. Thanks for the note. PeterSymonds (talk) 04:27, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I've done something similar on my first update :) .. The bot stalled. I posted a message at DYK talk - in essence, if you could do the same thing (for the next update at 16:01 UTC) as you've done last time, that would be great. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 10:59, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

On the same topic, do you think it would be possible to have a backup bot that could be run manually if an admin requests it? Regards So Why 11:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. It would require another bot to be written, if you wanted something like that. The reason only Nixeagle and I have the link to jumpstart the bot is because there's potential for abuse (I think some private data appears when the bot logs in, and there's a possibility to override the DYK time, or something). Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

General question: Is the bot running from toolserver?

My idea was to have a backup bot somewhere set up that could be activated by making an edit to it's userspace and which would then run once and then turn itself off again, for those times were the main bot is MIA but neither you nor nixeagle can be contacted in time. Such a set up could be done using a very slightly modified version of the code I think. Regards So Why 12:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the bot runs on the Toolserver.

Well, maybe that could be done. As I say, I don't really work in bots (I only have the ability to kick it), so I suppose it's worth discussing at WP:BAG or somewhere. If a new bot is written, it would obviously need +sysop, which can be done there too. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I always assumed that it didn't. Beats me why I did that though. I have filed a request at WP:BOTREQ yesterday, but so far no takers. I will add the backup bot idea as an alternative to rewriting it from scratch. A major rewrite/new bot would probably the best thing given the frequent hiccups of the current bot but a backup bot would be a good midterm solution.

On a side note, since you can jumpstart the bot, maybe you can ask nixeagle whether this information could be made available to a limited number of DYK active admins... Regards So Why 15:55, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll ask him if he's around, but he's been away on a long-term break for quite a while, so that may not be soon. On a brighter note, the last update went ahead without a hitch (even though I had to kick it twice). PeterSymonds (talk) 16:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Same ado, if its not difficult, could you please wake up the bot for the next update, 16:42 UTC, 5 December. If not, someone (not me) will hopefully update manually. For the update after that, I'm back on-line. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Soke Kubota Takayuki

Hello! Could you take a look at this again: the move was un-done. I muddled about trying to make order and then have un-done all my changes<g>. Thanks! jmcw (talk) 13:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Reverted and move-protected, with the instruction to revisit the talk page if the move is disputed. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi again - if you have time, could you take a look at Takayuki Kubota and make any suggestions that occur to you? I am never sure what to do when AGF is gone. jmcw (talk) 15:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. I'm probably not the best person to ask; I'm afraid I know absolutely nothing about the subject matter. Perhaps leave a note on the parent WikiProject about it, so they can assist you further. Sorry I can't be much help. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 15:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello again! Somehow the talk page was moved back but not the article: [1]. Could re-adjust things? Thanks! jmcw (talk) 19:29, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

And as long as you are familiar with this story<g>, could you look at this possible sock puppet's moves[2]? Thanks for your time and good will! jmcw (talk) 22:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Status: I am getting some help from User_talk:Explicit#Soke_Kubota_Takayuki. jmcw (talk) 11:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Robert I, Duke of Normandy

Can you please review your close of the move request there? I originally requested it as uncontroversial because the name I suggested was agreed upon in a prior move discussion. There was no discussion of a move to the current title and no discussion took place this time around, either. Thankyou. Srnec (talk) 00:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The new move discussion lasted the full seven days, and the consensus was to leave it at Robert I, Duke of Normandy. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 08:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Our bet

Six days and about twelve hours. Well done! It looks like you were almost exactly spot on about how long it would last ;-) --Deskana (talk) 11:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

lol - now cough up the cash! ;-) PeterSymonds (talk) 15:31, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

What's with this Little Grape? 86.189.5.222 (talk) 13:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Tau Alpha Upsilon

Dear Administrator

Please review this page http://www.deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Tau_Alpha_Upsilon_(deleted_02_Jun_2008_at_22:16) Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). I am an esteemed brother and current rush chair of SUNY Binghamton's oldest fraternity--Tau Alpha Upsilon. As the rush chair, it is my duty to make sure potential rushes/pledges are able to check the legitimacy of the fraternity, which in no doubt is legitimate as seen in SUNY Binghamton's website under the heading Tau Alpha Upsilon (http://www2.binghamton.edu/volunteer/student-service-group.html). As a brother, it is my obligation to plea that you restore our page and bring some respectability back to our brotherhood. If the question in hand about the deletion of the page is about legitimacy, then there is no doubt that the fraternity is legitimate, and since we are only a local fraternity and the only existing chapter and Alpha Chapter, we cannot provide as many sources for the articles posted in the deleted page as most are kept in secrecy within the brothers. Should they be released, it would be impossible for Wikipedia to confirm if the source citation is reliable. This is primarily because the information sent out in the Tau Alpha Upsilon's wikipedia page came from the esteemed brothers of the Tau fraternity, and as such, are considered primary sources. I am begging you to restore our page in wikipedia. The respectability and recognition of our fraternity lies in your hands. Once again, if the question is about the legitimacy of the fraternity, I posted different links below to prove that our fraternity does in fact exist, and since it's the only existing chapter of said fraternity, every information posted on our page will be a Primary Source, and as such, be difficult to find an outside source. For further questions about the legitimacy of our fraternity, Wikipedia is more than welcome to call Binghamton University's President, Lois B. DeFleur. Thank you. Please feel free to contact me either in my Wikipedia account or at 24mariachi@gmail.com

    In addition, we are also in one of you pages under the heading "Events Center" in this link  http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Binghamton_Bearcats

Here are the said articles.

http://alumni.binghamton.edu/AJ/2005/spring/takes.htm

http://www2.binghamton.edu/occ/greek-life/greek-orgs-list.html

http://www.taualphaupsilon.com/about.htm

http://taualphaupsilon.com/?page_id=5

http://www2.binghamton.edu/volunteer/student-service-group.html

http://www.bupipedream.com/Articles/Laughing-your-way-downtown-frat-hosts-comedic-professor/10407

http://bingfa.binghamton.edu/pdf/scholarships/Haran.pdf

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Binghamton_Bearcats —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24mariachi (talk • contribs) 00:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

RfA "closed prematurely"

You might want to say "closed early" rather than "closed prematurely" next time. It's just a matter of connotation, but to my ear at least, "closed early" suggests "closed before it would have been scheduled to close, whereas "closed prematurely" sounds more like "closed before it should have been closed," which is not at all the same thing. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Very well. I can't say I read that deeply into it, but I'll use "early" as opposed to "premature" next time. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Consensus on page moves

Hi,

Where there is consensus on a page move, but there is a dispute over the target, it is usually better to allow the discusion to continue until a consensus on the target is reached, rather than end the discussion, as you did here at 1975–76 USSR Red Army ice hockey tour of North America.

Have a good day.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 17:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

While I'm inclined to agree with you, we can't have move discussions go on indefinitely. It's best for people to reach a consensus by themselves, or by asking at the parent WikiProject page, rather than keeping it open too long. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I never marked it as vandalism, i just reverted it because it was false information. -- Dwayneflanders (talk) 03:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Then you've already misunderstood WP:RBK, which clearly states you must only use rollback for the reversion of blatant vandalism. PeterSymonds (talk) 06:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's not true. You might want to read WP:RBK again, there is no such statement, and none is implied. What is said is that rollbacks without edit summary should be used in obvious cases only.

While I'm here, is my verification request still on your queue? If not, please let me know, I'll ask someone else with OTRS access. Regards, Paradoctor (talk) 14:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there is. :-) "Rollback should be used only for reverts that are self-explanatory – such as removing obvious vandalism – to revert content in your own user space – or to revert edits by banned users who are not allowed to edit." Anyway, using rollback during a content dispute – which this undoubtedly was – is explicitly prohibited.

I must've missed that section. I'll take a look later today. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 14:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: the OTRS request, there is nothing in the OTRS system matching those names. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Paradoctor (talk) 17:37, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for blocking User:JAF3993. Although maybe we got off to a bad start, he has consistently accused others of bullying and just abused his editing privileges. fetchcomms☛ 20:45, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you also for blocking User:JAF3 and the bad RfA, which seemed too obvious to me anyhow. fetchcomms☛ 20:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Muzakaj

Hi there,

I too had my suspicions that this account was a sock of Sarandioti. Excellent work. How did you figure that out? Did someone notify you? Was there an SPI filed? I'm asking because I would like to know the details of the case in case he comes back in the future (which I'm sure he will).

I was asked for help by this user on IRC. As I looked more closely, the editing pattern looked more and more like Sarandioti, but the user denied any affiliation with the account. I then noticed that both Sarandioti and this user edited cswiki, and their styles were almost exact. I consulted a checkuser, who gave an inconclusive verdict; but the fact that they were on the same range was only added confirmation that I was speaking to Sarandioti. After I blocked them, they admitted it anyway. Hope that helps. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Amazing, he actually blew himself up. I was in the process of launch a massive SPI, with tons of diffs. He will almost certainly be back, so I will be keeping an eye out and will let you know immediately if I see anything suspicious. Best, --Athenean (talk) 21:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) PeterSymonds (talk) 21:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Pirveli Liga seasons

Hi Peter, thanks you for friendly advices, I try to patrol changes Related to Georgian football, but can you help me? I think that few seasons of Pirveli Liga must be deleted, but not to merged with Pirveli Liga. Please see Talk:Pirveli Liga 1990 and tell me what speedy delete reason I must give. Thanks P.S. Please forgive me for my bad English BRUTE (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. As the speedy deletion was already declined by another administrator, the best thing would be to take these articles to articles for deletion, in order to garner consensus for their deletion. The instructions for listing are found there. I hope this helps. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank's, Have a nice Christmas there! :) BRUTE (talk) 10:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, and the same to you! :-) PeterSymonds (talk) 12:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Iamdooser block

I've put this on hold. Can you look at the edits? The user says it may just be a shared IP at a college, and the edits seem to have nothing in common with ResearchEditor. Daniel Case (talk) 16:00, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I've unblocked. They were all confirmed by checkuser, but it looks like a legit editor accidentally caught. Hopefully, anyway. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 17:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Thanks, same to you! PeterSymonds (talk) 17:11, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Returned sock

Hi. Last summer, you blocked sock puppets for User:Excuseme99. I've tagged a new editor making similar types of edits to articles such as Natalie Wood and Kim Basinger. Red flags went off when I noticed the editor was editing content related to gay men Wood went out with and adding content to articles related to Lana Wood's book to various actor articles. I asked the editor about this and the comment was ignored. I think this is a WP:DUCK situation, personally. The username is User:Justppl. Thanks! Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I remember him; the behaviour matches. Blocked. Thank you. PeterSymonds (talk) 22:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Enjoy the season!

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

May this season bring you joy and cheer Peter! --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 00:28, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, you too. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism on Rooster

I am letting you know as the user (F'd to S C (talk · contribs)) specifically named you in the vandalism (see diff) and one of the edits had the messasge "I'm back" - so you might be able to work out who it is!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:59, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I have reported it at WP:AIV - I used your name there as a target of the attack, hope you don't mind, as anyone looking at the history of the article will work that out anyway! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Just a note that he has been blocked by User:Coffee The Thing _{Merry Christmas} 12:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

- Just a note: I'm faster than any other admin on IRC ;). --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 12:05, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
  - Just a note: I'm faster than any other rollbacker on IRC ;). --The Thing _{Merry Christmas} 12:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
    - Just a note: I'm impressed with the speed with which this was dealt. Thanks! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
      - Just a note: That's what she said. --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 12:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I had no idea my name meant male chicken. o: Anyway, thanks for dealing with it. It may need semi-protection again. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays from Phantomsteve!

File:Christmas collage.PNG

Happy holidays to you, PeterSymonds - hope you have an enjoyable, relaxing time
-- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:53, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! You too. :-) PeterSymonds (talk) 12:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

A Nobody^{My talk} is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 21:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

“

And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.

”

— (Alma 7:10)

The Thing _{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:User:TTTSNB/Merry_Christmas}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The Thing _{Merry Christmas} 00:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

A noiseless patient spider,
I mark'd where on a little promontory it stood isolated,
Mark'd how to explore the vacant vast surrounding,
It launch'd forth filament, filament, filament, out of itself,
Ever unreeling them, ever tirelessly speeding them.

And you O my soul where you stand,
Surrounded, detached, in measureless oceans of space,
Ceaselessly musing, venturing, throwing, seeking the spheres to connect them,
Till the bridge you will need be form'd, till the ductile anchor hold,
Till the gossamer thread you fling catch somewhere, O my soul."

—"A Noiseless Patient Spider" by Walt Whitman

Happy New Year Awadewit (talk) 05:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Same to you. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 11:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)