Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Scarian (talk | contribs) at 14:48, 15 February 2008 (→Re:RfA suggestions from 2 weeks ago: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Right now British

Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5 /Archive 6 /Archive 7 /Archive 8 /Archive 9 /Archive 10 /Archive 11 /Archive 12 /Unfortunate Incident /Archive 13 /Archive 14 /Archive 15 /Archive 16 /Archive 17

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.

203.94.143.9

Pedro, I urge you to look at the contributions for this IP and the fact that it's been given three warnings for vandalism this month alone. As well it has a very long history of blocks for vandalism. I believe a second look is worthy. Bstone (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

RE: Editor review

Thanks for the editor review, Pedro! I left a more lengthy response here, so you may reply there if you wish. Thanks again! Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 02:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

BRC

So, erm, when are you joining? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 08:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

When I get five spare minutes with a camera and my bath robe! Which could be 2012 with my time pressures at th emoment :( Pedro :  Chat  10:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

please sign here

I finally found you. I had adapted my signature from sorry guy and had decide to ask him if he minded. He told me he got it from you, so I ask you, do you mind me using and adaptation of your signature?--Pewwer42  Talk  10:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

More than welcome! Pedro :  Chat  10:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Notice of request for deletion of editor Pedro :)

Pedro, the editor you are, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that you satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space. Your opinions on yourself are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at User:GlassCobra/Editor for deletion#Pedro and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit during the discussion but should not remove the nomination (unless you wish not to participate); such removal will not end the deletion discussion (actually it will). Thank you, and have a good sense of humor :). GlassCobra 00:56, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, about time too! Pedro :  Chat  08:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Myles Munroe

Thank you for your edits to Myles Munroe.--Nowa (talk) 12:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Re: . As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wishes to fix my typos is welcome to do so... :-) WjBscribe 19:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

On RFR

Ha, ha. :) Well, I'm glad to know that our concerns there were supported by each other. :) Acalamari 20:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

-to

That wasn't "to" bold, was it? LOL Dlohcierekim Deleted? 20:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

) class !!

Rollback thanks and username

Thanks very much for granting me rollback :) My username is just my real name, so no link with the college :) When friends speak of how their names are famous, I usually win with the college in Winchester :D Best thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 21:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: WT:RFR

Sorry, but I'm not following you. Can we discuss this here instead of battle? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

yep! Pedro :  Chat  22:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to use January 10 2008, can you at least link "January 10" and not just "January"? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Done my friend - This is a wiki - you could have done it yourself you know!!. Please don't feel like this is some kind of "battle" that you "won" or "lost" - it's just about making wikipedia as clear as possible. Best wishes. Pedro :  Chat  22:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I know now what you were trying to do, however, now there's the matter of making sure all of these are styled in the same fashion. Is there a bot or something that can save us the trouble? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure you're correct here. My first random click was Talk:Reaganomics which is in the general format I prefer, and per MOS - basically not your format, I'm sorry to say. Bear in mind that WT:RFR is high visability so clarity is best. Altering individual talk pages of less high prominence articles seems a poor use of bot resources Pedro :  Chat  23:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

What would you suggest? Manual editing of individual talk pages or just leaving it alone for now? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd leave them - most seem either in the format as above or with no date specified at all. The link to the debate is far more important. Frankly no date at all hardly hinders the project - it's really only to try and pre-empt another XFD debate shortly after the first one. Pedro :  Chat  23:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:RfA suggestions from 2 weeks ago

Hi Pedro, I read your comment on my RfA... those dodgy AIV reports were all WP:HUGGLE's workings/bugs etc. I know that users must (at least) have a final warning or an {{subst:uw-vandalism4im}} before a report to AIV is possible. When Huggle has done these things I've quickly attempted to undo the error and taken full responsibility. I do hope that has been noted. Thanks again for your comment to me 2 weeks ago; I really appreciate it. Take care, Scarian 14:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)