Hello! Welcome to my talk page, feel free to leave a message for me at the bottom of this page, using a new heading for new topics. Please try and use descriptive headers, as it helps with my archiving (I reserve the right to change the header for this purpose). Messages in italic like this have been copied from other users talk pages to keep the full conversation thread together. I will usually reply on your talk page (exceptions include replies to possibly dynamic IPs, and when multiple people are involved in one conversation) to give you a new messages notification.

Useful links (either for you or myself): Userpage | Block log (Blocked) | Deletion log | Protection log | RFA voting rationale | RFA reviews subpage | To-do

• Full archive index of old conversations. If you wish to re-start any conversation from in here please start a new heading on this page.
• Quick links: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

15 January 2025
From the editors: Looking back, looking forward Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2024 In the media: Will you be targeted? Technology report: New Calculator template brings interactivity at last Essay: Meet the Canadian who holds the longest editing streak on Wikipedia Opinion: Reflections one score hence News and notes: It's a new dawn, it's a new day, it's a new life for me... and I'm feeling free Serendipity: What we've left behind, and where we want to go next Op-ed: Elon Musk and the right on Wikipedia In focus: Twenty years of The Signpost: What did it take? Arbitration report: Analyzing commonalities of some contentious topics Humour: How to make friends on Wikipedia
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Please put all your replies to my admin coaching update message here with your username as a third level header. It will help keep everything together and help me not miss anyone. Thanks! Petros471 22:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tango tango passed with flying colors, so sure, I can coach another admin.

As a separate issue, has anyone attempted to coach an entire group of admins at once yet? Hmm, well, I could at least do an admin 101 class on irc some weekend, if you like. People on rfa often turn out not to know the basics, which is somewhat scary.

Kim Bruning 22:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try and sort out assignments tomorrow once I've got a few more replies. No, that hasn't yet been tried. Good idea though- any ideas as to how to organise it? I think the best thing might be to ask everyone to join a special IRC session at a particular time/place as advertised somewhere public (i.e. more visible than the admin coaching subpage). Petros471 22:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. While I've got nothing against the program, maybe someone could coach me in how I'm supposed to do this? Most of my coachees don't really need help--or at least don't ask for it. But sure, assign one anyway, and I'll make sure to keep up with this one. -Mysekurity 22:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Your new trainee is Brazucs and your fellow coach is JzG. Once coaching has started please move the relevant entry in the coaching box up to 'Active'. As for how to do coaching: well different coaches have different methods. At any time of course your trainee can come to you for help with something, but you can also take a look at their contributions and see where they need to improve and/or ask them some questions/example scenarios. If your trainee is not that active you can always be assigned another one in addition. Let me know if you have any other questions. Cheers, Petros471 16:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. -Mysekurity 22:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I officially withdrew from Esperanza in June, so please delist me. Cheers. :) Chacor 02:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite ironic that just a few months ago you were being coached as part of the admin coaching program and now you are in charge of it! As far as I know I haven't been assigned a new trainee since your own coaching finished, and I think I would be able to take another one. Thanks. Academic Challenger 06:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well you were assigned SonicAD - IIRC by Titoxd, who forgot to tell you, which I did. You then showed up at User talk:SonicAD, and asked if he had any questions. I guess you never got a reply from that, and as his contributions show that's he's not particular active I'll archive it, and give you a new trainee. I'm sure he can always come with any questions at a later date if he wants :) Petros471 09:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, how's the coordinator? :D I don't remember if I told you about the sandboxes I used to notify users (User:Titoxd/Sandbox A User:Titoxd/Sandbox C User:Titoxd/Sandbox E), so if you want to borrow them, feel free to do so. By the way, mind assigning someone to me? Titoxd^(?!?) 04:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Thanks for signing up in Wikipedia:Esperanza's Admin coaching program. Since you've volunteered to help train a user, I've assigned Quentin Smith to you and to your partner, Jacoplane. Please make sure to be kind and helpful to your coachee. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks again! Petros471 17:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't received any contact from my coachee since you assigned him to me. What do you think we should do? Titoxd^(?!?) 04:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He does look rather inactive at the moment... You happy to take on a new trainee and possibly end up with two if Quentin returns? Petros471 11:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since he's on a dynamic DSL IP, I suppose there's really nothing we can do, is there? *sigh*  RasputinAXP  c 13:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I've just protected his talk page, I think it's been left open to editing and been reviewed by enough admins for him to be considered 'community banned'. Petros471 13:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You got your merge in my delete!!! :)  RasputinAXP  20:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conversation continued at User talk:RasputinAXP under heading of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Hostetler. Petros471 20:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're the best!!! CaliforniaKid 00:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry not sure where I am supposed to write this. I wanted to write an article and when I pressed the save button (ok sorry before I was finished) and then tried to edit it again I got a message that it was deleted by you. I would like to know why. This is the article:

"Kea Audio is a privately owned company located in Nelson New Zealand. It was founded in 1993 and specializes in high quality drivers incorporating new cone technology and design loudspeakers. In 1995 a new cone material was developed called "Polyepicell". This is a polymer hardfoam and has combines qualities like extreme stiffness and light weight. The enormous stiffness of Polyepicell eliminates bending and the specially designed damping technology avoids the feared cone breakups. In 1998 a new tweeter was developed where only an outer ring emits soundwaves. This reduces conebreak ups and improves the overall frequency response as well as a wider directivity. The founder Dipl.-Ing. J.Lang is a member of the audio engineering society and wrote two papers in 1989 on loudspeakers and loudspeaker cabinets at the University of Berlin which are available at the Institute of Acoustics' library."

I found other articles on Bose, Cabasse and Polk and I cannot see why this should be any different. I understand that advertising is not welcome, but why list all the big companies and the small ones are not allowed to be named? I do not think that only big companies are important, on the contrary a lot of small companies made a lot of important developements and inventions and the big ones usually get the patents sorted out and make millions. So it is my opinion that either all companies may be listed or no company at all. Kind regards, Johnedoe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnedoe (talk • contribs) .

When I deleted the article it read "Kea Audio is a privately owned company located in Nelson New Zealand. It specializes in high quality drivers incorporating new cone technology and design loudspeakers". On Wikipedia there are notability requirements, meaning that not every article is kept (that version certainly didn't meet them). If you think the new content that you were about to add means the article will meet the notability guidelines of WP:CORP then I'll hapily undelete the article (note that it still may be sent to articles for deletion. Petros471 10:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Johnedoe 11:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC) thanks. Sorry, does that mean I should add the above text in "" again?[reply]

I've restored the article, added the text you put on my talk page, and nominated for deletion via WP:AFD. You are welcome to continue editing the article to improve it, add information (especially information that is verifiable and citing third party sources). You are also welcome to contribute to the debate here. Petros471 11:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing too dire is up. :) I'm just hanging up the mop. Adminship is no big deal after all. :P -- Banes 16:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why my page, World Artist Network, was deleted. I will appreciate your re-evaluation of your hastey decision to delete my page. Let me know if you require additional information from me. Thank you.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Baltimoretom (talk • contribs) .

• WAN, World Artist Network on MySpace

I deleted this under criteria for speedy deletion A7, "An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject". Your article failed to do this.

For more information on what can qualify as a notable website, you might find the WP:WEB guideline useful. For more help on contributing to Wikipedia, see some of the links in my welcome above. Feel free to ask me any further questions on my talk page. Petros471 20:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did respond within minutes to assert its importance and I edited the page. The writing was deleted so I don't have a copy of what I responded with.

This is the largest group on MySpace, which is one of the world's most heavily trafficked websites. That is as culturally significant, if not more, than some of the articles on Wikipedia.

Thank you for your consideration. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Baltimoretom (talk • contribs) .

Hmmm, I suppose there might be enough claim on notability (the number of members) to deserve an WP:AFD discussion. Very well, I've undeleted and sent it to afd, where the Wikipedia community can decide. Whilst you are welcome to add your thoughts to that discussion I strongly suggest you don't ask the MySpace community to come and 'vote' on the AFD. AFD is not a vote, and doing so is not looked upon positively. You will strengthen your case on the AFD discussion if you can present (and put into the article) verifiable third party sources about the group, demonstrating why it is important. You will also need to pay attention to no original research, and neutral point of view. Petros471 21:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realise you were an admin until now, but I've already filed a WP:RFPP on this. Feel free to withdraw/decline my request if you wish, but having been on many WP:WEB AFDs before, the WP:SPA flood on this one will probably dwarf anything I've ever seen before if left unchecked. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  21:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just edit-conflicted replying to that request for protection, I was going to decline it for the same reason- i.e. let's wait till any flood actually starts (though I'm totally aware of the danger of one, hence the pre-emptive warning template, and the message I left on the author's talk page). Petros471 21:52, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you are hesitant to delete the earlier image uploaded under this name (which is orphaned-fair-use-replaced), you can delete the current image (as it is noncommercial uploaded after 19 May 2005 == speedy delete), revert to the earlier version, wait for 7 days and then delete that version too. -- Paddu 08:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I didn't delete that picture was because of the information presented in your User:Paddu/wowturkey.com photo template, which included phases like "Please use our photographs as you like!" etc. It's all deleted now anyway (I didn't realise that's what you wanted). Petros471 10:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I got your message too late. I've been travellnig for a while but am back now. --Guinnog 21:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Will you do me a favour and send a test email to my new account I just set up and attached to my wiki preferences? Thanks. --Guinnog 18:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a bit curious how 3-1 in favor of delete is no consensus. Indrian 04:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In closing as I did, I basically left it as an editorial decision. If the content is deemed notable enough to get some sort of mention in the main article, then not deleting the individual building ones allows that to happen without having to re-write them. However if the content is not notable enough then the redirect is effectively the same as deleting the article anyway (and I'd certainly resist anyone trying to revert the building articles away from a re-direct). I could have closed those as delete, but I think my closure was still within the area of administrator discretion (remembering that afd is not a vote). Petros471 09:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD is not a vote and your arguements for redirecting are sound, but your methodology, to me, is flawed. In your closing remarks you stated there was nearly a consensus to delete, which does not appear to support the facts and casts doubt on your use of administrative discretion in my opinion, at least on these specific closings. I known some admins find consensus at 51%, others at 66%, and I suppose there are probably one or two that set the bar even higher, but 75% sure as heck seems like consensus to me. I agree that a redirect is essentially a delete in this case anyway and have no intention of challenging the closing, but I am still curious how you did not find consensus in those debates. Indrian 16:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you're right, the 75% figure is pretty high for afd consensus (I usually use around the 66% if I'm even attempting to vote count). Basically that exact wording was copy+pasted as one of my standard closing statements, I could have probably done a better one for those (at least for the ones that actually were 75%, IIRC one of them had two keeps and therefore lower than that overall) and said something like 'basically consensus to delete but still redirecting because...'. Petros471 23:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can live with that. Thank you for clarifying. Indrian 23:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a page for Priority Club Rewards as a part of InterContinental Hotels Group. For some reason, it keeps getting deleted eventhough I provide the information requested once I see the speedy deletion message.

Please let me know what I need to do in order to have this page appear & not get deleted again.

Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Meyersl (talk • contribs) .

That article keeps getting deleted (without any further discussion) because it had already been deleted as a result of a articles for deletion discussion. Below is a copy of my reply on the articles talk page (I've copied it here because that talk page will soon be deleted as an orphaned talk page. You are welcome to continue discussion of this on my talk page. Petros471 23:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The page was deleted in accordance with the community decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priority Club Rewards. If you wish to appeal this, see deletion review, however I suggest this will not be successful. The alternative is to redirect this page to the main hotel article and add a section to that article on the reward scheme. Please make sure that it is written from a neutral point of view and you cite (but don't copy) sources. Petros471 14:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'lo Petros, I just got back from holiday. How are you? What do you think about my RfA at the moment? I've started filling in questions on your draft page which I located; take a look at the contributions one. Please let me know your thoughts some time, remembering that there is no rush at all. Thanks 8) —Xyrael 17:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Petros. I want to complain about the unknown user with this ip: 195.93.21.8

He changes pics even if i have warned him not to do.--Chronisgr 11:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• 195.93.21.8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Is there anything better about one picture over the other? This looks like a content dispute, so try and follow the advice given at dispute resolution, and make use of the article talk page to see what other editors think. If you can show me that there is clear consensus for a particular version, I'll be happy to sprotect the article for a while, otherwise you'll have to use the talk pages to try and reach consensus. Petros471 12:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know you can do it. That is why I request it. Userfy the article Jamarenyo wrote on Odhiambo Siangla. The article was deleted on August 21st. I am the subject of the article. I uploaded an image requested to improve the article before the debate that concluded with deletion.

The debate of the proposed deletion was quite enlightening. I agree Jamarenyo should have presented a verified evidence for the awards he listed behind my name, a position taken Nesbit and suggested by others as well.

What I am not sure of is the suggestion that others had little or no interest in my artwork other than those who would be interested in deleting Jamarenyo's entry about the artist. Smerdi of Tlon took the position, however, because I uploaded the image. Copyrights and access to equipments played a role. Not the interest alone. In fact, the uploaded image was sent to me from Rome, Italy where the collector, Dr. Mercia Gracy resides with the piece I called Liquid Fire.

Another thing I do not know is the extent to which the article can be userfied.

Crossmr was rightly concerned about those few awards some of which were scholarships and fellowships that should have been verified. If one takes the position of South Philly that the article could be strengthened, but now it is deleted, then I only would like to request what you can do. Userfy the article.

Siangla, August 23, 2006.

Yes, you are correct- I can userfy the article for you. However I'm going to have to ask you to register an account first, as I can only move the article into your userspace. At the moment you are editing from an IP 151.197.5.78 (talk · contribs). Just go to Special:Userlogin and you can register from there. Once you have done that, let me know what your account is and I'll restore the article into your userspace. Petros471 22:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Petros. I was wondering if you could give me one of your famous RfA reviews, if you're not too busy. Get back to me if there's anything you need me to do for it, or if you can't, or anything like that. Thanks! --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 23:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've got a couple of RFA related things in the works, so can't promise a timescale, but I'll do you one. Petros471 23:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I got it right. It is Siangla my talk. I requested you to restore the Odhiambo Siangla article to my userspace. Thank you.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Siangla (talk • contribs) .

The graph looks great (although I'd suggest removing the visible tick marks from the line). I noticed you left an open column for users in the Excel spreadsheet; that, in my opinion, is probably even more useful than the number of articles. This table would be useful if you decide to add a users column. You could probably use the total (which is not really the total) or >5 columns, unless you wanted me to incorporate the user data. -- tariqabjotu 14:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, though you did most of the grunt work (entering the data). I've done a massive amount of Excel graph work at uni and my last job so I though I would be able to do something like that :) I agree, I'd like to see that graph with user data. If you fancy doing that go ahead- I'm supposed to be busy now (doing work in real world). Let me know if you want me to do it though. I'd recommend using whatever data includes the greatest number of users because often it is the few edit users that cause the most work for admins, so no point only counting the more experienced users. Petros471 14:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I assume the blip in number of inactive admins last year is a result of a change in record keeping practices? --Guinnog 14:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm not sure of the technicalities behind that (NoSeptember would probably know better than me) but it wasn't a sudden rush of people all putting down the mop at once! Petros471 15:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although I hadn't really noticed it myself, you're probably right about it breaking lines so I've changed the sub to a small, thereby retaining the effect and being nicer for users at only four extra characters. As for templating it, I do this because it is the only way I an make modifications to the date part; User:^demon showed me how to do it. Is everything okay with this? Hope your preperations are going well, for university and for me! —Xyrael / 18:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible I won't have IRC for a bit so we're reduced to speaking over talkpages in the usual fashion. I noticed that you did quite a bit of work last night on the statement, and from your edit summary it appears to be complete and I think it looks really good. It complements the questions really nicely. I did a little copyediting and linking and I hope you're okay with that but please feel free to revert. Otherwise, perhaps we are ready and in that case we might be able start earlier. It would be better for me because if we start on the first of September I have several days of school which (obviously) makes it a lot harder for me to answer questions (although with the new blocking code it's significantly easier but the school blocks several key pages such as RfA). I understand you may not have Internet access towards the end of the week but I'd really rather get it done during my holiday so that I'm not too busy. Does this sound okay to you? I'll be around all day for a bar of death :) —Xyrael / 07:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I can go ahead sooner if you want- it's your thing afterall :) I've created Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Xyrael- I'll let you copy your answers in. Petros471 11:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listed - let's see if you get your support in first ;) With Where's, I was about number 60-odd because he listed it after I'd gone to bed. —Xyrael / 11:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the reminder. Yes, I am still interested. I have been dedicating increasing periods of time to wikipedia but will not really be able to concentrate on this till next month. I put together a list of subjects I needed some help with (some of them I worked around them on my own, so no help needed on those bits, but still have a few queries). I am currently on vacation but will take up your offer in a few days. Thanks again and best regards, E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 10:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. Prodego ^talk 12:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• That's strange because I found this article by going through the deletion log. For some reason, I can't find it there anymore. Danny Lilithborne 11:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad your still nominating potential admins. :)--Andeh 19:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Petros. Banes and I have yet to hear from our current trainee as to whether he's still interested in admin coaching, and a new school term is about to start for me, so would it be okay for to hold off on taking a new trainee for now? Thanks, Sango123 20:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, thanks! :) Sango123 20:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, just echoeing the above. Things are getting busier and busier in meatspace at the moment so I'd also rather not take on a new one just yet. What Sango said. :) -- Banes 12:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The closing date cannot possibly be earlier than the opening date, so adding "Closing Date (Theme): October 31, 1939" after "Grand opening: July 22, 1994" was clearly incorrect. Placing "Closing Date (Theme): October 31, 1939" in a section otherwise concerned with actual facts about the construction of the ride appears to state "October 31, 1939" as an actual closing date, rather than a thematic element. John254 07:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]