User talk:Phgao

Welcome!

Hi Phgao! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Lectonar 11:16, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Urea hydrogen bonds

Hi Phgao, I reverted your edit to urea because it was partly wrong.

I guess you thought each nitrogen atom has a lone pair that can hydrogen bond - this is not the case. The lone pairs on the nitrogen atoms are delocalised into the conjugated system of pi orbitals, and are thus unable to form hydrogen bonds.

The article states that the carbonyl oxygen can form four hydrogen bonds. This is very unusual and unsourced, so I've requested a citation. So you may be correct that urea can form 8 hydrogen bonds, but it is certainly not from the nitrogen atoms.

Ben 12:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

August 2007

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to War on Terrorism: You may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Jeremyb 17:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure. By the way, I see that your last edit to your user page looks like it might have been a mistake. --Jeremyb 17:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Just start editing it. It should have the parent page and a slash (/) followed by whatever you want as the title, for example User:Phgao/Sandbox. A convenient way to start editing a page is by linking to it or visiting it and clicking start this page. More info: WP:SUBPAGE and WP:USERPAGE. Check out the {{tl}}, {{tls}} and {{tnull}} templates and related families for ways to easily link to templates. Also, might be interested in the {{user}} and {{unsigned}} families. --Jeremyb 17:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I've seen you use the edit summary "r" quite a bit and I'm wondering what you mean. Generally revert is abbreviated rv. See also Wikipedia:Edit summary legend (don't worry I haven't even finished reading the page no less no all the one's listed there). --Jeremyb 18:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar :D

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your efforts in keeping wikipedia vandalism-free and for beating me to a revert one too many times AngelOfSadness talk 17:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You clearly deserved a reward for your efforts after you reverted so much vandalism. It's good to know that wikipedia isn't running out of anti-vandals(I guess thats the word). Anyway, I know it's very annoying when bots beat you to the revert. I can always predict that once I press undo, Cluebot has already gone ahead, reverted the page AND warn the vandal by the time the page loads for me. AngelOfSadness talk 17:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The -1000 I think is number of kb(kilobytes) removed. Those bots are programmed to revert edits with a certain number of kb removed and without an edit summary to explain. I think that's what Cluebot(anti-vandalism bot) is programmed to do. Bots are designed to do the "tedious" tasks in editing. They're good in a way but they can misbehave a lot. I love it when I revert an edit that Cluebot didn't catch or warn a vandal who's edits were reverted by Cluebot, but it wasn't fast enough to keep up with me :D AngelOfSadness talk 17:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You got there a milisecond before me. Unfortunately there is no for the person to be automatically warned unless you're a bot (Damn bots can do everything). There are a couple of anti-vandalism tools that can help speed up reverts/warning people. I personally use Twinkle which gives faster rollback (better/faster than simply revving) and it gives you loads more tabs beside the userpage/discussion/edit this page tabs. The other tabs help with warning the vandal(like click the tab, enter the article name and pick the type of warning), csd(request for speedy deletion of articles again click the box), arv(reporting vandals to admins), request for page protection and afd(articles for deletion different from csd). Here's the article about using/getting Twinkle. There's a whole load of other anti-vandal tools here. AngelOfSadness talk 18:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Twinkle is so dead-easy to use, that you can revert multiple articles at once depending on how manytabs/windows your internet broswer can have open at any one time. When you're reverting vandalism for a while, you'll see the strangest edits and be surprised that someone would be bothered to write such fodder/sillyness in an article. But warning the vandals is good as the warning history is an indication to admins that the editor is not making constructive edits and should be blocked from editing. But that doesn't mean warning vandals can be good. There are some that take their anger out on your talkpage and/or userpage after you placed a test1 template warning on their talkpage. So there's downsides to warning vandals, but them attacking your userpages will certainly get them blocked. I know from experience and my userpage history can speak for itself on this one. AngelOfSadness talk 18:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Sardis city.

Thank you. My friend made the fartville edit; thanks for removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.109.50.31 (talk) 19:07, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome

You're welcome for the revert. :) Acalamari 01:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi Phgao,

If you are still looking to be adopted, I would be happy to take on the task. I have been editing Wikipedia since March 2005, and have over 3000 edits. I have spent a considerable amount of time fighting vandalism, and writing/editing articles, but have also grown more involved in XfD's, and administrator related topics. Let me know if you're interested, and what you're looking to work on. Hiberniantears 20:40, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Outstanding! I'll take some time to really scrutinize your editing this weekend to see if their is anything specific I think I can help you with. Looking over your contributions quite briefly, you look to be a pretty strong editor already. As a fellow vandal fighter, I can probably be most helpful in that arena. The more I work on anti-vandalism, the more nuanced and interesting I find it. I'm always amazed at the subtle, clever ways people come up with to disguise vandalism, and find one of the greatest challenges to be not simply quickly spotting strange disruptions, but looking for patterns which may point on some hijacked IP's, or a number of editors acting in concert (or just one working through sockpuppets). In the mean time, please consider me at your service on any area of the project, and definitely feel free to delve into my own contributions. I've been here long enough to make a few mistakes, and learn from them along the way. I try to balance most of my current work with a little bit of article building, a lot of vandalism fighting, and a mixed bag of administrator related tasks, such as WP:AFD, and WP:CSD. I generally edit most days, so you can usually catch me on my talk page. My e-mail is also activated, so you can contact me that way by clicking on the "E-mail this user" link of my own user and talk page. Look forward to working with you! Hiberniantears 19:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 36	3 September 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Interview with Jimbo Wales
WikiScanner tool expands, poses public relations problems for Dutch royal family	WikiWorld comic: "George P. Burdell"
News and notes: Fundraiser, Wikimania 2008, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 04:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

revert to Liar loan?

Is there any reason why you reverted my changes to liar loan? I switched the previous reference, which was unclear and confused subprime lending with stated-income lending, for a better one. The replacement is by a prof at Wharton, and includes details of the proposed law.

If you see any problems, then please let me know, rather than just reverting. Thanks. 24.91.134.90 07:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The old reference is just not very good--it does not distinguish between subprime and state-income loans, completely different concepts.

In any case, I've replaced my link with the exact same story (syndicated columnist) from the Seattle Times, which I trust should be respectable enough. 24.91.134.90 07:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I know you've already got one, but I think you deserve another because you have beaten me to reverts about 10 times in the space of a 30 minute period! The Sanctuary Sparrow 08:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Australian Pavilion

A tag has been placed on Australian Pavilion, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Murderbike 10:02, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Your question on the 3RR rule

Great question. 3RR can actually be a pretty tricky rule when dealing with vandalism. The basic rule that you should always follow in this area is as such: Only exceed the 3RR limit in instanced of clear and blatant vandalism.

There are some excellent tips found here: Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule#Exceptions. The list of exceptions, IMHO, grows increasingly more complex as you move down. For the time being, I would stick to dealing with just the bullet at the top on blatant vandalism. That said, look over the rest of the list and take some time here and there to familiarize yourself with the policies (which are linked from the list). For example, the bullet on spam is a good next step, as you want to be certain that you can differentiate between spamming, and the good faith addition of links which might simply be considered extraneous. The real key here is thus: If you find yourself in a 3RR situation, before you cross that threshold, be certain that you are within the guidelines of policy. In most cases, if you are uncertain, simply move the discussion to either the article talk page, or the other editor's talk page.

Likewise, I would suggest that you always do two thing when reverting vandalism. First, leave an edit summary (which you do), and second, take a few extra seconds to leave a template message on the vandal's talk page. Often times, this step will inform you if you are dealing with an editor, or an IP which regularly vandalizes Wikipedia. When I am dealing with vandalism, I will often check the contributions off the editor who made the vandalism to see if they simply made a one off edit, or if they are making numerous bad faith edits. In either case I will always leave a template message (generally from the list of usual warnings. With any given vandal, you warn them once, and if they make another bad faith edit, warn them again... this continues to the fourth bad faith edit. If the editor makes a vandalism edit within a short period after the fourth warning, you can report them to WP:AIV, which is where administrators are alerted to vandals who need to be blocked. Individual admins take different approaches to blocking, and will generally consider the nature, quantity, and period of time a given editor has been making bad faith edits before deciding on a block time. I usually see blocks of around 24-31 hours.

As for the Visual kei which you asked me about. This article has actually popped up on my radar screen a number of times, and it seems to be the object of multiple POV editors. I don't personally know much on the subject, so I would be hesitant to wade into the article. However, I would not that the IP editor has escalated the issue to requests for page protection. Here is their diff from that page: [1], and here is the section: WP:RFP#Current_requests_for_protection. I would monitor this, rather than make any further reversions as the debate seems to involve a dispute over appropriate sources (and since I am unfamiliar with the topic, I don't know which sources are accurate). Hope this helps! Hiberniantears 14:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Image licenses

Well of the own work options multi license GFDL and creative commons allows for the greatest degree of reuse. It would really rathe depend on what you are trying to do. All the licenses do broadly the same thing (release the image for others to use as long as any derivatives are also released under the terms of the licsense and the author is credited).Geni 14:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

2mil

Thanks! Nobody's officially confirmed Oklahoma State Highway 113 yet as two millionth, but it's a very real possibility! —Scott5114↗ 08:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Smile:)

SJP has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hey! No problem. Just trying to make wikipedia a more friendly place to be:) BTW, keep up your good vandal fighting. Salaam:)--SJP 23:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Great! One good action has a ripple affect. You never know how many people you will help by doing/saying something nice:) Keep it up!--SJP 23:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Why the heck not? :)

Hasek is the best has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Hasek is the best 23:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

pssst...

Hi Phgao! Just a quick reminder, when using warning templates, always use subst:, (i.e. {{subst:uw-test1|Article}} because if you don't, the template is transcluded, and if it is updated or changed, it won't reflect the version that you used when placing it. (see Wikipedia:Template substitution) I noticed you were just using {{test}}, and it wasn't converting, so thought I'd just pop over to remind you. Thanks! ^Ariel♥Gold 08:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. You accidentally put a leading space, which results in that "non format" box you'll see. That's caused when anyone "indents" or tabs in, or leads with a space. If you want to read an essay I wrote that is a guide for Recent Changes patrol, I'd not only love your feedback, but I think it may be helpful for you perhaps, you can find it at User:ArielGold/Etiquette2. It is long, though, so get a cup of coffee or tea if you're going to take a peek, and feel free to comment on the talk page of the essay if you have any comments, questions, or suggestions! Cheers, ^Ariel♥Gold 09:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

P.S., if you have not already done so, you may want to go into your preferences (top right) and under the "edit" tab, check the box that says "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". This is really helpful over time, because even if it is just something like "rv", it lets others know what you did with that edit. Just an idea! ^Ariel♥Gold 09:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you have to? No. Is it desired and recommended, without a doubt. Not only to let the editor in question know what article you're referring to (helpful especially when someone goes on random sprees), but also to let other editors/administrators coming to warn the editor in question, they can easily see what articles he's been warned for already. I always, always do it. Additionally, a third parameter can be placed, with extra comments that you may wish to place, simply place it after the article's name, such as {{subst:uw-test1|Test Article|While your edit may have been funny, it was really not appropriate, so please refrain from further edits of this type in the future, thanks!}} Hope that helps! (And I cover that in the essay, as well, if you'd like to review it, along with the proper order, the proper amount of warnings to give, when, etc., like I said, it is pretty long, lol.) ^Ariel♥Gold 09:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hahaha oh gosh, I wish there was a way to remove "minor edit" or "edit summary" link, I can't tell you the times I've clicked those instead. If you're using Firefox 2.0.0.6 though, just wait till the page loads, and hit the back button, and your edit will still be in the window. That's saved me some serious typing in the past! ^Ariel♥Gold 09:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

No, sorry for the confusion, let me try to clarify. Let's say you're editing something, and you've spent a good deal of time typing it up. Then you go to hit the "save page" button, and instead, you click the "edit summary" or "what's this" link, and you're automatically navigated to a new page. Don't panic, simply hit the back button/arrow on your browser (to go back one page, not the backspace key), and it will return you to the page, with the open edit box, and your text should still be written in the edit box, just as you left it. Hope that explains things! As for speed when reverting, well, speed is good, but as with everything, sometimes speed just isn't possible, when you need to evaluate the page history, user's contribs, previous warnings, etc., it is best to be extra sure in some situations. And if someone beats you to the revert, hey, no biggie, hee hee. Thanks for reading the essay, I'm glad you found it somewhat interesting, lol. It is too long, I need to trim it down before moving it to mainspace, but I do think it would be helpful to semi-new or new patrollers (well, I hope it is, anyway!). Cheers! ^Ariel♥Gold 09:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, using it without the parameters works, but I'd again encourage you to include the article you're referring to, both to help the editor, and the administrators who may review the actions and warnings for reference. While not required, it is encouraged that editors use that parameter when warning someone or placing notices. ^Ariel♥Gold 09:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 37	10 September 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Interview with Jimbo Wales
An interview with Jimbo Wales	WikiWorld comic: "Godwin's Law"
News and notes: 2,000,000, Finnish ArbCom, statistics, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

Great work fighting vandalism! Just a suggestion: Try Twinkle -- it'll make your work easier. utcursch | talk 09:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The above message was appearing small, because the R Delivery Bot forgot to close the <small> tag in the message left on September 11. utcursch | talk 09:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is how to use Twinkle in simple steps:

(1) Paste the text below into your monobook.js file:

importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkle.js');

(2) save the new monobook.js page, and

(3) completely refresh your browser by bypassing your cache (hit Control-Shift-R in Firefox or Control-F5 in Internet Explorer).

Once you've done this, you'll see some extra tabs (in addition to "discussion", "edit this page", "history" etc.). Here's a screenshot: Image:TwinkleARV - AIV.png.

These tabs will provide additional functionality. For example, on a user talk page, you'll have "warn" tab. Clicking on "warn" will open a new window within the HTML page. You can choose the type of warning, level of warning and enter the article name. Click on submit, and the a warning will be left on the user's talk page. utcursch | talk 09:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hallo Arbeitstier. ;) Auch ich kann dir Twinkle nur empfehlen, damit wird die Vandalismusbekämpfung noch viel einfacher. Dazu empfehle ich dir noch WP:VF. Grüße, —DerHexer (Talk) 13:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

By boxes, do you mean tabs? I'm not sure Probably, it's because of your browser... According to WP:TWINKLE, Twinkle works best with Mozilla Firefox/Opera/Camino -- it won't work with Internet Explorer. You can always ask for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Twinkle. utcursch | talk 14:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome (again)

Thanks for remembering me (or was it the fact that the message was still on your talkpage ? ;)), but as long as i've got you on the hook, would you mind having a look at this. I'm quite sure we could use another pair of eyes, especially for some pending translations from Chinese. And, btw, you may still contact me for any questions you might have (if your adopter is busy or so). Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar 15:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Wrestlecrap

Thanks for the help with Wrestlecrap, it's been extremely difficult to deal with lately. They keep getting banned and keep coming back. Wikipedia doesn't think the page gets enough traffic for it to be protected, even though there have been how many edits just today alone? But instead of ranting I'll just thank you again for the help. DX927 19:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

• Nah, I don't think it's hasty at all, there were just a few instances where we had a vandal posing as someone affiliated with the website just to try and justify their vandalism as fact and I just wanted to let people know that it was the other way around. Sorry if that sounded confusing but the whole thing is pretty screwed up anyway. And honestly it worked out for the best because I found even more people who are willing to watch the pages for vandalism now. DX927 23:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oddfellows Oz

Thanks. Pdfpdf 15:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

No problems! (I read you have teenage children! You could say I'm a teenager as well. Phgao 15:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm. It's been a while since I was a teenager! Pdfpdf 16:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, did I mention I'm in Australia too? Phgao 16:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

No, you didn't. Pdfpdf 16:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Melbourne is a fun place... Unfortunately I haven't been up to Adelaide. Phgao 16:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

(As a matter of idle curiosity,) why don't you mention that on your user page? Pdfpdf 16:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I actually prefer not to put too much personal details up there. Got to be careful sometimes. But I see you even have your suburb! Phgao 16:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a big suburb! Pdfpdf 16:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Are you a native Melbournian? Pdfpdf 16:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

(It's 2am. I'm going to bed. "See" you when it's daylight. Pdfpdf 16:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC))

Toolbox

Hmm... depends on what you are trying to do. Do you mean that you just want the links to be on your user page, but not in a box, or do you mean that you want the actual box located elsewhere? Hiberniantears 17:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you may have stumped me with that one. My user page is pretty much the result of lots of trial and error. I controlled the location of the boxes primarily using page breaks. Feel free to click into the editing field of my page and look at the code. Also, I just reverted a little vandalism to your user page. Hiberniantears 19:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Phgao,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day.

Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design.

Roger Y. Tsien

Phgao! I am searching for information about Roger Y. Tsien. Please don't do anything to the article for about an hour. Thank you. RS1900 13:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedies

1. You can not delete a user page by speedy for lack of notability, only an article. 2. Any assertion of claim to notability or importance is sufficient to prevent speedy. Saying someone has published several books or is a professor at a university is sufficient for that. It doesnt necessarily have to be enough to show WP:Notability , just make a claim to it. Please do not overuse speedy, and make extra work for the admin --like me--there is quite enough real junk to remove. DGG (talk) 14:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Right, I was sure the user p;. was an accident--in this case it did look like an article!. -- and I see it really happened as an edit conflict. No problem there.

and please check WP:PROF--though not stated there is so many words, essentially all full professors at research universities turn out to have published enough and to have attained sufficient positions and editorships and awards to be found notable at Afd. I can recall only 2 or 3 exceptions in the last 6 months or so. For associate professors, it depends, and for assistant professors, they are usually not yet sufficiently well know. It's a good idea to quickly check for publications in google Scholar--not exact, but gives a rough idea. Remember you can use WP:PROD when in doubt. Happy hunting--almost all of what you have been doing is excellent! DGG (talk) 14:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Mecklenberg--test or context or empty would all have done, since we have an article. If we had not had one, it would be kept , labeled {{expand}} --oddly, all inhabited places are considered notable, large or small, no matter how little is in the article. Sounds silly, but it saves an immense about of disputation over which villages count as significant. You might want to check WP:STUB and WP:Common outcomes, as well as WP:CSD.

for Nathan Bazley, yes it goes. As it wasn't really empty, I marked it as db-test, but another admin found it was a copyvio, which is always a sure reason for deletion. Remember about WP:PROD when in doubt. DGG (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Your note about Hills Foodland

Thank you for your message. I (foolishly) assumed it was not notable or merely advertising/junk, but I have since removed the tag and added about two sentences to it and an external link. --J. Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

No problems! I've made mistakes too, I wanted to point it out to you, as I was also looking for pages like that, and came upon it and I myself was going to tag it, but I always try to google articles that seem to me which could be notable. Oh and don't call yourslf foolish as "to err is human". Keep up the good work! Phgao 14:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for being understanding. Just so you know, I've posted a message on the creator's talk page. Best wishes, --J. Atkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

No sweat, it's good that you followed it all up as well. Phgao 15:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for pointing it out.I have cancelled my vote.Pharaoh of the Wizards 19:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Reverting without warning?

Hello. I am just curious as to why you reverted ([2], [3]) the deletions made by 69.254.101.153 (talk · contribs), but did not issue them a warning explaining why you reverted their edits. --Kralizec! (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello thanks for the message. Firstly what the anon ip did was remove referenced material as well as lines of infomation without himself adding a edid summary. However I do not go and warn every user I meet unless the edits are overtly offensive or blantent vandalism. Also it is evident the ip does not want warnings as he blanked the page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:69.254.101.153&action=history. Which I reverted. Have a good day! Phgao 02:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore I see you edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_Naval_reactor&action=history quite a bit and I welcome you following up on my reverts. Phgao 02:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

If we do not tell people what they did wrong, how are they ever going to learn? Your edit summary does not even say why you reverted the edits, so this anonymous editor would be totally clueless as to what happened to their edits. --Kralizec! (talk) 03:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I always put "r" when I revert. I take that as being sufficient. In addition, I rarely revert contentious edits, always those that are blatent or remove referenced/sourced material or those that remove chunks of material without putting edit summaries themselves. Phgao 03:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Can I add that if "r" is not sufficient, and you would like me to give detailed explanations for each revert, that is not possible as when I'm reverting vandalism every 10 seconds on RCP, a simple "r" does it for me. Also I expect most using programs to assist in reverting would have added me to ignore, not showing my edits. Phgao 03:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

What does an edit summary of "r" mean to a new, unregistered user? Heck, as a multi-year Wikipedia user, "r" does not even mean "revert" to me ("r" means redirect, as in WP:R). Regardless, as noted in WP:REVERT, "it is very important to let people know why you reverted ... Explaining reverts also helps other people. For example, it lets people know whether they need to even view the reverted version (in the case of, eg, "rv page blanking")." --Kralizec! (talk) 03:27, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry no one else has pointed this out to me, I believe I will stick to what I do. Most editors are not babies, and they should be able to understand that removing infomation without any desription of why, will lead to it being put back. Also if I were to place a tag, I would simply place a warn tag for vandalism, which every other RCP person does. Note that the warn tag does not really explain why either, but vandalism is vandalism. Phgao 03:34, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

3 revert rule

Hi, Phgao. That article has been deleted more than once in the past as a cross-namespace redirect. --Rrburke^(talk) 03:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Welcoming!

I forgot to sign. It wasn't intentional.

A suggestion: do not link within Wikipedia using external links as opposite to double brackets. I'm browsing Wp through their SSL interface, and when I followed that non-SSL link without realizing I did, I got logged off. If you had used an internal link that wouldn't have happened. It's more logical, too.--Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves ^{talk / contribs} (join WP:PT) 03:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I'm don't understand what you are saying as I'm not that clued up with regards to the interal workings of the site. Can you explain further? Phgao 03:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

There's not much to explain, really. Just keep in mind, if it's something in Wikipedia or one of its sister projects, you should always use an internal link like this. The SSL interface uses a completely different address from the standard //en.wikipedia.org, so the session cookie (do you know what a cookie is?) only works for one address, not both, and that's why I got logged off. Anyway, just remember the internal vs external links stuff, and you'll be fine.--Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves ^{talk / contribs} (join WP:PT) 03:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do know what a cookie is *laughs*. Ok got it! Thanks. Phgao 03:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Opinion edits!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is it okay to put our own opinions into a page? Like is it alright for a guy like me to write on the Chris Lawrence or Cooper Cronk page that I want to see them in tight gym pants and i want to squeeze their bulges? Or is that a form of vandalism? What if you tell a true story about them (i have one here) in an empty toilets at the mall i saw Chris lawrence and grabbed his crotch... he told no one due to the embarrassment and said if i did it again he would smash me... Is that allowed?

P.S. Thankyou for the welcome it was very useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pooh the hat (talk • contribs) 04:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Apologize

Hello Phgao. I created the article 'Roger Y. Tsien' on 13:03, 15 September 2007. And you posted deletion tag on the article on 13:03, 15 September 2007. You should have waited for at least five minute before taking any action. Then you send me this message on 13:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC):

"A tag has been placed on Roger Y. Tsien, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD a7. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add hangon on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines. If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add hangon on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself."

You didn't waited even for one minute. I want an apology. Please apologize on my talk page. Thank you. RS1900 04:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)