User talk:Phantomsteve

---

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page — it will be on my watchlist anyway, so I will see your response If you leave me a message: I will answer on this talk page — please let me know if you need a talkback to let you know that I've answered. This will ensure that conversations remain together! Please click here to leave me a new message.

vn-58This user talk page has been vandalized 58 times.

Re: scripts not working

Hi! Some of the errors you've encountered (amelvand, picmark) are likely from changes to Wikipedia skin HTML since they've last been updated (possibly some time ago). Both scripts now seem to work on Firefox 3.5.6 and Google Chrome 4.0.249.43. Unfortunately there's no Windows readily accessible from this computer, so I can't test it on IE (your errors seem to be formatted like that), but if your errors persist, I'll see what I can do (perhaps on the VM front). Gracenotes^T § 00:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Pictor Los Angeles Convention Center Musca Puppis Indus (constellation) Seka Tikkabilla Refraction (metallurgy) United States Civil Service Commission Tucana Volans Reticulum Telescopium Horologium Holloway Columba (constellation) Gamecock Voice User Interface Bawn

Cleanup Interactive voice response VAIO Dell Latitude Merge Judith Miller Obscenity Republic of Texas (group) Add Sources 1688 Georgi Beregovoi Predictive dialer Wikify SEX (boutique) Desborough School Joint Rescue Coordination Centers Expand 47 Ursae Majoris SO-DIMM Queueing theory

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi :)

Hi :) I had recently requested for being allowed to help out in the account creation process for new users, through the ACC interface. I did leave a message on my talk page (as advised by the instructions), but till now haven't heard from the ACC team. Would you be able to guide me on how to get it done? Also Steve, if possible, could you tell me what all to do to qualify for rollback rights? Thanks ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 12:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Would it be possible for you to leave the reply on my talk page? Thanks again ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 12:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

• gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

• ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community. Matt Lewis (talk) 01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Important notice about VOTE 3 in the CDA poll

You are receiving this message as you have voted in VOTE 3 at the Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll.

It has been pointed out that VOTE 3 was confusing, and that voters have been assuming that the question was about creating an actual two-phase CDA process. The question is merely about having a two-phase poll on CDA at the eventual RfC, where the community will have their vote (eg a "yes/no for CDA” poll, followed a choice of proposal types perhaps).

As I wrote the question, I'll take responsibility for the confusion. It does make sense if read through to the end, but it certainly wasn't as clear as it should have been, or needed to be!

Please amend your vote if appropriate - it seems that many (if not most) people interpreted the question in the way that was not intended.

Regards, Matt Lewis (talk) 16:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

New proposal

Hi Steve, remember the new proposal I had discussed with you on my talk page? I've posted it in the Village Pump here. Do give your views whenever possible. Thanks ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 04:21, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

• Responded both on your talk page and at VPR -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks, and thanks :) Left a reply on my talk page actually, and was tired of leaving the talkback which looks pretty emotionless :) Tc, ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 18:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Bwilkins

Thanks for understanding, (or at least trying to understand), the rationale behind my ¬vote. Hopefully Bwilkins will prove me wrong by moving on to become an excellent administrator in every respect. Admittedly, it wouldn't be the first time. Regards, decltype (talk) 13:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

And thank you for taking my comments in the spirit in which they were given - seeking further explanation, rather than as a criticism. Although I disagree with your !vote, I do understand where you are coming from! I sometimes will ask someone to expand on their comment, as it is entirely possible that they may have seen something in the candidate's history which I might have missed. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

ER

Oh! I knew I was missing something.... I never actually realized where the asterisk was (I somehow only saw the one at the bottom). Thanks for telling me!  fetchcomms☛ 13:45, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

• News and notes: Statistics, disasters, Wikipedia's birthday and more

• In the news: Wikipedia on the road, and more

• WikiProject report: Where are they now?

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

uploading photo

hello thanks a lot for your valued contribution and corrections. I am new to wiikipedia and hence am making mistakes. sorry for them. i would like to know how do i upload the photo along with some info, which is usually found in the box on the right hand side. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupendrafest (talk • contribs) 17:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

• If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
• If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must find out what the proper license of the image is. If you know the image is licensed under a free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure what license the image takes, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

can't really put the box for the photo...isn't there a default box, which i could fill up with the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupendrafest (talk • contribs) 17:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

You need to use an infobox for that. I'll start one later! By the way, when you leave a message on a talk page (never on an article), you can sign and date it by putting ~~~~ at the end of your comment. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Test from alternative account

This is just a quick test. -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternate account of Phantomsteve]} 17:30, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I hope i am doing this right, forgive me if so

I have responded to you on my "talk" page. I have made many mistakes thus far, yet am learning. i am unsure as to whether or not you received my message back to you and I apologize for any misunderstandings. I think that the message is posted to my talk page. Thank you for your kindness and helpful advice. --Ladybrainbypass (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about making mistakes! Obviously, try to avoid them, but you won't break the wiki! Even if you make mistakes, they are easilyy remedied. As I mentioned on the help page, if you go to WP:ADOPT it will tell you how to get adopted (or alternatively, go to Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User/Adoptee's Area which explains more about the idea behind adoption. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I'm signing up to be mentored, for sure. You've been very helpful and if you have any further advice, then please feel free to share.

Also, if you run across a submission with no reliable sources, based in opinion, contains slander against particular groups of people, and even may contain unfinished sentences which fail to state the facts, etc.

Should such a submission be reported due to violations of this website, discussed amongst peers, help offered, or what is your opinion hypothetically speaking-- If you were to stumble upon this hate-fueled style article-- What would you personally chose o do in response?

Thanks again//--Ladybrainbypass (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

• Exactly what I would do would depend on the type of article, but as a general rule, anything which is unsourced, or not written using a neutral point of view or is slanderous should be removed immediately. If it's just part of the article, then just the offending section(s) should be removed. If it's the entire article, and it is slanderous, then you can replace the whole article's content with the tag {{db-attack}} and an admin will come along and delete it. If it is possible to just remove part of the article, then do so (make sure that in the edit summary you explain what you have done.

If the kind of material that needs to be removed personally identifies someone (gives their address, phone number, etc), then I would follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight to ask for this information to be permanently removed from the article's history (even when you remove it, it stays in the history, so can still be seen if someone looks at an old version).

If you come across this situation, and don't feel that you are sure about dealing with it, you can either leave me a message, or use {{helpme}} or {{adminhelp}} - someone on IRC will respond quickly. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barack Obama condolences

I saw it myself when it was new and thought of SNOWing it, but decided to leave it for a more experienced admin to be on the safe side. I'd have closed it when it expired, but I'm beginning to realise that my timezone puts timely AfD closures and good sleeping habits somewhat at odds! Olaf Davis (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I only came across it because the creator had left a message on the Help Desk asking for help with another article (Samuel Zoll - which was a bit untidy, but has been tidied up a bit now). I looked at their contribs and saw the AfD!

Oh by the way, I meant to say before, but your answers to my questions on your RfA were good! I especially like the answer to the question about the content dispute - a trick question, where you neatly avoided the wrong answer! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

... for withdrawing your question. I have myself debated the merits of such questions, and till recently I used to argue that such questions are justifiable since communication and clear thinking are desirable qualities in an admin. But in practice I notice that irrespective of how the candidate answers such a question, it results in numerous opposes of the sort "Oppose I cannot countenance an admin who thinks this way" or "who takes X lightly" etc. This is understandable given how passions on a current controversy are necessarily high, but unfair to the candidate in my opinion. Thanks for your taking my recommendation into account. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 21:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I was in the middle of withdrawing the same question on the other RfA, but my browser crashed! I am now going to do it, but I saw I had a message, so I thought I'd read this first! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Incidently, I see that the other one was answered! I have strucken it out, but left the candidate the option of reverting that should they wish to. If in your opinion (as an admin) you feel that the question shouldn't be on the page, I am happy for you to remove it completely from the RfAs. Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:38, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

If a candidate has already answered the question, there is no need to remove it (or strike it) unless the candidate prefers it that way (see Streisand effect). Note that your question did not break any policies, and there would be no justification at all for an administrator to remove it "by force". My recommendation at the RFA was just that; most decisions at wikipedia are arrived at by discussion and gentle persuasion, and the admin bit is only to be used to either implement consensus, or for egregious violations of policy. I hope you didn't imagine I was pulling weight as an admin in recommending the withdrawal of questions about current controversies, and that you removed it because you understand/agree with my reasoning. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 22:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I did indeed remove it as I agreed with what you had said. It wasn't until I was looking at your message above that I remembered that you were an admin! I didn't think that my question was against policy per se, but if it was then I would have had no objection to it being removed! Anyway, it's in the hands of the candidate to decide what to do with it, as that it what I put there! (puts on best Yul Brynner voice): "So it is written, so it shall be done" -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Additional references for "Singapore International Energy Week" Wiki entry

Dear Phantomsteve, I am a colleague of Aaron, the wiki user who has been working with you on the Singapore International Energy Week (SIEW) Wiki entry. I was looking through the entry and was wondering if you'd like to consider including the following articles as additional references to the write-up.

The Jakarta Globe Fast-Track Focus On Coal Power May Cost Indonesia Billions http://thejakartaglobe.com/resources/fast-track-focus-on-coal-power-may-cost-indonesia-billions/342190

Cleantech Investor Singapore: a “living lab” for clean energy research http://www.cleantechinvestor.com/portal/event-reviews/3014-singaporelivinglab.html

Enterprise Innovation Singapore takes first step towards smarter grid technology http://www.enterpriseinnovation.net/content/singapore-takes-first-step-towards-smarter-grid-technology

Celsias Energy, Peak Oil, and Development http://www.celsias.com/article/energy-peak-oil-and-development/

Insead Knowledge Climate un-changed: experts say Copenhagen conference a ‘process’, not a resolution http://knowledge.insead.edu/environment-copenhagen-conference-091203.cfm

Thank you for your time.

Matthew.lim (talk) 09:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for this, Matthew. I have family commitments over the weekend, so I will look at this on Monday or Tuesday. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Your message on 'protects the page' versus 'semi-protects the page'

Just a note to tell you I'd missed your comment on my talk page where you'd clarified about the wording. Just saw it and thought I'd leave a thanks note. :) ▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ _―Œ ^{♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣} 19:16, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries - I should have left a pointer to it at the bottom of your talk page so you'd notice it! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 20:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

American Technologies Network Corporation (again)

Hi Phantomsteve, I just wanted to let you know that this article is being discussed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_Technologies_Network_Corporation. Joshua Scott (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

test

-- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Problem solved thankyou very much. Go and annoy someone else now. Goodbye. Human Rights Believer (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)