User talk:Hats1$

Ronald Reagan
Hi! Welcome back to Wikipedia! The only reason you can't edit Ronald Reagan at the moment is that your new account was just registered today, and the article is currently semi-protected. It looks like the article was temporarily semi-protected a couple of days ago due to ongoing heavy vandalism. The semi-protection will be automatically lifted on Sunday; you'll be able to edit the article then. (If the protection wasn't already scheduled to expire automatically, you would still be able to edit all semi-protected articles on Monday, when your account will be four days old.)  Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs)  04:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Your Edits to the Lead Paragraph on Ronald Reagan
Hi there. Thanks for contributing to the lead of Ronald Reagan. Your edits provide more detail, but the lead is not the place for that (see WP:LEAD). In the Peer Review currently being conducted on Reagan's article, you will see that one of the comments was that the lead was too long. I cut it down, and the lead in Ronald Reagan's article is just the right length. It shows the proper amounts of statistics (i.e. it doesn't go to far in depth, but gives the reader a general idea of what Reagan acomplished)also. If you want to add more facts, I would recommend doing it in the correct and specific places of the article. If you need help, or don't agree, leave me a message. Again, I would visit WP:LEAD and for help with citing cources, visit Template:citebook or Template:citeweb. Thanks, Happyme22 22:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Please don't rm negative messages from your talk page. It's considered vadalism. Happyme22 06:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks for the response. I agree with you, Reagan is one of the greatest Presidents we've ever had, but that's not the point. I urge you to read WP:LEAD, becasue I feel that the lead is still too long and dense. That's even what they said on the Peer Review. The lead should only include major info (which I think there is), but we don't need flambouyant wording (see WP:LEAD) nor desnsity (see WP:LEAD). Again, please read WP:LEAD! I'm going to start cutting out some of the less imprtant facts, for according to WP:LEAD, we should make the readers want to read on, and not name everything in such detail that they don't have to. Again, please, please, please read WP:LEAD. Thanks, Happyme22 06:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)