User talk:TomPhil/archive2

'''This is an archive of my talk page. If you wish to leave me a new message, please click here to leave it on my current talk page. If you post a message to me on my talk page, I will respond on that page unless you request otherwise.'''

Crossing flags
Please do not cross flags on your user page. This may offend others and is even considered a crime in many countries. I am sure you are able to express your valuable opinion in a respectful way. Imagine someone crossed the flag of your country - also a union. ROGNNTUDJUU! 21:07, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If someone wants to cross the flag of my country they are perfectly entitled to do that. Britain has for many centuries been a beacon for freedom, unlike perhaps the nations you refer to that consider "crossing flags" a crime, and thus while we may not agree with those who may disrespect our flag, we do not seek to ban them from doing so in the expression of a perfectly valid opinion. I also believe that in the United States, where Wikipedia is hosted, "crossing flags" is not considered a crime.


 * In addition to this, you may be aware that the European Union is not a country, merely an organisation, and thus is not comparable with the United Kingdom, which may be a union, but is also a country. I am offended that you compare my country to the corrupt faceless organisation that is the EU, but I do not seek to prevent you from expressing your view. Also, please tell me who exactly it has offended? I have received no complaints, and certainly will not remove the symbol on the basis of possible offence to some hypothetical ultra-paranoid fascist. TomPhil 21:30, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Vilifying official symbols is considered a crime in many countries. Is it not even more offensive to strike a symbol of many countries than that of just one? Many countries have put a lot of work to make the EU what it is today. There are many good reasons not to support everything the EU stands for, why do you not just express in some detail what you do not like? Anyway, thank you very much for answering and removing the striked flag. ROGNNTUDJUU! 21:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't remove the image, and I see that it has now been restored. I refer you to the discussion on the images for deletion page for this image. I have never heard of anyone being offended by a cross through the EU flag. Although I am thinking of removing the image on the grounds that some people may find the EU flag itself offensive... TomPhil 20:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you clarify for me? If crossing the EU flag is offensive, why have you chosen to create a crossed out UK flag, this, according to you, insulting my country? As I said in our discussion on my userpage last night, I have no objection to you putting a cross through the flag to illustrate your point of view about my country, but I must object if you do it with the intention of insulting my country. TomPhil 20:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Why I created the image: user respect I regard it improper to say a flag can be crossed but not if it is intended to insult. It is disparaging to cross a flag and the remark you have in your box is, too. ROGNNTUDJUU! 20:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You are now inconsistent. You have just changed your statement from "crossed flages are inacceptable" to "it depends on the context". So please stop wasting other people's time. Misza13 T C E 20:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Just read: I expressly write that I think it is unacceptable to say it depends on the context. ROGNNTUDJUU! 20:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This whole argument is ridiculous. The man can put (basically) whatever he wants on his own userpage. I mean if people can deny the Holocaust or the Armenian Genocide on their userpages, I think that a crossed out EU flag is certainly acceptable. I would never want to live in a country where one would be punished for such an act. Easter rising 12:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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 12:46, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Good Catch
Good revert on the article Wells, I had to do one just before you. Do you RC Patrol often?Abcdefghijklm 11:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi. Thanks for you message. I have not RC patrolled regulary, but started doing it a few days ago, and will probably be doing it more regulary from now on, at least for the next few weeks. TomPhil 11:56, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, TomPhil! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. &mdash;Xyra e l / 15:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 15:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

dont get involved
One warning dont get involved. The admin whos page you restored blocked a page while an edit war was being resolved, then took sides. You want a war, you can get one, otherwise, mind your own business. - 66.252.251.84


 * Please don't threaten me. Whatever the admin may or may not have done, that does not justify you vandalising a page. Threatening a war also does not help your case. TomPhil 16:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Then don't threaten me either. I'm sick and tired of admins blocking and protecting pages cause they just feel like it.  This started as the simple inclusion about a televison character and wether another one likes bananas or not.  I agree it's gotten out of hand, but I didn't start this.  I will, however, finish it.  Go read the whole thread at Tenth Doctor page.  Here's how the arguement goes.

1. I make an edit. 2. one person reverts it, without explaination. 3. I re-revert it. 4. They re-revert it saying "oh, its not relevant". 5. I ask for discussion and re -revert. 6. They get a friend who's a member of their editing group to revert it. 7. I re vert it and get banned.

This is vandalism, admin abuse and im not going to tolerate it.....They want to play rough, good. I can do that. You want to get involved, great, ask for trouble. Or, make it known that I can be the most civil guy in the world, but I will not tolerate being blocked withotu discussion.66.252.251.84 16:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't cause trouble. Deal with your issue in a civil and mature manner. Don't resort to vandalism or threats. If you have a complaint against an admin or any other user then do it through the proper channels. If you act in a mature manner, then I will have no need to get involved. If you cause vandalism and I see it, I will revert it. If you do not want to play by the rules, please leave Wikipedia. Otherwise, I hope that you can resolve your issue and start making a positive contribution to Wikipedia. TomPhil 17:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * What a strange conversation. Well handled TomPhil... good work on keeping your cool in the face of a wiki-version of road rage! Easter rising 12:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Killara High School
Please note that the vandalism is much longer than the last revert you did - it didn't restore a correct version. RickP 11:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. I should have checked that the previous edit was not vandalism when I reverted. Sorry about that. TomPhil 11:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for warning (and blocking already?) the vandal and his IP address. RickP 11:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The vandal and his IP address clearly have no intention of stopping. He has vandalised the talk page of his IP address after being given warnings. I have now reported both so hopefully the vandalism to the article can stop. TomPhil 11:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I see new users registered for more vandalism. Can administrators block such registration, or only the users after they vandalize? RickP 12:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for
The revert on my user page. ;-) Netscott 11:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. Happy to help :-) TomPhil 11:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

207.200 IPs
Cheers for the work on revert and warnings for the AOL es bot, there's a few of us getting stuck in see here. Anyway cheers. Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 11:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry mate, accidently reported you to WP:AIV you reverted the Market town spam just as I hit report. Porquin noticed it, and I think deleted it, before you got owt. Cheers Khukri ( talk  .  contribs ) 11:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)