Dear Harry, Thank you so much for editing the typo in Mills Observatory page. Much appreciated. --Cyril Thomas 13:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your edit on the pneumatics page, and it reminded me of something I ran across. My father works in an oil refinery, and up until fairly recently all the instrumentation was pneumatic. He is aware of accidents happening where the instrumentation was running on nitrogen, and this resulted in the death of the control room operators when a leak occurred. Pneumatic controllers even have a dedicated exhaust port for times when you're not running air. --Paul Anderson (talk) 19:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My point was that there was no need to create two nearly identical lists of the same objects one after the other. That would be even more confusing. Serendi^podous 21:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As your changes are challenged, please make your case on the talk page, rather than reverting. Thank you. --Ckatz^chat_spy 22:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your edit, and would like your contribution to the talk page on Talk:Solar_System#New_List. -HarryAlffa (talk) 22:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment; I've replied again at Talk:Solar System. (Sorry for dropping in and out; I've had limited time the last few days.) Note that messages should normally be left at User talk (discussion) pages, not User pages; for one thing, if you leave a message on my user page, I don't get the big orange "You have new messages" notice. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 14:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Solar System^[a] consists of the Sun and those celestial objects bound to it by gravity. These objects are the eight planets and their 166 known moons;^[1] four dwarf planets and their four known moons; billions of small bodies, including asteroids, Kuiper belt objects, comets, meteoroids, and interplanetary dust.

A constant emanation of charged particles from the Sun (the solar wind), creates the heliosphere which permeates far into the Solar System and terminates in the heliopause, around about the scattered disc.

The eight planets and the first two, informal regions of the Solar System, in order from the Sun are:

• Inner Solar System, populated by the four Terrestrial Planets;

• Mercury
• Venus
• Earth
• Mars
• plus the Asteroid Belt which is populated by;

• Ceres (dwarf planet)
• Asteroids

• Mid Solar System, populated by the four Gas Giant Planets;

• Jupiter
• Saturn
• Uranus
• Neptune

The next regions are populated by the rest of the dwarf planets and other, similar and smaller icy objects.

• Trans-Neptunian region

• Kuiper Belt, populated by dwarf planets;

• Pluto
• Makemake
• plus other Kuiper Belt Objects and possibly other dwarf planets

• Scattered Disc, populated by;

• Eris (dwarf planet)
• scattered disc objects and possibly other dwarf planets

The next region is the Heliopause and is the edge of the Heliosphere. As the Heliopause is the boundary where the solar wind is halted by the interstellar medium, no objects are defined as populating it, although some outer scattered disk objects orbit through it.

The last, and extremely far flung region, is the hypothetical Oort cloud, which is considered to be the source of long-period comets.

Did you know?

Mercury & Venus are the only two planets without orbiting natural satellites, or "moons".

Earth is the only planet not named after a deity from Greco-Roman mythology.

The gas giants are each encircled by planetary rings of dust and other particles, Saturn's being the most visible and famous.

Dwarf planets are the only category of objects that populate more than one region of the solar system; the Asteroid Belt; the Kuiper Belt; and the Scattered Disc.

The largest dwarf planet is less than one fifth the diameter of Earth.

The Heliopause is the only region not named for any population of celestial objects.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Solar System. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.

Hi Harry-

Please don't edit war. It takes some time, but please try to come to a consensus at the talk page rather than reverting back and forth. If you undo the actions of another editor more than 3 times on a single page in a 24 hour period, you can be blocked from editing. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 17:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final notice. You are repeatedly restoring your version of the article Solar System, despite the fact that at least three other editors have disagreed with your changes. You are strongly encouraged to seek consensus for your changes before making any further edits to the article. If you continue to arbitrarily revert other editors in this disruptive manner, you will be blocked. --Ckatz^chat_spy 19:06, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I would just like to reiterate what has been said above. If you make one more revert to that page in the near future, you will be blocked from editing. You've already broken the three revert rule, and your continued edit warring will not be tolerated. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Solar System. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. We're clearly getting nowhere, and neither of us should revert any more on that article until there's some evidence of a consensus moving forward. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 19:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Harry-

I have nominated your Category:May contain nuts for speedy deletion. Please do not create pages to make a point; this is disruptive behavior.

You have legitimate contributions to make, but you don't do yourself any favors by pulling stunts like the creation of this category; it's very hard to take your contributions seriously with this stuff. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 22:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:May contain nuts, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:May contain nuts and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:May contain nuts during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 20:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trying to WP:CANVAS for support? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 02:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harry, don't spam user talk pages. If you want lots of people to learn that May contain nuts is up for deletion, then make a post at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). --Enric Naval (talk) 21:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just need to add to your messages "Since you contributed to xxxx, I think that you might be interested on this", and make sure that your messages reach an unbiased sample of editors (picking a bisased sample means, for example, posting the message on the talk pages of a group of users who would be inclined to vote to keep, you just need to avoid that). You probably chosed a good unbiased sample, you just need to remember to add why you chose that user to stop any complains of canvassing. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message; I was just disambiguating so I can't claim any expertise. --AndrewHowse (talk) 01:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The astronomical usage of the term "ice" is discussed in the article volatiles, and linked from the disamiguation page in the main ice article. Serendi^podous 11:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Harry-

In saying that WP:MOS gives the first version precedence, I think you misunderstand the idea of that guideline ("It is inappropriate for an editor to change an article from one style to another unless there is a substantial reason to do so") a bit. It normally applies to things like U. S. vs. U. K. versions of English and article-wide stylistic choices, like whether refs go before or after punctuation^[2], which have no bearing on the content of the article.^[3] Punctuation choices in individual sentences, like the one at dispute in Solar System, affect the meaning (albeit only slightly) and thus do not fall under that rule. Anyway, consensus always rules.

By the way, you're in danger of violating WP:3RR again; please refrain from edit warring. —Alex (ASHill | talk | contribs) 21:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]