Hi !! Hope this is better then the standard welcome you got that you didn't like.   

 :Thanks ) 
 :It wasn't that I didn't like it, it was just an impulse. It may have seemed impolite, which would be unintentional as I try not to be rude (most of the time) ) 

 :I hope Mel Etitis sees that he should apply common sense to the Jameswatt issue. He should ask himself if he thinks the edits were done in good faith. If you google for worldofbiography you'll see lots of evidence of SEO attempts for the domain. Oh well...   

 ::I doubt it. He is stuck on the Wikipedia guidelines that say its ok to ask for link postings on talk pages even though they are clearly spam links.   

 ==dendrophilia== 
 No reputable references from normal sexology authors. I browsed several thousand webpages to find a minimal derefence to something remotely serious about such kind of paraphilia.  Please see my comment in talk:dendrophilia. `'   

 == Agratek link in Security == 

 Please actually go to http www agratek dot biz before making decisions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by   •  •  •  UTC.  

 : It's pretty obvious linkspam. You know it and I know it, and because of that I'm going to remove it. If you own the site and feel that information on it could be useful to Wikipedia you could presumably contribute it to Security instead of spamming the link in the middle of the text.   

 :: Are you an administrater? If not, get a life. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by   •  . 

 ::: No, I'm not an admin. Do yourself a favor and buy some adwords instead of spamming wikipedia.    

 ::::I'm not the website hoster. It's obviously not a spam link because it is not trying to blaringly sell something and the patent is actually in the patient data base, I suggest you go look up the patent yourself.  

 :::::Please correct me if I am wrong, but how is http www agratek dot biz a spam page just because it's outside of Wikipedia? Many other wiki pages have many links to outside links.  

 :::::: There are many useful sites on the net that aren't wikipedia. Please tell me why yours is one of them and why you're so determined to have it in the middle of the security article with text encouracing users to "check this cool new concept"? Even if the site was of interest and notability, the link should not be worded like that.I'm not the only one reverting your link, why do you think that is?