There are actually two errors commited by Adam I see in this situation:
1/ Failure to Resolve Archangel of Thune's triggerred ability properly
2/ Resolving the ability ahead of time - it only triggers after Sphinx's Revelation resolves

They were both made at the same time.

Since he didn't anounce value of X for Revelation and put 3 counters on the angel (instead of 1), we should assume the “X = all mana in mana pool” shortcut is in order. He failed to draw the cards and note change of his life, so he clearly resolved Archangel's trigger before he was entitled to.

Gaining life, unlike drawing cards, is a one-time event. Adam doesn't gain 3x1 life, but simply 3 life. Therefore he should have put only one +1/+1 counter on his creature.

GRV for Adam, no infraction for Netta (called a judge immediately).

As for the fix, it's rather simple. I'd rewind by taking counters off the Archangel and leave Sphinx's Revelation with X=3 on the stack (it had been played properly, so no infraction here).

Warning for Adam.

Did Adam actually put the counters on the Archangel or simply said it? If he said it, I will not assume he resolved the trigger, I assume he simply said how the result would be. If he put the counters on the Archangel, then GRV for… putting two more triggered abilities on the stack?
For resolving the abilities before drawing or gaining life, I don't think it's an error, I would simply consider it an OoOS

Well. I'll continue to ask stupid questions (it becomes sort of a habit, heh).

For me, Aric's arguement sounds right - why do we think that an infraction was committed in the first place?
If Adam didn't put any counters on the Archangel and he didn't even resolve his Revelation, which should happen before an ability would trigger (and he clearly didn't - he didn't draw any cards), why do we assume that he resolved the ability incorrectly?

I completely agree with Giorgio here - I'd also assume that Adam simply said how the result would be. We have no visual indication that the trigger started resolving, we also have no visual indication that Revelation finished resolving (when the trigger would, well, trigger).

Of course, we can (and should) question Adam, and he can tell us what he exactly meant by his statement. If he states something like “I started to resolve my trigger OOOS, and my opponent said it's not right”, it sounds a lot more like GRV to me. However, I think that any sane player in this situation will, most likely, say something like “I casted a spell and I said that, as far as I understand, when this all will resolve, I'll win, so we can end this game right now, but my opponent says that I won't win”. That makes a lot more sense here than assuming by default that the player tried to do technically OOOS trigger resolution.

So, by default in this scenario for me - no infraction; explain the players what exactly will happen (current game state - Revelation on the stack); allow them to continue playing.

I'm going to built on what Alex Zhed said and make it into a direct question:

What type of information is the future game state after a set of spells and/or abilities resolves?

-mf

Is there any other possible answer to the question above, except derived?

BTW, I share Alex Zhed's version: it looks like Adam is only announcing results. I would actually ask to clearly denote game state by moving S.Revelation from the hand(it is on the stack) since it was announced and cost was payed and ask them to proceed from this moment further.

Dmitry: Since the MTR defines free and derived information by listing what qualifies, which entry are you saying applies here?

Hello Judges!

First, thank you all for participating this week. We had some interesting discussion here about rewind points, and whether or not a game rule violation had actually occurred or not.

To address the question of whether or not a violation had actually occurred, Adam has demonstrated his intent clearly, that he believes he has won the game by putting 3 counters on his Archangel. Regardless of whether he actually put physical markers on the card or not, his statements are enough to demonstrate what action he was taking, and issue the GRV.

As for the rewind point, the error was that Adam put the wrong number of counters onto the Archangel, and as such, we rewind to that point, and put 1 counter on instead of 3. The question was ambiguous as to whether or not Adam had drawn his cards, if you come across this situation in real life and Adam hadn't drawn, he most certainly will get to draw his cards as well.

As another reminder, in cases of a Game Rule Violation, the opponent will have frequently committed a Failure to Maintain Game State and need to be given an appropriate warning, however in this case Netta called for a judge immediately and does not receive the warning.

Thank you all again, tune in tomorrow for another edition of the knowledge pool!