Talk:Jordanhill railway station/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Millionth Article

For the date of the creation of this article, dont forget that 23:09 on 1 March 2006 is GMT time. For Paris time for example, it was created at 00:09 on 2 March 2006 (the spanish welcome page should be changed or be more precise for example, same time as in Paris)

Vberger 11:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC) - from the French version


This is the 1,000,000th Wikipedia article, see [1]. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 23:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah one million articles is a lot, but the problem is this article is probably quite difficult to expand compared to the half a million article. -- Snailwalker | talk 23:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, I guess we'd better try! Melchoir 23:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

As an undying supporter of public transportation, it is comforting news that this article is a milestone for Wikipedia.

You lucky bastard.... Congrats on the 1,000,000th article!Amaas120 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Good show, everybody. Let's get it to featured article status, just to show we can. WIKIPEDIA! HOOAH! Sum0 23:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I think Nach0king is a worthy winner as I've been checking Special:Recentchanges today and he's added quite a lot of articles on Scottish railway stations, not just tried to hit the million mark as quite a lot of people did. David | Talk 23:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:1m-PR-en for a quick summary of the peopel going for the number. - SimonLyall 23:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

We officially have 1,000,000 articles! I told User:Jimbo Wales that we will! I challenge us to another million articles! -- User:Michael Simpson

As a Brit I'm thrilled that the millionth article should be about a Scottish topic. Howay the lads! Lee M 01:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! 68.101.254.59 06:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe THIS was the millionth article. Gross.

Hi, congratulations! Does that mean we have one million articles excluding those previously deleted and those categorised for deletion? Does anyone know the name of the half millionth article? Cheers Gregorydavid 09:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The half-millionth article was Involuntary settlements in the Soviet Union. Now if only some of those people had been involuntarily settled at Jordanhill...! Lee M 02:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
File:WikiOnemillion.JPG
ONE MILLION ON WIKIPEDIA. WOOT!
File:Jh1MILL.JPG
1 MILLION!

One Million - made two images for it too--HamedogTalk|@ 13:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Congrat guys and girls. Good work. V(^^)V FWBOarticle

The millionth article is Scottish :-) Alec McEnemin 16:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Lucky Scotts, Congratulations! Orhanoglu 17:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's a pity it wasn't Welsh. You know... Welsh... Wales...! still at least there's a Celtic connection, sorta.

Congratulations! Jordanhill railway station - how fantastically mundane! Adambisset 18:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I wish the millionth was Jim Trelease. I should've waited!

I alsmost double took when I saw this -- somewhere in my home city! Now we have everything one needs to know about an obscure station in Glasgow and more! Nashikawa 21:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely true! You know, someone should go back in time and tell Jimmy Wales what this site would become, just to see his reaction. Seriously, some random article is the millionth, and there's a proposed ceremony with railway officials. Good thing this wasn't an article on, say, a recently discovered toe fungus. Hmm, how do you think the media would react if this had been an article on, say, a company that makes condoms? Twilight Realm 04:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


woohooooooo! go Wikipedia we did it! ONE MILLION! congrats everybody! --70.161.224.44 23:03, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Afd?

C'mon!!

Lotsofissues 23:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Huh?! --Cyde Weys 23:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Do we have to tolerate all these unexpandable rail station articles? Lotsofissues 23:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Survey says ... yes? --Cyde Weys 23:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Unexpandable, you say? Just look at it now - and just wait until next week, when the press release has been circulated and printed! Warofdreams talk 00:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't quite understand what possesses people to suggest that articles should be put AFD, least of all this one. Will 22:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree with user Lotsofissues. It's mostely a pointelss article. Let's face it: now it got expanded. So what ? Anything notable happend in this station ? Anything of special interest ? Anything justifying the existence of an article? Nope. One station amongst all, on the planet. Ah la la ! Vanicruftisement is loming over us, once more. And now imagin the number of gogos rushing to create an article for every station on the line ! Go and read a few rfc's. Some example of user immagining their very own city/station/utterly_non_notable thingy is worthy. Anyway, just MO. Lotsofissues has the point c'mon ! Gtabary 23:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

So let's have some vote, just to see. AFD ?

  1. yes to afd. Gtabary 23:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
No way. There are lots of articles like this. --Banana04131 00:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Visit this railway station

With the imminent publicity, perhaps Jordanhill will become a 'celebrity station.'

Life imitating facts? :-)

asnatu 23:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

If you visit, please commit some crimes, or other noteworthy events. Lotsofissues 23:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and the article definately needs a photo of that station! :) --Splette Happyjoe.jpg 23:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

As someone suggested on Wikipedia:Village pump (news)#The millionth article:

Sounds like a good excuse for a flash mob. We could all go to the station, dance around singing "yeah one million!" then disperse :) --Durin 23:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

That would be a lot like what happened on #wikipedia-countdown on IRC when lilo invited the whole freenode to it. --cesarb 23:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

  • At the very least, someone should visit the station and take some pictures of it. zafiroblue05 | Talk 23:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Maybe we could convince Scotrail to rename it 'Wikipedia railway station'. Or maybe we shouldn't even ask and someone should go there and replace all the signs :) Huskyoog.jpg Husky (talk page) 23:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good place to have a wikipedia:Meetup (or at least a good place to gather for one) Raul654 23:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The train for the gathering leaves from Platform 2¾ --Jumbo 02:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

WOO! This is my local station, use it everyday to get to University...wonder how many other people who read this will also use it regularly?? (hint - post here if you do) Ksyme99 19:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikimeca A333A 01:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Translations for other Wikipedias

I bet, that if someone translates the article for the German Wikipedia, it will not take longer than 5 minutes until some of the busy, fast deleting "that's not worth beeing a German Wikipedia article"-activists there will kick it out. Could be a reason for them to think about their politics in that field--84.56.115.190 23:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, let's see about the 5 minutes. I just translated the article to German. --Splette Happyjoe.jpg 00:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
ok, it's still there, could maybe have something to do with the hint on the millionth article ;-)--84.56.115.190 00:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Put a notice on the talk page of the German article, explaining it's the millionth on the English version. That may justify it somewhat (I'd do it, but my German is hopeless) -- Gurch 00:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Don't be so negative about german wikipedia - the rules are strict, but not ignorant... --Trickstar 01:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, my god this is so sad. I have to admit you were right. It took more than 5 min but the German article is now candidate for deletion [2]. So far there is a majority to keep it... --Splette Happyjoe.jpg 09:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
It's now that I realise how woefully crummy Babelfish is. Among the translations of the AfD vote it has come with is "Something which this station does not make enzyklopaedisch is able I to discover delete -- Finanzer 10:17, 2. Maer 2006 (CET) P.S. the size of the M... on EN is me banana. " and "I was times courageous and have the totally irrelevant muck rausgeschmissen. The info. von Toolittle should stand after possibility in the article. For the time being to delete neutrally with tendency. -- Gardini somewhat to look up leave?" smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. I imagine most non-English wikipedians speak enough English to be able to go to en.wik... for more niche Britain/America related topics. Very arrogant. The wider issue aside though, this article definitely *does* need to be kept. The topic is now a small part of history, and there is a high probability of people searching for it, not just on the english version. On this topic, I'm surprised I can't find this article in pt.wikipedia.org or es.wikipedia.org yet.

We keep your cute little station. @Gurch: Your German works (somehow). Greetings from Germany. --80.132.55.67 21:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC) - logo

I'd vote for deletion, too, if my IP wasn't blocked in the German wikipedia (not my fault). To the next one million articles on railway stations.129.13.186.1 23:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Mentioning one million

I didn't think I'd have to actually say this, but: don't. Melchoir 23:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. No self-references. Until we do get permission to have the "Wikipedia's Millionth Article" Plaque fixed in the wall of the station, in which case it would be worth mentioning! David | Talk 23:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Now that would be awesome. Melchoir 00:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Is it less notable than the number of parking spaces? Haukur 00:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
If it gets picked up by the media, which it hasn't yet, then a mention might be appropriate. Otherwise, saying in the article that it's the millionth on Wikipedia is original research, I kid you not. Melchoir 00:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
We can cite the Wikipedia press release, that's a publication by a reasonably respected website and should meet WP:V. Haukur 00:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I had that thought, but I'm squeamish about citing... us. There was talk at the press release draft about "choosing" a good representative millionth article, and an early draft indicated a different article. At least one Slashdot comment accuses us of covering up that the true millionth article was something embarassing. Now, I trust the result announced at [Wikipedia:Village pump (news)#The millionth article], but I think it could invite trouble to cite ourselves on this one. Let some media outlet regurgitate the press release, and we can cite that. Melchoir 02:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I think it's about to hit slashdot - my "Wikipedia reaches 1,000,000 articles" story submission shows as having been accepted and there's something about to hit the front page. Ohh, I'm getting all tingly :-) </geek> -- AJR | Talk 01:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
The queue from acceptance to front page is usually about 12 hours. Raul654 01:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
NEvermind, it's up. Raul654 01:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
and a link! Jillium 01:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
It's now on google news with ten articles, check the link you posted :) -- Dandelions 19:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Glasgow, Yoker and Clydebank Railway

No article? Can someone with knowledge of the area create one, please -- Gurch 23:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Created as stub =). — TheKMantalk 00:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Is this crime worthy of inclusion?

Bottle thug hit pensioner, 81. 156 words 30 January 2001 Evening Times 7 English (c) 2001 SMG Newspapers Ltd

A THUG struck an 81-year-old man with a bottle because he thought the OAP was "being cheeky", a court heard.

James McGill (22) hit James McGinn on the head at the platform of Jordanhill Station in Glasgow.

Glasgow Sheriff Court heard McGill told police: "I don't know why I hit him. I thought he was being cheeky to me."

Cath Harper, prosecuting, said Mr McGill had turned to Mr McGinn and asked him the time before hitting him with the bottle.

"Mr McGinn said he had been drinking with friends and had quite a hazy recollection of events. McGill told officers that he was sorry for assaulting Mr McGinn and said he thought Mr McGinn was being cheeky to him."

McGill, whose address was given as being a prisoner of Barlinnie, admitted the assault.

Deferring sentence, Sheriff John Baird said: "You going to jail is a distinct possibility."

Lotsofissues 23:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

What happened next? Did he go to jail? (I don't think it's notable, personally. Look at this article compared to the other stations on the line. It's big enough). -- Gurch 00:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I also don't think so. Melchoir 00:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
"You going to jail is a distinct possibility."?! His address was already given as Barlinnie Prison! -- Arwel (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank god

.... #1,000,000 wasn't a {{nn-band}}. JDoorjam Talk 00:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Lotsofissues 23:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

We came scarily close:

Ashibaka tock 00:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

One million articles and Squidoo...whew, that was close. — TheKMantalk 00:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad I didn't join the mad rush for articles. This would have pushed the One million articles article to the million spot. By the way, where did you get that list? --Phantom784 02:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[Wikipedia:Village pump (news)#The millionth article]. -- user:zanimum
HEY!!! This is not millionth article! One million articles is deleted which makes this article 999,999 and Squidoo 1,000,000! Lakinekaki
Millionth article created, I believe. --Jumbo 05:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I know. I'm just being picky :O) What I'm saying is that there may be more millionth articles if counted in that way. If after 1,000,004 there were 7 deleted, than count was again below million, and some other article was again millionth. But this was probably the first one to reach that milestone. Lakinekaki 05:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
There are a bunch of articles created before this one that will eventually be deleted (e.g., in AfD), but it was this article that finally broke the 1 million threshold. — TheKMantalk 06:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Did you get that list from Recent Changes? What you should be looking at is New Pages. Looking at that list, here are the ones right around the millionth article:
--Mini-Geek 13:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
That list came from a logging function specially added to the software just for that purpose. See Wikipedia:Village pump (news)#The millionth article] for the full explanation. --cesarb 15:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Developer plans next to station thwarted (2001)

Residents win bid to beat builders. 160 words 19 September 2001 Evening Times 15 English (c) 2001 SMG Newspapers Ltd

HOMEOWNERS already angry over a rash of new housing in Glasgow's west end were today jubilant after learning plans for a new development had been rejected.

Glasgow council planning bosses have rejected plans for 50 townhouses at 459 Crow Road.

People in Broomhill, Jordanhill and Hyndland had already objected to three other developments saying there were not enough shops, schools and facilities to withstand the burden of further houses.

But despite hundreds of objections from Broom-hill Community Council, local councillors and MSP Pauline McNeill, they had failed to block a previous scheme at Randolph Gate.

Further proposals followed for Churchill Drive, with the Walker Group seeking permission for 32 homes on an embankment near Jordanhill station.

Last month three home owners in the same street were offered double the market value for their homes by a property developer who wanted to flatten them to provide access to homes next to Hyndland station.

I know--but, we are desperate. Lotsofissues 00:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

When was Jordanhill station built? -- user:zanimum

Semi protected

This article is semi-protected, and should remain so for the next few months, IMHO. -- user:zanimum

You mean to preserve its original state? I suggest to list this article as world cultural heritage! :-) --Splette Happyjoe.jpg 00:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I disagree with this being protected. It's similar to how we don't protect articles after linking from the Main Page. Superm401 - Talk 00:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Most article selections for the main page won't appear in (hopefully) hundreds of media outlet's news stories. -- user:zanimum
That makes it even more important that we don't protect. We want to show one of the best things about Wikipedia. We are the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit (and we can self-regulate). Don't worry; plenty of people (including me) will watch like hawks for vandalism. Superm401 - Talk 01:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you, Superm401. I don't think it should be protected. – b_jonas 15:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Burger van youths (was "Laughing")

The Diary. By Ken Smith & David Belcher. 771 words 4 February 2004 The Herald 14 English (c) 2004 SMG Newspapers Ltd.

Burning issue

A BURGER van at Jordanhill station in Glasgow's west end is surrounded by a crowd of lads from no-nonsense St Thomas Aquinas Secondary when a uniformed girl from the rather more upmarket Jordanhill School arrives and asks for a roll and potato scone, also requesting could she have "the scone fried crisp at the edges and soft in the middle". The burger-flipper ponders briefly, wondering whether his al fresco mobile establishment has been mistaken for the conservatory of the neighbouring Three Sisters restaurant. He then replies: "Look, hen, you can have it burnt like everybody else's."

How is it possible that this could be published?--Isn't the Herald a newspaper of record? You Scottish people love class warfare. Lotsofissues 00:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The Herald's Diary section is a lighthearted round-up of mostly anecdotal stories, intended to amuse. (See the Herald website for more examples). Clearly the tone was too subtle for your bourgeois middle-class sensibilities (just kidding!). Forgotten account 12:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Template is unfortunate

The article uses a template (Template:Stn_art_lrnk) for railway stations which is rather unfortunate: it claims to link to an aerial photo, but doesn't. The template should be fixed and point directly to our map and aerial photo source. AxelBoldt 00:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, multimap doesn't have an aerial photo source for that yet. Someone has already added one to Google Local, and Glaswegian Wikipedians will contribute ground-level photos soon. Nach0king 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the link from the template. Superm401 - Talk 00:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Sources

There need to be sources for which lines this is on. Superm401 - Talk 00:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Adding now. Nach0king 00:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
    • That map is helpful, but it still doesn't provide the line name. I know it's nitpicking, but do you have any ideas about where this info would be explicity stated? I've searched pretty thoroughly. Superm401 - Talk 01:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm starting to think that these names might be unofficial... Nach0king 09:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

We should have featured stubs

Seriously, this article is going to be so polished within the next....fifteen minutes, lol...Deckiller 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


Usage statistics

I have emailed First Scotrail asking about usage statistics for this station. Nach0king 00:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Anyone want to call them?

First ScotRail Customer Relations First ScotRail, PO BOX 7030, Fort William, PH33 6WX

Tel: 0845 601 5929 Email: scotrailcustomer.relations@firstgroup.com

Lotsofissues 00:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

It's after midnight in Scotland right now; I'll call them in the morning. Nach0king 01:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Just off the phone with a very helpful woman at Scotrail. I asked her for usage statistics on Jordanhill and its two surrounding stations, as well as info on when staffed services ended etc. She said she will do her best to find out and email me the results. Here's hoping. Nach0king 09:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
The most recent figures for these are available online from the Strategic Rail Authority (although responsibility for this has been transferred to the Department for Transport, who may be releasing a new set of figures soon). Based on ticket sales on 2002/03, there were 85,861 journeys started at that station, and 94,613 completed there, over a period of 1 year, and not taking into account SPT ZoneCards. [3]. I don't know if someone would like to incorporate that into the article, or wait to hear back from First ScotRail? Teflon 12:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
That's an excellent starting point. Add that in and I'll add to that whatever Scotrail send to me. Nach0king 13:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Someone please nominate this article for DYK, I would do it myself, but I can't seem to figure out anything interesting about it. ("Did you know that Jordanhill railway station features 10 Bicycle racks and a ticket machine?") Obli (Talk)? 00:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Um, it's already linked a tad prominently from the main page already. Let's not go about asking for redundancies. Raul654 00:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, didn't see the new 1M notice Obli (Talk)? 00:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Media

Considering the prominent link on the main page, has anyone contacted the Glasgow media about this? We could generate some media attention there. NoSeptember talk 01:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll post that to the Wikimedia Foundation Communications Committee mailing list. -- user:zanimum
I know a guy at The Herald. I'll get in touch. Nach0king 01:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Various other tidbits

Is there a way to find out the number of passengers which use the station on a daily basis? --HappyCamper 01:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

We have to call Scotrail. Lotsofissues 01:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I have emailed them and will call them in the morning. Nach0king 01:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
See the section "Usage statistics"- basically, the woman on the phone said she'd email me the info I asked for. Nach0king 09:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Is Jordanhill Station mentioned in "White Rage" by Campbell Armstrong? It's set in Glasgow, but I haven't read the book.Iwalters 00:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC) Has Jordanhill station been on film? A Glaswegian needs to address this. According to this site: [4]several films have been shot in Glasgow. The station might have been shown. Iwalters 02:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Will Jimbo visit the station on vacation?

Since the millionth article was about this place, do you think he'll come by and promote this station in a way pertinent to its fame here? Jimbo seems to travel the world often, so I wonder if he'll come to the Jordanhill railway station and put up a plaque or something similarly commemorative? --Shultz III 00:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Looks like we both had the same idea! I suggested that on his talk page about 20 minutes ago. BillyH 00:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Of the idea, Jimmy's acutally saying that it's "very very cute." -- user:zanimum

Vandalism

I fully expect to see the station repeatedly vandalised tomorrow night. Hopefully there are teams of workmen standing by to revert. --Jumbo 02:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

No doubt there are :-) Cyde Weys 02:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, you mean the meatspace station, not the article? Johntex\talk 02:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
No he doesn't mean the actual train station, silly little man! We can reinstitute semi-protect on the article then, if need be. -- user:zanimum
Ah, yes, I did mean the actual train station. I'm quite sure the station has been vandalised previously, and if it gets any media attention, it is likely to do so again. I was actually making a tongue-in-cheek comment about life imitating WP, but if bored schoolchildren vandalise the article, perhaps Jordanhiller kids will do the same in real life. --Jumbo 03:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Ha! I thought so. And zaniumum, watch out who you call little. :-) Johntex\talk 03:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
We can't semi-protect while it's in the news; it unnecessarily sends a bad message. There are plenty of people ready to revert vandalism on the blink of an eye. Superm401 - Talk 03:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree. We should do everything possible to avoid any sort of protection so as not to give the dead tree press amunition about verifiability concerns. Johntex\talk 03:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
If anyone vandalises the station itself, then I'm sure someone will report them to Real Vandalism In Progress -^demon 03:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
If anyone vandalizes the station itself, we'll have that muchh more to add to the article so that it can become featured! —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 03:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Still, in that blink of an eye, ten people could see "Joe likes to suck cocks.", and leave WP permanently. To bad we haven't roled out article validation yet. And frankly the press would just interpret us as being properly cautious. -- user:zanimum
I agree with you that that momentary vandalism would be damaging. However, I think you are giving the press a little too much credit. I know I am stepping into your domain here, but I also deal with the media on a regular basis. I can hear their lead now, "Wikipedia, the on-line encyclopedia which anyone can edit, reached a milestone one millionth article today, but they had to promptly lock-down the page so that only priviledged users could edit it as a result of the rampant vandalism that makes Wikipedia a questionable source for research. Encyclopedia Britanica president..." Johntex\talk 03:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
<cough> · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 04:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
It would be a little funny if this article were nominated for deletion. Olin 12:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Or, to continue the joke above, if the real station were listed on SFC (Stations For Closure).
  • Close - station is unkempt and just takes up room that could be made available for more roads.
  • Strong close - station is badly designed and poorly lit.
  • Weak keep - you could always paint it up and add more lighting. We have too many roads as it is.
  • Close - We have enough stations.
    • Hey, you have the same IP as the first guy! Sockpuppet!
      • Yep. IP address traced to some macadam supplier in Aberdeen.
etc etc... --bodnotbod 02:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
It's a train station—wouldn't it be redirected? JDoorjam Talk 02:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Image

No picture?

What? No one has found some good pictures to add to the article yet? ;-) NoSeptember talk 00:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

user:TonyClarke appears to be the only Glasgow resident on en, I've sent him a message, requesting he consider taking a photo. -- user:zanimum
There are probably more, who just don't disclose their location. I think the original contributor said on IRC that he lives nearby. I doubt anyone else will bother going all the way there just to take a photo, though -- Gurch 00:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
My morning work shift finishes at around 9 in the Anniesland Cross area. I'll try and get some shots. Erath 00:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll be in Glasgow tomorrow as well, fittingly enough. I'll go to the Mitchell Library and see what I can dig up if someone else has the photos covered. Nach0king 00:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
There is one picture on Flickr but it is licensed with All rights reserved. Maybe someone can message the user that uploaded it? Not a great picture, but ok for a short time. --L1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 00:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
None is often better than bad. Remember, this page will be some people's first impression of Wikipedia's quality. -- user:zanimum
There is a better picture here [5]. Again it is copyrighted though... JMiall 01:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
There are some other historic photos here [6] but only thumbnails are displayed. It says the photos are from the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland and the Herald & Times. --L1AM (talk - 'tribs.) 01:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

From the same website as above, this page has some good info that may help expand the article as far as history. Plus, it has a 1913 Ordnance Survey map. Would that be public domain? Jonathunder 01:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Safe bet it is. -- user:zanimum

Google maps

I know they are copyrighted, but maybe a link. Is this what it is? [7]--Rayc 00:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

How can Google maps be copyrighted? The images are in the public domain. That's how Google gets to use them. --Jumbo 02:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh no no. Read the page, this particular one is (C) The GeoInformation Group. Google pays for anything anywhere near to being closeup. -- user:zanimum

I don't think we should any images unless they're highly relevant and free. People have attempted to add the ScotRail logo and a home-made image (which doesn't provide the original source and hence may be an illeagal derivative work). We should be able to get a good free image tomorrow; until then, I think we should hold off. Superm401 - Talk 03:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The two images are different cases. I can only speak to the logo. I added the ScotRail logo image to this article. It's use clearly falls under fair use to represent a station of their railway system. It certaily is not as good as a picture of the station, but I maintain it is better than having nothing while we wait for the picture. Johntex\talk 03:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
True, but why take away an image that relates to the article while we wait for something even better? Why not give our readers a little splash of color and educate them about the logo for the rail line at the same time? Johntex\talk 03:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Someone has now removed the logo, claiming it is not fair use. Can someone please expalin how the logo of a railway company is not fair-use on an article about a railway station they manage? The station can be considered part of the company, and the logo is fair use to represent the company. By extension, the logo is fair use to represent a portion of the company, or a portion of the company's operations. Johntex\talk 03:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I (Johntex) am seperating future discussion into specific areas for each image:

Logo Image:ScotRaillogo.jpg

  • Support - The logo represents the company that runs the station. The station can be considered part of the company's operations, and the logo is fair use to represent the company. By extension, the logo is fair use to represent a portion of the company, or a portion of the company's operations. Johntex\talk 03:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Please read WP:FUC (fair use policy). Fair use images should only be used when there is no alternative and they add significantly to the article. This article does not need the logo of the company associated with the station, a link to the page about that company suffices. ed g2stalk 03:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Legally we're probably okay to use this image as fair use, but Wikipedia's fair use policy WP:FUC is not just about law. ed g2stalk 04:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding us of the policy. I agree policy is also important, but this is not against policy. The policy you cite says "...or specifically illustrate relevant points..." The management of the station is mentioned in the article, and it is relevant. Johntex\talk 04:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Sure, let's use it. Trainbuff 04:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Map Image:Jordanhill station, Glasgow, location map.PNG

  • Support I believe this image is fair use and relevant. Johntex\talk 03:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
The home made map is also fine, as you can't copyright geography, just interpretations of it. This is a reinterpretation of an interpretation, based on non-negotiable geographic co-ordinates. -- user:zanimum
Yes, but was there any interpretation, or was it just copying (even by hand)? Superm401 - Talk 03:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
So would you agree that until/unless a photo appears, there is *no alternative*? Even if a photo is available, the logo has to be judged on its own merits. By definition, if we editorially feel a logo adds to the story, then there is no free alternative to using the official logo. It is up to us to decide if it adds significantly to the article, no policy can pre-judge that for us. (unsigned by User:Johntex)
Sure, let's use it. Trainbuff 04:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Old, small b&w photo Image:JordanhillStation.jpg

  • Oppose This siteThe source site specifically disclaims the right to put their content on "websites" Johntex\talk 03:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I've tagged it {{fairusereview}} and User:Johntex removed it from the article. He is incorrect in thinking the website's copyright policy is relevant. Fair use is for when the copyright holder doesn't want you to use the image. However, he was right to remove it because it doesn't fit Wikipedia:Fair use (a free alternative will almost certainly be here tomorrow) and there probably isn't sufficient need/purpose for it. Superm401 - Talk 03:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Comment:Try reading their copywrite page before tagging and deleting. The image will work for now until we have a better one. thanks! Mmeinhart 04:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)--

Sure, let's use it. Trainbuff 04:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The map seems to show the Great Western Road as Inverquory Road (an error that google maps also has.)

Handmade station sign Image:Jordanhill-station-sign.png

Awesome image - great for top of article. Thanks L1AM! Johntex\talk 05:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - Wow, I saw this discussion and was about to add here but you beat me to it. Glad you like it! (Its not the best but hey, I tried) And for those who haven't seen the images summary, I made it from scratch but it was inspired by a photo seen here [8]. Even with some soon-to-be-added photos, this might have some use. — L1AM (talk) 05:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Those are the old-design station signs. The new ones look very different. In the meantime, though, that's great! Nach0king 09:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Whoops. I guess that would explain why they're being sold as collectables (I should have known better). Ah well. — L1AM (talk) 10:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Aireal View Image:Jrs.jpg

  • This one has been removed because it is tagged non-commericial. I don't see why that should cause it's removal. We are a non-commercial website. Johntex\talk 06:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Um, for a start, non-commercial images are speedy deletes, apparently you need to read the entire image use policy. ed g2stalk 15:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
As I have already politely mentioned to you - it is impolite of you to keep implying that people haven't read the policy - especially when I have specifically informed you I have read the policy. The word "non-commercial" does not even appear on the page you reference. Do you want to try again to justify your erroneous belief and bad behavior? I notice that you have already resorted to violating Wikipedia:Three Revert Rule in an effort to enforce your control over this page. Images are speedy-deletes if they are illegal to use. If they have a proper fair use justification, then they are fair-use, regardless of whether the copyright owner puts up some mumbo-jumbo claim that says otherwise. Johntex\talk 20:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

General discussion, not specific to a single image

I urge all contributors not to get involved in the above vote. The discussion is only minutes old. ed g2stalk 03:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Thank you, but it is not a vote. It is a discussion of our positions based upon our understanding of relevant law, wiki-policy, wiki-guidelines, editorial taste, etc. It is an attempt to get consensus on each image individually, and to avoid edit warring. Johntex\talk 04:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

This discussion doesn't make any sense because we will have a good image for this article within a number of days if not hours. Ashibaka tock 04:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Precisely, we don't need to fill in with un-free poor quality images just because they provide a bit of decoration. ed g2stalk 04:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
And in the meantime, while we have hundreds or thousands of visitors coming to the page, why shouldn't they see these fair-use images? For that matter, even after we have a photo, why shouldn't we keep a map, and possibly even a logo, if we decide as an editorial decision to do so? Johntex\talk 04:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm sensing the need for someone to go there in real life and snap pics :) Raul654 04:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
How silly, you guys fight over it all night. Dont be jealous I downloaded the first legit image of the station. My claim to fame baby! haha Mmeinhart 04:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)--
Having copyright unfree images all over a front-page article hardly sends out the right message to visitors of the free encylopædia. Especially when their usage is contradictory to our own policies. If you would just please read the fair use policy page... ed g2stalk 04:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Not at all - it is consistent with our goal of expanding people's access to informaiton, including informaiton obtained under legitimate fair use protection under relevant laws. Also, I think I have made clear that I have read the policy, so please don't keep asking me to read it, it borders on being insulting. Johntex\talk 04:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but you don't seemed to have understood the underlying principle. Wikipedia is about providing free information. Fair use does not extend to third party use, and so is not free. It is used as a last resort, when there is better alternative. There is a clear better alternative here, the text "First ScotRail". The logo of the ScotRail does not tell us much about Jordanhill station. ed g2stalk 04:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I disagree with both your assertion of facts and your logic. You state there is a better alternative, but that assumes facts not in evidence. Firstly, no one has yet uploaded a free picture. Secondly, even with a picture, we may make the editorial decision that the logo provides a different value. As to your logic, if fair use images were not beneficial, they would not be allowed at all. The fact that a free image is better than an identical fair-use image is not relevant when only the fair use image is in existence. Johntex\talk 04:46, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Well if for some reason we decide that the logo adds significantly to the article, and that it just can't do without it, then we can stick it in. As it is likely some free images will appear within the next day, I suggest we just wait. ed g2stalk 04:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Ordinace Image

link. Can we use this? are ordinace maps public domain? Found on this website: [9]--God O War 06:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I already mentioned it in a reference; it is public domain in the US because it was published before 1923. However, I don't want to include it because of the letters. If someone edited them out, that would be cool. Superm401 - Talk 07:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Could we provide a legend to correspond with the letters? – Minh Nguy?n (talk, contribs) 08:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Bridge construction

The above site led me to The Mitchell Library. Is this related? They're 1914, thus PD. -- user:zanimum

Images may not be reproduced without the permission of the copyright holder. What? -- user:zanimum
UK copyright. Something like life of the author +80 years.Geni 13:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Pictures as requested

The quality's not brilliant, and the sun kinda gets in the way of one or two, but here's a selection of pictures from the station I took this morning.

Erath 11:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind uploading these on Commons? --Voyager 11:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll get right on it (dial-up allowing). Erath 11:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry, I'll get it done for you. -- user:zanimum
Okay, you did it. I'll delete these off Wikipedia now. -- user:zanimum
Sorry, beat you to it! Delete away, no problemo. Erath 12:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Not got any ones of the platform 2 "shelter"? If I get the chance I might try and get one...its a bit different from the platform 1 one... Ksyme99 19:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Maps

Try not to duplicate any map links (like Google Maps) that are on the mapsource page, which is linked to from the first sentence. Superm401 - Talk 05:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Picture of the station

Someone who live near the station could take a picture of it and upload to wikipedia Mateus Zica 05:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there is a notice at the top of the page about that, and a category tag at the bottom of the page. We expect we will get one very soon. Johntex\talk 06:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Now we've got a whole Commons cat full. Still obviously open to more, as with anything. -- user:zanimum

Google Map Image

I have deleted the Google Map image (as a {{NonCommercial}}) and removed it from the article. Their TOS clearly states that the images are non-commercial, which is not acceptable here. It is not fair use either because we can link and will soon have free images. Please do not repost it without explaining. Superm401 - Talk 06:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Per the discussion above, the copyright owner does not have permission to deny fair use. Fair use images are allowed on Wikipedia. The belief that other images may be coming does not diminish the current relevancy of fair use images. Even if/when free images do appear, they may illustrate different things than the fair use images. Johntex\talk 06:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
It may be fair use, but in this case we're linking to Google Maps (and many others) through mapsources (at least now that someone put the template back). This allows them to use the service of their choice as well as zoom and move the map. Thus, it is a superior solution. Superm401 - Talk 07:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
That is a better reason to remove it. Your original stated reson for removing it (the fact that it is non-GFDL) would not be a good reason for removal, in and of itself. Your statement that non-commercial images are "not acceptable" is false. Johntex\talk 07:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
In response to the discussion above, I have re-instantiated the image. It has not been added to the article. However, a full explanation of why I deem it to be of fair use is explained in the summary section of the image page. If you disagree, please respond now. I agree with Superm401. Users can look up the imagery themselves. However, the same applies to the non-geographical map. I believe it would be more convenient for users to have access to the image if it was to be included in the article, and would still apply as fair use (once again, see image page). -TechnoGuyRob 07:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Non-commercial images are not permitted unless a valid fair use rationale is given; if it is not, they can be deleted on sight. See Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Images.2FMedia. The image may be fair use (with the accompanying statement it has now), but I would still much rather we stick to the link; that's why this feature is available. Superm401 - Talk 07:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I just read this part from Wikipedia's fair use page: "[In the context of what is not fair use] A detailed map, scanned from a copyrighted atlas, used in an article about the region depicted. The only context in which this might be fair use is if the map itself was a topic of a passage in the article: for example, a controversial map of a disputed territory might be fair use." I still disagree, on the contention that the aforementioned image is fully sourced, is a screenshot of a web page used for identification purposes, and is merely a small fragment from a larger part (the map of Glassgow) used to indicate a geographical location. Nevertheless, I hesitantly accept your opinion on the matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TechnoGuyRob (talkcontribs)
My opinion is that it may be fair use but that we shouldn't include it regardless. Superm401 - Talk 08:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
But it is not used for identification of the website, but of something completely different. I think that is the crucial difference. --Pasky 09:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Gallery on page?

I don't think some of the photos are too great, no offence to the person who was kind enough to go out and photograph them, considering this page will recieve media attention in the next week or so and has a large link on the main page. I suggest maybe only having three images on the page in its current size. Also, the train arriving photo is pretty poor, the sun in the corner is very distracting. I suggested this here first, as not to offend anybody. --HamedogTalk|@ 13:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I like to think that the sun in the corner represnts the dawn of a new era, the arrival of a new day, a new train and a new article. But while it's not much chop as a photograph, I think it is great that photographs were taken and uploaded at the earliest possible moment. Including one of the famous ticket machine. --Surgeonsmate 13:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking on similar lines as Hamedog, especially about the "train arriving" one. Many thanks, by the way, to Erath for coming up with these! My favourite Erath photo so far is the footbridge - Image:Jordanhill station pedestrian bridge.png. What are other people's opinions? Also, I think a photo of the front of the station would be good. --A bit iffy 13:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I do admit, the sun really bit into one or two of those, and it was only a cameraphone. I'll blame haste and give you free reign to criticise - but that's why I took 8 of them. Erath 13:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Nearby Stations?

It's great to have this one little station have a huge article, but it makes no sense to do it without expanding nearby stations... surely we can find more info on them, rather than just leaving them as stubs? I'll get right on it, but since I'm not from the UK, I'd like some help. :-) SonicAD (talk) 04:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Petty postcode point

How should we deal with the postcode? I don't think it should be in the intro, but I also don't think it should be in the "Services" section where it was before. I'm not even sure whether the postcode should be included as it's probably of no interest to anyone (except me, as I find postcodes interesting, but I'm sad like that). Any comments?

Also, I've changed the text again so that, as before, it doesn't say "in Glasgow postcode area G11 7DW". This is because a postcode area has a technical meaning - in this case the "postcode area" is the "G" at the beginning of the code. Hope that's OK with everyone. --A bit iffy 08:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. The two most notable things about a railway station are where it is and where it can get you to. There seems reason enough to include postcode. Superm401 - Talk 09:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for the current code. The station profile has "G13 1QL" as the code. Superm401 - Talk 09:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
the UK railway stations - J list on this site is usually up-to-date. Nach0king 09:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
A small percentage of postcodes do change each year. That could be the reason for the inconsistency. --A bit iffy 09:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Hopefully the info that First Scotrail have pledged to send me will help on this matter. As the station doesn't contain any addressed buildings (that I know of), I wonder if they even keep records of its exact postcode, instead of just one that would locate it on a map. Nach0king 10:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Because the station info at both nationalrail.co.uk and firstgroup listed the G13 IQL code, I've changed the article to this. Superm401 - Talk 10:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm, but the new coordinates are way off, pointing to a house west of the station. Mihai -talk 10:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, I've changed the geo coordinates back. I got the new ones from multimap, but I don't think that's where the original's from, as they have another digit. Superm401 - Talk 10:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Media mentions

I'm looking at Google News, and I notice that the news items for this milestone are beginning to be published, some more heavily dependent on the official press release than others. --Jumbo 12:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I second this. Both thanking those that took them and asking for some higher quality pictures. We should only include the better looking ones, since it's just a matter of waiting a little longer to get them (where the sun is out of the way, etc. I'm personally inept with a camera, so I can sympathize, but we still need well done pictures. - Taxman Talk 13:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I took some photos but I need to get to my home PC to see if they're any good or not. I'll do that soon. Nach0king 14:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Make sure you upload them to the Commons directly. -- user:zanimum
Though they're not that great, I've added the pics to the Meta version of the PR, as a possible addition. -- user:zanimum
None of the news stories I've seen so far picked up on how much the article has changed; they all imply that the article was created in much its current form. This may seem superficially good but it actually is regrettable because this collaboration has shown (in accelerated form) how Wikipedia can beat the odds. Superm401 - Talk 15:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

At the Mitchell Library

I have found two small pamphlets on Jordanhill history here, from which I have taken notes. I am about to add the relevant data to the article. Sadly, the Herald archives here only begin at 1907, and after checking the first ten years I found nothing of interest. I'll try to blag a friend's Glasgow University library card, since mine expired after I graduated, in order to access the 1887 onwards files. Nach0king 13:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I have now added some of this information. Nach0king 14:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
If you read this while you're still there, could you ask them if they have any PD historical images? They have some stuff online that's only usable with permission, which is impossible now on Wikipedia. -- user:zanimum
I browsed the postcard collection but it only had Scotstounhill station. I'll certainly go and ask in case I missed any, though. There are a couple of old maps but they are of extremely low quality; again, I'll ask for better ones. (I logged out in preparation to log off to go and use my home PC, but it's still me, Nach0king.) 195.173.16.65 14:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Nach0king, you'll surely be a member of the convocation of Glasgow University (by dint of getting a degree there) and therefore should be able to get a new library card. Perhaps. That, at least, is the way things work at Manchester uni. --Tagishsimon (talk)
It's £25pa for graduates to join Glasgow Uni Library. [10] Teflon 14:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Yep, you need to pay; not that I have any problem with doing so. I spent many happy (and admittedly not so happy) hours on Level 8 of that library. I'll sign up next week; been meaning to do so for ages. Nach0king 00:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Ridership Stats

There's no point in badgering Scotrail for ridership stats. They're online for all stations in the UK, here: http://www.sra.gov.uk/pubs2/performance_statistics/stat_usage/stat_usage.exc Also, read the notes about them: http://www.sra.gov.uk/pubs2/performance_statistics/stat_usage/stat_usage_notes.pdf A435(m) 14:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Detailed info, such as the most popular destinations of the tickets bought from JH, might be nice. Nach0king 00:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

PNG photos

Bad idea, people don't want to download 400k for <1 MPx images... ed g2stalk 15:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, my mistake. Thanks to whoever started JPG'ing them. Erath 17:08, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Map

The map looks suspiciously like it was copied from google maps, or a similar unfree source. OpenStreetMap explain this in more detail here. ed g2stalk 15:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Delete unnecessary details?

"The station no longer has a staffed ticket counter, but it contains a ticket machine. There is a ramp up to both platforms and a connecting footbridge between them. The station car park has room for eleven cars, with two spaces designated for the disabled. There are racks for ten bicycles. A closed circuit television system was introduced in 2002 to monitor the station." Aren't such details a bit too specific for an encylopedia? Is there any reason that makes them worth mentioning? --Chrissi 16:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading it. It allowed me to visualize the place. In ten years, someoneone coming to this article will be able to walk through the place using telepresence. A detailed description is the next best thing. What's unneeded to one person is exactly what a second person was looking for. WAS 4.250 16:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Details about ticketing and the platforms should stay. These are typical details for subway/rail station articles. Though, the number of parking spaces appear to be lifted directly from [11], whereas [12] incidates 8 parking spaces. Maybe rather than giving a specific number, it can be summarized to say "there is limited parking and a bike rack". -Aude (talk | contribs) 16:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Does that not prove the need of Wikipedia, to do an independent investigation, and prove one source invalid? -- user:zanimum
OK, I deleted the dubious facts about parking and the trivial detail about CCTV (which station hasn't?), but left the rest intact. And I doubt that "there is limited parking" would be an interesting fact. --Chrissi 16:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)