User:BD2412/Archive - Articles (first 50)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives
By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):
Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th-5th
Misc.-1st-2d-3d-4th/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd-3rd/Vandalism

Dated (beginning June 1, 2009): 1st-2d-3d-4th-5th-6th-7th-8th-9th-10th-11th-12th-13th


This archive contains discussions of articles on general topics.

Movement to impeach George W. Bush[edit]

Thanks for weighing in so knowledgeably on the Harper's cover. .--Beth Wellington 19:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

John Dufresne[edit]

BYI, John Dufresne teaches creative writing at FIU.--Beth Wellington 19:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks - I've fixed it. I took his intro to creative writing class, many summers ago. BD2412 T 19:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Didn't mean that as an error, just to let you know there was an article. I've updated it to match the FIU faculty listing. Since there aren't course listing I can't speak to his other teaching. I'll drop him a line and tell him if it's "verifiable" (i.e. somewhere on the site) we can add to the listing. Also not sure about Gulfstream, as the issue shown lists him as editor but years ago.--Beth Wellington 22:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Dubai Ports World controversy[edit]

I noticed that you reinserted the category "Bush administration scandals" in this article. I removed it again. If you intend to reinsert it, please post a note on the talk page... Although you may not have run into me, I'm familiar with your work. You're one of the users I highly respect. I'd hate to get into an edit war with you over this issse. 172 | Talk 06:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. 172 | Talk 09:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Irwin Schiff[edit]

I should have known this was written by an Attorney. Your attempt to "discredit" Schiff's findings seems quite obvious. In regard to his birth place, date, etc. I am NOT a fanatic of Schiff's. I just happen to know how to read the Internal Revenue Code Book. Perhaps you should acquire one, it may enlighten you. Particularly, code 3401(c), code 61, code 871, code 911, etc. You of all people should know that the courts can silence anyone, if needed. Take it from one that knows, considering I also happen to work in that field. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rawhide4u (talkcontribs) .

  • Pleased to meet you. Yes I am an attorney, and I have read the IRC - and I'm not sitting in jail at the moment because I pay my taxes. Shiff's convictions discredit him more than anything I could do. If you join him in believing that the income tax is illegal, and only imposed because of a massive conspiracy among all federal judges, the President and his servants in the executive branch (which enforces the tax laws under his authority), the Congress (which passes the laws and would amend them if they were interpreted improperly), and by extension the entire U.S. electorate which either continues to put the same people back in the halls of power, or just stays home on election day, then you should flee such horrid corruption and find a safe haven in a country where taxes are unenforced. Rwanda, perhaps. When a majority of the population is behind a conspiracy, that conspiracy can be titled "the rule of law". Cheers again! BD2412 T 01:56, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Pleased to meet you also. I too am not sitting in jail and I do NOT pay any personal income tax. Your response seems to venture into a different direction. I do not believe Schiff has ever stated that the “Income Tax” is illegal, as a whole. His reference seems to sway into the “Personal” income taxation issue. He does stand correct in stating that there is NO law requiring individuals working, for a non-governmental company, be liable to pay Personal income tax.
    • Since you are familiar with the IRC then you must already know this. If not then do your research. Rawhide4u 02:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

LOL..... Very true!! It's not the few that slip through the cracks that matter. It's when those cracks become doorways for the masses that it becomes a problem. Rawhide4u 03:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

USCOTW[edit]

I saw that you've worked on the Bill Ritter (politician) article, and would like to encourage you to support it in the USCOTW elections. Thank you, Editor19841 22:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

P.R. of New Jersey Supreme Court[edit]

I don't know the "normal" result of a RfPR request, but has the current one I filed on the NJ SC gone far enough? I'm thinking of putting it up for Featured status (The articel, not the peer review request) and am wondering if I should wait longer with the peer reviewing. Thanx again 68.39.174.238 21:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Pic expanded. You'll have to do the citations, since they're totally foreign to me. I'm looking for other infos on their "reputation" now... 68.39.174.238 23:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Elizabeth Morgan page[edit]

BD: An anon IP tried to add a one-liner to the Elizabeth Morgan page, but Musical Linguist reverted it. Could you please take a look and consider re-adding the line. It was about a retrial in the Elsa Newman case. There was also a useful link added to the Stephen A. Friedman page. -- 71.139.165.206 17:27, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Help, help, the gremlins are after me[edit]

OK, so I'm trying to help get Gremlins up to featured status. I owe this to one of my favourite childhood movies. I've been trying to think of fair use rationales for the images, none of which were uploaded by me. I've tried doing this the same way I do everything around here, learn by example. But I can't see any examples of good fair use rationales for DVD covers, and the plushies might be a problem too. Could you have a look? Thanks. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 22:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Benedict XVI wikipage(s)[edit]

There are censors (like "Musical Linguist" and others) who are censoring sourced and cited information from Ratzinger's wikipagesfrom the Pope Benedict XVI-related wikipages regarding his service in the German Army during World War II, such as the below-referenced material from [[http:// www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1572667,00.html]]:

"It was possible to resist, and those people set an example for others. The Ratzingers were young and had made a different choice." 84-year-old Elizabeth Lohner, a resident of the pope's home town Interview with the Times of London April 17, 2005

Given that "Musical Linguist"'s homepage shows that she is clearly dedicated to Catholic apologetics, one has to ask if she is qualified to be a Wikipedia administrator. There are other Catholic censors (Demiurge, Ali-oops, Jtdirl) who prowl Wikipedia and do whatever they wish on their censorial agenda, and even get others to follow them. If Wikipedia cannot even include the above-referenced quote from a native of Ratzinger's own town, who was in a perfect position to know the reality on the ground, then what purpose does Wikipedia serve except as a bully pulpit for censors, revisionists and apologists like the above referenced editors/administrators. 216.194.57.160 16:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Mass disasters/war[edit]

Good for you for keeping up that page. It's easy to let something like that fall into disrepair. Czolgolz 13:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Pandeism[edit]

I see you have wrote most of what's here on PanDeism!! For fifteen years I've been practicing this, and only recently heard of the 1800+ use that is half the article, and should not be the top half!! I have made it the bottom half, I hope with your blessing... The rest is much that is contradictory to what I have learned is truth... please see http://www.fringecult.com/?page_id=3 for the The Precepts of Pan-Deism at the Pan-Deist Project, an internet outreach program for Pandeism... also, the Christian Wiki offers a brief but wholly accurate definition at http://www.christianforums.com/t2738327-wiki-pandeism.html, Pandeism: The belief that God precedes the universe and is the universe's creator, that the universe is currently the entirety of God, and that the universe will one day coalesce back into a single being, God. Pandeists believe all consciousness, in all life, to be fragments of God's awareness. I added that to the page some time ago and see it was erased - why? It is the most accurate statement!! //// Pacific PanDeist —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacific PanDeist (talkcontribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia - please feel free to add your knowledge to the article, citing to whatever sources you have to support it. I think the article is fine either way - but someone else might always decide to switch the order back around. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Obnoxiousness again...[edit]

Can I bug you to look at New Jersey Supreme Court again? The peer review was archived, and I don't want to bring ANOTHER one up so soon after, but I've made some additions and am wondering if you could take a look, etc? Thanx again dude. 68.39.174.238 03:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Tomorrow, my obnoxious anon amigo! Off to bed. Cheers! BD2412 T 03:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanx dude. I also assume your comment about the "change" involved the your mom business? 68.39.174.238 03:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
      • You assume right! BD2412 T 03:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Unsolicited spam message[edit]

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Point Park Civic Center/archive1 if you have a moment. Regardless, hope all is well. Thanks a bunch, Christopher Parham (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

A question on bios re lawyers[edit]

I was looking at the lawyer bios, and I saw hardly a stub on Alito's law clerk. Do you know why the law clerk is notable in his own right? I have had long discussions about the value of a doctor bio, so I looked at lawyers (closer to my home for me). I was a little surprised to see this. Vicarious notability isn't very notable. I don't see any other claim to fame (or infamy, as the case may be).. MollyBloom 01:13, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree - law clerks as law clerks are not inherently notable (although many later become notable lawyers or profs). BD2412 T 01:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Laleh Siddigh[edit]

Thanks for starting this article; I am trying to raise the profile of women in motorsport and expected to find nothing about her on here. Many thanks for proving me wrong. TiHead 15:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I'm glad to have gotten it underway! BD2412 T 15:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Florida[edit]

Thanks! I've been working on other Florida projects and saw the danger of deletion notice, and my OCD nature kicked in. Ideas for topics, boy, do I have! Mostly history and geography, as I love to travel, and have seen most of the state (except around Naples and west of Tallahassee). Plus I'm fairly good at proofreading, so maybe will work on that some too.

Btw, I see you fiddling with the colours on the portal page. Can I suggest green and blue, maybe? You know, palm trees and ocean? Check my sandbox to get an idea.

Look forward to working more on this. As long as I can still do the occasional frivolous stuff.  :)

Ebyabe 04:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Responded on user's talk. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I take your point on the color. I'm going to make a change, and if you think it not okay, please feel free to revert. It's a little easier on the eyeballs, IMHO.  :) Ebyabe 20:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Coral and seashell... clever combo! bd2412 T 20:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Portal[edit]

Thanks for supporting the proposal to create a portal for U.S. government (and politics?) topics. The proposal passed, and I copied my draft over the the portal namespace. It's at Portal:Government of the United States. While I don't expect you to be involved with maintaining the portal (given your work at Portal:Law), you are certainly welcome to make any updates (especially law-related). Feel free to stop by the portal talk page or just go in and make any improvements or changes you see fit. In its current state, the portal is just a starting point. --Aude (talk contribs) 02:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure I'll be by from time to time! :-) bd2412 T 12:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Help[edit]

Hi, could you help me here? --Nearly Headless Nick 14:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

NewUser needs input[edit]

Newbie User_talk:Rdengrove#2 contacted me[1] about a large rewrite he did on Mephistopheles, and I plead 'ignorance', save for superficial passing familiarity. If you've got some knowledge in the area (or perhaps, instead on or about 'Faust'), or just want to be 'welcoming', see if you can lend a hand. Thanks! // FrankB 16:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Presidency of the United States[edit]

Hi BD2412 - I know you're active on WP:P/P, so I'd like to have your view of whether this portal will be a good addition to WP. I'm trying to emphasize the importance and depth of the subject even though it is not so obvious as a nation or a geographical region. This Fire Burns.....Always 14:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

As opposed to Portal:U.S. Government, this is a refined, specific area, yet voluminous - I estimate over 200 articles directly related, and a lot of media and facts. This Fire Burns.....Always 15:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll comment on the proposal page. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

America: From Freedom to Fascism[edit]

Hey, pardner, I guess I've been kinda quiet lately (although I think I did a lot of editing earlier this week). I just removed a huge amount of text from the above referenced article. The interesting thing is that I absolutely agree with about 99.99999% of the commentary that I removed. It's just that the commentary lacks neutral point of view (in my opinion). I posted the removed material on the Talk page for the article. Any thoughts? Yours, Famspear 21:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, the ideas apparently expressed in the film are fairly stock tax protester and conspiracy theorist nonce, so a simple link to those articles should substitute for a thorough debunking within the article on the film. bd2412 T 13:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Portal:US presidency[edit]

Hi BD2412 - please have a look at this portal again - as you suggested, I expanded the scope and changed the title to "Executive Branch." What more should be done to push this through? This Fire Burns.....Always 03:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I see you have withdrawn this request. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Taft quote[edit]

It's a little late, but I believe Taft spoke that he didn't "remember I ever was President". Maybe it helps. Buh bye! Aaрон Кинни (t) 09:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks! bd2412 T 03:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Stock Exchanges[edit]

I hope you can help me here is the story below.

I am having a small problem I am trying to make a Category for the Category:Companies listed on the Alternative Investment Market that is like any other Stock Market Page like Category:Companies listed on the London Stock Exchange but when I add a ticker symbol ({{aim|CCP}}) for Celtic F.C. I get (Template:Aim). I have heard that they are listed on the Alternative Investment Market which is in England. Can you help me correct what I am doing wrong. I put Celtic F.C. under ({{lse|CCP}}) but I think it needs to be under aim|CCP Thank you for your time. John R G 19:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the question! If there is no template for the AIM, nothing will come of adding the link to one. bd2412 T 19:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

When I try to replace lse with aim it does not seem to work on the main page and I do not know what I am doing wrong. Maybe you can help me set up a template for aim. John R G 19:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I fixed it if you want you can double check it and see if everything is ok. John R G 20:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Do market links usually go to the top of the article like that? I don't do corporate stuff, so I'm unfamiliar with the style. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I really dont know but I think it looks pretty good where it is but if you want to move it. Its up to you. John R G 23:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia[edit]

Surely the link to the Pantheon should be to that Pantheon? Orbicle 07:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

someone's been messing around with There's a Skeeter on my peter[edit]

Someone seems to have been playing around with moving the above article that we have both worked on, but I do not have the administrative tools to undo the tests/vandalism/experiments. Can you check it out? youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 12:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

all clear. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 12:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
There are in fact, vulgar and non-vulgar variations of the same song - the children's version is a non-vulgar one, but I'm emailing the author of the website where it is featured to get source information. bd2412 T 15:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
That, actually, was not what I was refering to. I was talking about someone messing around with the page move function, but his or her moves have been fixed and the vandal blocked. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 12:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I saw that as well - thought the issues were related (i.e. the page move was retaliatory towards some disagreement over the editing). But the other issue required resolution as well, so now it's taken care of. Cheers! bd2412 T 14:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your continued diligence on the topic. Cheers. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 15:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


Footnotes[edit]

Hi BD, do you have any advice on why the footnotes in my article duplicate themselves? Thanks, CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 06:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Fixed, I think. Not sure which thing I did was the fix, tho. bd2412 T 06:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks :P That's very strange- references like that in other articles have worked for me, and everything always looked good in show preview, but I had to revert myself again. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 06:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
      • No problem at all! :-) bd2412 T 15:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Roni Lynn Deutch[edit]

Greetings from Texas! Your input could be valuable regarding the article Roni Lynn Deutch at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Roni_Lynn_Deutch

My personal view is that the article is pretty much an advertisement, even if the article wasn't put there by Ms. Deutch herself -- but you may have a different perspective. Yours, Famspear 19:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Majority-minority state[edit]

The "External factors" section was 100% unverifiable original research.

I don't know whether the statements in that section are true or not. If they are, the section would certainly be relevant to the topic - and you certainly won't get any argument from me if you put that section back in, as long as the statements are supported with references. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 05:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured list candidate[edit]

I thought you'd like to know that List of United States federal legislation has been nominated to be a Featured List. It needs 4 votes by October 2 2006.

As I have labored hard on the article, I would appreciate your looking it over. You can find a discussion here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States federal legislation.

Thank you!

Markles 23:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Problem with an article[edit]

You probably don't remember me, but you welcomed me to Wikipedia a few moons ago.

I just ran into a problem in the article Jack Moran, and I explained the problem on Talk:Jack Moran. My question is: Is there a tag I can add to the article to ensure that a Wikipedian with knowledge of film history takes a look at the article sooner rather than later? My thanks for your help. --ShelfSkewed 03:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

List of intellectual property legislation pending in the United States Congress[edit]

Just created this; thought you might be interested in helping to expand it. Most of the articles on pending legislation are a mess and are miscategorized, so maybe this might help organize things. Postdlf 17:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, I'll have a look - they just passed a few things. bd2412 T 22:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Low level category deletion edit war at St. John's University School of Law[edit]

I'm looking for a third opinion on some edits I've made adding categories to this law school page. An administrator, User:Crzrussian reverted my edits, and I reverted them back and started a discusion. Please let me know what you think.--Cdogsimmons 20:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I see that it's settled. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Fl. Intl. College of Law[edit]

hey great job expanding the FICL article, making it informative without sounding like a advertisement. other law school articles should look like that. Taco325i 14:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Twat[edit]

This is your only warning. The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked. --Boris Allen 16:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Greetings friend. You put a warning on my talk page which accused me of blanking a page or template with respect to twat. Since I've done neither, but have only removed vandalism from that page and protected the page, I must assume that you are either mistaken, or have chosen to misuse the warning template. If this was a mistake, please take care not to warn your fellow Wikipedians when they make appropriate edits or otherwise take proper actions. If you dispute the removal of the image (which in my view is entirely unrelated to the article topic), or the protection of the page, please raise that on the article's talk page. If this was an intentional misuse of the warning template, please be aware that the misuse of a warning template is also a form of vandalism, and will be dealt with accordingly. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I gave you the warning as I noticed you had removed an image from the page. As far as I could tell from revision histories it had not been considered vandalism, although someone had attempted to enlarge it unneccessarily. Another user had twice removed it, and they appeared, especially through edit summaries, to be nothing more than a juvenile vandal making personal attacks. If indeed the image was vandalism then I apologise for the warning template. Regards, Boris Allen 17:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Understood. This is an editorial judgment, but I can think of no conceivable justification for that particular image having been placed in that particular article. The placement seems entirely and gratuitously pejorative to the subject of the image. Cheers again! bd2412 T 17:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Life of Brian[edit]

This was really one funny mistake, considering the difficulties with it in the film itself.  :) You fixed it already of course. Garion96 (talk) 19:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

List of Fetishes?[edit]

Are you still interesting in the article? Please let my know on my user page.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 04:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Kind of busy with other things at the moment. bd2412 T 06:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks BD2412 teaching me about Talk.[edit]

For your archiving purposes, I am sending our dialogue.

>I added passages on Richard D. Wyckoff and a link to a white paper the >James Forte wrote on Wyckoff that was published by the Market >Technicians Association of New York. > >I am new to wikipedia and just getting used to how to send messages, etc. >I did not know how else to respond to you, so I have send you this mail. >Is there a better way I should have responded?


Thanks for the message, but you can respond by putting a note on my talk page (just click the big "T" after my name in my signature). You'll also want to put the pages you've worked on your watchlist by clicking the word "Watch" at the top of your page - that way you can see if anyone else edits (or vandalizes) those pages. Cheers! -BD2412 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jccoppola (talkcontribs) 14:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

Ashwood University[edit]

Greetings, old friend! Hope all is well with you. Can you help me keep an eye on Ashwood University? The place is far and wide reported to be a diploma mill, handing out degrees for cash without requiring students to, say, go to any classes. Various anons and new accounts seem to pop up all the time to delete the well-sourced critical info, and/or to instead insert the false claim that the institution is "fully accredited" and hands out valid degrees, or the like. I'm on the verge of semi-protecting the article. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I will put the page on my watchlist. Seems to me that a revert (and block if needed) strategy should be used in situation, rather then semi-protection, the vandalism seems to come only sporadically. I will be watching! Happy editing, Prodego talk 19:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for your time[edit]

Hi BD. Long time no talk, glad to see you are still churning out reams of edits. I'm here to request you take a look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Report of 1800/archive1. I am trying to get this article through FAC before I go on vacation in mid-June, and your help in this process would be of great value. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of Denmark[edit]

You just changed the end year of Johan Ludvig's term as Ministers of State from 1751 to 1763. That does not fit the term used in his article, or the start year of his successor. Perhaps you accidentally used his year of death? Thue | talk 17:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I was going by the dates on the world statesman website, which seems fairly authoritative. Denmark has a peculiar history of having co-regents, so it seemed plausible that there was some overlap. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I checked in various old encyclopedias. [2] says that "johan ludvig" was state minister until 1763. [3] only calls Bernstorff "statesman" and foreign minister (but says he had great influence, also internally in Denmark), and [4] calls Bernstorff state minister, but conspicuously fails to say when he became state minister. I also note that "johan ludvig" had a great number of titles, and is described as not overly bright, so it seems reasonable that Bernstorff was "in effect" state minister, though he may not have held the title. It would be nice if the old encyclopedias would have stated the facts outright, but I get the feeling that the encyclopedia writers didn't understand it completely, and instead of admitting it just left those gaping holes in the articles, hoping nobody would notice. Thue | talk 20:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I suppose the solution then is to "teach the controversy", as it were, and explain why we're not sure who did what when! bd2412 T 21:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Margaret Fishback[edit]

Thank you for creating this article! I'd been wanting to do it for ages, but never had time. I always felt she deserved her own article. Miss Dark (talk) 00:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)