User talk:Dave1185

Unified login: Dave1185 is the unique login of this user for all public Wikimedia projects.

This page may be protected with Troll-Be-Gone® against editing from new users. If you cannot edit here, you may leave a message at User talk:Baseball Bugs (him being my authorized lurker, replier, watcher and all).
Frankly, I can forgive you if you had been an asshole/troll/vandal in the past year but know this, the admins are still watching this page, be nice or your message may be simply removed and you may be blocked without further warning.

¡Ay, caramba! You have a zit. → Click here ← for more details.

...

Vandals, trolls, and other fiendly visitors, please note:

"Wikipedia is a community,
not a crazy den of pigs!"[1]

Social experimenters, please note:

"We're an encyclopedia,
not a bunch of lab rats in a cage."[2]

Troll feeders, please note:

"Recapistrulating to the trolls
is morally reprhensible."[3]

It is 13:47:51 on August 4, 2024, according to the server's time and date.

This user served with the Republic of Singapore Air Force.

This user has read and understood the BIG HUGE FREAKING PURPLE BOX. Have you?

This user is a WikiDragon.
...one of the last of a dying breed...

vn-130This user talk page has been vandalized 130 times.

Template:User DGAF4

This user has been on Wikipedia for 17 years, 1 month and 22 days.

en-4This user can contribute with a near-native level of English.

zh-3該用戶能以熟練的中文進行交流。
该用户能以熟练的中文进行交流。

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

de-0Dieser Benutzer hat keine Deutschkenntnisse.

yue-1呢個用戶可以用簡單嘅粵語進行交流。

This editor is a Senior Editor and is entitled to display this Rhodium Editor Star.

This user has created a global account. Dave1185's main account is on Wikipedia (in English).

This user is part of the Welcoming Committee.

Bollocks, I don't wear pants when I sleep.

It's believed by some that comments made by this cat began the entire thing

Archive 1: Dave1185 MMVIII
Archive 2: Dave1185 MMIX
Archive 3: Dave1185 MMX (NB:Donkey years ago, I fried two 166mhz Pentium MMX in my many attempts of overclocking them first to 180mhz, then to 200mhz. It worked~! When I found the Celeron 300A, the rest became history. Ahhh... good times~!)
Archive 4: Dave1185 MMXI

Welcome!

Hello, Dave1185! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Midorihana~iidesune? 07:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Midorihana^~iidesune? 07:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the Secret?

What is the Secret?

Someone asked me via email what is the secret that I've gotten so much vandalism plasted on my pages (130 counts!), drive-by harrassments (coined by Bugs!) and impersonators. To which, I can only reply you something two different Admins told me on two different pages/time:- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gogo_Dodo&diff=438201860&oldid=438201591 ; http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ched_Davis&diff=438217890&oldid=438210146 . Then it occured to me, I saw that somewhere on Wikipedia (User:Antandrus/observations on Wikipedia behavior#26) that says: "If a vandal insults you, it is a reliable indicator that you are doing something right." And most importantly, I believe in The Secret, doing good will attract more good and as long as I do more good than bad, everything is covered, don't let it bother you too much. Thank you! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 21:14, 16 July 2011 (UTC) (PPS:Okay, I've kept my end of the bargain, the rest is up to you now - annonymous emailer. ) I haven't seen the film so I don't know how they develop the idea, but it certainly works for the big things -- such as "doing good", "becoming peaceful" and so forth. "Practice loving-kindness and harmlessness as if they were the greatest form of bliss, and they will be." (Tibetan Buddhist saying, I think quoted by Thich Nhat Hanh) Antandrus (talk) 22:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC) Yeah, as well as Desmond Tutu, its as if they all understand it without actually saying it. Great minds do indeed think alike! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 22:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

---

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	The Barnstar is for you Dave. Rnb.chatterjee (talk) 01:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you, glad that I could be of help. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 10:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

2.220.204.70

Hi Dave. Restoring the ISP template is fine, but probably best to avoid excessively poking the guy with edit summaries like "you're just helping to add to my edit count." 28bytes (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• Apologies, got carried away there after someone mentioned about the pointy edges on my head. Restoring the template again, without prejudice this time. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 12:36, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• No worries. Looks like he removed it again; I'd just leave the page alone for now. We can restore it later. 28bytes (talk) 12:47, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• note - FYI - Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Dave1185 - regards, Off2riorob (talk) 12:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• If his claim is true, that I have indeed gone mental wihtout myself actually knowing anything about it... then I'm sure he is no less anal, screaming like a little girl on a Saturday. Well, look on the bright side, at least he's not out drinking, driving or doing weed. Anyway, note that I'm a long-term subscriber of WP:DGAF. In any case, most vandal/troublemaker(s) almost and always give me names, no matter how right/wrong they are and/or have become. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:Ethnic Groups And Languages.png

Hello Dave1185. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Ethnic Groups And Languages.png, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: WP:F10 only applies to files other than image, audio, or video files. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:31, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• I see... now in this case, can you please tell me under what/which criteria is this image file eligible for speedy? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 20:34, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that any of the speedy criteria apply. You may have to nominate the image at WP:FfD. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:40, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

• Much appreciated, thanks! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 20:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dave1185. You have new messages at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Tasc0.
Message added 04:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Σ ^talk_contribs 04:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Dave1185. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- BilCat (talk) 20:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

G280

See this revert, which probably belongs on the "My Favorite Reversions" list. Do you have any clue why "G280 is a more amenable number sequence [than G250] in certain cultures", and which cultures are in view here? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

This blog may have a clue, but it doens't explain what the problem with "G250" was that would necessitate a change in the first place. Odd! - BilCat (talk) 21:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• East Asian region, PRC to be exact inluding ROC as well I guess and the number 8 is a very auspicious number in East Asian psyche, oftentimes symbolising prosperity. Lately, China/Taiwan has been producing quite a bit of rich and/or super-rich people so its not surprisingly why they've been targeted as the most likely client for the renumbered G280. Hope this help somewhat to explain it to you. Best, and don't forget to check your email. Cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 21:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

• Sounds like similar reasons for Airbus skipping A350/A360/A370 and using A380 for their double-decker airliner. -Fnlayson (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Bingo! Per FlightGlobal, "a Chinese expert tells Flightglobal the number 250 can be translated into Mandarin as "stupid" or "idiotic"." I had a feeling there was a reason they waned to change from "250" to something else! The nose knows. :) - BilCat (talk) 19:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• Now that you've mentioned it, its not entirely correct because the number "250" when spoken or transliterated into Chinese, especially in the Southern regions of China (especially in Cantonese and Hokkien), is a slang for a stupid something something something... most often added in front of a sentence to imply a rat (as in Chicago gangster-styled lingo), a turncoat, a mole or a traitor. Not exactly what any business excutives and businessmen would want, eh? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 19:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Changing "links to redirects" to section anchor links

Hi, I noticed that you've been converting a few links to redirects into direct links to section anchors. While normally direct linking is preferred, sometimes it is not. Section headings can change, or be spun off into separate articles. By having a redirect point to a section anchor (ex. Harvest HAWK or MC-130J Combat Shadow II), we can avoid having to change all of those individual links, and instead just change the redirect. It also makes it easier to track down for changes later on, as a link to a redirect is more visible and easier to fix than a link to a section. I hope you will consider this in the future. Thanks! Ng.j (talk) 01:48, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• Noted. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:01, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Aviadvigatel PS-90

Dear Sirs, Please, note that the engine marked PS-90 has never been existed. It was marked as PS-90A from the very beginning. In support of this you can turn to the articles about the PS-90A in the annual issues of the recognized Jane’s aviation encyclopedia for the years of 80-90-s. In addition, we use the information of the engine manufacturer; see the Aviadvigatel’s edition Engine-Building Design Bureau. 50 years. History Pages, 1989, the article From M-25 to PS-90A. See also the Aviadvigatel’s website about the PS-90A engine (http://www.avid.ru/eng/products/civil/ps-90a/). Based on the above the PS-90 title shall be changed to PS-90A, i.e. the false subject shall be removed from the encyclopedia. As the renaming I have tried to make the last time was rejected, please, give me advice what shall I do in such situation. Yours sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solovei777 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I reverted him before because he did a cut-and-paste move to PS-90A, and because the mateiral he added was an unattributed, poor translation of Russian article, with few sources. I've know real issue with moving the current article to Aviadvigatel PS-90A, provided that there was no pre-production PS-90 design (nothing I've seen precludes that), and assuming a PS-90B/C/D et al never appear! - BilCat (talk) 10:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• Kind of stupid and strange that he didn't see the possibility of more variants being spawned or spin-off. If there's an "A", then "B", "C", or "D" is sure to follow somewhere along the timeline and what happens then? PS-90B, PS-90C and PS-90D? As the saying goes "never send a boy to do a man's job." --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Spare tires

This seems to be merely trollish at this point. - BilCat (talk) 10:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• I'll give it to him, he likes to toy with words and he's good at it but my surprise is why is he still a programmer when he could be a lawyer instead? While walking around the flightline sometimes, the aptitude of some pilots are also of a concern to me, some of them like to talk too much, grumbling/lamenting at why they are not flying the A380/A330 and/or being stuck with the A318/A319/A320 instead. Robin Olds expressed his philosophy regarding fighter pilots in the quote: "There are pilots and there are pilots; with the good ones, it is inborn. You can't teach it. If you are a fighter pilot, you have to be willing to take risks." Having been around pilots all my life, I agree totally with Olds, its either you have it or you don't. Sadly, HC isn't one of them, not that he is one to begin with. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:54, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

In my nearly 5 years on WP, I've seen several somewhat-good contributors degenerate into trolls and sock-masters. I sincerely hope HC doesn't follow that route. - BilCat (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

• He is well on his way, even as we speak. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 19:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Boyd Coddington

Hello, I know you've been involved with editing the external links of Boyd Coddington. There's weird stuff going on that I don't quite understand since I know nothing about the subject. Going through the history, I'm not sure about what's correct and what's wrong. I think it should probably get semi-protected, but think someone in the know should look at it beforehand. Thanks! --CutOffTies (talk) 15:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

• I concur and if you take the time go through the edit history, the timeline was suggesting that Boyd himself was involved in the initial editing but the catch is, he's been dead since 2008!!! Then you see another editor going by Boydcoddinggtonjr, who has since gotten his name changed to Hotroddude (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) after I had informed him of his potential COI issue if he carries on editing on that article. Even as we speak, this is very wrong because this means that even if he had change his username, the COI issue remains and is still a blockable offence. On the other hand, his other alias of Boydjr (talk · contribs) and Boydsbestfriend (talk · contribs) had been abandoned following separate COI warnings being issued earlier. FYI, I'm obliged to suspect that all this is either the work of a fanboy or it is really his son that's involved here but I doubt so. In any case, it might be best for you to go WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard and ask for help directly instead. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 17:08, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Alright, thank you --CutOffTies (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
    • Just an FYI, I opened a sockpuppet investigation because Boyd Jr. has yet to reply to my request on his user talk page, and more problematic behavior occurred after my request. -- Atama頭 17:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
      • Noticed that, he had the whole weekend to decide and react so this is something not out of the blue for me. In any case, I think you might dig out a big sockfarm there. Again, thanks and best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 23:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

On the field guide to trolls

I do believe we have a Number 7. Love it when that happens. :) Antandrus (talk) 18:15, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• I concur, but is there a possibility of exception? I mean, I counted 8 editor watchlisted by me that falls into such category (OWB#7) with one failing his shot at RfA and has since announced his retirement, while another went on to become an Admin. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 21:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Exceptions always exist, but not from that account! It's already been indeffed! Btw, I just read OWB #70, and it's so true! - BilCat (talk) 22:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I've seen some exceptions too -- it's the 'devoid of content' part that's critical. Hoping I'm not giving away too much here, but back in the days I used to do a lot of troll-fighting I kept track of these. Starting pages with a dot is a giveaway. Here is an example; I was watching it, but someone nailed it with a checkuser. Here is one that's still on my sleeper watch list. So it goes ... (Oh and thanks for the shout on #70; unfortunately I really do find that to be true ...) Cheers both, Antandrus (talk) 01:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

• IDK, judging by their first edit of a single period mark, do you think they are both linked/related? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 01:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Seen this?

talk about peeing in the wind! - BilCat (talk) 22:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• Bill, you've been stalking me again... but I glad you're thinking what I'm thinking and its not surprising why I don't want to speak to him, in the first place. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 22:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I actually totally agree with the guy's point, but it ain't ever going to happen. As much as I hate it, the compromise exists for a reason, and that reason hasn't changed yet. Btw, I'm not sure what it is you think I'm thinking, but you can let me know elsewhere! :) - BilCat (talk) 22:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• Point taken but in the bigger picture, the compromise exist for such reasons we all know too well, considering that without precise naming convention/format, we'll be in a hell of a big mess by now. As it is, the mess is not as big as before so his points can be ignored. :) --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 22:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Still, I'm convinced that if WP had been founded by a Brit, not by an American, there would be no such rule as ENGVAR, and British English would be standard usage in all articles. And we both know the Brtiish well enough to know I'm probably right! ;) - BilCat (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

• Now this I have to agree wholeheartedly... too many a times I've been wondering what is wrong with the puter when it is actually the language version that's casuing all this. Problem is, I've been reading too much aeroplane manuals written by American for American aircraft, so much so that my vocabulary has been totally corrupted! Now, my old friends from the states are telling me that I speak with an Aussie accent instead. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 22:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

$%^&*(+* Templates

Hi Dave, I've have been asked this question numerous times and the simple answer is that the Wiki templates (all of them!!) contain errors that are very difficult to correct, including use of second and et al. authors, full titling, multiple and first editions, location, date location. I have tried to get template designers to address the programming faults, to no avail. I can correct all of these programming errors, but it often makes more sense and less time to start out with the correct Harvard Citation or Modern Language Association (MLA) style guide employed in a "scratch cataloguing" format. Since I do Wikipedia editing as a diversion from my other work, I tend to spend little time and give articles only a cursory examination. If there is a very minor error such as a misplaced comma, I "tweak" the article and I don't usually elaborate on the change since it will show up in the history note on the article. As for citations, I rely on the MLA (Modern Language Association) style which is the world's most common bibliographic style and one that is accepted by Wikipedia. I have been utilizing this citation style in my own writing and in the cataloguing that I carried out in my other life as a librarian. I know that the standard today for library cataloguing is to simply download an entire MARC (MAchine Readable Cataloging) record form an established library but I continued to be a curmudgeon and relied on "scratch" editing which I still apply to Wikipedia work today. Basically it follows the old format of: Author. Title. Place of Publication: Publisher, Date of publication. (with variations to satisfy ordering and researching stipulations, usually ended by including an ISBN (international standard book number) and at times, page references). There are some subtle variations of the MLA style to facilitate multiple authors, articles, multimedia and other questions. Sorry for being verbose but I will make a point of stopping to clarify some of my edits but when it's merely a spelling, sentence or grammatical error, I will still give it a "tweak."

Further- the style employed for note citation is the Harvard Citation style which one other Wiki editor eons ago had begun to use and even though it works well with the MLA style, it is a separate system. Basically, the first reference is completely cited and all following references are provided in a brief format: "Author(s) Date, page." Sorry, I got off on a tangent in my earlier response, you merely wanted to know what style was being employed. FYI, my other problem is that I have a background stemming from 35+ years as a librarian and due my ancient teachings, I had gone through rigorous training for cataloguing and reference works. As you can visualize, I am an old fossil but I have in my last few years, been able to adopt newer technology. My last assignment in a high school library was eye-opening as my library technician and I simply downloaded MARC (Machine-Accessible Record Control) information from library collections where the questionable book was already cataloged. What a joy, simply copy someone else's cataloguing and paste it into our data base. To me that is like the "template" system but it isn't always the best way. I did have to resort at times to doing my own cataloguing to correct errors. As an author and editor, I have an interest in the mundane and arcane world of cataloguing and referencing.

As you may already determine, there are a number of suggested styles that are in place on Wikipedia. Many of these are based on the use of templates for editing and here is where the issue may actually be of discussion. The template guides have a number of variances that do not match the actual APA (American Psychological Association) style, which is one of the style guides used for referencing research. The APA guide was developed at a University level as a shorter, simpler guideline and intended for psychology, education, and other social sciences. University professors invariably assigned this guide to newcomers because it was considered easier to master and had the basic information required for a citation. However, the Wikipedia templates that were created by editors such as yourself or other editors used the APA style, or some slight variations of it.

I do understand the use of templates, it is merely that the catalog information that is in the "widely-used" template is based on a system that is not best adapted for research papers. I understand that many editors may prefer a template because it looks simple to use but as I indicated before; for me, it is just as fast to "scratch catalog" and if you know how to use the MLA style, it actually provides more information for the user. There have been some efforts to rewrite the templates but I find it easier to do without them and still give a source citation. Again, that's me... where I have been involved in major articles- see Amelia Earhart, North American P-51 Mustang and the Avrocar (aircraft), you will find that I have properly referenced sources of information (just not with templates). As to other's suggestion of having the template designers revise their work, I can't see challenging the whole wiki editing group when most people rely on the templates. My rewriting them to a more commonly used style would take a whole lot of explanation, as I have attempted to do for you. It's hard to summarize 30 years worth of cataloging experience for a non-librarian and make it relevant. If I didn't care what system I used, why would I change? would be the obvious reply. BTW, if you ask me the time, I will tell you how to design a clock. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC).

• Thank you for clearing that one up, best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 23:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi Dave, please be more careful with your edit summaries especially when replying to disruptive users such as in these edits[4][5]. Edit summaries are not for communication with another account. Summaries like the above may encourage disruptive behaviour rather than discourage it, please remeber to deny recognition rather than 'feeding' bad behaviour--Cailil ^talk 12:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you, I will keep that in mind. Note to self, do not feed the troll, not ever again, end of story, period. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Syllily

Dave, I understand your frustration with non-communicative editors, especially those who are violating important rules, like Copyrights. These are very important areas and I appreciate you noticing these and tagging them. I agree though, you probably want to step back for a bit as there are only two editors editing the MEDEA Awards article, you and Syllily, and you at opposing each others editing which means it will start to appear personal very soon - maybe it already has. Although it's clear that you know what you are doing and the other editor doesn't as far as the rules go, that editor has put effort in and is probably very attached to the article. I noticed you are using rollback (both Twinkle and native) to revert without custom edit summaries, though certainly there was no vandalism by Syllilly. I'm guessing that's a sign of getting frustrated with the user and not typical but you need to be careful with that. Again, the identification of the copyright issues was very important, I think you just need to move on to another one and stop back MEDEA Awards in a week, if you really want to. Take care and please, keep up the good work!--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 13:20, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you for noticing this case; roger, wilco and best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 23:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)