User talk:SandyGeorgia: Difference between revisions

FACs needing feedback ; view • edit
Five Nights at Freddy's: Help Wanted	Review it now
Roswell incident	Review it now

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:15, 18 July 2009

If you want me to look at an article or a FAC, please provide the link.

If you are unsure if a FAC is closed, please see WP:FAC/ar.

I usually respond on my talk page, so watch the page for my reply.
To leave me a message, click here.

Tools and other
useful things

Some of
my work

Nice
things

Yukky
things

Hepatorenal syndrome

Dear SandyGeorgia, if you had some time, I was wondering if you could look over hepatorenal syndrome. Specifically, I worry that it has been written with too much jargon and will get destroyed at WP:FAC as a consequence. Greatly appreciated. -- Samir 15:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I may be able to get to it towards the end of this week. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much -- Samir 05:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Layout

Hi there,
About a week ago you dropped by Wikipedia_talk:Layout#proposed_stylistic_changes with some critiques. At that time, I was relatively new to the page, but I had recently made a proposed revision [1] to the section Wikipedia:Layout#Standard_appendices_and_footers that was well-received and has stuck.

Since then, I have tried to propose some other changes [2]. I'm a relatively new Wikipedia editor, and I inadvertently frustrated some people by making my changes without discussing them first. OK, that makes sense, I'm happy to work towards a consensus. However, I've discovered that it's not really possible to make a reasoned contribution to the discussion there -- I feel like the page is being dominated by a very finicky/territorial/taxing character. I'd really like to stay involved in improving this page, but not under these circumstances. I'm wondering if you could review the talk page, tell me whether my complaints are justified, and advise me on how to proceed. Thanks. Agradman ^{appreciates civility}/_{makes occasional mistakes} 23:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did I post on your page?

Sandy, what do you make of this accusation [3] that I posted on your page trying to derail the Benzodiazepine FAC? I do not remember posting anything on your page before, do you? Thank you The Sceptical Chymist (talk) 17:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sceptical please stop going around wikipedia trying to find admins to turn on me like ANI and now here. You are not without sin.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 20:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a simple misunderstanding. SC: "posted on FA director's page requesting it be closed" is a reference to something he did. LG: your wording was imprecise, enabling misinterpretation. Now can we move on? Maralia (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I apologize for misunderstanding it. LG does get in trouble with commas often. I should have known. The Sceptical Chymist (talk) 21:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shortened notes?

Are there valid objections to using shortened footnotes? If you take a look at Jonestown#Notes, you'll see several sources repeated over and over simply to list the page number. Wouldn't a Footnote/References format work better here? I've proposed changes on the talk page, but the editor wants to keep them this way. I think it would save a lot of space and make it easier to read if I converted it to shortened footnotes. What's your opinion about this type of referencing style? Viriditas (talk) 01:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter as long as the article is consistent on the usage, I think. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bold

Please explain why you undid my edit. At the very least, Ten Commandments should be in bold. Thanks. --Spotty ¹¹²²² 04:05, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:MOSBOLD#Boldface: "If the article topic does not have a commonly accepted name, but is merely descriptive (e.g., history of the United States), the title does not need to appear in the first sentence, and is not bolded if it does." Tne Commandments in Roman Catholicism is a descriptive name, not a commonly accepted name. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:12, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that. However, in the article's title is Ten Commandments in Roman Catholicism. Ten Commandments is in teh first line of teh first sentence. It would make sense, at least, IMO, that that should be bold. It may not be commonly accepted, but its in teh article title and first sentence. --Spotty ¹¹²²² 04:16, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a descriptive title: it's one church's interpretation of the Ten Commandments. It is not The Ten Commandments. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks for explaining! --Spotty ¹¹²²² 04:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAC to keep an eye on

You may want to keep an eye on the FAC for Rocket: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rocket/archive1. The nominator has been striking issues when he feels they have been satisfied instead of the person opposing. When asked not to do this, he stated his intent to continue. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:39, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to revisit this one, there seems to be an issue with WP:OWN and an unwillingness to follow suggestions, see this edit: [4] -MBK₀₀₄ 01:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoreviewer

Re: your note on Ruslik0's talk page. Having the "autoreviewer" flag on your account simply means that pages you create are automatically marked as "patrolled". As someone who is quite active new-page patrolling this is quite helpful as it cuts back on the number of good pages that I have to mark patrolled and frees me up to concentrate on pages that may or may not meet Wikipedia's standards. Hope that this answered your question. :) Happy editing! -T'Shael, Lord of the Vulcans 01:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

H.M.S. Pinafore

Thanks for your help at the FAC. Question: Why does the MOS (and you) require a space *before* ellipses? That seems like bad typography to me. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Tony1 (talk · contribs) :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!

SandyGeorgia,

I must apologize, I was unaware of the style manual until you mentioned it to me. Rest assured, for I have now studied it and have a new understanding of what Wikimedia guidelines are currently explicit.

You are so kind to have actually responded to my humble editorial suggestions.

71.218.58.34 (talk) 17:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri FAC

The nominator of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri/archive2 would like to withdraw the FAC. Just wanted to point it out as I don't know the proper procedure for removing a withdrawn FAC. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done and done. Steve ^T • C 21:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/February 2009 tornado outbreak/archive1

I've decided to withdraw this nomination so when you have time it can be archived. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tommorow's FAC promotions

Hi Sandy. I'm going to attempt to promote/archive at FAC tomorrow. I'll make it as far through the list as I can :) Karanacs (talk) 20:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to stay away from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Time Traveler's Wife/archive1 - my mother-in-law just lent me the book and until I have a chance to read it I don't want to be spoiled on the plot. Would you mind making the decision on this one this weekend?Karanacs (talk) 17:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MOS question

Should web magazines be italicized? Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dispatches

Has a decision being made to scrap them? YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think Sandy's just very busy and no one has stepped up to coordinate them in her absence. See this. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

something about the revamped 1c could be useful, expecially enforcing it at FAR where things are lagging. I am afraid if I wrote it, it would turn completely activist about weak articles being kept seeing as I am supposed to close the FARs YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. I could think of several editors who could help out, but four stand out in my mind: Laser brain (talk · contribs), Awadewit (talk · contribs), Cirt (talk · contribs) and DrKiernan (talk · contribs) (the latter two are pretty active at FAR from what I see). Dabomb87 (talk) 03:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep an eye out

User:Shappy/Amazing Race Wikipedia. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question re image

Some of us have been working on the Oil shale extraction article in hopes of restarting an FA process. Question: There is an image on page 14 of this DOE paper on oil shale (page 14, it takes a little while to load) that presents a schematic overview of the process. Do you think this would be a useful addition? If so, how to size it? Your reply at the article talk page would be appreciated. Sincerely, Novickas (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incentive system for reviewers, again

WT:FAR. To be frank, I think there is 0% chance that the average detail of reviews will decrease. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 02:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:GA articlehistory errors

Okay, thanks for letting me know, but now I'm not sure how to add the fact that The Boy Who Knew Too Much is a GA since I did what's on that page you linked too. The Flash ^{talk} 17:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I've been trying to help lower the backlog on the GAN page, didn't see how it was screwed up before. Also, why exactly is it labeled as "Arts" when it's a GA for "Theater, film and drama" ? The Flash ^{talk} 17:46, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks again. I'm not really planning on doing that much GAN reviews, but I think I'll just have to start looking at the AH before I put the template up. Thanks again. The Flash ^{talk} 17:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Dyslexia/Dyslexia sub-articles

Hi I have added a few research documents on the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Dyslexia/Dyslexia sub-articles sandbox, which may resolve some of the issues you highlighted when you last visited the Dyslexia article dolfrog (talk) 20:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Asthma FAR

I apologize; I was not active on Wikipedia at the time of your request. — Knowledge Seeker দ 21:35, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing to your notice

Someone in WP management needs to look at the Barbara Biggs entry, as it seems to my amateur eyes to be largely an advertizement of Biggs books, and a beat-up of her deeds and status based on what is written in same self-authored books. There are some references to media who interviewed her about her books/deeds but these again rested mostly on her own opinions about herself drawn from her self-authored books. Is there not supposed to be independant verification of her claims? 58.165.69.67 (talk) 10:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing survey

Hi SandyGeorgia. My name is Mike Lyons and I am a doctoral student at Indiana University. I am conducting research on the writing and editing of high traffic “current events” articles on Wikipedia. I have noticed in the talk page archives at Barack Obama that you have contributed to the editing or maintenance of the article. I was hoping you would agree to fill out a brief survey about your experience. This study aims to help expand our thinking about collaborative knowledge production. Believe me I share your likely disdain for surveys but your participation would be immensely helpful in making the study a success. A link to the survey is included below.

Link to the survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=P6r2MmP9rbFMuDigYielAQ_3d_3d

Thanks and best regards, Mike Lyons lyonspen | (talk) 21:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAC/FAR

Might be fading away.... YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 03:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Anne FAR

I have nominated Anne of Great Britain for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.. [I'm inviting you because you initiated the first FAR on this subject, which resulted in a decision to keep it featured. I think that decision was problematic, and decided to reopen the issue] john k (talk) 17:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Article history

Thanks. Been a while since I closed an acr, now that we coords are apparently updating the ah template with acr info as well I'm havin' some trouble figuring out how to get it all up and running. Thanks for advise, I'm sure I will get it sooner or later if I stick with it. Stay safe, and have a happy summer! :) TomStar81 (Talk) 22:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Silent Alarm FAC

Hi, the nomination hasn't gathered any more thoughts in days. I was wondering if you'd like to review.

I'm pretty sure that the article is more than suitable for FA and that could be the reason why people aren't commenting as it's a given that most reviewers will only point out negative things. I'd like to speed the process along in any way I can.

Thanks. Rafablu88 21:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help with citations in footnotes

I'm having trouble getting citations to work in footnotes in the 2009 Orange Bowl FAC. If either you or one of the helpers who watch this page could help, it'd be extremely helpful. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think your problem lies in the fact that you are using <ref group="nb"> the same way as you would use something like <ref name="awesome source"/>. You need to either place a reference inside the tag, and then use a </ref> tag, like this <ref group="nb"> REFERENCE </ref>, or if you are going to use the same reference over again, you could probably use <ref group="nb" name="foo"> and then use <ref name="foo"/> afterwards. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 23:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ref tags can't be nested, see WP:REFNOTE for a workaround. Here's an example fix. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:12, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~How in those examples would I use a repeated reference in an infobox? That's the specific example I'm having the most trouble with. When I attempted the workaround, it seemed to destroy the infobox.~~ JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:50, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip! JKBrooks85 (talk) 04:54, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The day has come

SandyGeorgia's Awesome Wikipedian day is November 2.

Hi Sandy. I meant to return your Day sooner. It came in very handy. You are released from all obligations and Spells. Cheers, Outriggr (talk) 05:11, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might like this for the same reasons I do:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcdbGxYX9es&feature=related

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did, thanks. I watched Gran Torino a second time last night (this movie really chokes me up for some reason), and I think the song would be excellent in the soundtrack. Outriggr (talk) 06:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Must be the Lab! (Send Dog!) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:53, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can't hurt! Send Dog? -> Dogsend -> Godsend? I'm trying here... Outriggr (talk) 00:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Put the dog on a plane! (Been doing it for years.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:37, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions

Are you aware that you're approaching the six-figure mark? (In edits, that is—your checking account must have gotten used to that quite a while ago ;)
When and why, in the name of all that is good and holy, was alt text made guideline, policy, and a requirement for FAC? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My dear Fv: hello ! The edits go up, slowly; the checking account goes down, more quickly.

I haven't followed the alt-text discussion closely: Eubulides (talk · contribs) is the go-to guy on that !

Miss working with you :) Maybe someday I can work on articles again ! Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Coggins

Hello, Sandy. Mike Christie is unavailable indefinitely due to his move. I implemented all of your recent suggestions, many of those listed at the article's previous FAC, added more sources, copyedited the prose, changed the layout a bit, and as I think it's ready for another round at the FAC, I listed it there. Thanks for all of your advice! -- Avi (talk) 17:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vacation pending

I'm going tomorrow and will have no computer access until I return on Monday, making for my first real break since joining the project. I have one oppose (Magdalena Neuner) where the nominator has responded; if I don't get a chance to strike it, please consider it resolved. There's one other FAC (Jackie Robinson) where I just left an oppose that I won't be able to check for two or three days. Other than those two, I have nothing urgent that needs a re-review. I'll be back from the last place you'd think I would travel to in time for your/Karanacs' Tuesday run-through (I assume she will see this here). Giants2008 (17-14) 03:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know; may the best team win !!! LOL ... have fun ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2004 World Series PR

You commented on the 2004 World Series FAC a while back. I've now started PR in the hope of renominating it. See it here. BUC (talk) 08:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Advisory

Yes, I felt strongly that one of you should have been asked. But, perhaps, if you are all occupied, it's okay in the long run. And you are also right that ArbCom will inquire about additions if necessary, they are quite communicative, to say the least. :) ceranthor 17:34, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I'm planning on making a stride towards saving Whale song at FAR, it's an extremely interesting and worth-wile article, any suggestions for a noob (at FAR)? I found a source, it's Britannica, but I don't think the encyclopedia is considered a reliable source. Input?ceranthor 00:40, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008 film) original (faulty) review

Hi, I'm not sure that you were right to remove the article history as it does record the original faulty review and comments upon it. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The articlehistory had errors, and I don't have time to fix all the GA ah errors. Please read the instructions at Template:Articlehistory, and be sure to incorporate the peer review, and scroll to the bottom of the page to check for the red error cat when done. Alternately, if you're unsure how to build an ah correctly, you can just leave a GA template on the page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing mine. I was literally walking out the door and forgot to scroll down. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; yours was an easy fix ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Just wanted to say thanks for the FAC promote of 2009 Orange Bowl and for the citation help. JKBrooks85 (talk) 13:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monkey (TV series)

Casliber has nominated you to play the role of Sandy, the water/fish monster YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 15:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

bwaaahahaha! Don't let Tim Vickers get hold of "Sandy, the ex-cannibal"!!! And Marskell already tried to turn me into a philosopher ... I'm pretty sure he failed ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

I've blocked the nominator of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Is Google Making Us Stupid?/archive2 indefinitely as a sockpuppet of The Wurdalak, who is a suspected sockpuppet of Manhattan Samurai. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 12:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talyllyn Railway

Well, I've finally got an article onto TFA. I've just re-read A fool's guide to writing a featured article, and realised I omitted an important stage in the FA process. Therefore, please accept these chocolates, belatedly, as a thanks for your help and for all the good work you do. ;-) — Tivedshambo (t/c) 17:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why, thank you !! My chocolate supply has been dwindling lately ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Red face

Minor typo! diff. Sometimes I shouldn't get out of bed in the mornings! Tim Vickers (talk) 18:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whew !!!! That's a relief !! Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Accessdates

I see people change accessdates for web references, and I don't think that's a really good idea, and I don't think it should be encouraged at FAC. If the web page changes, the accessdate may be important to find an particular version. People could search through page history to find the original, but then people could do that without the accessdate at all; if it's there it should stay there, unless the person changing it verifies the cited info for all uses of the ref is still valid. I also noticed that someone has a script which strips out everything from a ref except the URL. The person then runs User:Dispenser/Reflinks to re-add cite info from the (now bare) URL. This means, if a citation were already fixed to have the right title or address styling issue, the fixes get removed. Just a heads-up to the talk page stalkers. Gimmetrow 22:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source checks...

I managed to walk out of the house without my normal files and stuff so source checks will have to happen when I get home .. probably Saturday. Sorry about this, but things just got seriously busy and now that I'm traveling, it's too difficult to do on the road here. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Left-aligned images in the lead

A fairly exhaustive RfC at Joseph Priestley regarding its left-aligned lead image concluded over a week ago with (surprisingly) no consensus. While the supporters of the image's left-alignment are particularly talented, established, and prolific editors, I nevertheless want to make FA directors and delegates aware of the fact that there is no consensus on this issue. I only bring this to your attention as image alignment has been raised in subsequent FACs (e.g. John Calvin and John Knox) and some editors have potentially been misrepresenting the extent to which left-alignment is settled or stable consensus beyond their particular interpretation and substantial dissent from other editors (as indicated in the RfC). Madcoverboy (talk) 01:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image opposition for Charles Carroll the Settler and Quark

Sandy, I am not going to bother answering to some replies in those FACs because their tone do not deserve a decent reply. My opposition to those images still stand; the copyright status on those images are in doubt. I have done my utmost to state my opinions in the external links to them (Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#300 year old paintings under copyright in US??! and commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Charmed-dia-w.png), but again I am not going to keep repeating the same points in them if others do not pay attention to the underlying arguments. This is a heads-up to help you decide if the opposition should be over-ruled or not. Jappalang (talk) 13:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Che Guevara's article.

Hi, Sandy! Long time no see. I gather you could be interested in the discussion (or rather, the turmoil) that has arisen over a small edit war after I inserted the words "mass executioner" in the lead of the Che's article. One of my motives for doing it is that nowadays in Venezuela, as you probably are well aware of, that criminal is being hailed by chavistas as a hero and "Liberator", in the same ranks of Simón Bolívar, which is not only preposterous but nauseating! Regards, AVM (talk) 14:15, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 253: / Line 253: @@
 Sandy, I am not going to bother answering to some replies in those FACs because their tone do not deserve a decent reply.  My opposition to those images still stand; the copyright status on those images are in doubt.  I have done my utmost to state my opinions in the external links to them ([[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#300 year old paintings under copyright in US??!]] and [[:commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Charmed-dia-w.png]]), but again I am not going to keep repeating the same points in them if others do not pay attention to the underlying arguments.  This is a heads-up to help you decide if the opposition should be over-ruled or not.  [[User:Jappalang|Jappalang]] ([[User talk:Jappalang|talk]]) 13:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
+== Che Guevara's article. ==
+Hi, Sandy! Long time no see. I gather you could be interested in the [[Talk:Che_Guevara#.22Mass_executioner.22_label|discussion]] (or rather, the turmoil) that has arisen over a small edit war after I inserted the words "mass executioner" in the lead of the Che's article. One of my motives for doing it is that nowadays in Venezuela, as you probably are well aware of, that criminal is being hailed by ''chavistas'' as a hero and "Liberator", in the same ranks of [[Simón Bolívar]], which is not only preposterous but nauseating! Regards, [[User:AVM|AVM]] ([[User talk:AVM|talk]]) 14:15, 18 July 2009 (UTC)