Jump to content

User talk:Ealdgyth: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎TPS alert ...: new section
Line 449: Line 449:


I need two pages from [http://www.worldcat.org/title/transactions-of-the-radnorshire-society/oclc/499949046?referer=list_view this journal (''Transactions of the Radnorshire Society'')] in volume 71, (2001) pp. 168-169. It's an article by Andrew Breeze "The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 1053 and the killing of Rhys ap Rhydderch". [[User:Ealdgyth|Ealdgyth]] - [[User talk:Ealdgyth|Talk]] 20:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I need two pages from [http://www.worldcat.org/title/transactions-of-the-radnorshire-society/oclc/499949046?referer=list_view this journal (''Transactions of the Radnorshire Society'')] in volume 71, (2001) pp. 168-169. It's an article by Andrew Breeze "The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 1053 and the killing of Rhys ap Rhydderch". [[User:Ealdgyth|Ealdgyth]] - [[User talk:Ealdgyth|Talk]] 20:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
: [http://welshjournals.llgc.org.uk/browse/viewpage/llgc-id:1191402/llgc-id:1198348/llgc-id:1198516/get650] [[User:Cavila|Cavila]] ([[User talk:Cavila|talk]]) 21:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:24, 9 January 2012

FACs needing feedback
viewedit
Weise's law Review it now


Featured article removal candidates
Sideshow Bob Review now
The Supremes Review now
0.999... Review now
Battle of Red Cliffs Review now
Mariah Carey Review now
Pokémon Channel Review now
Concerto delle donne Review now
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask Review now
Geography of Ireland Review now


Good Article promotion

File:Papiroflexia Commons 015.jpg Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Springbok (horse) a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated.

In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article promotion

You did it again!
Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making Bregowine a certified "Good Article"! (Pictured: artist's impression.) Thank you again; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 21:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Nikkimaria...

21:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Children's Museum update

Kit Cat Klock

It's time again to share the latest news on the Children's Museum of Indianapolis Wikipedia project! In the last few months we have been busy with our third image donation, which was made up of 150 images that were professionally photographed specifically for this upload. We are asking for volunteers to categorize these images and distribute them into Wikipedia articles. Your help is appreciated! Check them out here.

We have also donated our first video and a second GLAM-Wiki Infographic to Commons. In September we were thrilled to welcome Jimmy Wales to the museum. Following our successful Edit-a-Thon and Translate-a-Thon in August, translations have continued with the help of the established QRpedia community, (particularly Russian translations thanks to Lvova!) We have begun to analyze our implementation of QRpedia codes and completed an extensive case study. In November we presented at the Museum Computer Network conference about how museums can effectively collaborate with Wikipedia. You can see more details on the Prezi.

In more general news, in addition to serving as the Children's Museum's Wikipedian-in-Residence, it was recently announced that I will be taking on the role of US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator for the Wikimedia Foundation. In this role I will be working to streamline the process of connecting interested US GLAMs with the Wikipedia community. If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to let me know. Be sure to sign up for This Month in GLAM to keep up with the latest GLAM-Wiki news from around the world (subscribe).

We have a listing of High Need and Moderate Need requests on the Ways to Help section on the project page. I encourage you to lend a hand if you're able. While the Children's Museum partnership continues to truck along, we still are in desperate need of volunteers to help disperse our images and update and maintain content. Thank you for your time and help. Happy holidays! LoriLee (talk) 16:45, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the card

This was very nice of you and I was touched. If I get round to doing something similar (and why not?) I will be sure to send you one in return. In case I don't, let me wish you a happy holiday season and a great 2012. --John (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas cheer

Seasonal greetings and
much happiness for 2012!
Keep the bishops (and the horses) coming! (This historic image shows Brian, on the right, requesting a peer review from Malleus Fatuorum, on the left). The spirit of SandyGeorgia hovers between them.
Brianboulton (talk) 15:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ealdgyth, merry Christmas, I hope you're having a good holiday. Just wanted to let you know, in case you missed it in the excitement of the last few days, that I have offered a GA review over at Plegmund. That said, there's no hurry at all, feel free to get to it when you get to it. J Milburn (talk) 01:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Season's greetings

and best wishes for 2012!
Thanks for all you do here, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:59, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have a great Christmas

Christmas pudding is hot stuff!
Have a wonderful Christmas. As the song says: "I wish you a hopeful Christmas, I wish you a brave new year; All anguish, pain, and sadness Leave your heart and let your road be clear." Pesky (talkstalk!) 22:28, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Season's greetings!
I hope the holiday season is relaxing and fulfilling, and that 2012 will be fruitful for you. --John (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Four Award
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Robert de Chesney. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have reviewed your article at Talk:Oda of Canterbury/GA1 and placed in on hold. I tried to convey in my review the problems I had and I'm hoping you can remedy them. Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 22:23, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's the holidays - I know that for me, having relatives underfoot never helps things .. nor do two teenagers out of school! Thanks so much for the efforts you made, they definitely improved the article. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:24, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I have reviewed your nomination and made comments at Talk:Ælfric of Abingdon/GA1. Meanwhile the article is on hold.

Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 01:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've been working with Montanabw on this article from when I created it. Several others, mainly Vsmith, Materialscientist, Gerda, Dreadstar, have helped. It's been lead DYK, made GA, and had a PR. We'd like to get it to FA but would very much appreciate it if a skilled reviewer and writer such as yourself looked it over first. FYI, Yogos are only found in Montana. I've set a watch on your page just now.PumpkinSky talk 11:49, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E, if you can do a run-through on sources, formatting and any writing/style issues that jump out at you, I'd appreciate it, I've helped Pumpkin a little on this one, but enough that I am too blurry-eyed to see it clearly any more. Be good for a total outsider to look at it, and like our horse articles, to point out places where it could be gibberish to laypeople. Montanabw(talk) 00:01, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low Readership: Low to High Readership: High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs   Cleanup
Readership: Low Henry Sandford   Readership: High Godfrey Giffard
Readership: Low Lawrence of St Martin   Readership: Medium Earconwald
Readership: Medium John Boste   Readership: Low Martialis (P. Aelius)
Readership: Low John of Oxford   Merge
Readership: Medium Robert Braybrooke   Readership: Low Hinkeyville, Iowa
Readership: Medium John of Sittingbourne   Readership: High People of Ethiopia
Readership: Medium Thomas Langton   Readership: Medium Boughton under Blean
Readership: High Germ-X   Add sources
Readership: Medium William Chillenden   Readership: Medium International Society of the Descendants of Charlemagne
Readership: High Ceolnoth   Readership: Medium Richard Courtenay
Readership: Medium Chief Wampage   Readership: Medium Bosel
Readership: Low Simon Sydenham   Wikify
Readership: Low James Goldwell   Readership: Low Colin Salisbury
Readership: Medium Reginald (sub-prior)   Readership: Low James Haddon
Readership: Low Roger of Salisbury (Bishop of Bath and Wells)   Readership: Medium Mary Carruthers
Readership: Low Ascelin (bishop)   Expand
Readership: High Robert Neville   Readership: High Indonesian language
Readership: Low Henry of Lexington   Readership: High Abbaye aux Dames
Readership: Medium Roger de Bailleul   Readership: High Oklahoma City Public Schools

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review

It was a difficult article to judge how much exposition to give. Thank you for your comments, which were excellent. Happy new year,--Wehwalt (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries at all. I went ahead and watchlisted it so if you want more input/etc feel free to just comment on the PR and I'll notice (sooner or later). Ealdgyth - Talk 22:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It may be a bit piecemeal; I don't have many of my sources with me, but will be home tomorrow night. I did bring Jones with me :) so I can make a start.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Henry continues...

Work on the redraft of Henry II continues... There are couple of bits I still need to finish off to form a first draft, but the general structure is there. It is, however, clearly too long at the moment. (I think I could get away with something of a similar length to John at FAC, but not much more) and I've red-marked a couple of sub-articles I'll look to create with the spare details as I edit a couple of bits down over the next week (there is already some spare material stacking up on another sandbox page). There are clearly a lot of bits to sort out, but if you get a chance in the next few days, any early thoughts on the overall balance/weighting/tone of the draft would be greatly valued... (NB: you'll notice that this time I'm trying out doing the wiki-linking last of all, to see if that doesn't avoid the overlinking problem of my last few articles!) Hope you had a good Christmas, Hchc2009 (talk) 16:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

YOu may want to check out Wikipedia:The Core Contest - Our friend Henry II of England is on the list. I've signed up to work on a few things, but left Henry up in the air for you. Plus you may find some other interesting articles ... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have signed up! Almost there with the first draft now... :) Hchc2009 (talk) 10:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not getting back to you on this sooner; I did intend to, it just slipped my mind. I think Lemurbaby was a little harsh to quickfail it- I've given badly written, unsourced pop culture articles a chance before, and I'm someone who's certainly not scared to fail poor articles! I also disagree with some of the criticisms made. I do have some sympathy (broadly) for the idea that "it would be perfectly acceptable to include the information [from the primary sources] with a caveat indicating the limitations on the source's reliability"; for instance, a line like

Gervase of Canterbury, writing in [decade], made claims xyz. Later historians have concluded that claims x and z are false.

might be a good addition, especially as this is such a tiny article. Articles like this are, naturally, very difficult, and when reviewing them I aim to be particularly critical (as you perhaps know!) to offset the fact that they're so very short. On the other hand, GA was, in its early days, often touted as a project to recognise articles on subjects about which little is known, so not appropriate for FAC. I think a discussion about the appropriateness of a renomination/rereview could probably be had on the GAC talk page. There's perhaps also a discussion to be had about the appropriateness of articles like this at GAC, and even the possibility of merging this content elsewhere (though that's not a notion I would support). I'd be happy to have a chat with Lemurbaby (who I will be notifying of my comment here) and/or start a discussion on the appropriate talk page, if you like. J Milburn (talk) 02:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was just a bit .. err... put out by the quick fail. But not enough to go through the hoops of a reassessment - I wanted a second opinion from someone besides Malleus (and someone who is frequently quite critical of my articles, which is good!) on whether or not to even try again. My opinion is that given the nature of the office - all of the English archbishops deserve their own articles - especially when (as in this case) they have Oxford Dictionary of National Biography articles also. I generally am not afraid to have critical commentary on what I've written - and welcome outside views - especially because I know I'm familiar with the subject matter and look to the GA process as a good way to get outside non-specialist opinions. I'm fine with renoming - that's not a problem. If you have any further suggestions before I do so, please feel free to rip into the article on its talk page!
It's been a pretty frustrating couple of weeks for me. Watching Malleus get ripped to shreds isn't much fun for someone who has always had only good interactions with him and seen only the great amounts of help and work he's put forth. I almost feel like I've lost my right hand, and certainly lost one of my most consistent collaborators and helpful co-editors, who was never afraid to tell me I was out of line or that I'd written nonsense. It's been hard to get back into the idea of editing and I've not had much joy of the two most recent GA reviews I'm in either - I must be writing especially dense and incomprehensible prose lately and it's got me feeling useless. And with no Malleus to co-edit with ... well... a lot of the joy of the site has gone for me. Thanks for the second opinion, I may lean more on you to help out with the missing spot of Malleus. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 02:58, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're more than welcome to lean on me; your articles fascinate me, and if I can help with them, I'd love to. I'd say a renom is appropriate, but the best thing to do before then would be to make an effort to encorporate some material from the primary sources, making explicit their questionable reliability if you are able to without drifting into original research. I'd be happy to offer a full review (tomorrow, as I'm up far later than I intended already) but, seeing as we've had this conversation here, offering the GA review itself probably wouldn't be appropriate. J Milburn (talk) 03:10, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no, I'd not expect you to pick up the review - but I'd welcome suggestions before I renom. And thanks, it's been a downer of a month, quite honestly! Ealdgyth - Talk 03:12, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pain fitzJohn has two capitula

Welcome to the 2012 WikiCup

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially began at the start of 2012 (UTC), and so you are free to claim any content from after that time. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 13:27, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ealdgyth, and Happy New Year. :) FYI, I have nominated the Franco-Mongol alliance article for FA status. Since you are listed as one of the more frequent editors, I wanted to let you know about the nom in case you wanted to participate. Best, --Elonka 19:32, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully this nom will go better than the last one. I'll try to check it over in the next few days - I'm a bit backlogged with peer review and other reviewing... plus I signed up on a whim for the WikiCup as well as Wikipedia:The Core Contest - that'll teach me to get ambitious! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks and no worries, I just wanted to make sure you were in the loop. Good luck with the competitions! --Elonka 19:40, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited John de Gray, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Belleek (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New year, new hat

Ning-ning (talk) 17:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gods. No. I would not be caught DEAD in that... ugh! Ealdgyth - Talk 18:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd take the pony, though! Montanabw(talk) 22:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paulí de York

Hello, I just translated Paulinus of York to catalan (ca:Paulí de York), and I submitted it to peer review since I obviously think it has FA potential. A user asked me two things that maybe you can answer:

  1. When was he revered exactly? Why? Which pope was it?
  2. Do you know more about his relics? what are them? About the festivities (10 october), do you know if there are any celebrations in England?

Thank you, I hope you can provide me with the information (maybe it isn't available??). You can answer me in my disc or better in ca-wiki (ca:Usuari Discussió:Arnaugir). Thanks in advance--Arnaugir (talk) 21:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paulinus was never formally canonized - his sainthood predates the formal process by a few hundred years. His relics (if there ever were any) are likely long lost - when King Henry VIII of England dissolved the monasteries (see Dissolution of the Monasteries) many shrines were plundered, and those that survived that were often destroyed in the next 100 years or so. Very few relics survive from English churches or monasteries. Hope this helps! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Migration period

You changed a "c. 400 to 800" to "around 400 to 800", leaving a comment that it avoids "jargon". There are a couple of minor issues with that. First, "c." had to go--most abbreviations are unnecessary here, so it was easy to replace "c." with "circa". "Circa" is fairly common, but one might consider that jargon. As is, just having an abbreviation was sufficient for a change, so you did not really fix "jargon". On the other hand, given that the piece appears to lie in your area of interest, I hope you will set aside some time in the future to do some revisions to Migration period. There are many things wrong with it, with a single abbreviation being one of the most minor. Alex.deWitte (talk) 03:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's on my list for work, eventually. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Horse exhibition

You might be interested to know that the British museum will have its first exhibition on the horse from 24 May to 30 September. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cruel, cruel, cruel. I'm going to be soooo stuck in America... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pu up the URL when it goes up; sometimes those museum sites make good sources for our horse articles! Montanabw(talk) 01:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Main page appearance: Justus

This is a note to let the main editors of Justus know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 5, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 5, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Justus (died between 627 and 631) was the fourth Archbishop of Canterbury. He was sent from Italy to England by Pope Gregory the Great, on a mission to Christianize the Anglo-Saxons from their native Anglo-Saxon paganism, probably arriving with the second group of missionaries despatched in 601. Justus became the first Bishop of Rochester in 604, and attended a church council in Paris in 614. Following the death of King Æthelberht of Kent in 616, Justus was forced to flee to Gaul, but was reinstated in his diocese the following year. In 624 Justus became Archbishop of Canterbury, overseeing the despatch of missionaries to Northumbria. After his death he was revered as a saint, and had a shrine in St Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Points and laughs* Sucks to be you :) (Actually, I probably shouldn't do that, karma will put one of "mine" on the front page when I'm on vacation or something...) Dana boomer (talk) 23:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The worst thing about having 40 some FAs is... the odds are against me managing to keep them off the front page. Gods. Tomorrow. Lovely. THAT'll make the visitation tonight just so much MORE fun... I think daBomb hates me...Ealdgyth - Talk 18:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so I won't do what I want to do to a certain person we all know, too many other fish to fry. let me know when life on WP is getting dull, I'm waiting for the opportunity... Montanabw(talk) 01:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting read. My finger is on the protect button if things get out of hand --Guerillero | My Talk 02:14, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Usually the obscure early bishops/archbishops are pretty easy TFAs... they just get the usual "poopy-head" stupidness and usually some decent gnoming edits. THe ones I hate are the high medieval bishops... they get ... odd. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ethelnoth

Hi Ealdguty, I left you a question here. If this edit is unproblematic (that is, if your fifth edition has that information too), then I can pass the article. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TPS alert ...

Would GREATLY appreciate anyone able to acquire by hook or by crook The Family of Dinan in England in the Middle Ages AND provide a reliable translation... I'm not asking for much, am I? I can dream... See.. if the WMF was REALLY wanting to be helpful, they'd provide this sort of service... yeah, right. Dream on. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help ... but I'm seeing Ealdgyth reviews all over FAC-- thanks !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I'm going to be within 12 miles of a copy from next Wednesday. It's in the reference section of Exeter Central. Ning-ning (talk) 09:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy - won't get to a FAC today until this evening - but I think I cleaned up all the loose ends on any reviews I've done. I'm off to do some bookstore shopping later today, yay! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Query ...

Replies on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 18:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you don't have the review watchlisted, I've gotten through most things, and would appreciate additional or updated guidance as appropriate. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll get right on that. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 15:38, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TPS alert ...

I need two pages from this journal (Transactions of the Radnorshire Society) in volume 71, (2001) pp. 168-169. It's an article by Andrew Breeze "The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 1053 and the killing of Rhys ap Rhydderch". Ealdgyth - Talk 20:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Cavila (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]