User talk:Penguins Are Animals 5327/archive3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you have any information on Rav Michel Yehudah Lefkovits that you could contribute to his article?

Jeffrey Pool[edit]

This is not a terribly good article, but I'm not sure that NPOV is the right tag - see my comment on the discussion page.--Runcorn 20:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine; thanks. --Runcorn 06:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alicia Alighatti[edit]

Thanks for the support! I submitted this to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts -- is there a guideline that would let me count it as straight vandalism? NawlinWiki 14:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I put those new users I welcome on my watchlist for a few days. I notice you gave User:Muncho the standard test1 notice on his talk page:

"Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Bachrach44 16:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)"

Since he had written the article himself and done most of the edits, I'm not sure he was really screwing up the page. I'm also not sure that he would understand what you mean by a test, given the several hours he appears to have put into the article. Maybe I'm missing something. Perhaps some coaching (mixed with encouragement) as to what you're looking for would be helpful at this point. --A. B. 18:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your correction -- thanks!--A. B. 18:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Dezidor victim of Cerveny kohout

Can You Help Me?[edit]

I created the article on Jonah Meyerson, and I was wondering if you could help me upload a picture onto the page. The picture I would love to use is on:

If you could get that one of him in the grey shirt with the white background onto his page, I would be grateful. I know I have been editing things and not doing things correctly, but I would like your help. He's a talented actor and he deserves a Wikipedia page, complete with picture. Thanks again. ~Fame~

Can You Help Me?...AGAIN?![edit]

I figured out how to upload the file and all that good stuff, but how do i convert a BMP file into a JPG or whatever it is? I need to know in order to upload the pic. Thanx.

Vandalism[edit]

Please refrain from editting other uers' contributions, such as the image that was uploaded on the Alicia Alighatti page. The image is a legitimate contribution and should not be reverted. There is no reason to remove it again, so stop using vandalism as an excuse to remove an image that you personally disagree. Wikipedia has a no point of view policy so please stop influencing it with your own and trying to censor content that you find disagreeable. Clever curmudgeon 19:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Confucianism, you will be blocked from editing. ---B- 06:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see, you didn't post the offending content, you merely corrected the grammar of it and left it in place. While I apologize for accusing you of posting it I daresay you are still at least an accomplice after the fact. Correcting the grammar of such obvious vandalism is like touching up the graffiti on a wall. ---B- 22:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not edit other revert edits to other users' talk pages that does not concern[edit]

You deleted an entire string of conversation I had with User talk:NawlinWiki on his talk page. Do not edit other users' conversations that are not addressed to you. Clever curmudgeon 13:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hear, hear! 71.30.146.165 22:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of edits simply due to religious perspective is not ethical[edit]

Bachrach44 removed four of my recent edits simply due to the fact that he disagreed with my religious perspective.

Bachrach44 said: For the record, pages by right-wing evangelical Christian groups predicting the end of days do not belong on pages dedicated to Judaism. --Bachrach44 18:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

However, my edits did relate to the pages. Bachrach44 simply did not want my religious perspective published.

I respect Bachrach44's right to his religious opinion and expect the same in return.

Bachrach44's perspectives relating to the Sanhedrin and the Noahides are from a Jewish view, while mine is Christian.

Bachrach44 tried to imply that my subject was "predicting end of days." However, my main subject is the purpose of the Sanhedrin and Noahides. Their end purposes, according to them, is to bring about the "end of days."

I pray that my edits will be restored and proper ethics and respect may be shared between us.

Thank you and God Bless, Brad L. Burge Brad 19:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neither is spamming wikipedia to promote your own site :-) response here.

Liozna[edit]

Shalom, I'd appreciate if you could take a look over at Liozna and vote for or against deletion.

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

Shkoyach!

ACS[edit]

I see you have reverted the Assumption article. Would you by any chance go to Assumption, or did you come upon the edits by chance? Also, the two editors that are placing these edits on the article are grade nine students from assumption. i have antoher question. These images of teachers are under free liscense, but I must ask if we can include a staff profile with a famous quote, ex. Ron ROss, the librarian is known for his "NO VIDEO GAMES" policy, and Mr Jamie Stewart, with "NO HOBOISM!"?--AeomMai 19:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not blame the IP adress, it was the two mentioned above. The IP is shared by at least 600 students, so their is bound to be some vandalism.--209.202.75.74 19:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and does that also mean no pictures of the teachers may be posted?--AeomMai 20:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you.

It is true. JP did win the midget(junior) boys track and feild award at OFSAA(I cant remember what it stands for).

File:Motherussia.jpg Hello Bachrach44, and thank you for your support at my request for adminship, which ended with an awe-inspiring 86/1/2 result. I plan to do much with my shiny new tools - but I'll start slow and learn the ropes at first. Please deluge me with assignments and requests - I enjoy helping out. For Mother Russia!! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polite request: Please explain your actions re the reversion of this page on my talk page. THE KING 14:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Category:Sephardic Orthodox rabbis[edit]

Hi Bachrach44, you'll be pleased to know that I've created a new, objective category - Sephardic Orthodox rabbis. Unlike many other recently created categories that have been bitterly disputed, this category doesn't rank Rabbonim by how Frum they are or their political beliefs. In short, it's absolutely impossible to argue why any of the Rabbis have been placed in it - because of course they're all Sephardi. I hope you like it and that this simplifies matters. Many thanks, Nesher 16:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vfd and Vfm[edit]

Hi Bachrach44, please see

Many thanks, Nesher 21:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Websense Edit to Ulysses article[edit]

Bachrach44, I tested this claim myself and don't know how to cite that. I went to the online version of Ulysses and 7/18 or however many I said of the chapters were blocked by Websense at my place of work. Is there a way to note this verification? Crasshopper 13:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Bachrach44! I have created Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism. Please put it on your watchlist, and please add relevant AfD's as you find them. Cheers. - CrazyRussian talk/email 19:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


UPDATE[edit]

Hey Bachrach44. I just realized that I did misread it. Sorry for the misunderstanding. It happens. Peace, no war.

--Mc2006 05:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC) MC2006[reply]

Thanks from Yanksox[edit]

Hey, Penguins Are Animals 5327/archive3, thanks for supporting my RfA, with a tally of 104/4/7...


I am now an admin!!!


I was and still am very flattered by all the kind comments that I recieved, I will also take into account the comments about how I could improve. I guarantee I will try my best to further assist Wikipedia with the mop. Feel free to drop in and say hi or if you need anything. Again, thank you so much! Yanksox 07:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting Directly vs. Indirectly and POV[edit]

Unless you can point out exactly where in WP:POV quoting an expert directly is more POV than merely referencing what they say, I'm going to revert the article71.74.209.82 20:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your contact info[edit]

Hi Bachrach: Hope all is well. You have not enabled your Wikipedia Email feature in your "tool box" on the left hand side of your user page. Sometimes editors overlook that when it's a useful way of staying in touch with other editors. Best wishes. Shabbat Shalom. IZAK 13:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

Hi, please join in the discussion on the Noahide Laws talk page about cleaning it up etc. Thanks! Chavatshimshon 08:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can[edit]

Category:Palestinian rabbis[edit]

What does one make of the new Category:Palestinian rabbis and Category:Talmud rabbis in Palestine, should they be renamed to something like Category:Rabbis of ancient Palestine? so that it does not connect, and become confused with, the way the word "Palestinian" is used today (meaning the very unJewish modern Arab Palestinians, who have nothing to do with these rabbis!) Thanks. IZAK 09:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not using "Palestine" or "Palestinian" for Talmud and rabbis to avoid confusion[edit]

Note: Many articles about the rabbis of the Talmud and Mishnah are derived from the archaic Jewish Encyclopedia, published between 1901-1906, over one hundred years ago (when the Middle East was still under the thumb of the Ottoman Turks) and which used the archaic expressions "Palestine" when referring to the Land of Israel, and to the Jews living in the areas of the historical Land of Israel as "Palestinians." This is a big mistake that requires constant attention and correction, especially when copying and editing articles from the Jewish Encyclopedia or from similarly archaic sources such as Easton's Bible Dictionary (1897). At this time, no-one uses the term/s "Palestinian/s" (in relation to anything associated with Jews or the land they lived in and which they regarded as their homeland) nor by any type of conventional Jewish scholarship, particularly at the present time when the label "Palestinian" is almost entirely identified with the Palestinian Arabs who are mostly Muslims. Finally, kindly take note that the name Palestinian Talmud is also not used and it redirects to the conventional term Jerusalem Talmud used in Jewish scholarship. Thank you. IZAK 13:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not using "Palestine" or "Palestinian" for Talmud and rabbis[edit]

Makes sense, I'll try to remember. However, there was a period when everyone referred to the land of Israel as Palestine. Therefore, to say something like "in 1940 Shlomo Pines emigrated to Israel" would appear to be an anachronism. Don't we have to use the term "Palestine" during a certain period for historical accuracy? What is this period? From Roman conquest until 1948? Thanks. Dfass 15:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Dfass: Note: The term "Land of Israel" is an old one of Biblical origin, whereas the name "Palestine" is considered offensive by many Jews because it was coined by the Romans after they crushed the Jews of Judea-- and needless to say today it refers exclusively to the Arab Palestinians and never to Jews. Note also that the "Land of Israel" article is not the same as the "Israel" article because the latter refers to the modern post-1948 Jewish state. My main concern was about rabbis from the Mishnaic and Talmudic eras, up until about a hundred years ago being called "Palestinians" on Wikipedia as a follow-through from the many articles that have been copied and pasted from the old Jewish Encyclopedia and which collectively create the wrong impression. Such are the hazards of relying on dated information, long-discarded terminology, and unsuitable writing and communication styles. Wikipedia as a modern encyclopedia should not be relying on archaic terms such as "Palestinian rabbis" that could potentially cause grave misunderstanding. I think that from the time of the British Mandate of Palestine, also shortened to "the British Mandate" and sometimes "Palestine," that Jews were associated with those terms from 1923 until 1948 when the modern State of Israel was declared. I hope that you have noted that I am most definitely NOT saying that whenever the Jewish Encyclopedia uses the term "Palestine" that the single word "Israel" should be used -- obviously I do not mean that because when Israel is used alone on Wikipedia it refers to the MODERN State of Israel only. On the other hand, what I am saying is that when the word "Palestine" is used in archaic sources that predate modern Israel, and when writing about Judaic topics that relate to the Middle Ages, Talmudic, or Biblical times, then the better, more accurate, less controversial term for Wikipedia to use is "Land of Israel" which is historically what the Jewish people, and everyone else in academic life, have and do still call it. Hope I have clarified myself, and thanks for caring. IZAK 12:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, I think I get the drift. I will pay attention to it in the future. (Don't be so down on the Jewish Encyclopedia though! It's an incredible work, written by some tremendous scholars. I think these articles significantly raise the quality of Wikipedia, whether their English is somewhat archaic or not. If you compare a JE-borrowed Wikipedia article to one written by "the masses," you can't but be struck by the difference in quality and scholarship. The typical Jewish Wikipedian (myself included) is not capable of producing articles of anything like that caliber. Most Wikipedians cannot even be bothered to cite the sources for the couple of factoids they manage to dredge up from their memory of 10th grade.) Thanks again for the clarification. Dfass 15:16, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hi Dfass: I am not down on the old Jewish Encyclopedia at all, and I fully agree with you that it is a more than masterly work of scholarship. But is was written in the context of the culture of over a hundred years ago as a product of the nineteenth century! My specific concern at this stage was only about how the meaning and application of the word/s "Palestine" and "Palestinian" are getting "lost in the cut-and-paste process" because one hundred years ago, "Palestinian" was used as an academic adjective as for example, together with "rabbis" ("Palestinian rabbi/s") or the Talmud ("Palestinian Talmud"). Up until 1948 the words "Palestine" and "Palestinians" still had application/s to Jews because of the existaence of the British Mandate of Palestine until 1948 in the territories of historically Jewish Land of Israel. Since then, the name "Palestine" and "Palestinians" has shed any connection to Jews and the modern Jewish State of Israel which was set up in contradistinction to an Arab Palestine. Particularly since the rise of the PLO (the Palestine Liberation Organization), following the 1967 Six-Day War, the term and notion of "Palestine" and "Palestinians" has become thoroughly and exclusively connected with the Arab Palestinians to the point that no-one (not in politics, academics, the media, religion, etc) associates the name "Palestine" and "Palestinians" with the Jews or Judaism, so that it can safely be said that the notion of a "Palestinian Jew" is an archaic anachronistic discarded notion. So when cutting and pasting articles from the one hundred year old Jewish Encyclopedia, one should not fall into a "time warp trap" by blindly pasting articles from it without some sensible updates, and not to inadvertantly recreate and foster terminology for Jews and Jewish Israelis that neither they nor the world accepts or recognizes. One needs to be conscious that the term "Land of Israel" is a well-established name that has survived for a long time and is still the preferred term of choice when speaking in modern terms, so that Jews not be confused with Arabs and vice versa. By speaking of the Category:Rabbis of the Land of Israel, meaning rabbis (or any Jews) associated with a historic geographic area, one also avoids problems such as calling pre-1948 rabbis or people "Israelites" -- used only for people in the Biblical era or "Israelis" -- which refers to citizens of the modern State of Israel. Thanks for your input. IZAK 07:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WUSTL Project[edit]

Hello, I noticed you've made edits to WUSTL articles or that you are in some way connected to Washington University in St. Louis. I thought you might want to become a member of Washington University in St. Louis WikiProject . We've recently built the project page and started a drive to improve articles in the WUSTL series. Please take a look to edit an article or add one of your own. Once an article's status has been agreed upon, feel free to stop by and lend a hand in getting it to featured article status. Hope you can participate!
--Lmbstl 12:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for taking the time to comment on my my RfA, which was successful. I learned a lot from the comments, I appreciate everything that was said, and I'll do my best to deserve the community's trust. Thanks again! And thanks for your kind words and support. --Shirahadasha 05:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Distances in astronomy articles[edit]

Generally, a few of us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomical objects who have been editing the articles on galaxies do not use the distance measurements given in amateur astronomy websites, NASA press releases, or other websites designed for the general public (like Astronomy Picture of the Day). These distance estimates are usually rough guesses based on the galaxies' redshifts (see Hubble's law) and not true distance measurements. Consequently, the distances based on estimates from redshifts may be quite inaccurate. Please do not use these sources as references for distance information in the future. Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 14:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For an example, see NGC 2915. Astronomy Picture of the Day apparently listed the distance as 15 Mly. A refereed scientific paper by Karachentsev et al. gives the distance as 12.3 Mly. This is an error of 20%. Dr. Submillimeter 14:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Hi Bachrach44: Could you please Email me via my user page at Email User:IZAK. Thank you so much. IZAK 08:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1901[edit]

Hi Bachrach. You left a note on jtdirl's talk page about an entry in the article 1901. jtdirl is no longer contributing to Wikipedia (I haven't got round to unwatching his page yet), so I have taken the liberty of tagging the Zero-ists article that was linked to in that entry. If there is no response in the next week or so you could safely delete the entry, I imagine. Cheers, Scolaire 23:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Six-Day War[edit]

Greetings. There is a bug in your AWB software! It changed the word "thrusts" to "throughsts". I have changed it back. Unless this overzealousness in the program can be debugged, it would probably be a good idea to inspect for such unwanted consequences before updating articles. Can you put the word out to other users of this program to be aware (or wary) of this problem? Thank you. Hertz1888 20:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response. I'm glad it was such an easy fix. All our problems should be so small. Hertz1888 22:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the Western Bluebird was changed from a "thrush" to a "throughsh" :-) Nyttend 02:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bachrach44. An automated process has found and removed a fair use image used in your userspace. The image (Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Bachrach44/archive2. This image was removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image was replaced with Image:Example.jpg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image to replace it with. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 23:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typo correction[edit]

Just so you know, your edit here was a mistake. Goten is a character's name, it should not have been changed to "Gotten". Just a heads up in case you edit any more DBZ-related pages. VegaDark 19:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the speedy deletion tag from this article. It is clearly not nonsense, and the the subject seems notable enough to merit inclusion based what I've dug up from other sources. It badly needs a rewrite to address WP:OR and WP:RS concerns, and I have tagged it as such. If you wish, you are certainly free take it to AfD. Thanks, and take care. --Finngall talk 19:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just edited the Noah's ark article and then noticed you had locked it. Since I was able to edit it, I'm not sure if the lock was effective (or perhaps there's just a lag). If the former I just wanted to let you know about it. I also want to assure you that I have no opinion on whatever the edit dispute is, and I apologize if I unknowingly edited something controversial - I am simply trying to clean up bad spelling on wikipedia. --Bachrach44 13:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When an administrator protects an article, there is option for him or her to set the expiration date. I set it to be seven days from the time of protection, which corresponds to 01:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC) (as noted in the history). The protection template does not show the exact time at which the protection expires. Thus, the best possible option is to put the date of expiry (which was May 10, 2007). The reason you could edit the article is that the protection had expired. The template does not disappear automatically; either another user will remove the template or DumbBOT will do it. Since you have alerted me that the protection has expired, I have removed the template myself. -- tariqabjotu 16:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get one of your spelling checks on this article? Much appreciated! Lipsticked Pig 19:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, now that's service! THANKS! Lipsticked Pig 20:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OMG my spilleng sucks, thanks again, I'll try to start using spellcheckers more myself Lipsticked Pig 20:35, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Dear Bachrach, Thanks for the typo edits in the Sanbenito page. Much appreciated. --Cyril Thomas 01:46, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling fixes to talk page archives[edit]

Hi, you probably shouldn't be editing talk page archives - even for spelling. Best to just leave them be.-Localzuk(talk) 22:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added to this, there's no need to edit talk page comments at all (some people might even find it rude to have their words edited). Leave the typo fixing to articles. Cheers. Trebor 21:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC) Oops, just read your userpage. Sorry. Trebor 21:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful[edit]

Please be careful not to introduce errors when "correcting" spelling. "Turk" (with a capital letter) is an ethnic description. With no capital, "turk" is a young dynamic person eager for change. When you change the word "turk" to "Turk", you change the meaning of the sentence in which it appears, and when you do it while altering someone else's comments on a talk page, you can make it appear that he has made an ethnic slur when in fact he has not. In short: if you think all instances of "turk" should be "Turk", you are wrong. - Nunh-huh 04:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing up the article. --NEMT 09:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Pennsylvania[edit]

Hello there!

I'm writing to inform you that we are now forming the first local Wikimedia Chapter in the United States: Wikimedia Pennsylvania. Our goals are to perform outreach and fundraising activities on behalf of the various Wikimedia projects. If you're interested in being a part of the chapter, or just want to know more, you can:

Thanks and I hope you join up! Cbrown1023 talk 02:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Halberstam[edit]

You don't think we can say Halberstam follows Gamliel? Why not?Thewebthsp 17:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ASG broadcasters[edit]

I actually just referred to the article List of Major League Baseball All-Star Game broadcasters when filling in the TV sections for the articles. Highway99 18:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiping[edit]

I just reverted most of your "spelling corrections" in Wiping - that article is written in British English, and per WP:MOS switching language versions is not appreciated. -- Arwel (talk) 20:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chavos Yair[edit]

Are you a descendant of Yair Bacharach?--רח"ק | Talk | Contribs 23:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you[edit]

The Jewish Barnstar
Thank you for rating many articles part of WikiProject Judaism this is greatly appreciated Java7837 18:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Underconstruction[edit]

Sorry, but I'll be working on them very soon. In fact, I already am working on external links, but I will work hard on them, so don't think I'm trying to discourage or distract people. Thanks Soxrock 19:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Under construction/In use[edit]

This is in response to the comment left at User talk:Soxrock. You're referring to the {{inuse}} template. The under construction template is used to show other users that a page will be greatly expanded in a short time. The under construction tag is there so people don't delete articles for not having any information on them, and the template itself says that anybody can assist in expanding the article. The "in use" template, the one you're talking about, is the one that discourages other users from making edits for fear of edit conflicts, and it isn't on any of the articles. Ksy92003(talk) 19:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, no harm, no foul. I plan to keep them up for about 10 days or so. I will get to all of them eventually. Some I could probably already take off, but I'm not going to... yet. Soxrock 00:00, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:high five![edit]

A few short days ago, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Judaism has 899 article. Today it has 1381. You and I are probably largely responsible for this. :-) --Bachrach44 15:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Yasher koach! --Eliyak T·C 19:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, check out the most recent log at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Judaism articles by quality log. --Eliyak T·C 20:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

for correcting spelling in talk pages.

There are a few talk pages of important articles (for me) that I have corrected the entire talk page! I don’t understand why wikipedians don’t bother to run a spelling checker before posting. (I have also corrected the awful indentation of other editors in talk pages).

Thanks again,

Cesar Tort 17:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]