User talk:Brewcrewer/Archives/2008/September

Mug shots

I started a thread here: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Mug_shots. Would you mind giving input? Thankyou. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin

Thanks for your note. I restricted my reformatting to one section at a time. One reference at a time is very inefficient. I just went back and did a check to see how much of your previous edit to the Family section was reverted. The edit conflict removed content that you added to the first paragraph — "The family lives in Wasilla, about 45 miles (72 km) north of Anchorage" from the first paragraph and a few references that you removed. My apologies. I did purposefully make a two wording changes.

Thanks for your work on the article. — ERcheck (talk) 05:04, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. At this time, it's really impossible to do large scale edits to the article. This article has really gone nuts. It has been edited on average an edit every minute and a half since the rumors of her nomination started. I have yet to come across such a phenomenon here at Wikipeida. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

If you're interested

I wrote Lebanon in the Eurovision Song Contest, you may be interested since they withdrew because of the Israel issue. If you want to proofread too that would be great because I want to get it up to GA status. Grk1011 (talk) 12:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look at it. But be careful what you wish for, you might not agree with my edits. However, don't hesitate to revert my edits if you don't agree with them, my version isn't necessarily better than yours. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

What's your opinion on the category "Israel-Lebanon conflict" too? Grk1011 (talk) 15:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Was thinking about that, but than though the better of it. The article, Israeli-Lebanese conflict, which seems to be the parent of the cat, mainly refers to military conflicts between the two countries. But I don't have a major problem with its addition. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I looked in "Politics of Lebanon" which seems plausible but that category mainly has articles about political parties and such. I'd say go for "Israel-Lebanon conflict". Grk1011 (talk) 15:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

True, the articles in the category are mostly about political parties, but the subcategories in the category are more about "real politics" i.e. Category:Israel-Lebanon conflict and Category:Foreign relations of Lebanon. But as you wish, just switch the cats. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Is the network singular or plural, I thought singular, but you changed it. We usually only use the plural when we say Lebanon (country) and its broadcaster, but idk. Also, its too bad that the other site that has tons of info Oikotimes.com, updated their site and didn't archive the the older articles, there would be many more articles about Lebanon, maybe we can use the wayback machine? Grk1011 (talk) 17:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the singular/plural. I think I'm finished for now, I hope I didn't totally ruin the article :-) I wonder if the expansion it went through the last couple of days make it eligible for a DYK? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Its just under 3x expansion, needs 5 for DYK, but i found two more sources and I'll see if I can add a little more to the article. Thanks for all your help, I'm going to put it up for Good Article status when I'm done. Grk1011 (talk) 18:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

It just passed the GA review! Thanks for your help! Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 22:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

lol. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 22:20, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

embrace the love

you totally know this made me want to Twinkle-bomb you, right? :p TravellingCari 02:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

LOL. That guy did not catch me in the right mood. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

figured as much. I know you won, my doorman was happy. All Else OK? TravellingCari 04:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

oh wow, I didn't know that you're such a fancy gal that you have a doorman. I guess I have to treat you with a bit more respect. A bit stressed these days, but otherewise I'n doin fine :-) Thanks for asking. I hope all is well with you despite your lack of October plans ;-)--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's harder to find a non-doorman building these days. We're not talking concierge type, but rather security and delivery. It's a good system. I have October plans, both football and baseball. Your Mutts had a bigger lead with fewer games to play last year, for that matter so did the '78 Sox. It ain't over :p. Hope your other stressors go away. TravellingCari 14:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

What are your football plans? You better not be a Giant fan, cuz I won't be able to rib you. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 18:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Guilty as charged, since the day my 5th grade teacher brought Phil Simms in to meet our class. TravellingCari 18:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, luck you! You probably remember it like it was yesterday. No? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and then I feel old when I realise how many years ago it was. Was right before they won in '91 so doubly cool. No one was going to forget that. TravellingCari 16:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Was that after he lost his job or before? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Before, just before he broke his...ankle was it? I can't remember what it was. Rumours abounding here about other QBs losing their jobs, but I don't see that happening. PS: Instant replay is dumb, even when it goes in their favor. TravellingCari 02:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Mike'd Up

So the fact that the host of the show himself states that the following guests have been contracted to appear regularly on the show is not a reliable source? I have to wait for Bob Raismann or Phil Mushnick to report it in their article first? Who by the way get their material from listening to the show. That doesn't make sense. How about the fact that they are listed on the WFAN website in the Francesa audio files. That should be a reliable source enough. Hobbomock (talk) 22:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, and it does make sense. There is a strict rule against original research. Contentious articles would be crazy if everyone added what they personally saw and heard. Although the rules' applicability doesn't seem to be correct when applied to this specific situation, we must abide by the original research rule, and can't decide that we will abide by the original research rule sometimes and sometimes we won't. If you can get a clip where he Mike states that they will be his guests, that, as a primary source, would be great. But clips of interviews don't establish that they are his official guests. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANK

go, enjoy :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travellingcari (talk • contribs) 22:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoo hoo!

Hi Brewcrewer, Thank you for your welcome cookies. I actually do have a question regarding my Wikipedia entry. I was told it was flagged for deletion for being too advertising based. It is simply an explanation of what "Whoo hoo" means to WaMu. How would you suggest it be changed? I don't see it being any different than the way "Got Milk?" was described on its page or "Think Different" for apple was described. Just curious if you had any educated advice on what could change to help it be more neutral. Thank you, and look forward to hearing back from you. Rosangela1985 (talk) 06:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, my apologies for deleting someone else's post it was not intentional. I really appreciate your reposting my entry. I was reading your conversation between the other Wikipedia people and I understand that there is an element of too much WaMu promotion. If you could please just let me know what key parts are really too much I'd be happy to remove them. I guess I have just read this too many times to know what's not sounding neutral. I'm not sure even something that you do, but if you could help this "noobie" out I would really appreciate it! Rosangela1985 (talk) 17:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

From what I understand, it's not the WaMu promotion that concerned the deleting administrators, it was the ad agency's promotion. It usually isn't a specific word or line that makes something promotional-like, rather it's the general context of an article. Hopefully, I'll be able to play around with the article a bot more in the next few days so that we can move it into the mainspace. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

If you would like to improve the article, a good place to start would be to find reliable sources for the information that you put into the article. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, do you know what its relationship is with this song? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

By reliable resources do you mean articles talking about the ad campaign or something more definitive than that? As for the song I don't think it has any relationship to the song other than the word whoo hoo. Rosangela1985 (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Also you mentioned above that you would play around with it to move it to the mainspace. What is considered the "mainspace" as opposed to what it is on right now? Rosangela1985 (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

News articles that talk about the ad campaign would be ideal. Right now it's on your userpage, and not officially part of the encyclopdia. The name of the article is not Whoo hoo!, but User:Rosangela1985/Whoo hoo!. After the article has been improved it can be moved into the mainspace, and the name of the article would become Whoo hoo! (and this redlink will turn into a bluelink). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I went to add a couple more links to news sites with articles talking about whoo hoo but its looks like on reference page they have already been added. Are these helpful to legitimize the page? I'm sorry I have so many questions I just want to make sure I'm doing everything I can to get this onto the actual encyclopedia. Rosangela1985 (talk) 19:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It might then just need some trimming and then it will be all ready to go. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Great well thank you so much for all your help! Rosangela1985 (talk) 18:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that my Whoo hoo! page has been edited quite drastically. Just wondering if that was you who did the editing or someone else? Are you the only one allowed to do the editing on the page or is pretty much anyone able to go in and make changes? Just a little curious as to the jurisdiction of editing on here. Rosangela1985 (talk) 18:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was I that pared down the article. To ensure that it stays in the mainspace and does not get deleted, I had to removed any hints of self-promotion and anything unsourced. Regarding who can edit the article, edit can, just like the vast majority of articles on Wikipedia. Also, if you would like to see who edited the article, you can click on the "history" tab that is located at the top of each article. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

talk pages

Hi, I don't really understand talpages but thanks for the warm welcome! Anagonzalez (talk) 01:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin

Hey Brewcrewer. Just a heads up that I restored some info that you removed here with a link to here. The quote comes from the 12th paragraph which says: "It was so cool growing up in this church and getting saved here," the governor says, "getting baptized by Pastor (Paul) Riley." --Cdogsimmons (talk) 22:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, OK. I looked it over twice, but didn't see it. Thanks. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey Brewcrewer

Congrats on the help you performed around Norma and helping me to be calm if things become too hot. Letting you become aware also, I've got Bonnie (name) on the network, new page. If the editors wanna guide me, please be free. Thank you, Brewcrewer.

See here-Bonnie (name)

Neurotic heart (talk) 00:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi there and thanks for contacting me. You did a pretty good job on the article. The only problem I have is the list of the people named Bonnie. There are probably hundreds of notable people named Bonnie who have Wikipedia articles. Listing all them would be an unnecessary waste of space, and listing only some of them would make it unfair to those not listed. Besides for this problem, to begin with, I don't see the benefit of having a list of names. People that are looking for an article about a specific person but can't really remember their full name would be far more likely to remember their last name then their first name. So the list doesn't really serve as a useful index. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

As you may have noticed, I moved the article to Bonnie (disambiguation). The reason is that the article covers more then just the first name. It also included the name of a city (which I added) and the name of hurricanes. I also took the liberty of removing the list of names per above. I hope what I did is not too disagreeable with you. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Excellent move. You're correct there are many hundreds of Bonnies under Wikipedia, so listing all the Bonnies may be a real waste for personal space and time. Kudos. Neurotic heart (talk) 03:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Why, thank you! Rarely does anyone agree with me around here ;-) --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 03:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Mike'd Up

On 11 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mike'd Up, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

In reply to your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Nevard here

In Wikipedia:Deletion_policy, in the subsection "deletion discussion" under section "Processes", it says "Follow the instructions at the top of the relevant process page."

In the instructions at the top of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, in the subsection called "The following are practices that should be avoided:", it says:

• Try to avoid contradictory or confusing recommendations, such as delete and merge, which can't be done as edit histories of merged text must be preserved (see also Wikipedia:GFDL).

People making very complicated recommendations like

• Delete unless the article about his father already contains a section about the previous owner of the car, in which case Keep, or if the template on the family article is modified to contain a section about the family heritage and the brothers article has the information about the will removed because this information is duplicative and may fit better in the lists, in which case Merge to a better target, or redirect if the target article is already too long.

Makes the closing administrator's job unreasonably difficult. The person making the recommendation should go find out all of those details, and make one succinct recommendation. Just to describe the research process that should be followed and expect somebody else to do it, is not helpful. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 18:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Please be more careful when adding comments - you lost an "l" in someone else' comment. - Eldereft (cont.) 05:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

AFD

You reverted my reversion immediately just now. I was about to post to the talk page to explain my reversion so your action was prhaps too hasty. Anyway, the text in question is best left while the matter is discussed so that other editors can see what we are talking about. Colonel Warden (talk) 20:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Tosontsengel (disambig)

...unless there aren't more than 2 Tosontsengel which I do not know. --katpatuka (talk) 12:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Technical help

Hi there, been on holiday so sorry for the delay. The problem was in the Iconstasis subbage. You need to close html tags, so where your Iconstasis subpage starts with a "div" tag, it needs to end with a "/div" tag. I fixed it for you - take a look. It seems to work fine now. Incidentally the image:Symbol support vote.svg should be used for Good Articles, rather than the FA star, which should really be only for featured articles. Good luck with getting some more symbols! Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 10:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Umm, I'm not some techie guru you know... I'm not sure what the problem is with your archives, the second one looks OK to me, just a bit empty? All that I know about archiving would come from Help:Archiving a talk page, so you're better off getting it from source rather than it filtering through my addled mind! Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 08:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

ITN

On 18 September, 2008, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article(s) 2008 Yemeni American embassy attack, which you created or substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the In the news candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 11:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem...article do better if they have more than one person's input. Thanks again, Spencer^T♦C 19:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Joe sernio

A tag has been placed on Joe sernio, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jordan Timmins (talk) 18:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: help offered

The Muhammad Ali article is very poorly sourced. One problem I have is over the term Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital. It is now called Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital but was once called NY Presbyterian Hospital: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_Presbyterian_Hospital

In 1984, when Ali was admitted to the hospital, it was called NY Presbyterian Hospial, so..what do I call the hospital...best regards and thanks in advance.

I think i can do one of those Columbia-Presbyterian Hospital thingies that you gave me on the newbie pages..not sure though

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F06E7DC173BF93AA2575AC0A962948260

btw, as you can see from the above posted link...it is half broken. This is not really a big deal because I can go to a local public library and confirm it on microfiche. Johndoeemail (talk) 06:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I will have to take a look at it a different time, my dumb real life doesn't give me too much time these days. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 23:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Cappy (Kirby)

A tag has been placed on Cappy (Kirby), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Olly₁₅₀ 22:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Kirbys and Cappys

Sorry about the quick redirect - I was actually trying to do what you were apparently doing, averting a quick delete. I put the redirect in for quick overwriting to save the spot. There's quite a bit out there in several contexts about the Cappys... now I'll just get out of your way. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks like it is back to a redirect. I don't have a strong opinion about it either way (I know nothing about the subject), but I get anal when it gets tagged and deleted for the wrong reasons. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I had to move fast after seeing it tagged - apparently, the Cappys have several roles in the Kirby game/anime series (I'm familiar only with the latter, thanks to my daughter). Apparently, the tagger knew even less about it than either of us... but have fun with it! 147.70.242.40 (talk) 22:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Baluchistan honor killings

Hi, thanks for the positive comment about my work on Israr Ullah Zehri. However, I'm not happy about your edit, or about the creation of the article entitled Baluchistan honor killings, which I think seriously understates the scale of the problem. There's no factual basis to assert that the phrase 'Baluchistan honor killings' refers only to a single incident, i.e. the five women who were buried alive in August 2008. Please refer to this Times article: [Three teenagers buried alive in 'honour killings'], which states that honor killings are common in Balochistan and other areas of Pakistan, and cites the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. The only distinguishing feature of the August incident in Balochistan is that the women were buried alive. Please either correct or reverse your edits - thanks. Rubywine (talk) 13:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what you're getting it. Would you like to rename the article, would you like the article deleted? Please explain. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 14:53, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying that the article massively understates the scale of the problem of honor killings, by stating that the title of the article refers to a single incident, although I'm sure that wasn't your intention. The practice of 'honor killing' is widespread and commonplace. Is there a good reason to have an article about honor killings in Baluchistan, as opposed to any other region? I can't think of one. I'm not a deletionist, so I'll leave the decision up to you - but I'd certainly prefer that your edit to Israr Ullah Zehri was reversed. Thanks. Rubywine (talk) 13:34, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I understand that it is commonplace, however we can only write what we are told by media sources. This specific honor killing got a lot of coverage in media sources so it was eligible for its own article and own "name". Stoning of Du'a Khalil Aswad is another such example. The main article, honor killing covers the general topic. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 09:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. There are plenty of other reputable, published sources which we're allowed to use besides media sources. The Asian Human Rights Commission and the records of the Pakistani Parliament are perfectly appropriate sources. In fact I would go so far as to say that slanting articles away from serious, scholarly research towards flash-in-the-pan media coverage (especially when it leads to the trivialisation of a really important issue!) is precisely what an encyclopaedia shouldn't be doing. Rubywine (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we really disagree. International media sources are the easiest sources to use because they are in English and they are easily found. I agree that serious scholarly-researched articles might be more appropriate for WP, but it for sure doesn't mean that "flash-in-the-pan" article should be deleted. When someone more competent than I writes a "scholarly - researched" article I would be more than glad to incorporate (and then delete, if deemed necessary) my "flash-in-the-pan" article into the greater article. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

24.61.243.203 (talk · contribs)

You have a response in my page. -- Alexf⁴² 10:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

WaMu

Well, there are $28.4 billion reasons to think that senior debt is not entirely irrelevant. And they are the one who saved the depositors. Otherwise the FDIC fund would be bankrupt today. I hardly see this as not belonging to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.195.119.31 (talk) 01:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Malalaï Kakar

Hi. If you are the editor who's additions I changed when I made this edit [1] please don't take it personally. Understand that I wasn't referring to you directly when I used the word "you". I really meant "in general, one shouldn't" rather than "you, Brewcrewer, can't". I've re-added the information [2], expanded it to keep the information from (what was presumably) your edit so as not to offend you and added a few references from well respected and reliable sources to support the information I've added. If you have any problems please feel free to let me know or revert the changes. Ha! (talk) 22:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but you caught me in a bad mood (My stupid Mets). Your point was well taken, and I shouldn't have put her age as 40 if the ref says late 30's. But in any case, her exact age is not really relevant to the actual story. Therefore, the current status of the article, with multiple references to multiple possible ages looks a bit silly. We shold decide on an age, and move on. Whatever. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 03:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Comic Relief(band)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Comic Relief(band), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Comic Relief(band) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Comic Relief(band), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 23:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, much thanks

I did not know you only had to do: to make a reference. I thought it was more WYSIWYG. I was looking at the bottom of the articles to figure out how to make a reference. But there was obviously nothing there. I thought when you edited the Mike and the Mad Dog article, you made reference 59, reference 60, then made reference 58, reference 59. I did not know that the Wikipedia software did it automatically. I was looking at the bottom of the page instead of looking at where the reference was created.

...I am rolling know..

As far as Columbia-Press is concerned, I have been going there every month for the last 20 years and stopped going there about 2 years ago. So they changed there name within the last 2 years I guess. This is probably just another reminder that verifiable sources are more important than personal experience. You were not confused...I was :)

That Muhammad Ali article is seriously missing some citations and, my goodness, he must be one of the most quotable persons in the history of sports.

But thanks so very much for all your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johndoeemail (talk • contribs) 02:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)