Talk:Kimi Finster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Biased , confusing Page I've been a rugrats fan since I have memory and I have followed the show even until now in All Grown Up, I know Kimi Finster enough to see that the contributors are exaggerating with their point of view about Kimi Finster.

The page has a lack of facts, most of the paragraphs are just speculating about uncertain events of the future or even episodes that might not be real at all.

Plus the page has a lot of irrelevant details, they even included episodes were Kimi was not shown at all which I think it's disrespectful for this encyclopedia.

Finally they are enlisting a lot of skills and traits (which aren't real or shown on the show) for this character but instead of explaining them they just quoted moments were Kimi appeared and the page goes on and on about those moments and repeating them constantly but nothing that could be essencial.

This page needs to be cleaned and the bias should let other contributors to put information too. Tamao 06:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Comment Most of the information here are based off of observations. Granted myself and NewEraOutlaw are both HUGE Kimi fans so maybe we REALLY got carried away but when I look at it, I do not see THAT MUCH Bias. Ok the stuff about Episodes were Kimi was not in can go, the stuff about Sister,Brother can go until it becomes official. Also, I do not see, with the skills and traits, as us going on and on about those moments. We make observations from the show and consider best possibilities. For example, Kimi IS an opportunist, she's done it one more than one occassion. Oh yeah, the couplings stuff ok we can get rid of too. Also, most of what we contribute are not exaggerations but mearly detailed obersvations. We look at details and listen to dialogue and take them into account, we look for patterns and put them into account. Finally, as stated before, we DO let others contribute, a lot of times we just trim their contributions that's all! The only ones we totally delete are the completely negative ones. We are just trying to keep this article stable and not end up like it did a couple of months ago where someone edited it to be completely negative and anti-Kimi, full of Kimi Bashing and stuff. Name one time we acted otherwise? Staredcraft
  • comment The observations you quoted are from fans of her, but you have to understand this is not a fan page, people can't bash her here because everybody has the right to add comments to make it more objective weather they are negative or positive, you guys have no right to delete other observations made by people who find some other things from what you see, Wikipedia does not belong to you, Now look at this : "There are many defining traits which set apart Kimi from the rest of her friends on "All Grown Up". " then you quoted a lot of moments were Kimi was on scenes but you didn't show a trait, besides traits are something the characters have all the time not just one episode key thing, that's just trying to fill the character, Why the episodes where Kimi was not can go in? if she wasn't there is irrelevant, again is a page about the character not a fan page,Brother,Sister especially can't go because is speculating and it's againts Wikipedia policy and is not just that random episode, it's ok if you list the future Kimi episodes but you are talking about possibilities that might not even occur on the show like Hiro being dead, you guys should wait for the episodes to air before adding any information regarding to them, the Kimi profile is pretty much repetitive, you need to mention Kimi's age, friends, hair color several times, when there are tons of pics and informantion regarding to it? one time people added Kimi is selfish which is true, and you guys deleted it, I just say Kimi is an ok character but it has its defects , wikipedia being an encyclopedia should have the good and the bad side of the character, being a rugrat fan I feel offended when people biased have their opinion and don't let other people to have it too, the page is for everybody, of course I like to see so much work on a wikipedia page and I'm glad you are huge fans who contribute a lot but you guys are not owners or editors, being fans of the character doesn't give you the right to edit other contributions, so just let other people contribute even if you don't like what you see and when you are here try to be objective more than being fans. Tamao 18:28, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Addressing the matter

Hey, guys. Just getting my two cents in. First of all, Tamao, you have demonstrated a severe dislike of Kimi, and used that biasedness in one of your edits on the page (where you claimed Kimi had some psychological disorder, is 'weak' and 'allowed herself to be manipulated by others', all of them demonstrably false entries.) Then, you removed two of our links on the main page, even though there are other fan sites on other character pages, to demonstrate the fan perception of characters. To be honest, Tamao, you are definitely not doing this in the best interest of the page...you are eliminating this because you have a clear dislike for the character, which is very, VERY contradictory to the rules of the Wikipedia.

On the matter of not 'having facts', consider the following:

  • All facts stated about Kimi are quoted from the episodes, with references tagged in paranthesis. On top of that, the fansites at the bottom of the page verify some of the information (the information on the character cards, for example.)
  • All quotes are also referred to from episodes, and noteworthy ones are placed in Trivia, the same as the other Rugrats character pages, and even on others (such as the Mortal Kombat character pages. Note that none have been penalised for this practice.
  • CHECK THE COOLTOONS NEWSLETTER. They give all details about up and coming episodes, including controversial ones such as 'Sister, Brother', which was taken down quickly (but captured by somebody). Speculation is merely predicting what may or may not be true according to the All Grown Up canon, and also serves to provide some insight as to what may eventually, or inevitably happen in the series.

Tamao, it is clear that you are the biased one here, and are using very unbased claims to remove this page. I have done my research on the matter, and have contributed to this page in the best way that I can. That isn't to say, however, that others have not contributed towards this page....check the 'History section'. As you can see, many people have contributed what they know towards the page, and your edits are the only ones that were removed on account of being biased against the character. My information sources are as follows:

  • Episode transcripts provided by http://agufan.web.aplus.net/ (the transcripts are currently down)
  • Luke's AGU fansite (which has several photo captures from the show, several of them verifying what is being claimed)
  • Super_Yo's All Grown Up fansite (contains the character cards from the Cooltoons website, which has some information which was used for the Statistics section)
  • Regular viewings of the All Grown Up episodes themselves (Curse of Reptar and Blindman's Bluff is currently on my computer)
  • The Cooltoons Newsletter (found on http://www.cooltoons2.com), which gives previews of episodes.
  • The message boards of Luke's AGU fansite, Super_Yo's AGU fansite, the NickDisk forums and others which gives a fair overview of what the reaction of the show in terms of the fandom is.


I have done my research on Kimi Finster's character, and have used what I know to contribute towards this site. Others have, as well. And if nobody but you had a problem with it and the similar way the others are structured:

Then it means that this whole thing was called on account of bias. When I find out the procedure for doing so, I am reporting you, Tamao, for abusing the Wiki and calling an unrightful deletion.

And staredcraft, do NOT do that whole 'Granted we are HUGE fans of Kimi' thing. The Wiki is meant to be a straightforward account of a discussed article, NOT an expression of fandom. I believe I've told you that once already. It is important that we keep it as neutral as possible.

However, Tamao, after reviewing the entry, I see one thing that will be removed. The 'Hiro' issue will be taken off, as it does seem rather speculative instead of factual.


New Era Outlaw 23:52, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Comment report me if you want, I'm not abusing of anything, several people besides me have tried to edit it including people fanatics of the character and their contributions are eliminated, the page is mainly controlled by you guys and is not fair.

I'm not againts people wanting the character to be known, but you guys need to check the facts before posting them, the page is ok, but it still needs a lot of cleaning because there are things that you see on and on, your pal Staredcraft admited the couples shouldn't be here, and there are other things like the traits, instead of naming them you just quote scenes where Kimi was at, that's disrespectful even for the character, is like you don't like how is she and are trying to fill her, people said she is selfish which she is, but also Angelica and Tommy, and people say it is because of the independence trait they have, something you guys just didn't think but consider it an aggression to the character, I guess that observation is better than "Kimi cooked in Dude Where's my horse but not anymore" what trait is that? The only thing I'm asking for is organization, and I'm not the only one complaining, I'm the first one complaining very different, so if you want to report me go ahead, and please Don't shift the focus on me,New Era Outlaw, I told everybody from the start that I am a rugrats fan , and I like the 8 characters the same, it gets on my nerves that Kimi being the last one to add the cast has fans that really don't like for what she is, she has her own special things like the others if they aren't developed that's something different, and I admit, Kimi needs work but that doesn't mean I'm againts her, she needs more support than the others because she was the last,but an obvious biased person pretending not to be and accusing people to be is low. I recommend you to read the article and check your facts, I told you I'm not againts the future episodes I receive the KC newsletter too just to let you know, but you guys add things that might happen in the episode but you aren't sure about them ,are you?, I'm just asking you guys to wait for the episode before adding information about it. Tamao 03:15, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Response

I'm also noting that you don't quote your own sources, and you also have not read my counter argument at all. Did I not present you with all of my information sources? And who else is complaining? I certainly don't see anybody else. Plus, if you even bothered to go through the forums to find out fan feedback like I have, you'd know that Kimi has her detractors, but a bigger fan following. You would see this in the fanart, the fanfiction, the heated debates that used to go down on several of them.

If you want organisation, I have done just that, placing several tidbits of information in their own categories. Note the segments Rugrats (which was there before I came on), All Grown Up, Character Analysis, Fan Criticism, and Trivia. I have done my organisation, and if you look at the other character pages, you'd see that people have also adopted the same format.

And really, Tamao. You called me biased, and yet you neither deny nor confirm the fact that you posted the following?

  • her venture ends up winding the gang in trouble, as the walkie-talkies she stole from a helpless child in the water park (to help the gang find Tommy's
  • Kimi seems to be a very selfish and insensible girl as is seen in "Bad Kimi" where she doesn't share information about Z, "Truth or Consequenses" where she gives her back to Tommy,"it's cupid stupid" where she cares more about Z than her supposdly best friend Susie,"Tweenage Tycoons" were the tickets were apparently more important than Dil, "Lucky 13" were she didn't show any compasion for Angelica,"Memoirs Of A Finster" where she put Japan over Chuckie,"Runaround Susie" where she's mad at Susie because she wants to follow her dream and demands Susie to quit, "Izzy, isn't he?" where she gives more support to Izzy than to his own brother, and the list keeps growing.
  • Is known that Kimi is weak and easily manipulated by stranger as is seen on "Bad Kimi".
  • Kimi might be Bipolar, as she is seen in "Bad Kimi" and "Memoirs Of A Finster" changing her moods and making a big fuss about everything.

Correct me if I am wrong, but that very much seems a bit biased, now doesn't it? Let's break it down a bit further, in order:

  • "Stole from a helpless kid in a water park." And just what was wrong with the word confiscated? Was it truly necessary to paint Kimi as if she was some common, heartless theif? The original text where it said that she 'confiscated' the walkie-talkies meant the same thing: She took it. No need to curry the sentence by adding the words 'stole' or 'helpless'.
  • I'm not going to quote that second one, but just one thing. You cannot really judge a person as 'selfish' and 'insensible' (already biased statements on its own) for not divulging information, especially when IT WAS STATED EARLIER IN THE EPISODE "BAD KIMI" THAT Z MADE HER PROMISE TO KEEP IT A SECRET. Also, Susie never appeared in "Bad Kimi", where Z appeared. So already, that point is blatantly bogus. Also, remember that it was TOMMY demanding new ideas from Dil, not Kimi, in "Tweenage Tycoons." Kimi even spoon fed Dil at the end of the episode to comfort him. How exactly is that 'selfish' or 'insensitive'? And, as for Izzy, remember that EVERYBODY, not just Kimi, was rooting for Izzy. It was a group mentality, something most people are very susceptible to.
  • "Is known that Kimi is weak and easily manipulated by strangers." If Kimi was, in fact, 'weak', would she have stood up for her actions at the end of the episode? Also, no other episodes in the AGU season show Kimi interacting, much less 'being manipulated' by strangers. Dismissed as a false item.
  • "Kimi might be Bi-Polar." If you even read the article thoroughly, you would have realised that this is a psychological disorder, and, if true, would happen in every single episode, not just the two you quoted. Kimi has demonstrated no clear cut bi-polar behaviour in any episode.

And, you also eliminated the entry which stated that Hiro is the name of Kimi's father. It was factual, why did you remove it?

And, as I said before, and I'll say for the last time: OTHER PEOPLE HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THIS PAGE BESIDES MYSELF AND STAREDCRAFT.

We are just the main contributors to the article, but others do have their input. See the Trivia tidbit "Kimi has never spoken her native language."? That was added by Angie Y. And the part about Kimi's father Hiro and the preview for "TP+KF"? That was contributed by a user of Luke's AGU Message Board, Kimi12715, but had to be edited because some of the text said things like "K-C promised- no couplings!", along those lines.

The thing is, people contribute, and we usually leave them alone, because they have just as much right to contribute as we do. But, when somebody contributes something that takes away from the integrity of the Wiki (a.k.a. your input), we had to do something, because those entries were clearly false, unbased, and had no cited resources. So, Tamao, that is why your input has been deleted...because you insist on casting the character in a negative light instead of providing information about the character.

And fandom has nothing to do with it. Leave the mudslinging off the Wiki, please.

Oh, and I noticed that you bumped my comment all the way to the bottom, when recent discussion entries are to be posted top down. Way to go.New Era Outlaw 03:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Some thoughts from an outside observer

First, my credentials: I don't know a damned thing about Kimi Finster, Rugrats, or All Grown Up. Never seen the shows, never really been interested, etc. Not that there's anything wrong with these things, mind. They're just not my cup of tea.

That said, I've sorta found myself in the position of an unofficial mediator between the folks who want to maintain this page, based on my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kimi Finster. People are asking me questions about the article, whether it's biased, and so forth. So I've taken a look at the article, and would like to offer the following thoughts:

First off, the article is overly dense and cluttered. You've got a lot of meticulous detail that isn't necessary for an encyclopedia. Just to provide one example, consider the following:

In 'Memoirs of a Finster' it was implied that Kimi knows how to ice skate. Chuckie had been going to her for lessons so he could be ready for a party his friend Nicole was having. At the time, Kimi was distracted due to her discovering of her Japanese heritage, but, in the end, she finally woke him up early so she could teach him. Although Kimi has never been seen ice-skating on the show herself, the fact that Chuckie came to her for help implies that she does know a thing or two about it. It is also safe to assume that if she is good at ice skating, it's possible that she's also a good roller blader as well (part of her wardrobe implies that Kimi, in her spare time, is a roller skater.)

That whole paragraph can be usefully condensed into:

"In 'Memoirs of a Finster' it was implied that Kimi knows how to ice skate. Although Kimi has never been seen ice-skating on the show, Chuckie was taking ice-skating lessons from her in this episode."

And that's really all you need to convey the facts. As an example of a well-formatted, well-written Wikipedia entry about a fictional character, you might take a look at Ron Weasley (or, really, any of the Harry Potter characters).

Secondly, there are several aspects of Kimi's personality and character are mentioned multiple times throughout the article, when they only need to be mentioned once. Examples include (but are not limited to) the fact that Kimi likes Dummi Bears (mentioned 3 times in the article) and the fact that her father is named Hiro (also mentioned 3 times in the article).

Thirdly, the stuff about who's being paired off with who in various slashfic and shipfic fan pages is not something that really belongs on the character's main page. The Harry Potter fans on Wiki have created a Harry Potter fandom page. You folks might consider doing the same, making a Rugrats fandom page and then putting all of the fan-related stuff — especially the who's dating who stuff — into the fandom page.

These are, ultimately, just suggestions. I have no enforcement powers. I'm just a user, like you folks, and merely seek to have high-quality Wikipedia articles. But I think that, if these suggestions were implemented, the article would be improved. → Ξxtreme Unction {yakłblah} 20:01, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

This is excellent advice, and I suggest everyone involved take it. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 20:05, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I agree with these observations

First of all I want to thank our observers here Extreme Unction and a Man In Black, I'm glad to have neutral opinions about the issue, and I can't have put that better myself, I totally agree with you, and that were my points the article was filled with useless information which is not Wikipedia's interest, I just say the article needs a good cleaning, again Extreme Unction Your points are very valid and i thank you for sharing them with us.

New Era Outlaw, sister, calm down, I don't want you to be mad at any of us here, we're just discussing the best way to improve the article, if I don't quote my sources is because I have the episodes recorded, I don't need to go to fansite to get information unlike you who should watch the show (which seems you don't instead of looking for information provided by other fans.

2) I did post some of the ones you named, but those were just observations I did about the character, if you don't like them I have no problem with them being removed, but I don't get why yours which have the same problem with other users should stay then.

New Era Outlaw no offense, but before editing an encyclopedia, take a reading course, you are accusing me of giving you bogus information:Also, Susie never appeared in "Bad Kimi", where Z appeared. So already, that point is blatantly bogus. When I put Kimi seems to be a very selfish and insensible girl as is seen in "Bad Kimi" where she doesn't share information about Z, "Truth or Consequenses" where she gives her back to Tommy, "it's cupid stupid" where she cares more about Z than her supposdly best friend Susie, as you should know Z and Susie both were in the episode It's Cupid Stupid, As you can see your anger and biasedness aren't letting you see the facts.

I guess I don't need to say more but It's clear that someone who doesn't know when characters appear or not can't talk about the show itself, even if you have fansites to back up your observations I'd suggest you to watch the show someday.

I don't want you to be mad at me ,really, but seems like when things don't go on your way you freak out and start typing in caps, so calm down is a friendly discussion about an article, so take it easy, sis.

Finally, again I agree, th article can be cleaned and improved,as Extreme Unction said the article is overly dense and cluttered, so we should work on it, to condense it and make it a respectable article of Wikipedia, Thanks. Tamao 20:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Tamao, while I applaud your enthusiasm, calling people "sis" and "sister" and being generally confrontational is no way to do anything other than make people emotional and defensive. The idea here is to find things on which we can all agree, and then work from there. So rather than telling Staredcraft and New Era Outlaw how they need reading lessons, and don't know the characters, and are biased, and so on, and so forth, why not take a more constructive approach?
What is there about the article as it currently stands that you like? What do you agree with 100% insofar as the article itself is concerned? What parts of the article can you look at right now and say "This is important information about Kimi Finster, and needs to be in a Kimi Finster article?"
Let's start there and see if we can find some common ground. Once we've done that, then we can talk about maybe adding some other, more contentious things. → Ξxtreme Unction {yakłblah} 20:46, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Response

Thanks for your intervention guys. I will start working on a new transcript right away for the page...one which will be a lot less cluttered and will provide more information on Kimi's character.

And Tamao, you would do well to follow Extreme Unction's advice. He's basically telling you what I and staredcraft have been telling you all along- stop getting all bent out of shape and actually do something constructive towards to Wiki. Also, when this template is cleaned up, you should also promise that when you make entries, you do not do so in sheer bias of the character as you have done in the past, and you must not remove any links without prior explanation. And I am an avid viewer of the show, thank you very much. If you've read my sources, you would see that as point #4.

In a few days, a new edited page should be put up.


Oh, and just for the record...I'm a guy. Up to Klasky-Csupo and all knows that.


New Era Outlaw 22:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Deal

First of all, I don't want to sound rude or anything but, New Era Outlaw, don't cover yourself with holy water and pretend that you and Staredcraft were telling me all this time to do someting for the wikipedia page because that isn't true, you attacked me and my points since you started posting in this page and anybody who reads this page can tell you so.

Anyway, Ok let's make a deal, I guess we all want the best for the wikipedia pages so, let's try to re-start it again and those contrversial entries, will be discussed here, seeing the points of view of all of us and we will determine if the entries should stay or not.

I hope we all make an effort to make this page a good part of wikipedia, thanks. Tamao 17:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Response

The reason that I've 'attacked' your points were because they were decidedly false entries. And I do believe that I've posted them up here already for everybody to see. They can also go to the 'History' page and see for themselves. And yes, we were telling you this all of the time. Since this discussion page was opened.

Guys, I want to thank you all for your help in assembling the page, but just something to consider. If Tamao didn't complain (to date, this person is the only one to do so,) would any dispute have been brought up to begin with? It seems to me that it is only one person disputing the 'neutrality' of the article. We are all in consensus that some of the entries needed to be taken off, but Tamao, you are giving me the impression now that you are just angry because your entries were not included, so you're exaggerating by making it seem as if everybody's edits have been taken off, in place of mine and staredcraft's. Coule it be that you are just simply venting off steam because your entries are deemed unsuitable for the Wiki? Your past posts on this page and the history of this Wiki entry seem to suggest so. Also, you still have neither confirmed nor denied that, you're just dodging the subject constantly.

All I know is, staredcraft and I, as very knowledgeable people about the character, have worked hard for the last three months to put as much information as we possibly could into this page (with a LOT of help from the others), only to have somebody raise the red flag because they're the only person whose points and edits were rejected because of false information.

Now, does this sound right to you?

New Era Outlaw 17:59, 17 November 2005 (UTC)


On an entirely different note, the fandom page mightn't be such a bad idea. Thanks for the advice, Extreme Unction.New Era Outlaw 21:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Extreme Unction I've tried to mantain myself cool on this page, but New Era Outlaw is making it too difficult, I ask for some respect here, because New Era Outlaw is just trying to piss me off, but I won't play his inmature game.

Now Read my points above:

  • The page has a lack of facts, most of the paragraphs are just speculating about uncertain events of the future or even episodes that might not be real at all.
  • Plus the page has a lot of irrelevant details, they even included episodes were Kimi was not shown at all
  • Finally they are enlisting a lot of skills and traits (which aren't real or shown on the show) for this character but instead of explaining them they just quoted moments were Kimi appeared

Notice that I pointed some other things besides the biasedness of the page, now you say I'm the only one complaining but Extreme Unction and Men in black agreed that the page need some cleaning:

  • First off, the article is overly dense and cluttered. You've got a lot of meticulous detail that isn't necessary for an encyclopedia. ---> As you can notice he's agreeing with points 2 and 3
  • Secondly, there are several aspects of Kimi's personality and character are mentioned multiple times throughout the article, when they only need to be mentioned once. -----> You see?

The difference is Extreme Unction isn't complaining like me but suggesting, but at the same time he agrees with me about how the page needs some work.

As I see things you don't want to change the page like you've said before but now seems like you're backing off:

Thanks for your intervention guys. I will start working on a new transcript right away for the page...one which will be a lot less cluttered and will provide more information on Kimi's character.

All I know is, staredcraft and I, as very knowledgeable people about the character, have worked hard for the last three months to put as much information as we possibly could into this page (with a LOT of help from the others), only to have somebody raise the red flag because they're the only person whose points and edits were rejected because of false information.

Now it just sounds like you decided to keep the page as it is.

I just tell you that the page isn't completly bad, I agree there are some good points, but when I read it, the article goes in circles, i just say it needs some fixing here and there.

And , no I don't mind if my entries are not taken in account, but get my point , you can't say they are true or false because Kimi Finster is a fictional character and she changes from the eyes which see her, just take that in account, you can't go there deleting entries and threatening people just because they don't agree with your observations.

I say you've done a good work on the page, but it needs to go to the point instead of going in circles, is an advice because we care about the page, and all we have the right to have an opinion, now Does it sound right to you?

Tamao 05:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree the page is based and full of unecessary information and the main contributors don't let other to contribute. You need to put up both sides of what people think cause or your not really getting the whole Idea of the real charater. 172.147.192.227 02:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Is this for real?

Are there people who are really biased for/against Kimi Finster?!? I would not have thought it possible! - Ta bu shi da yu 03:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Large copyedit done

Really, a lot more needs to be done. Please, don't reinsert the trivia section because we are NOT a fan site! It's perfectly fine to link to fan sites that include this information, but unless you can incorporate it into the main text it's really not necessary information.

The section I've not touched are not neutrally written. They are written from the perspective of a fan, and quite sloppily worded. The text needs a lot of tightening up.

One last thing: Perhaps Rugrats needs it's own template? - Ta bu shi da yu 04:15, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Okay, hear what...

I would like this resolved as soon as possible, so I would like to hear what you guys want added to this page. Right now, it's in an extreme state of disrepair compared to the other character pages, which follows this template (especially the Dil page). Yes, Tamao, that includes you as well, I want to know what specifically you want in this page, so we can get rid of that neutrality issue once and for all.

And Ta Bu Shi Da yu, there is nothing wrong with the Trivia section, as it provides lesser known facts and highlighted tidbits about the character. Many character pages, even outside of those in Rugrats, do have Trivia pages:

Check those and see.New Era Outlaw 17:19, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Pictures

The original photo of Kimi was taken down by an editor (I put it back). Since then, another user added this photo. Do you think it should be included? It's a bit strange. Nonetheless, if someone knows the specifics of how she fell, ripped her pants (I don't remember), you may want to re-add this with a better description. Michael 05:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyone? Michael 21:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/i/m/Talk%7EKimi_Finster_1cb7.html"