User talk:Coredesat/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Welcome!

Welcome to the Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject! I see you have made some random edits to some modern hurricane articles, and us at the project are glad you decided to join us. Some of last year's articles were made rather hastily, and any help in organizing them or adding content would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me or at our headquarters. Have fun, and see you around. Hurricanehink 17:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Article formatting

Dear Tropical cyclone editor,

As a member of the Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject, you are receiving this message to describe how you can better tropical cyclone articles. There are hundreds of tropical cyclone articles, though many of them are poorly organized and lacking in information. Using the existing featured articles as a guide line, here is the basic format for the ideal tropical cyclone article.

  1. Infobox- Whenever possible, the infobox should have a picture for the tropical cyclone. The picture can be any uploaded picture about the storm, though ideally it should be a satellite shot of the system. If that is not available, damage pictures, either during the storm or after the storm, are suitable. In the area that says Formed, indicate the date on which the storm first developed into a tropical depression. In the area that says Dissipated, indicate the date on which the storm lost its tropical characteristics. This includes when the storm became extratropical, or if it dissipated. If the storm dissipated and reformed, include the original start date and the final end date. Highest winds should be the local unit of measurement for speed (mph in non-metric countries, km/h in metric countries), with the other unit in parenthesis. The lowest pressure should be in mbars. Damages should, when available, be in the year of impact, then the present year. The unit of currency can be at your discretion, though typically it should be in USD. Fatalities indicate direct deaths first, then indirect deaths. Areas affected should only be major areas of impact. Specific islands or cities should only be mentioned if majority of the cyclone's effects occurred there.
  2. Intro- The intro for every article should be, at a minimum, 2 paragraphs. For more impacting hurricanes, it should be 3. The first should describe the storm in general, including a link to the seasonal article, its number in the season, and other statistics. The second should include a brief storm history, while the third should be impact.
  3. Storm history- The storm history should be a decent length, relatively proportional to the longevity of the storm. Generally speaking, the first paragraph should be the origins of the storm, leading to the system reaching tropical storm status. The second should be the storm reaching its peak. The third should be post-peak until landfall and dissipation. This section is very flexible, depending on meteorological conditions, but it should generally be around 3. Storm histories can be longer than three paragraphs, though they should be less than five. Anything more becomes excessive. Remember, all storm impacts, preparations, and records can go elsewhere. Additional pictures are useful here. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its peak, use a landfall picture in the storm history. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its landfall, use the peak. If the landfall is its peak, use a secondary peak, or even a random point in the storm's history.
  4. Preparations- The preparations section can be any length, depending on the amount of preparations taken by people for the storm. Hurricane watches and warnings need to be mentioned here, as well as the number of people evacuated from the coast. Include numbers of shelters, and other info you can find on how people prepared for the storm.
  5. Impact- For landfalling storms, the impact section should be the majority of the article. First, if the storm caused deaths in multiple areas, a death table would work well in the top level impact section. A paragraph of the general effects of the storm is also needed. After the intro paragraph, impact should be broken up by each major area. It depends on the information, but sections should be at least one paragraph, if not more. In the major impact areas, the first paragraph should be devoted to meteorological statistics, including rainfall totals, peak wind gusts on land, storm surge, wave heights, beach erosion, and tornadoes. The second should be actual damage. Possible additional paragraphs could be detailed information on crop damage or specifics. Death and damage tolls should be at the end. Pictures are needed, as well. Ideally, there would be at least one picture for each sub-section in the impact, though this sometimes can't happen. For storms that impact the United States or United States territories, this site can be used for rainfall data, including an image of rainfall totals.
  6. Aftermath- The aftermath section should describe foreign aid, national aid, reconstruction, short-term and long-term environmental effects, and disease. Also, the storm's retirement information, whether it happened or not, should be mentioned here.
  7. Records- This is optional, but can't hurt to be included.
  8. Other- The ideal article should have inline sourcing, with the {{cite web}} formatting being preferable. Always double check your writing and make sure it makes sense.

Good luck with future writing, and if you have a question about the above, don't hesitate to ask.

Hurricanehink (talk) 20:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

TFD of Kerala user templates

Please see Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_May_31#Template:User_Kerala_and_Template:User_KERALA_wiki where you had voted, where the nomination has been changed, and reconsider your vote.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 08:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:User girlfriend

Hi, I notice that you are using Template:User girlfriend, which has been moved to {{User:UBX/girlfriend}}. The link currently being used on your page is a cross-namespace redirect and will probably not last. It may be advisable to change the link. Thanks. —Mira 01:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

6/6/06

Today is 6/6/06 silly =) I added the current tag back in A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. mboverload@ 22:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Asian Supremacy

You voted to delete the article Asian supremacy because you felt it was unverifiable. It is verifiable. The organization Goldsea supports Asian supremacy.--Dark Tichondrias 01:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

How about reconsidering

re: Someone called me back from a wikibreak via email on this, and I've explained the rationale and system we're (taking a break <g>) from building. Thanks // FrankB 21:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Scouting in Humberside

Thank you for noticing my small effort on that article and altering your opinion on its deletion. Unfortunately new young editors who are scouts leap in and write a rather poor attempt at an article on their own County, or even worse their own troop. --Bduke 05:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem. At least it looks like a decent article now, and not an ad. --Coredesat 05:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposed AfD

I have made enormous changes to the article - Bangladesh Booty, and I hope the notability issues have been addressed at length (thanks to snug and DaveG12345 I have found some good directions on that), though it still needs some development in articulation. I am working on the verifiability part now (I got some directions on that as well, thanks to you guys). Keep me posted for directions, an I wish some of you will get your hands dirty in tidying up the article as well. (Aditya Kabir 13:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC))

Cicero's Pizza

Hi, I was just wondering if you'd consider revisiting your vote on the VFD for Cicero's Pizza. You state that you don't believe it is notable, however evidence to the contrary has been presented on both the article page and the VFD. Cicero's Pizza does infact meet WP:CORP requirement 1A and is considered a notable business as serveral non directory, or business produced news articles from independent sources have been written about the establishment. Thanks. Gateman1997 20:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)


Cardinal Newman High School

You seem to be a veteran on school deletions. I honestly thought that this could get speedily deleted. How wrong I was. (sigh) How wrong I was. In your experience would you expect there to be any hope of getting this through? --Stroika 09:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Slim to none once the "all schools are notable" people show up. I don't see why people cite WP:SCHOOL when it's a rejected policy. --Coredesat 09:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two-way artist

Feel free to close speedily deleted or nomination-withdrawn-with-no-delete-votes AfD's yourself. Just add to the top {{subst:afd top}} Speedy deleted by user:whatever ~~~~ and to the bottom add {{subst:afd bottom}}. Don't hafta be an admin to do that. Cheers. - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to let you know that of all comments in AfD, yours have been most helpful as a neutral second opinion. Your comment today per WP:ORG where I had nominated under WP:CORP showed me a section of documentation that I was yet unawares. Thanks! Ste4k 00:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi again! About being marinally notable... is there a scale that you use to go by? Since the article is all self sourced and is attached to an advocacy group I am very suspicous about anything that it says and have to go by external research. Any help would be appreciated. I was getting ready to put an AfD on his book as well. I'll wait until I hear back on you about that, if you wouldn't mind giving a new person some tips. Thanks! Ste4k 08:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

LOL, sorry, I forgot to tell you.. Gary_Renard, sry. Ste4k 09:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's no "notability scale", it's just my opinion. The book seems to be at least somewhat popular (otherwise it wouldn't be ranked so high on Amazon.com). Since it's only my opinion, I chose weak keep. I'll probably change my "vote"/argument if there's no verifiable notability.
And don't worry about the new user thing, I'm fairly new myself - I've only been around since January. :P --Coredesat talk 09:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Tagi AFD

I posted a message like this on the Tagi AFD page. It was for you and three other editors. You wanted to make it a redirect. I said that if Tagi becomes a redirect why not every tribe in Survivor history? What makes it special? TeckWizTalkContribsGuestbook 11:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It's a plausible search term. --Coredesat talk 11:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure every other tribe is also.TeckWizTalkContribsGuestbook 11:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Torre DeVito afd

Just to let you know, I added some related articles in with this AfD after you cast your delete vote. Could you take another look? Thanks. Mangojuicetalk 05:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Changed my reasoning and did some research on the other poems. --Coredesat talk 05:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Associated Content AFD

Can you expand on "heavy vandal magnet". Does this have to do with users submitting external links to their content? We can ask them stop doing that and assit the removal of said links. Curious there is something that can be done to assist. Thanks, Jcurran talk 19:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, upon further review, that was a mistake, since I misread something in the history. I'll remove it. Just don't delete the AfD tag again. --Coredesat talk 19:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments on a cleanup please

Hi Coredesat! I performed a merge/cleanup today regarding a bio that was attached to a category I'm working on. I'd appreciate your comments in the discussion pages on Marianne Williamson, please. I would like to bring all of the items in this category up to at least this amount of credibility if possible. Thanks! Ste4k 05:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Check out the talk page for that article. I've gone ahead and left a comment. --Coredesat talk 05:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks on that! I will address that issue shortly, you might want to read my comments in that regard. On a different matter in the same general category, and about the AfD on Gary Renard I've made a comment on the bottom, and would like to move toward consensus if possible. I'd like to perform a merge of the author's article to his book and made a general comment below in the discussion pages of the latter. I will be contacting the other parties discussing the article for deletion, and would appreciate your consideration there which would allow a speedier conclusion. After the merge is performed the resulting article may have enough beef to resist an AfD. It appears the book may have enough notability to save the page of it's author. Ste4k 08:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Per Gary Renard I appreciate your strike on the AfD. Also, on Marianne Williamson I reverted the "possible" POV change you made earlier since the statement (although slanted somewhat) is also nearly a quote from a previously cited source. Hope you don't mind, but also, if you feel that it should just not exist, I will agree but would like at least to mention or segue her contributions to society concerning how she ended up creating that Center for helping people. Ste4k 10:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments on Amelico (AfD)

Since you don't fully understand the situation, I will refrain from saying things I would very much like to say. My works are not yet copyrighted and I want to protect my material. Roygene 04:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

What I meant to say in the AfD was that you are not the one who created the article. By G7 in the criteria for speedy deletion, only the creator of the article may ask for speedy deletion. AfD's goal is to discuss the article and decide whether it should be deleted or not. Please don't take any comments made in the discussion personally - if you want this article gone, don't interfere in the AfD process and it will probably be deleted. As for protecting your material, there's really not much I can help you with (I'm not an expert at getting things copyrighted). Unfortunately, since your material is not copyrighted, there is no violation of the copyright violation policy here. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Amelico (AfD)

Well, crap on your policy. I feel repeatedly like I'm dealing with government bureaucracy. Roygene 05:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't write the policy. Take it up with an admin if you have a problem with it. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 05:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Your opinion please

Have you seen this? List of people by name

It's already been up for AfD multiple times in the past all the way til 2003. Question, and your opinion, please... How is a new person like myself supposed to have any respect for policy when this entire massive mostly empty tree should all fall under WP:CSD#A3 ??? Ste4k 13:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I could have sworn I voted on an AfD for that article already. Unfortunately, it's something that will have to be left alone, because they have more than enough people to mess up any AfD vote and cause a no-consensus result. It's essentially like the GNAA (which has been nominated 18 times and kept each time due to its members coming here and disrupting the AfD), only not nearly as annoying, and not made up of internet trolls. It's something that won't easily go away unless they stop working on the project. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 20:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
On another matter that should ring a bell, I wasn't aware of anything in the AfD procedure that mentioned any minimum amount of time for an article to be nominated. I also have a difficult time figuring out why people vote upside-down, i.e. someone will say, "so'n'so wrote an article in that magazine" but they don't seem to get the point that no other publisher has ever mentioned the magazine itself and the magazine can reprint pretty much anything that it wants. Ste4k 20:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Some things may never be figured out, like the whole sockpuppet/meatpuppet thing. But yes, AfD debates usually last for at least five days unless they need to be closed early (due to withdrawn nom or a speedy keep/delete/redirect). --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 20:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Girls At The Cairo National Stadium

Hi. can you try offering help by addressing the Girls At The Cairo National Stadium case? it's clearly a troll's plot by a user called Haham hanuka. Marina T. 21:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The Entire thing

I went and found some actual references, wrote the entire thing myself from scratch. Please feel free to review the entire ACIM-cruft wrapped up neatly into one actually true article. Course in Miracles (book). The entire Cruftegory] I am hoping may be replaced by this one article so I will be doing a straw poll on that later. Turns out that the "ACIM" organizations basically lost their rights to print this book altogether. It's out of print. Ste4k 10:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stella Matutina

This article has been added to, and there is enough room to expand. The others have changed their vote, and I'm asking if you can review the AfD talk page for this request, and see if you wish to change your vote. If not, thats ok too. Thanks. Zos 16:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

ouch on school nom

Did I stick my finger in the wrong socket? :) Thanks for pointing the school guideline. Ste4k 07:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not a guideline, either. I'm staying out of the debate because people seem to think it is policy/a guideline, and that because of that, all schools are notable. I don't usually vote on school AfD's because they usually result in a keep or no consensus decision. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 07:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars AfDs

So far, we've been on the same page with the AfDs; however, I wanted to discuss something with you and perhaps get a response: I think many of the larger 'text lists" actually serve the purpose of benefiting the encyclopedia by containing the fancruft. You've probably heard me say "cruft dam" before; keep the list, contain the cruft; delete the list, lose the containment. Minor lists such as the plant and one-liner bulleted lists are exceptions; they are so basic and non-notable that they actually even invite cruft, which is why I voted delete. What do you think of this stance? — Deckiller 20:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I actually like that idea. If the cruft can't be deleted, then containing it on the lists is the next best thing. Of course, there are things that are just too ridiculously crufty for even lists, like the plant list. If people want to make articles for the things on the list, they can go to a fan wiki and do it there - those articles don't really belong here. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 20:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. Plus, some great articles (some even GA or FA level) have come out of the cruft containment lists, like Spira (Final Fantasy X). On the other hand, seeing a Flora of Star Wars would be as ridiculous as List of plants in Star Wars ;-). — Deckiller 23:13, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Wapnick

If you have a moment, I'd appreciate you reviewing my comment on the bottom of this AfD. Thanks. Ste4k 16:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Article for deletion: Torrent finder

Hi, I hope you can take some time to vote on the AFD debate for the Torrent finder article (i noticed you had voted in another torrent site debate earlier). The debate is taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Torrent finder. thx! Zzzzz 11:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

2006 FIFA World Cup controversies

Hi Coredesat! Thanks for your recent interest in the AfD of the 2006 World Cup controversies article. Your input is most appreciated. Since the AfD is now closed (the article has undergone significant change since you voted) and the World Cup almost over, I'd like to encourage you to put some input into the improvement of this article, either by improving where you think you can, or by suggesting changes on the talk page. Kind regards, MyNameIsNotBob 03:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The ACIM (book) Afd discussion resumed

In case you may be interested, the nomination for deletion of the A Course In Miracles (book) article, in which you placed a comment, has been resumed by myself. The nomination had been closed after only two days, and thus instead of submitting a new nomination, I have reopened the old discussion. Thanks for your interest and comment(s) on this discussion thus far.

-Scott P. 11:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Star Wars ship names

Hey, Coredesat! I've read your comments on the aformentioned articles. Please explain your thinking more to me, as your definately have more experience than I. If necessary, I'll add a description for every ship: it's condensed history, commander, accomplishments, famous battles it was at, and where it was destroyed.

Thanks,

RelentlessRouge 11:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The major issue with this article is that it's just what its title says it is - it's a long list of names. Such a list fails WP:NOT, and would probably work much better (in an expanded form, of course) on Wookieepedia, especially given the crosswiki links in the list article (there are probably articles for most of these ships there, anyway). At the very least, the article is unsourced, and articles don't meet WP:V unless sources are given. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 18:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Charles Buell Anderson

I would appreciate your opinion on this AfD. Thanks. Ste4k 21:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Not Game Guide

How can it be an invalid arguement if you have similar elements list in every game such as list of weapons, units, or technologies. You are a hipocrate and should delete the following similar pages which share similar properties:

(list removed)

Cs california 17:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

First, please read WP:NPA. Secondly, please read the discussion on the AfD thread. There are better explanations there than anything I could put out. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


Unmaintainable?

The Mathematics list is HUGE compared to this list, and it is maintained just fine. Please explain how the food-related list is unmaintainable at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of food topics. --Transhumanist 20:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

There are some better explanations on the AfD now. It's basically that the list is too vague, and lots of things could be considered a "food topic". For the math list, it's at least clear that the articles there have something to do with math. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 01:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for my first barnstar. --Wedian 14:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem. :) --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 23:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


Welcome to Esperanza

Nice to see you found our coffee lounge!

EVOCATIVEINTRIGUE TALKTOME | EMAILME | IMPROVEME 14:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

question

Would referring to someone as a "great stubifier" be considered a compliment? If so, then please accept mine, even if belated. :) Ste4k 18:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Gaia Online

Thanks. :) I plan to re-expand the article at some point with more general information (that is, minus the cruft). --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 23:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Charles Buell Anderson

Hi, you voted recently to delete this article. The final outcome of that AfD was no consensus. There were several mentions of merging the two articles together and I originally placed a merge tag on the article as disputed (due to several people voting to delete it). In the discussion of that article recently, an editor has shown the desire to merge the two articles. I am letting you know because the status of the merge tag is no longer disputed, and I am advising all of the editors who voted against that. Thanks. Ste4k 01:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Question about db-repost

I have a question about db-repost. I've never used the tag because I'm not allowed to look at deleted content. Are non-admins just never supposed to use db-repost? What do non-admins do? Do we just prod or afd and wait for admins to suggest db-repost? Am I just not understanding something? Thanks a bunch. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 13:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I used it because I remember the article clearly from the previous AFD, and as far as I know, there's no restrictions on using it. At the very least, it gets an admin to look at it and verify that it is indeed a repost. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 14:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Your support on my recent RfA!

Thanks for contributing to my successful RfA!
To the people who have supported my request: I appreciate the show of confidence in me and I hope I live up to your expectations!
To the people who opposed the request: I'm certainly not ignoring the constructive criticism and advice you've offered. I thank you as well!
♥! ~Kylu (u|t) 04:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Big time thanks. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 04:12, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
No problem. Congratulations! --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Kittie May Ellis

Thank you for telling me how to RfM. I've now done that, and posted to Kittie May Ellis that I have done that. Maybe this will keep an admin from deleteing. Wjhonson 06:26, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

And she is on wikisource. Just spelled Kitty instead of Kittie.Wjhonson 06:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
And added there by wjhonson... Fram 14:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Irrelevant. She is there, and by virtue of being there, needs to have some mention here. Wjhonson 15:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Anchor Cruft

Based on your participation at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Angela_Russell, I thought you'd like to know that the AFD has been restarted and moved to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Russell (second nomination), where you can vote on it a second time. JianLi 17:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/WPVI-TV_Anchors JianLi 17:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Please tell me to sleep!

  • It's Monday tomorrow! Er, today! I can't be up all night again! ;_; Danny Lilithborne 09:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Arbitration Request Filed

I have asked for abrbitration involving User:Nscheffey. See here. Please post any comments you desire to add. Ste4k 08:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On 26 July 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tropical Storm Bilis (2006), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Syrthiss 14:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Terrorist attacks carried out by LTTE

Hi . Based on your participation at [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terrorist attacks carried out by LTTE] whichhas been expanded by about a hundred attacks now, I'd like to ask you to compare both pages. Please read Terrorist_attacks_carried_out_by_LTTE. You will see that it has a different subject from Notable Attacks by the LTTE and will be expanded to list about 400 terrorist attacks by the LTTE. Notable Attacks by the LTTE already lists about one hundred significant terrorist and military attacks and it is not proper to add hundreds more minor terrorist attacks there. It dilutes the meaning of Notable Attacks by the LTTE. Ruchiraw (only ones significant in terms of impact are notable)23:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem here is that Notable attacks by the LTTE contains everything in the other article. Terrorist attacks carried out by LTTE is redundant to the existing article, which can be expanded if need be. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 23:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Please see if State terrorism in Sri Lanka is a POV fork. It contains material covered in other sources but rehashed to meet a particular POV> Ruchiraw 00:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I'm still pretty new at Wikipedia, so thanks for the tip. Mikeeilbacher 13:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)