User talk:Wongm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
Archive01.


Contents

[edit] Locomotive page moving

I seem to have opened the floodgates, eh? I came back today to finish off my cleanup of some locomotive articles, including renaming, and they've already been done for me!

Soon you and I will have had our hands on every vaguely-worthwhile rail-related article on WP!
Jb17kx (talk) 04:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The only problem with the naming is that it makes it a bit more difficult to link to loco articles from other articles - you need to remember who introduced the loco when adding the link, unlike before. However, it does aid disambiguation between classes to some degree.
Anyway, I think the next article I will start will be on stuff that isn't on the net already - for locos http://www.victorianrailways.net/ and http://locopage.railpage.org.au/ cover them to some degree. Once the article gets stated I might as well expand and reference it though. Operation Phoenix is one I have been intending to start (the State Library has some 1950s VR flyers on it). My stack of old Newsrail magazines is another staff of interesting things to make and expand articles on. ;-) Wongm (talk) 07:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
You might have a point about linking, but you saw how I mucked up the expansion of ARHS yesterday - whether the N class was ordered by Vicrail or V/Line is the least of my trouble! This has the benefit of consistency - no more "Oh, was it the Victorian V class or the Freight Australia V class?"
Having been through and added more information where possible to the article infoboxes, I'm now looking at going back and cleaning up the actual text. A lot of it is pretty ratty, some with huge disposition tables, that sort of thing. I agree that locos do have some coverage out there, but I've found some of it to be conflicting or unclear. Here it's all in once neat place. Mind you, I was surprised last year to discover that Sprinters still hadn't got an article.
Speaking of the State Library, I've been meaning as well to check out their rail-related collection for some time now... Might have to over the holidays. I don't have anything like old Newsrails to draw on though.
Jb17kx (talk) 00:10, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] You may be interested...

..in this. Talk:Geelong, Victoria#GA review. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 01:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] March 2008

I know vandals can be a pain, but I don't think this edit summary was appropriate at all. Please refrain from such behavior. --Charitwo talk 13:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation pages and name pages

I reverted your second edit to Nathan. Where a person is known simply by a single name, then it is appropriate for them to be included on a disambiguation page. That's what the disambiguation page is for -- to list all pages that might be intended by a search term or internal link. See WP:MOSDAB#Given names or surnames. It's not a problem that such a person will also be on the list in a Name article e.g. Nathan (given name). - Fayenatic (talk) 18:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Whoops! Yes, very much a first timers mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll keep it in mind for next time! :) Tuddy —Preceding comment was added at 07:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Interstate lines and template

There are quite a few concerns about the articles and template which I will have to pursue with you some other time - being a historical they are conflating some things which disallow a clear historical perspective - however I do not have the time at the moment to have a detailed critique of what you have created -= you will have to wait for a while - but i will be back about it all soon -0 cheers SatuSuro 11:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you around - it is a difficult one. Now I am justifying my decisions 'backwards' - a search says http://www.auslink.gov.au/ does use the names. Lucky for me then!
Except for Sydney-Perth railway - your concerns are correct. O.S. Nock in 'Railways of Australia' 1971 calls it the Indian Pacific. ARTC today splits it (for just the bit they manage): Kalgoorlie to Crystal Brook (in SA) and Crystal Brook to Broken Hill. The bits on the west and east aren't theirs - what the Australian Rail Track Corporation calls them these days is different to the old government railway authorities too.
I do feel there is a need for a 'top level' type page on the corridors though ,but the naming and making sure I am not making it up... Wongm (talk) 11:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Finally got in after some edit conflicts ;-) Wongm (talk) 11:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Found a stash of nice gov.au references for the Sydney-Perth link - they call it the east-west line or corridor: google: [1] [2] [3] [4]. It is more 'Eastern States with Western Australia' though. Wongm (talk) 11:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Apologies for the initially very offensively abusive insultingly outrageous comments which i wrote over - good to see your intrepid hard work is working out a resolution to the issue :) - the point is the perth- sydney link is about 5 sections to make up an idea - you got to be so careful - and most of the sources are not exactly attendant to the issue of different sections belonging to different authorities - they are playing with an idea - you will need some good redirects for all the odd labels and then direct them to your version - cheers good to see you are having fun wih it :| SatuSuro 12:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bendigo

i hate to say it but ur really good at what u know! which is mostly geelong. so why are u going and changing things in the bendigo page? i live there. i know alot more that u. so please stop putting girton back there. i am putting a page in which actually links somewhere. also because i don't like ending things on a bad note im just going to say that i like ur maps and i noticed that u have done a lot of pages for geelong. so a big well done for that! i hope i can do the same for bendigo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobby lood (talk • contribs) 10:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't realise the Girton Grammar School link when nowhere - sorry about that. For the see also sections they don't have to be a fixed size, and it is usual to try and keep them small, by incorporating the links into the main text (like what I did with the 2003 Bendigo tornado article link). An example is the Geelong article. Hope that helps you out. ;-) Wongm (talk) 10:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Issues

Whether its rebecca, me or anyone else - the point is that there should not be potential 3rr over dead or alive station articles - it is a wikipedia wide precedent (not so called consensus) - if you dont like em - dont touch em - thats my philosophy - to actively remove articles like has doing was not actually helping anyone - as there are those who will insist that a station has existed - it can have a stand alone article - (if you choose to amalgamate with locality articles - just remember its your personal preference - it is not generally accepted process).

It is my opinion that you should leave others practices alone unless you are actually contributing a positive outcome - to infer that any admin regardless of who it is - might be a problem - is basically avoiding the issue - and inferring that you dont agree with wikipedia processes and precedents - better to focus on the issue rather than other editor or you will find youself with some problems mate. SatuSuro 06:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Gawd i dunno what you were up to at the Mount Lyell article (copyedit?) in february i have to go off for a few days now (wont be around to respond or whatever) - expect a reversion of some of your editing and a good spray from me next week - have a good weekend :) cheers SatuSuro 02:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd appreciate a gmail answer to the gmails i sent if you have time - thanks SatuSuro 13:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images

By all means add alternative text, but there is no need for a caption on a station box which should only show railway stations. The CityRail one was designed to not have a caption but to leave all information like that outside the infobox. It would be good if we were consistent between states and had no captions except for alt text. JRG (talk) 12:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

By the way - the Melbourne Station template looks really bad on Firefox - there's way too much white space between the header and the picture. It desperately needs fixing. JRG (talk) 12:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Agree with the Firefox issue - now that you point it out I see it, might tinker with it. I do see a bit of a reason for omiting captions but am not yet convinced - it takes up room but it does make a photo more useful than without, assuming the caption is useful and not just 'xxx station'. Might remove caption display but keep alt text for now. Wongm (talk) 12:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Turns out the overlay of the text on the image is the issue - text before image puts the white space at the top, and vice versa. IE does it too. Wongm (talk) 12:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
That looks much better. By the way, do you see too much blue space between the header picture in Template:Cityrail Station alt and the image? It seems to do that on some browsers (eg. Safari). Is there any way to fix that? JRG (talk) 08:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I am only able to test in Firefox, Opera, and IE. In said browsers I don't see what you describe. Perhaps swapping the order of the image and the text (and altering the CSS location on the text), or moving the div tags to include it, or swapping div for span or something else. Wongm (talk) 11:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Port Phillip Channel Deepening Project

Hi Wongm, thanks for the formatting help and spelling mistake fixes!. I've been working on it recently and due to the sheer amount of information that has to be sifted through regarding this complex issue I sometimes have information all over the place. The only thing I object to is your placement of the notes in the 'Timeline' section under references. The 3 notes are not references in themselves, rather further information (not appropriate to put in the body) or links to further information (regardging a statment made in the article but strictly not references). What are your views on this? Davido321 (talk) 03:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Notes in the 'Timeline' - I read them, and the pdf file didn't seem to be reference for a statement, so I sse your point. Personally I have never used them myself, I don't mind undoing that and restore the 3 notes from the section, but I am not sure where the best fit is for them is. Wongm (talk) 07:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Now re-added them. Wongm (talk) 07:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Davido321 (talk) 12:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Melbourne-Adelaide railway

That's much better. Thanks, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Belair railway line, Adelaide

As you're obviously more familiar with the template than I am, and as you've been cleaning it up, you may want to do a couple more changes:

  • There were two branch lines south from Mitcham:
    • One from Mitcham (not Torrens Park) to Clapham on a separate right-of-way, not going near Torrens Park station.
    • One from Mitcham to Sleeps Hill (to the Sleeps Hill quarries), going down the same right-of-way as the main line, but carrying stone, not passengers, and not stopping at any passenger stations. (However, there were rail yards at Mitcham where the stone trains would do "stuff".)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You wouldn't have any links to an online map showing it? All I have at present is an old and not very detailed Australian atlas to work off. I am going over a fair few of the Adelaide line diagrams as well, make sure I don't stuff anything up in the process. :-) Wongm (talk) 12:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, not that I can "put my hands on" at the moment.
The Clapham line came straight out of the south of the Mitcham station, and ran along Price Avenue up to Springbank Road.
(Whereas the main line comes out the south-east of Mitcham station, and follows Belair Road to Torrens Park station.)
Note, it branched before Torrens Park station, and did not go near Torrens Park station.
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
P.S. I've been using Google Maps to get alignments and current street names; it surprises me how easy it is to pick the old railway rights-of-way - I guess a huge embankment that goes in a straight line or a gentle curve is a fairly permanent feature of the landscape!! Pdfpdf (talk) 13:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shared rail-bed

Note that, between Goodwood and Belair, the standard gauge Melbourne-Adelaide line goes down the west side of the railbed that the broad gauge Belair line goes down the east side of.

Does it add any value to put the blue line down the left side of the line diagram?
Pdfpdf (talk) 13:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

With the Victorian lines I have been working on, we have had issues with passenger services != the railway line. The Belair line is the current suburban service, the Bridgewater was a former service along further, The Overland uses the standard gauge, the standard gauge is part of the Adelaide-Melbourne railway but ARTC calls their SG bit the Adelaide-Wolseley railway or something else. The same goes for other Adelaide rail lines, they have names like 'North', 'Port', 'South' etc and the suburban services that operate along them are separate. You have the problem of stuff overlapping, but if you split too much you get useless stubs.
So to get to the point, the blue line would probably be worth adding. ARTC have diagrams of the SG line on their site to show where the crossing loops are, will get around to it at some point. Wongm (talk) 13:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Television schedules in network articles

(spam) Hi, I noticed that you recently discussed on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian television whether current television schedules should be included in network articles. I have started a discussion about this at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Television schedules in network articles. Please express any opinion you have there. - Mark 02:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nicknames

Hi. I'd like to know why you reverted my edit on the Donna Pinciotti page when it was perfectly legitimate. I'm really getting sick of some of you Wikipedia nazis going and reverting legitimate edits just cos they feel like it, as if they owned the site. It belongs to everyone. Not just you. As long as it's presented well and not inaccurate, what is your problem? Atouraya (talk) 04:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Apologies if I came over a bit heavy-handed. I didn't mean to take it out on you. It's just really frustrating when i make a legitimate edit and within 30 mins someone has reverted it. For example, out of all the 70's Show kids, Fez is the only one who hasn't got a nicknames section. I've gone in and added one to his page with a couple of examples on more than one occasion, but it keeps getting changed back. And when I reference it in the discussion section, no one bothers to reply. Annoying! Atouraya (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you revert the external link for MyFishCam?

I was happy to see that the owner of MyFishCam.com put an external link on the Fishcam page. Then, the very next day, you reverted it? Why? It's a legitimate external link, and my personal favorite fishcam site. I'm glad to see that it's been reinstated.

I was possibly a bit heavy handed - but the the moment the article isn't flooded with 50 links to everyone's own online fish webcam so it might as well stay for now. Wongm (talk) 01:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Typos

No worries. And they're not actually typos - they're deliberate. For some reason creating templates hate all sorts of things (I experimented heavily with an early version of the template and couldn't get the refs to go in) so I have to create them like that then fix them up in AWB with various subst parameters :) Orderinchaos 04:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll leave the bits and pieces there for you, instead of me wasting time going though manually. Wongm (talk) 04:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Hopefully it makes a bit more sense now that I've done three of them - the idea is to create the article from an Excel spreadsheet as a substed template, then fix with AWB, then edit the actual article to make it more human-friendly. :) Orderinchaos 05:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Victor Harbor railway line, South Australia

Cool. (I didn't notice - I'm glad you pointed it out.) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome.

Hello, i've herd of you before and i've wanted to meet you.

I'm perfectly aware of the fact that you are a serious rail contributer to Wikipedia, so am I!

Maybe we should get to know each other a bit better

My name is WikiSandbox1, so I'm pleased to meet you

See you later, and if you have any queries dont hesitate to contact me


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 05:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coolley

Railroading - gawd i hope not - a lot of it is out of date compared to rae and others - oh well yet again more fun of checking your edits and being rude to you :) - cheers - hope you had a good weekend SatuSuro 03:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

He he, thanks. Have you come across WP:HUGGLE? It's the tool I'm using. Sam Korn (smoddy) 16:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Electricity Commission of New South Wales

Hi. Thanks for the comment. I hope I am replying in the right way. The issue with the ECNSW is that it was a commission, then a commission trading as Pacific Power, and was then corpritized, fully owned by the government. Employees kept all entitlements at least until the sell off to Connel Wagner. The seperate entries in the Australian Energy page tends to create the suggestion that there were two totally different organizations.

Even as a corporatization, it was still NSW Government who controlled the enture place. Even to the point of redeployment within the NSW public service... Vk2tds (talk) 10:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Street sign theft

Ah, I was thinking I missed some since the vandal had many edits in a row to that article. I guess it does help to check. Thanks. -- RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 00:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harold Winthrop Clapp

Thanks for your comments and good luck on your gauge article.

Zzrbiker (talk) 12:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User warnings

Hello. Thanks for helping fight vandalism. In reviewing User talk:69.153.199.61, it appears that you issued three escalating warnings simultaneously today [5]. Since escalating warnings are only given if a vandal ignores the previous warning, I presume this was a mistake, but wanted to double-check just in case. Thank you, --Kralizec! (talk) 01:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I dont think you got my last message

Hey, i dont think you recived my last message, could you read it and reply to me ASAP?

WikiSandbox1 (talk) 02:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I did get it, but forgot to reply - I have too many windows open when I am on the net. It is good to have more people out there interesting in railway articles, I might run into one day on a railway trip somewhere. Wongm (talk) 04:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regional railway stations

Nice work on these - you've really been improving these articles lately. Any chance we might see an article on the New Deal now? Rebecca (talk) 00:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I have left a message regarding the images in these articles on Rebecca's talk page. Any assistance etc. you can provide would be much appreciated. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 02:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The article on the New Deal is in the works - I finally chased up the copy of Newsrail that had an article on it. Adding links yesterday was just me procrastinating from uni work. The full station listing is at User:Wongm/New_Deal. The Sate Libary of Victoria has a series of brochures on Operation Phoenix of the 1950s - that is another thing on the to do list. Wongm (talk) 04:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied to you at Rebecca's talk page. I was not a lot of help but I hope at least to have pointed you in the right direction. -- Mattinbgn\talk 11:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hey!

Hey, great you got my reply. It doesnt matter whether you didnt get my last one as long as you get this one.

Ok, so if you had about 5 to 9 windows open at the same time you would have a big RAM capacity on you computer (maybe you have a Mac?)

Now, I've herd a lot about you, you're a very keen rail enthusiast, which is good because I'm one as well. I beleive you know Matt Julian? (he's on VICSIG and vlinecars.com), i'm keen on meeting more rail interested people and well......... i think thats about it?

So, you think you'll bump into me one day? Well, you just might because I travel on V/Line for leisure (with a family member), so its quite possible that you could (you would most likely see me on a Warrnambool pass as I have already traveled to Geelong).

Just to let you know if you want to ask me any questions at all feel free to send or post a new section on my talk page.

See you sometime...........


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 05:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, when exactly do you think the first VLocity 1300 car will enter service? I'm eger to know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiSandbox1 (talk • contribs) 09:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Great minds

hmmm - its never ending - check out my new edit at freightlink - the scene shifts faster than we can keep up - the fin review art isnt that illuminating but SatuSuro 07:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC) Doh just noticed your edit there - and i am sure the most recent edit is better english and sense though SatuSuro 07:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of highways in Northern Territory - Which do you prefer?

I have created the highways in importance of their highway status, and their route number. Little emphasis was put on street names, even if they were duplicated and hyperlinked on the same page. Apparently Bidgee has a problem with this, and I would like feedback on this page as to which looks smarter and easier to read.

Here are the options:

Option 1

OR

Option 2

Also view List of highways in Tasmania, and look at the National Route 1, Bass Highway, and A2 Bass Highway status to see that an emphasis was put on route numbers, as oppose to the name of the highway, as to which inspired me to change each Listing of highways in Australia, to this conventional format, as it is not only easier to read, but better to comprehend, and note the importance of the highways and their route markers.

[edit] Compensation (Railway)

Have added something to Compensation (engineering) re railways. Tabletop (talk) 02:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another Reply

OK, right though the Silverton Cs class are basically C class locos, with some modifications to them and repainting. Thats all

Whoops! I misread the reply. The X's had powerful engines added to them and other stuff, then called XR.

Though personally I would prefer if there were separate articles so that we could read about a different loco (it would be annoying because its called the VR class, not the Silverton Cs class)

I also dropped off another note as well, do you think the Albury line should be converted to SG? (I think its a disgrace) and when precisely do you think the first 1300 Vlocity car will enter service July?


Thanks for dropping by..


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 00:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rosstown Railway Diagram

Rosstown-railway-melbourne.png is a great diagram, but Leila Road is shown too close to North Road. It should be a bit closer to the Rosstown Railway line than it is to North Road. At its Eastern end, Leila Road hits Murrumbeena Road near the start of the first bend (but I am not sure that Murrumbeena Road has always had a bend - I have seen old street directories (1950's) that show it bisecting what is now Duncan MacKinnon Reserve) 220.253.22.242 (talk) 01:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mulhouse C2 trams

Hey, thanks for fixing up the article on that. It needed expanding because my information wasn't precise. That tram needed an article anyway. Maybe read my last reply and catch up...


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 05:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Melbourne - Albury Gauge Conversion

Well, its been made public and official, the 'historic' Victorian Railways BG track will soon be gone for ever (in 2010).

I personally think that it is a disgrace for Victoria. It should be kept as a heritage monument so that people could see what the North East of Victoria looked like before it time today, also permitting Anniversary Spirit of Progress trains or other heritage trains.

You know what, I'm getting the feeling that Melbourne and Victoria will become Standard Gauge in a few years time now........ what a shame that would be to see our original track (and it does a good job to) just dissapear into thin air.........

OK, so now N class locos (N468 will definitely be converted) are being converted to fit this stupid rail line Vic Passenger services, as well as carriages? Thats not on. Though I can definitely say that if this is a success than Victoria will be as risk of a major gauge conversion...... which I think is ridiculously dumb and money wasting.

I not happy with this issue. What is your verdict on this?


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 05:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


PS: I've send other replies though you haven't responded yet.

I've just been busy with Uni and exams so haven't had much time to reply.
The gauge conversion is a waste of money in one way, but so is having two tracks side by side and one train not being able to pass another. One hopes the money spent will mean rail will be better able to do what is supposed to do, and get trucks of the Hume Freeway. I recall reading that Adelaide - Perth has 90% of freight on rail, but Melbourne - Sydney is only about 30%.
I dunno what locos or carriages will get gauge converted - they are all supposed to get the new livery like N468 over time, it was just first one out. Most of the V/Line track and Connex lines won't get converted - there are just too many trains. It's more the lines to Mildura and the other ones up north that have no passenger services that have seen conversion proposals.
There really isn't that much heritage in the track with anyway - I have trouble telling the difference unless the track is dual gauge. The line will will still be there, just a tad different. Wongm (talk) 07:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Melb - Albury line

Hey Wongm, you didn't post any links or notes on my talk page so I was unaware of your replies. You know what, keep studying for your University exams and my messages will we waiting for you when you reply. I wish you all the best with your exams.

OK, this project is partially a wast of money. What they should have done was to have converted both lines to DG, permitting extra V/Line trains and Pac Nat/CountryLink trains, therefore this being the most simplest and practical solution to the problem. Getting congestion of the road is a problem, though using this idea that I've written above is more straight forward.

I am absolutely wrapped that Melbourne wont become SG, because it could create problems for the state which could result in a waste of money. The line to Mildura should have passenger services (BG) already, why not?

I could guess which locos/ cars could be converted but the N carriages and broad gauge only, so how are they supposed to converted them? (H cars as well) and what do you mean by to many trains? Rolling stock?

Well, I got the idea in my head that the Sprit of Progress and the building of the line would have made it special in a way, and you can tell in track size SG from BG and what noise is made when a car travels over a SG crossing and a BG.

I my opinion, I don't like any V/Line lines being something besides SG. We are a BG city and thats it full stop. No conversions.


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 05:08, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


PS: The VLocity 1300 cars, when are they coming to service exactly?

[edit] BRS carriage - S type carriage

Well, its good that you redirected the article. I was waiting for someone to do that, especially you. You're absolutley right, though it was an experiment to test how fast someone could pick up and fix something, good for pointing that out. Mind you the BRS carriages are a favourite of mine, cause of WCR, I wouldn't mind owing one myself. Also check out 707 Operations.

See you later......


WikiSandbox1 (talk) 10:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TfD

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Seth Rogen

Template:Seth Rogen has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Darrenhusted (talk) 11:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)