| Revision as of 03:49, 25 May 2006 editXaosflux (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Importers, Interface administrators, Oversighters, Administrators83,863 edits →[]: re← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:56, 25 May 2006 edit undoRappy30V3 (talk | contribs)5 editsm fucker!!!!Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ] | |||
| == Flood of new templates == | |||
| Hi Kim, | |||
| These are the latest: | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| They look like this: | |||
| {{phylo}} | |||
| {{speciation}} | |||
| {{origin of life}} | |||
| If you have any suggestions for articles to include that I may have overlooked, please let's have them. And if you want to give a hand with the upcoming evolutionary ecology template, which is a little short of material, please do: ]. | |||
| Best wishes, ] <sub><span style="text-decoration:none">]</span></sub> <sup><span style="position: relative; left: -36px; margin-right: -36px; text-decoration:none;">]</span></sup> 04:27, 18 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Natural selection, Qg == | |||
| Hi Kim, thanks for your comments on ]. It's nice that there are new people willing to take it forward now that I've resigned from that article. | |||
| I wasn't sure what exactly you were trying to do when you temporarily changed the link from the qg template. Just for your interest, when I add the template to an article, I always remove those links from the "see also" section that are also present in the template. So you should be able to find the articles that link to any given subject not through the template by diffing, say against . Hope this is useful. - ] <sub><span style="text-decoration:none">]</span></sub> <sup><span style="position: relative; left: -36px; margin-right: -36px; text-decoration:none;">]</span></sup> 09:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Thanks== | |||
| How nice of you, I'm really touched. It's just good to be able to help with someone smart and enthusiastic] 20:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Sexual articles== | |||
| It looks as if we have similar ideas regarding sexual articles, especially regarding those containing original research. I hate to read articles containing potential lies. If you'd like me to take a look at anything you've nominated for deletion, let me know. ] 06:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Please dont merge articles without first discussing it with the people editing the page, especially when you are moving to an unknown name thank you. This should be either reverted back or move to Australian Ring Neck the Twenty Eight '''is not''' a Port Lincoln parrot. The Port Lincoln is not found in the southwest of Western Australia, there is over 1,000 km between habitats. ] 01:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == HOX9 == | |||
| I thought it would be better to reply to you comment in the ] here rather cluttering the AfD with my non relevant reply. Thank you for the explanation, a I stated genetics is not my strong point, I am now a lot clearer and can now easily see how I was heading down the wrong path in regard to clusters. Thanks --]] 16:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Australian Ringneck == | |||
| Hi Kim, source for the status of the twenty eight are local media the only major print media here is paid subscriptions so cant access there, it was a big issue here about a month ago. I'll need to track down paper source for cite as there isnt any sufficiently quoteable sources from the net. The best net referrence to the issues are from New Zealand where they cite dept Conservation and Land Management , Agriculture Protection Board and University of Western Australia. | |||
| If you want to remove the paragraph from the article go for it, I have a copy which I'll work on and use to replace when I can sufficiently cite. ] 02:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| You have done exceptionally well with this article, even more so as I haven't always been the most co-operative with its developement. I listed it for GA status and that recieved a positive response within hours. ] 15:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Argument style and the Turing test == | |||
| You know, what's-his-name often reminds me of ] when he responds to arguments -- it's just about as productive to argue with him. ] 02:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Yeah well, I wish I could think of an excuse. ] 03:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I know. Hope springs eternal, but I think he's stuck -- he's invested too much of his ego in this silliness, and now he's convinced he is Rosa Parks. But once he started attacking the admins, that was all she wrote. ] 03:16, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Natural selection == | |||
| I am impressed by anything you and Gleng agree on. I have notified ] - as a rule, I defer to him on these matters and I think you would be wise to ask his advice. I won't do this myself, but I think ] and ] can be trusted on for well-informed views. I encourage you to solicit their views. I am swamped right now and cannot give it a close look for a few days. But if Guettarda and either Rikhurzhen or Frank Sweet give it the thumbs up, just go ahead and make it the new article. And if Marcos stries screwing with it, I will protect it. ] | ] 22:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thumbs up from me. If it comes to a vote, please include my comment (I really won't be around after today). ] 23:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :You might also solicit ]'s opinion, if he's around. ] 23:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Agreed. Graft is always thoughtful and well-informed too, worth seeking out. ] | ] 23:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Done, done and done. And I have solicite comments of a valued colegue who would definatly give comments if he thinks things should be written different. :-)] <sup>]</sup> 23:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I assure you that if, in addition to Guettarda's thumb's up, Rikurzhen, FrankWSweet, and Graft agree, you can very confidently make the permanent (as it were) change. ] | ] 00:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I see Rikurzhen left some general feedback/advice - which all seems reasonable to me. Can you incorporate it? ] | ] 00:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| re above...how about adding something like | |||
| It is important to note that, while natural selection provides an explanation for the origin of adaptations, natural selection does not inevitably lead to adaptations, nor does it necessarily lead to an increase in the fitness of individual organisms. For example, natural selection operating at the level of genes can give rise to 'parasitic' elements in the DNA (see ].)?] 16:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Biological Psychiatry arbitration == | |||
| Thanks for your recent letter in my user page. I’m just curious: shouldn’t part of the ongoing talk in workshop page have already been moved to ] as Stifle has suggested? . Also, how long you feel this process will take: days? weeks? more than a month? I don’t feel comfortable to edit until it’s all over. —] 22:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I responded you in my subpage. Thanks. I already posted a brief entry in biopsych talk page, as you suggested, but an editor has replied. He only wants a most brief mention of the FDA warnings. What would you recommend? —] 04:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hi Kim. I’ve seen your comment in biopsych talk page. Frankly, it would be a lot easier if someone else writes the concrete proposal. The material is all there in my subpage or the FDA bullet quotes. I simply don’t think it’s wise that I do the job during this process. (Perhaps Solo999 who has recently reentered the arena will give us a hand?) —] 03:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Whats wrong with ] and ] that you have to change it to ]? '''All''' are the '''same'''. --] 00:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Lou Franklin == | |||
| Re: Lou Franklin—I'd suggest just ignoring the posts on his talk page. If we assume good faith to what is probably an unreasonable extent, it seems that we are unable to effectively explain the arguments that you (and I, and others) have placed on his page, and that further reiteration and recapitulation is likely to be unproductive. | |||
| If we don't assume a maximum of good faith, he's just trolling to get a rise out of you (and I, and others) to amuse himself during the remainder of his block. Either way, it's not productive, and if he is trolling, then I don't like to see him get the satisfaction of a response. ](]) 01:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Bouquet== | |||
| ]]] | |||
| Thanks, I am honered! ] <sup>]</sup> 16:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Christian Naturism issue== | |||
| Kim, ] is having an issue with an anon revert-warring because of a link to a place that apparently in the past 'may' have had some unsuitable images on their site, and which the anon (who for reasons 'we wouldn't understand' cant id themselves & get an account...) knows the site admin of, and I guess has a beef with...long story that boils down to censorship &c. Have tried to reason, won't listen, next option is 'prob' to get someone to semi-protect the page, you seem to have some more wisdom/experience in terms of how WP handles 'issues'; can I get you to either have a look or tell me where to go (figuratively of course {{smiley|1}}). Cheers, ] 14:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| 's alright - I think they semi have it under control now. Thanks for stopping by. Tot ziens. ] 01:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Coming Clean == | |||
| KimvdLinde, there is a message for you and all others who put up with my recient antics on my talk page. ] 20:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I understand you are probally still upset at me. However, I knew the vandalism would easily be reverted and I appoligize for all of my rude comments directed at you. The reason I used my comuter a work was so my administrator election would not be affected. Thanks! ]` | |||
| In respone to asking every new admin canidate "that question." Your're scaring me now! Im going to do a poll at the disscussion page you started to see if revealing my identity would make people less inclined to vote yes to me. ] | |||
| == Hi Kim! == | |||
| I can never resist saying hi to someone who shares my name. :-P | |||
| Mindspillage pointed out that you're also a biologist, which is definately cool, so fair enough, I went and read your user page :-) | |||
| Hmm, you've given up on working on the evolution and natural selection pages? That's not good. That's still a project I've had on the backburner for a while. | |||
| Well, since I'm here anyway, maybe we could work on that? I haven't worked on any articles in a while. and I'm pretty good at dealing with people with differing beliefs on wikipedia. ] 21:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Biobarnstar for you == | |||
| {{award2|color=#e9f9ff|image=Bio_barnstar2.png|size=110px|topic=The Bio-Barnstar|text=For orchestrating the rewriting of ] and many editorial contributions as part of this effort. ] (] • ]) 14:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC) }} | |||
| Thanks, I am honered! ] <sup>]</sup> 16:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Revert== | |||
| Becuase, unless I am mistaken, the digits changed and it looks like the intro of false info. Feel free to revert. ''']''']|<sup>]</sup> 16:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Well I obviously didn't look at the history. ''']''']|<sup>]</sup> 16:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == List of Puerto Rican birds == | |||
| Thank you for all your help on ]. I will soon (probably today after I add the last of the pictures) nominate it for featured list. I would like your opinion on the matter. Is it ready? ] (]) 17:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Edit to Funnybunny's RfA == | |||
| Hi, you appear to have removed all the oppose comments from Funnybunny's RfA in edit. Could you explain why you did this? Was it a mistake? I have reverted your edit. Thanks, ]]] 04:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks, I thought it must have been a mistake, especially given your record here on Misplaced Pages. Glad we could sort it out quickly. All the best, ]]] 04:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Barnstar thanks == | |||
| Thank you for your kindness. I am humbled by your barnstar. ] (]) 17:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Nat Sel== | |||
| Hey Kim, I hope to have time to look at the new article soon. I've been hanging out at the hospital with my new daughter while stuff piles up on my desk at work. ] 00:36, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Unequiocal evidence for the operation of Hamilton's Rule in humans == | |||
| Hi Kim, | |||
| I am writing a paper on the operation of Hamilton's Rule in humans, and have asked the question below on the HR discussion page. As you seem to be very knowledgeable in this field, I was wondering if you might give your view? | |||
| It is unethical to manipulate genetic relatedness in humans. Furthermore, without exception, all studies of HR in humans to this date suffer one common drawback: the evidence is entirely observational, and it is therefore in no case possible to exclude categorically all confounding variables (interaction time, reciprocity etc.), so as to make an unequivocal test of the claim that human altruistic behaviour is modulated by the genetic relatedness, when other factors are held constant. | |||
| In the light of this, what would constitue unequiocal evidence for the operation of Hamilton's Rule in humans ? ] 08:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == LOL == | |||
| thx for claryfying. in this case, im the one who needs your help! best--] 18:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == My RFA == | |||
| {| cellpadding=2 style="border: solid blue; background-color: lightyellow" | |||
| |- | |||
| | ] | |||
| | Thank you, KimvdLinde, for voting in my ''']'''. It closed with a final result of '''75/1/0'''. Now that I am an administrator here, I will continue to improve this encyclopedia, using my new tools to revert vandalism, block persistent vandals, protect pages that have been vandalized intensively, and close ]. Any questions? Please contact me by adding a new section on my . Again, thanks to all of you who participated!!! -- ] ] ] ] ] 23:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| ==VandalProof 1.2 Now Available== | |||
| <div style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"> | |||
| ] | |||
| After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now ''available for download!'' Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features ]. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to ], I now have an account on <span class="plainlinks"></span> with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my ] tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to ] and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your ] for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --] (]) 02:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| ==Lovebird== | |||
| sure thing regarding tone down. regarding the following paragraph from lovebird: "Lovebirds are very active and require a safe space for flight in addition to a roomy cage. They require lots of toys and things to chew on and play with. Without daily flight, a roomy cage, many toys and things to play with, and -- most importantly -- constant social interaction (i.e., a mate), they may resort to feather-plucking, which can be hard to stop. It is also a good idea to provide a bird bath tub, as they love to take baths almost every day. After taking a shower, many times they like to sun themselves in order to dry off." | |||
| There are several opinions presented as facts, particularly the need for flight. There is wide belief that pet parrots should be clipped and therefore not allowed to fly. Whether we are in agreement with this is irrelevent but my many birds are all clipped and do not fly yet I asses them as being happy and healthy. I would like to adjust the statement about daily flight being a requirement for a happy bird. This is clearly an opinion though it is stated as a fact. Also, constant social interaction with a mate is incorrect. Come to think of it I don't think the term "i.e." is even used correctly in this context... But whatever. I will await your response before editing the flying opinion here. Thanks. btw, am I using your discussion page correctly? I am unsure where I should be typing all this. {{unsigned|66.235.35.207}} | |||
| :I moved it down to the end. If you get to a talk page, you will see a set of tabs at the top. One of them contains a + and if you click that one, you are given the easiest option to add something to the page. The other thing that is generally a good practice is to sign your posts at the end with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> so that it is claer who wrote what. | |||
| :The problem with many of the pet sections on the pages of many parrot species is that it is more a how to guide, and full of persoanl experience. I think the best way would actually to make a new page that deals with parrots as pets in general and have subheaders when there is specific information about a species. That would clean up the species pages from it, and the repeated information. What about the flying, opinion as far as I am concerned. I think that would be the way to describe it. ] <sup>]</sup> 06:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you for the information. I agree that it is opinion. I will attempt to appropriately edit that piece. Also, I noticed "color" and "colour" are both used in the same sentence. Is that ok? ] 06:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::The policy on spelling is that an article obvious liked to a specific country gets the spelling of that country (Australian parrots -> australian spelling etc). If not, it follows the spelling of the first page, and that was color. So, color should be used for this page. ] <sup>]</sup> 06:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Awesome changes, really like them. I'm just going to do a minor tweak on the grammer in your most recent edits. please don't be offended. ] 06:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Go ahead, I am not a native English speaker, and I am dyslectic, so feel free to change my spelling errors and grammar.] <sup>]</sup> 06:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Two more quick questions, the picture on the lovebird page, umm, makes those birds look as if they are living in crowded and dirty conditions (note the feces on the perch). Am I allowed to replace the picture and if so how do I do that? I imagine there are instructions on how to do that somewhere on wikipedia, could you point me to them? | |||
| Also, what does the 'at venus' above your name refer to? thanks ] 06:50, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Regarding your last message? How do I make an account? Is there a subscription fee? ] 06:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::If you have a nice image, either one that you made yourself, or one that is not limited by copyright issues (Misplaced Pages does not allow copyrighted images), you can upload them without a problem. At the left, under the search, you have a series of linke, inclusing one that says '''Upload file'''. Just follow the instructions, choose the appropriate license (easy ones are GNU GFDL (self made) or related). With that, you give away the copyright and make it possible that anyone in the world will use it, and you can not prohibite that. After you have done that, you can replace the image, and I think you are right, a better imnage would be nice (especially of a wild color individual). | |||
| :::::::As for the second question, many people at the internet assume that everybody is male, but woman come from venus (men come from mars), so I added that as to indicate that I am a girl/woman. | |||
| :::::::It is 100% FREE! And at the right upper corner, there is a link that you can use. ] <sup>]</sup> 06:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Biopsych == | |||
| Thanks for your message. I appreciate your sentiments and am grateful for your advice to Cesar. I have a lot of time for him as an editor - and as a person - in the brief time i have interacted with him. | |||
| I'm frustrated at myself as much as him, for the way that the Arbitration is progressing. I do feel he was unfairly been dragged into something due to his unfortunate alliance with Ombudsman. Nevertheless, having interacted with him in ] and now ], i'm also concerned that is strong advocacy means he genuinely struggles to distinguish between fact and opinion on this subject. I think unless he can accept that and try and take a step back from the "us v them" viewpoint, he is going to continue to come into conflict and next time ] will not hold up. As he does not seem to accept it himself, I'm hoping that ArbCom will find a way of instilling that gently, without resorting to bans. | |||
| The irony here is that i have little interest in the field of psychiatry myself, originally only coming to it on a cleanup drive, and then, having worked with him previously, i was asked back to try and reason with Cesar when he began tagging with Ombudsman. I myself tried to take a middle ground but now i find myself trading accusations at ArbCom with the person that i'd hoped to help avoid taking there! I guess i felt it is a somewhat necesary after Cesar decided against a newbie defence to run with the revisionist FDA angle. Anyway, sorry to come over here and bend your ear over this, but i feel you are doing a sterling job on councilling Cesar so i thought i would at least try and explain myself. Best. ] ] 08:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : Very perceptive of you, once again. I'd fully support a mentorship in the manner you propose, also. | |||
| :I'm not too bothered about getting my knuckles rapped by ArbCom. My contribution to the article itself was only the proposition and drafting of the criticism section - so i'm hopeful that the Arbitrators are smart enough to see that - but its a new experience for me also, so perhaps i deserve a warning too. Who knows. I think some of the other editors were taking too hard a line in the other direction, as evidenced by trying to find a middle ground during the discussions, so would support an intermediate solution. I think that is the way it is going anyway. I think will refrain from communicating directly with Cesar now, as i don't think he is receptive to my comments and our discussions are becoming confrontational to noone's benefit. Good luck with your mentorship idea - and do let me know if i can help in anyway. ] ] 18:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :: Hi KvdL. If i may be so bold, now might be a good to to propose that mentorship you mentioned . It appears the concept of ] and ] still have not hit home, even after you warned him. False accusations of vandalism and stalking on a ArbCom page is not going to do his case any good whatsoever. ] ] 09:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Hrm.... The scientific names should be in italics. Otherwise it's a nice image. My only problem in using images to convey data is that when the data changes, the image must change as well. ] has a phylogeny on it done purely in Wikicode, which anyone can update as our understanding changes. Your images can not be modified by just anyone - they need tools external to Misplaced Pages to be editted. - ] ] 10:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Yes, I have to dig into the code to make it italics. You can always leave the wikicode version commented out, and if there is a change, and the image can not be changed, you can always go back to that version. ] <sup>]</sup> 10:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Textbook suggestion?== | |||
| I see that you are an evolutionary biologist and a self-described "academic." Could you please suggest a few general texts on evolutionary biology that might be appropriate for someone with a decent background (some grad level) in molecular bio and genetics? I am very interested in the topic but don't know how to go about evaluating the texts that are out there. I am a fairly visually oriented person and find that the quality of graphs and charts makes a real difference to my understanding of materials so if you know of a text with good visuals, I would most appreciate it. This is a LOW PRIORITY request. I just want a readable text for my own purposes and it doesn't matter if you don't get around to answering this for several months or even skip it all together! Thanks. ] 21:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you for your suggestion of the Futuyama text. I've seen this text mentioned but didn't realize that it was such a recent publication. I will check it out soon. I hope the local college bookstore has this in stock. ] 21:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Natural Selection == | |||
| Ok first realize what the defintion of a Scientific Fact is and a Scientific Theory, because that is important to understanding what Natural Selection is. Thats like saying that Gravity is a fact not a theory, which it indeed is. Natural selection is the Scientific theory that is one of the many factors that proves that Evolution is indeed a fact. And its not up for me to prove to you whether natural selection is a only a theory, its yet to be proven so therefor it cant be considered a fact. {{unsigned|Redsox19488}} | |||
| Thats all you have to say why not substantiate why natural selection is not a theory instead of saying your wrong it seem that you know not of what your talking about it appears to me that you need to asses the ideas of which you determine that natural selection is a fact. Plus I believe that you should asses the ideals by which you edit the page because it is unfair for you to determine that it is indeed a fact due to your inept beliefs. I believe this is a biased statement in defense of your ideas. I mean not to scrutinize you I just think that you should show an unbiased view of something that I myself believe to be true. However for the sake of the causal person in such a time where comprehension of the truth is influential in the beliefs of evolution and creationism or intelligent design, I believe that your actions are unjust. {{unsigned|Redsox19488}} | |||
| I wish to express the sincerest apology, it was not meant to connote the idea of evolution as a theory as it indeed is a fact, however Natural Selection is a scientific theory and should be treated as that, and I would appreciate if you would do so{{unsigned|Redsox19488}} | |||
| ==CorbinSimpson's Request for Adminship== | |||
| <div style="background: #CCFFDD; border: 2px solid lime; line-height: 1.25x;">]'''Thanks for voting in my request for administrator rights, even though it failed (13/30/4).''' Sadly, work has forced me to respond to you all using a substituted message rather than a personalized response. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that administrators, to me, should be chosen and approved by the community, and I will continue working to become a better editor and Wikipedian. No matter what the alignment of your vote was, I will take your comments seriously and use them to improve myself. If you wish to discuss your comments personally with me, I would be more than glad to talk about things since the RfA is now over; just leave your concern on my talk page and we will sort things out. Thanks again for voting, and happy editing! - '''<font color="#003399">]</font>'' '''<sup><font color="#009933">]</font></sup>''</div> | |||
| == ] == | |||
| I've restored the TFD notice to this template, as the tfd debate on ] is not closed. Did I miss something here? — ] <sup>]</sup> 03:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the reply, I just updated it to a direct link to the current tfd page as tfd has gotten huge lately. The original nominator did not put the tfd template anywhere useful, that's why the date is off. — ] <sup>]</sup> 03:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC) | |||