User talk:Joelr31/Archive4

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Macedonia (terminology)

Thank you for your comment. Large scale modifications have taken place since you made it. For more details, please refer to the link above, and to the article itself. :NikoSilver: 12:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

History of PR

Hi Joel

Thanks for your message. I had a look at the article, and I'm afraid that I think it fails Criterion 2a by a long-shot. Is it likely to be featured on the main page soon?

How do you feel about the idea of listing the article for a major review, to motivate the main contributors to improve it?

Tony 13:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ciudad Seva

First things first: Hello! how you doing? I know I've been away from the wiki a long time, but i'm slowly coming back and I just wanted to let you know. As of right now I'm out of ideas of where I could be used to do some work so if you have any ideas feel free to drop by my talk page and let me know. The only topic I have on my mind right now is Luis López Nieves who is an important writer, a 'compatriota nuestro' (he is also family: uncle on my mother's side). I wanted to improve the articles relating to him as much as I can.

I started today the article about Ciudad Seva (the web site) as part of my attemps to imrpove the articles related to him. I thought about telling you (and some others) so that you can maybe drop by and help me fix and improve the article litle by litle (especially my horrible spelling). See you around.Nnfolz 19:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Phishing article

Hi, do you think that it should be moved to the FARC list or taken out of the FAR process? It's been there since 23 July. Changes are here: [1]. I've asked the regulars. What about Wikipedia? (Sandy thinks it should go to FARC.) Tony 15:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Joel. Are you under the impression that articles can't be moved directly from minor review to FARC? Tim Marskell and I discussed this a little while ago, and I think we concluded that it's OK to do so. Otherwise the whole process could take six weeks to delist an article, which he feels is too long. This brings me to a more basic question: should the minor and major review lists be merged? One reason not to have the minor review process is that it may act as a disincentive to contributors to take up the spade and improve the article ("Oh, just a minor tweak will do it; there's only a little bit to do; someone else can do it"). The system would be simpler if binary rather than ternary, and those who run the room (seems to be you, Tim, Sandy and I at the moment) would find it a little easier to keep track of time issues. I'm copying this text to the others, and to the FAR discussion page. Tony 22:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Projects List

Feel free to edit my talk page list as needed. I just wanted to get us started: treat it as your own entry. Sandy 19:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Closing FARCs early

Hey Joel. I noticed you closed a couple of the FARCs early this week (Henson and Bogart). I agree these articles were doomed; Henson was particularly bad and I was sort of itching to remove it myself. However, I think we need to stick with process and leave them two weeks. My worry is this: if we remove the "obvious" ones early, someone may come along and de-list a less than obvious one early as well and create a problem. By leaving everything for the same minimum period no one can complain that we didn't give them time. Make sense? Marskell 15:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I started a thread on the FAR talk. We'll see what the rest of the FAR cabal thinks ;) Marskell 16:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Chat

Hi Joel, thank you for your message. I'm going to slow down a bit in Wiki. The family has a lot of health issues. I am glad that I befriended you, a person who loves Puerto Rico as much as I. You're the only person that I trust enough to hand down "La Batuta".

On the other hand, I received this e-mail which made me happy and that I'm going to share with you:

Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 13:46:05 -0700 (PDT) From: astrid rodriguez <astridpr@yahoo.com> Subject: UN ILUSTRE BORICUA... To: opinion@elnuevodia.com

En la enciclopedia mundial de la internet Wikipedia, la cual funciona a base de colaboraciones gratuitas, hay un marín boricua llamado Tony, segun explica hijo de emigrantes boricuas a New York, que ha escrito cientos de articulos sobre los puertorriqueños mas ilustres los cuales han dado la vuelta al mundo poniendo nuestra isla en alto, destacando lo mejor de ella, por puro amor a Puerto Rico.

Ver pagina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marine_69-71

Tony tambien es el editor gratuito de "Puerto Rican Military History Channel of "El Boricua" a monthly cultural magazine".

Creo que este tipo de orgullosos puertorriqueños en el exterior, deben ser destacados en nuestras noticias, porque en vez de concentrarse en hacer famosos a lo vulgar, lo grosero, lo criminal, se debe destacar lo mejor de los ciudadanos de nuestra isla, lo mejor de aquellos que trabajan arduamente por hacer de lo nuestro LO MEJOR.

Solo así podremos modelar mejores ciudadanos.

Atentamente,

Astrid de Rodriguez Carolina, Puerto Rico

Imagine "me" UN ILUSTRE BORICUA (smile). Take care amigo, Tony the Marine 20:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Peralta

The article of Medal of Honor candidate, Rafael Peralta has been posted for deletion. Please express your opinion here:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rafael Peralta. Tony the Marine 02:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Page move for Charles Huggins

Thanks for dealing with that so quickly! Carcharoth 22:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Move requests for Elder Scroll related article

I've replied on my talkpage. I ask you reconsider and re-evaluate the nominations in question. -Randall Brackett 23:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Hammond Organ

Hi, thanks for your contribution on Hammonds. You changed electric to electronic. I believe that electronic, as this definition indicates, is used interchangeably with the word "digital." caused or operated by electric, magnetic, electro-magnetic, electro-chemical, or electro-mechanical energy. "Electronic" is sometimes used interchangeably with "digital". Most forms of electronic storage will be digital, but electronic storage can also be analogue (for example, some forms of electro-magnetic or magnetic storing data). (See also Digital and Analogue.) www.med.govt.nz/buslt/int_prop/digital/discussion/digital-08.html Certainly the new 2006 Hammonds are electronic organs, with computer chips and solid state circuitry.... But the old WW II era Hammonds were big ELECTRIC beasts, with electric motors spinning tonewheels and magnetic pickups. We are talking electric-guitar-type technology here -- wires, magnets, potentimeters, etc.NatMor 14:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Consensus question

I have been working on the backlog for WP:RM the last two days, and most the moves have been pretty straight forward, but this one is very close. It says in the guidelines that 60% is the minimum, but this seems too low for me. In the true style of consensus, I would normally look at the discussion for such a low support rating, and whichever side makes the best argument, would get the result. But the reasoning for this move is petty (for lack of a better word), and neither side makes an argument which causes me to make up my mind. Any advice? Thanks. --liquidGhoul 12:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Macedonia (terminology)

Hi. I see you've hardly edited since your opposition. The article has improved significantly since then. Please re-evaluate. :NikoSilver: 01:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

A few more FAR notes

Hey again. A few notes. You'll probably have seen this discussion on the FAR talk. I think, as I've emphasized there, that if there are little or no comments on a nom we should go default keep if citations are not an issue. If citations are absent, however, we may delist with only a couple of "removes" because we need to keep chipping away at the list of FAs absent citations. Make sense?

Also, look at the syntax on {{FARpassed}}. Pagrashtak has set up an option to insert the date and old version when closing the kept reviews. You can see it in action at the Zelda talk page.

Finally, I'm sure you'll notice the comments to this affect, but there seems to be consensus to leave Sarajevo open while improvements are being made. Cheers, Marskell 13:32, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I need your help

Please go to Talk:List of notable Puerto Ricans and address User:Cmh, who insists on removing our established criteria link from the page. He also wanted to remove our flag. Thank you Tony the Marine 15:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Bigtop/Miscellaneous objects

Could you restore this page because I need something to get? I'll delete it again once I'm done. Thanks! --Bigtop (tk||cb|em|ea) 03:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

my RfA

Thanks for your opinions in my RfA. Ultimately, the request did not pass, with a vote of (43/16/7). But your honest opinion was appreciated and I'll just keep right on doing what I do. Maybe I'll see ya around -- I'll be here!
Cheers! - CheNuevara 17:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Main page

When you add a template to something that's going to appear on the main page, don't forget to protect it from editing. You added {{pokenum}} to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 28, 2006 but didn't protect it. A vandal noticed and added an explicit picture to that template, causing it to appear on the main page.--Srleffler 20:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar for you I hope you didn't puke upon seeing that vandalism

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For oyu for reverting that Very Disgusting )To say the least Vandalism to the featured article. good job! Æon Insane Ward 21:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hope you didn't get sick when you reverted, I would have but I had to go and puke. Æon ^{Insane Ward} 21:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy

Hey, there ! I'm neutral on Final Fantasy; whatever is the consensus so far is fine with me. Sandy 16:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

FF

Yes, go ahead and close it. I'm kind of regretting FARCing StarCraft, but it's done now. Tony 16:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Final Fantasy

I posted a note on the page. We can wait a day or two more. Sorry, my time has been very limited the last few days. Feel free to close the stuff above Sarajevo that is past two weeks. Marskell 21:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and closed it. Jeepers the page is getting long. I'm tempted if more come up before others get closed to delist them and gently ask nominators to wait a while. Marskell 16:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thx for adding the passed template on FFX. I've been rushing in my work at various internet cafes and forget. Marskell 08:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Content fork?

What is the difference between Category:Knights of the Order of the Bath and Category:Knights of the Bath? Joelito (talk) 20:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Craigy144 tells me the former is correct and the latter wrong, so ... please help move them across :-) - Kittybrewster 20:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

thank you. learning all the time - Kittybrewster 20:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Atri, Italy

Thanks for the help with the Atri article.JVian 15:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Joelr31, Thanks for supporting my RfA. I am honored that the consensus was to allow me the added privilege of the admin mop. I appreciate your kind words in my RFA and your note of congratulations. — ERcheck (talk) 01:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Bill in U.S. House of Representatives contains one of my articles

The following Bill H.R. 3440 Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa Post Office Building Designation Act introduced to the United States House of Representatives by Congressman Luis Fortuño, contains the mini-biography of Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa which I wrote. What a pleasant surprise (smile). Tony the Marine 17:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Your porject

Joel, I checked out your Sandbox and all I could say is WOW! You're article has featured article written all over it. I know it isn't finished and that you have more to add but, I really like what I have seen so far. You are right there isn't anything like it in the internet. It's like when I wrote the Military history of Puerto Rico, there was nothing like it in the net. Don't you think that it would be nice to received some credit for the all the work you're doing and time that you're putting into this project? Let me know when you're finished, I want to be one of the first ones to read the completed job. Tony the Marine 22:09, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

NEDM review

Heya Joel, I am relatively new to wikipedia though I have been using it anon for a long time. I was wondering if I could ask for a quick review of the NEDM deletion discussion page. I know that various fans of the genre probably submitted material for the page that seemed akin to vandalism. While thier controbutions were probably substandard, I believe that the actual subject matter deserves a more unbiased study from a third party researcher. If you could drop in and give us your opinion on the matter- I think they would be quite happy to hear what you think about something less 'fanbased' being entered in it's place. Thanks! --Dashhammer 12:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Henry I & Henry II of Poland

Hi. You closed two RMs for Henry I the Bearded and Henry II the Pious; but you seem to have moved them on top of each other. Can you fix this when you have time? Regards, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 19:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

More closing

I have made vote-like comments on the three at the bottom of the page so I won't close them. It looks like there's some consensus to leave Papal Conclave and Phishing open a bit, but Lastovo seems doomed. Marskell 19:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Puerto Rico

Why do you continue to add the Task Force link to the Puerto Rico article? That web page is already linked further below in the Politics section. Joelito (talk) 15:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The political relationship between PR and the USA is characterized by ambiguity. http://www.guiyao.com/mio.html Too many Puerto Ricans use the word Commonwealth as if it meant something by itself. This report is not the only (perhaps not even the best) source of information, but it does speak unambiguously. I don't like everything it says, take this for example:

"The Federal Government may relinquish US sovereignty by ... ceding the territory to another nation".

That statement should make any boricua throw up. The problem is that i think its true, i don't think they will really do it, but it is a reality check, they could if they wanted (they have the sovereignty, we do not). We boricuas must wake up, and for the first time since 1493, stand on our own feet. I truly think this report is the federal gov speaking crearly, unambiguously to us. Why do i continue to add the link?, because i will love to see that every boricua reads this report. After that they (boricuas) will reach their own opinion. Vjperez (talk)02:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

not reference anything?????Vjperez (talk) 05:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Fauna of Puerto Rico

It looks great. Is there any specific area you would like my input, do you want an indepth review, or just general input here and there? As you probably noticed, I'm on a wikibreak, and I probably won't have a chance to say much before the weekend. Guettarda 23:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Ace Books erroneous FAR

Sorry about that; still new at this. Thanks for fixing it -- I'll see if I can get the nom right next time. Mike Christie 04:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Phishing FARC

In my defense about using the footnote before the puncuation, that is the style i'm in habit of using from college. my mistake for puting it in the wrong location. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 13:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion

I wrote the article Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa Post Office Building Designation Act, the first bill in history that contains an article from Wikipedia. It appeared on DYK and right away somebody "tags" it for deletion. I inviteyou to express yourself here:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Jose Celso Barbosa Post Office Building Designation Act. Thank you Tony the Marine 16:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Fauna of Puerto Rico

What can I say? This is truely one of the best articles that I have read. You have such talent for writing. The article is well written and very interesting. What I see is an article with feature article written all over it. Talking about featured articles, some people would like to see my article 2nd Battalion 9th Marines (It was my Battalion) nominated for FA, but I don't want to go through all the hassle.

It is people like you whose articles about Puerto Rico have educated thousands of people who read Wikipedia and have put "En Alto" the name of our island. Tony the Marine 05:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Changes to List of countries and outlying territories by total area

What is the reason for ur bigotic treatment of the matter. u must be american. azad kashmir is the term used by pakistan. second, all the terroties that r not administered by india r not included, so that leaves nothing, so the bracket statement doesn't need to be there. india claims the pak occupied kashmir also to be a part of its geography. so actually its aread should also be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ankitsingh83 (talk • contribs)

Ghulam Kashmir

Ghulam Kashmir is what the area is known as officially. It means occupied Kashmir. i will soon make a page on it. i m not attacking anyone, i m just writing what the fact is, coz i know more about that part. And u can't block someone who is editing a right thing.

Fauna of Puerto Rico

On 16 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fauna of Puerto Rico, 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.

Brilliant article, Joel. It's ready for an FA nom already, in my opinion. -- Samir धर्म 09:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Dennise Quinonez

How is it that the picture doesn't help identify who she is? I think that until a better picture can be found that one should be left there, after all there are no copyright violations or anything like that. Cjrs 79 14:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

what do you consider a commercial link?

Mifi601 15:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)mifi601

List of Countries by Areas

Explain ur reason for continuous reversals to the page given above. I am explaining mine -

1. Regarding PRC and USA at no. 3 & 4 PRC should kept over USA bcoz of Alphabetical order. Even if that is not considered, the HK and the territories administered by Taiwan make PRC 3rd. USA itself had recognized in 2004 Taiwan as an integral part of China. And also United Nations includes Republic of China's non-Taiwanese territories as PRC's.

2. Regarding the Ghulam Kashmir, most of the world doesn't recognize that title. It is considered universally as Pakistan Occupied Kashmir(for which there is a page). And removing the bracket part of includes territories not administered by India, well that is evident from the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir page as is given in this page. So there is no territory of India taken into account in this page that is not administered by India.

3. Regarding Argenitinian claim in Antarctica, a lot of countries claim that but nothing has been written about them bcoz Antarctica's claim is not recognized and neither administrative. So it is pointless to even mention that.

Explain ur reasons for continous reversals to the original page. If u don't follow the three-reversals rule ur account maybe blocked.

How to Know which user edited a page last?

Thx for the last message. I thought it was use. But please do tell me how to find out the user that last edited a page. - ankitsingh83

Thanks for the Info

Thanks for the inf. and i was tring to delete my comment but sorry about that, won't happen again.

Ankitsingh83 16:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)ankitsingh83

Jaguar

Thanks for the link and looking at the page. As an amateur, I want to be careful about taxonomy/phylogeny. I have some generic "most closely related to the leopard" sentences in the links at the moment, but I still have some questions. Before I started editing, the page stated that the Tuscany lion was a sub-species under the name Tuscany jaguar, but it seemed to me this was a Wiki invention and that the cat is an ancestor of the lion, not a jag relative. But then your link states that "The leopard and the lion represent the last species separation within the jaguar, leopard, and lion clade (Janczweski et al., 1995; Peters and Tonkin-Leyhausen, 1999)." Does this mean the leopard and lion are more closely related to each other than either is to the jaguar? That doesn't seem right! Any help appreciated.

The page has improved anyhow. I've spent two months staring at FA removals and decided I ought to get back to mainspace editing and get another page up to FA standard myself :). Marskell 21:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Fauna of Puerto Rico: exceptional work to bring such a full page out of the sandbox! I'll try to read it more closely to help with ce'ing. To be Tony-like for a second, the first sentence has to be a definition. "The fauna of Puerto Rico is considered low in richness but high in rarity" is a description, not a definition :).

I notice you reference works specifically ("Smith has argued...") while not using Harvard refs. I've debated with myself about this. I often write sentences with "one study has shown" where I think it would be fairer to just state "Smith's study...", but I can't decide what is exactly right for Wiki.

Regarding jaguar, OK, I do think I roughly understand clades, but my reading and your explanation seem to be: jag speciation first, then lion and leopard. What makes intuitive sense (and what the article sort of suggests now) is a common panthera ancestor, followed by an intermediate jag/leopard ancestor, followed by a subsequent split—ie., jags and leopards have a close and most recent split. Of course, evolution is not always 2, 4, 8... I'll try and look at the articles cited within the article itself. Marskell 22:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

FAR of anarcho-capitalism

Why did you close it? Everybody hasn't had a chance to vote, yet. --AaronS 16:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Those are good reasons, and I wasn't assuming that you didn't have any. :) It's just that I happen to know that a few people haven't been active in a few weeks, but were originally very active in the FAR. A recent rise in sock puppetry regarding anarchism-related articles has driven them off for a bit. To date, I am the only original person who thought that the article should be reviewed to have voted. --AaronS 18:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I have notified interested parties of the closing of the vote. I request that there be a wee extension while they consider whether or not they would like to vote or add anything to the discussion. This includes editors who I believe might vote to reject as well as editors who I believe might vote to keep. Due to the controversiality that often surrounds this article, I feel that it's important that we make sure that the issue will be settled when it is settled. --AaronS 18:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Eh? Is there any really point in denying my request for extension? What harm is done? --AaronS 18:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:Country article

It has been taken to the talk page. Thanks so much for the reminder, and for taking action towards his trouble-making activities. — Instantnood 20:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

"Trouble-making" indeed, coming from someone who has had three arbcoms under his belt.--Huaiwei 20:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

In response to user:Huaiwei's remarks above, please take note of who were involved in the ArbCom cases, the fact that the "second" one was opened based on technical ground because the "first" one was improperly closed, and the "third" one was done in my absence (when I was blocked and could not submit any statement). Thanks. — Instantnood 20:53, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Caribbean avian biogeography

Hi; sorry for taking so long to answer your request. Here are some references to Caribbean avian biogeography I found. Many should be available online.

• Am. Mus. Novit. 1712: 1 (The relationships of the West Indian species of Aratinga (Aves, Psittacidae))
• Am. Nat. 163: 227 (History and the Species-Area Relationship in Lesser Antillean Birds)
• Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 12: 75 (Zoogeography of West Indian vertebrates in relation to Pleistocene climatic cycles)
• Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27: 163 (Historical Biogeography of West Indian Vertebrates)
• Auk 3: 1 (The Birds of the West Indies, Including the Bahama Islands, the Greater and the Lesser Antilles, Excepting the Islands of Trinidad and Tobago) - further installments: 3: 187, 3: 337, 3: 454, 4: 37, 4: 108, 4: 223, 4: 311, 5: 48, 5: 155
• Auk 118: 35 (Molecular Systematics and Biogeography of Antillean Thrashers, Tremblers, and Mockingbirds (Aves: Mimidae))
• Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 238: 2 (Caribbean Paleogeography)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 3: 179 (Zoogeographical notes on the breeding Passeriformes of Puerto Rico)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 6: 173 (Affinities of the Antillean Avifauna)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 14: 177 (Status of the genus Vermivora in the Greater Antilles with new records from Jamaica and Puerto Rico)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 14: 183 (Distribution, probable evolution and fossil record of West Indian woodpeckers)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 24: 11 (Warblers of the West Indies: I. The Virgin Islands)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 24: 112 (Warblers of the West Indies: II. The Western Caribbean)
• Caribb. J. Sci. 26: 75 (Warblers of the West Indies: III. The Lesser Antilles)
• Cladistics 10: 43 (Reply: Towards a biogeography of the Caribbean)
• Evolution 48: 1041 (Historical Biogeography of the Bananaquit (Coereba flaveola) in the Caribbean Region: A Mitochondrial DNA Assessment)
• J. Biogeogr. 12: 445 (Zoogeographic Patterns and Tectonic History of Jamaica and the Northern Caribbean)
• J. Caribbean Ornithol. 17: 23 (Independent Geographic Origins of the Genus Amazona in the West Indies)
• Matthew I. Williams & David W. Steadman: The Historic and Prehistoric Distribution of Parrots (Psittacidae) in the West Indies

Apart from that, I have come across some papers on other taxa (like icterids), and of course there are many papers dealing with specific locations. If you need anything more specific, write me a not and I'll look what I can find. Dysmorodrepanis 16:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Auto Blocked

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. I believe that I am suffering from an autoblock right now. Here are the details:

My IP address is 165.21.155.12 The name of the blocking admin, which is Joelr31. The reason I am blocked is: Autoblocked because my IP address has been recently used by "Huaiwei". The reason given for Huaiwei's block is: "edit warring". Please look into this matter as soon as possible. Thank You! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 01:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Dawson's Creek Featured Article Status

Hey. I'm not sure why you removed the featured article status from Dawson's Creek. The link you provided to why it was removed has 3 support votes and 0 disagree votes. So what's going on? Thanks. --DieHard2k5 17:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)