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.
Oh yes. Sorry I haven't had a chance to look at the dance portal much lately, I've been a tad busy, but scientific method is right up my alley. I'll be glad to help out. I might not have a chance until tomorrow to have a thorough go at it, but I'll have a look right now. riana_dzasta05:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply
OK, I've got a todo list goin' on the talkpage, and I'll set to work and get a related portals bar. But yeah, you should definitely work your magic touch with the colours and layout, it's dead boring right now! riana_dzasta05:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Christmas spirit? :) It's not bad, we definitely need some interesting images and content to back it up though. It's hard to find images for something as philosophical as scientific method, though... riana_dzasta06:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Notbluenotgreen. I challenge you you pick something better from
that not list!
Those three form a "core" all the others relate to. Maybe an additional link to
Portal:Science/Portals and WikiProjects#Portals would be enough with a bookmark to the portal box. Use the "portal" image in that box.
At the end of the talk page, someone mentioned expanding the scope/title to "Philosophy of Science." How many "umbrella" portals (science, history of, philosophy of, ...) do we need? Before we get too far into it, is this portal at the right level of discoure? (I'll read you reply in the morning.)
Rfrisbietalk06:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply
That doesn't sound like a bad idea (renaming to philosophy of science). Scientific method is important, but I think the scope of philosophy of science would be broader (allowing us much more room to do things with the portal!) Maybe I'll drop a question over at WikiProject Science... riana_dzasta06:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Having started the 3 portals Science, History of science and Scientific method, I must say that I oppose moving the Scientific method portal to a new name. That said, I am happy to aid in the construction of Portal:Philosophy of Science if that is what you need. Please let's just leave Scientific method in a portal for itself. Otherwise, if you feel confident about working on Portal:Philosophy of Science by yourselves, then more power to you. --
Ancheta Wis21:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi, I just saw your note on the talk page, so I withdrew the proposal and started a new one. How much do you want me to "roll back"? I hope to see you at
Portal:Philosophy of science.
...do you plan on doing anything about all the redirects and out-of-date page name references you created by moving the page? :-)
Your message arrived while I was posting
this – methinks it means something does need to be done...? (Apologies to've missed it...) Yours,
David(
talk)13:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Maybe there aren't that many "unlinked" references, like the page header, so I changed that. If I come across others, I'll just do it. :-)
Rfrisbietalk16:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Wow, that's cool, thanks! I'm just not sure what you mean about that "in a few months time" business. I'm just waiting for the backlog to clear up a bit.
Hi Rfrisbie. A big thank for offering your help. This
fish portal took me so much time and energy as I'm not the expert with this kind of stuff. But at least it's ready now (I hope). Anyway, you do seem like a real pro. If you have any advice or recommendation, I would take it to heart. And if you would like to add or edit any feature to the portal, I'd appreciate it too. It would be nice if this could make it to the featured status. Cheers --
Melanochromis00:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi, Melanochromis. I think you did a great job getting the Fish Portal up an running so quickly! I think it's already featured material. It just needs a few tweaks here and there, plus a little time under it's belt and it will be ready to nominate. I noticed the portal layout looked very familiar right away, so I checked a little closer. (The talk page was a bit of a giveaway. ;-)
The main question I would have you consider is how do you want to rotate the selected content? Obviously, I'm a sucker for the "random" approach. If you prefer a "schedule," like monthly as you have it now, I'd suggest dropping the year and use some version of {{CURRENTMONTH}} → 07. That way, the rotations will take care of themselves. Once you have the rotation design settled, you'll know how much "selected content" you still need to add.
You also need a section on the "Archive/Nomination" pages for folks to actually nominate stuff. Other than that, featured reviewers will nit-pick this or that, so just set up a to-do list on the talk page and solicit input when you have most everything how you want it. Then do what they suggest before you submit the official nomination.
If these suggestions help out, let me know what you decide and I'll start pitching in. Then we can just note updates and such on the portal's talk page and/or edit summaries.
Regards,
Rfrisbietalk02:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks again, Rfrisbie. Yeah, I noticed the cat portal has that random feature. That was such a cute trick. If I didn't see your works, I'd have no idea how much you can do in wikipedia. Anyway, I think it'll be very nice if the fish portal has that too (actually any portal should have that. it's more fun than going though the archieve). I was thinking I'm gonna study how you did it but I haven't had the time yet. Been busy reviving another near-dead portal (
Thailand portal). And I'm not sure I understand how to use your {{CURRENTMONTH}} → 07 command. I guess I have to study more. But maybe you can teach me how. Or if you want to do it yourself, please go ahead. It'd be my honor.
About the featured nomination, I'm glad that you think it's a featured material. I had a lot of free time in the past couple of days. That's why it went up this fast. This weekend I'm not sure if I will have time, but if I do, I'll try to polish it more. And you caught that the nomination part isn't ready yet. My energy just ran out first just when I finished the archive part.
My long-term plan is to try to get other
WikiProject Fishes people to help maintain the portal. I don't know how long I'll a lot of free time like this. If you think the nomination/evaluation process wouldn't take long, I'll fight for it. But if it's gonna take several weeks or months, I'm afraid the portal might need to get other helpers.
Anyway, that's a cute template. I think I saw it before in someone's profile. I've been a fish owner too for a very long time. But now I just help other people keeping fish. It's less exhausting giving out advices than cleaning up the tanks yourself!! --
Melanochromis08:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Cool. I'll go ahead and set up the main page and one subpage for randomized displays. Then all you have to do is up the "max=" count by one on each section when you add a new item, and you'll have an example for the other subpages. I'm willing to set up the featured feedback and nomination activities whenever you say the word. It's really not much of a fight with good content like this, and the design has a proven track record. It's just about ducks and rows. Another thing to keep in mind for featured portals is the only "allowed" place for red links is at "Requests"...for new articles. Remove links elsewhere. I just put up my only "snail" tank a few weeks ago. It is a lot easier to take care of my wikifish here.
Rfrisbietalk13:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
p.s. Nice logo!
I saw your added the randomization to the fish portal. Thanks a lot. I will convert the selected article section to be workable with this. I have a small technical question about it though. Is this function completely ramdomized or can you set the "default" subpage before readers choose to randomize it? Because I thought the fish portal would have people submitted their nomination for selected article/picture of the next month and have the evaluation process for each article/picture of the month (or week, etc.) similarly to the
India Portal. This would add some participation as well as a little excitement for the fish editors and make them come check the portal every month. But if this "default page + randomization" is not possible, I guess it's alright. We'll find a way to work around it anyway.
I removed all the red links except for the article requests. You can go ahead with the featured feedback and nomination. I'd be really appreciated if you do.
Like they say, if you can think of it, it's possible; but the current randomizer "always" works like that – randomly. It would take some "fancy" coding to do what you have in mind, that I haven't seen anywhere and don't know how to do. Unless you explicitly tell me otherwise, I'll set up the three other selected pages like selected fish. I'll wait to hear back from you before I begin.
Rfrisbietalk23:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)reply
You can go ahead with the randomization. I have been trying to figure out how to do "default+randomization" and I think I found a crude a way to do it, which is to create two different pages that appear identical to the reader. The portal:fish/default, which would be the default page and has to be updated monthly (particularly links to monthly articles), and the portal:fish/random which would work like the cats portal, and there has to be a function for switching the pages. Anyway, this is too complicated to implement now. So let's just do it your way. --
Melanochromis00:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oh wait! I just have an epiphany. Actually, it's not that complicated at all. And I think it would work with the same set of subpages too!! Here's what we should do.
portal:fish - leave it non-randomized as this will be the default page that has monthly content. Everyone will be redirected here when access it from other articles.
portal:fish/randomization - You can create this page by copy and paste the portal:fish and then added the randomization feature here. After you are done I'll make the portal:fish look identical.
The trick is that when readers clicked at "Show another article, fish, and picture" they will be redirected to portal:fish/randomization and when they clicked at "Show the article, fish, and picture of the month" they will be redirected to portal:fish --
Melanochromis00:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi again Rfrisbie. Just to let you know that I have modified
Thailand portal and now it is randomizable and also comes with the default selected article of the month. This is cool but it gave me so much headaches trying to figure out things. I'm thinking I'll do the same thing to the fish portal soon. --
Melanochromis04:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Okay, I basically follow what you're doing, but I must say I probably wouldn't go to all that trouble myself.
You seem to have everything under control, so for now, I'd prefer you set up things at the fish portal. There's always going to be little details to work out the first time something this complicated is implemented, and you can read your mind easier than I can. If you have any questions or want to bounce an idea off someone, let me know. If there's something "obvious" you want me to do, just give me a buz on that too. Looking good!
Rfrisbietalk04:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Hello Rfrisbie!!! I just finished polishing
the fish portal. Now the portal used your achive system except that it's chronical (monthly) instead of randomized (which can be implemented quite easily when the portal has more articles). I introduced the nominations system which was inspired by the
India portal but made it easier to use. I think it's pretty much ready. Can you help me get feedback and nominate it for featured? And thanks a lot for your advice and help. Cheers !! --
Melanochromis12:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Oh Rfrisbie. You are so nice. I don't know how to thank you this time for organizing the feedback and also for revising the portal. The reviewers seem to have a lot of demands, which I don't always agree, but I'll do my best to accommodate them!!
On the other hand, I thought they were very supportive. (For example, check out
this exchange. Maybe you should contact
Chris huh, if you haven't already ;-) They're just doing what I asked them to do.
Almost everything is a minor design consideration. About the biggest controversy is whether to use your graphic or a photo. I'd suggest just bite the bullet on that and use a picture. You still can use the graphic for the talk page notice.
The only content issue is about needing more selected items, which is in the works. Using the monthly nomination format, I suggest waiting until February to show three months of history updating the sections through that method. (You could try nominating the portal in January, if you have a backlog of nominations by then. If not, you might want to reconsider going to a randomized rotation, adding items as you find them.) After that, it's clear sailing swimming to the bronze star!
Congratulations!
Rfrisbietalk23:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Yeah, I agree with your suggestion. The logo would probably have to be replaced with a real picture, unless people change their minds (which is unlikely). I'll start looking for an appropriate picture. I'd hate to say this, but the suggestion for a goldfish picture is not really suitable. The portal is associated with the
WikiProject Fishes which is focusing more on taxonomy rather than the aquarium aspects of fish. And fancy goldfish is such an extreme domestically bred pet, taxonomists wouldn't have much to do with those bubble-eyed, double-tailed, pearl-scaled, pom-pom-headed creatures.
And this leads me to ask you about another idea I always had: WikiProject Aquarium Fishes !!! It's obvious that there are a lot of editors who are interested in just the aquarium aspects of fishes but not taxonomy. These editors are less likely to join WikiProject Fishes as they feel out of place. So WikiProject Aquarium Fishes can get them together and focus the work on the aquarium care aspects of fish articles (with subtopics such as tank setup, feeding, breeding, diseases, etc.). WikiProject Aquarium Fishes will work very closely with WikiProject Fishes which would become its parent, similarly to
WikiProject Sharks. So what do you think? --
Melanochromis09:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks!
Thank you so much for providing that thorough evaluation and helpful suggestions regarding the
Business and Economics Portal. I think I can get a handle on most of the stuff needed for the portal, but I would like to take up your offer to provide assistance (if you don't mind!). One troubled part is the Topics section of the portal, which I really can't seem to figure out. I mean, it's such a broad topic, and I can't find a way to separate it. Also, I think an archive for news isn't necessary. As someone mentioned in my previous FP nomination, I don't need an archive since the headlines are all coming from WikiNews. Also, can you help out with the topics section of another portal I created:
Portal:Disasters. Feel free to make any changes to the portal, if you like. Thanks for everything, Rfrisbie! Nishkid6420:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Sure, I'll help out with the topics on both portals. As a rule-of-thumb, my approach is to start out with the main articles of subcategories. I actually do this by stripping ":Category:" from each item in the "Categories" section, then check out what's going on with the red links. After that, I look for what seem to be other "important/high quality" articles at
Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index, etc. I'll do the first "cut-and-paste," then turn over most of the content expert additions to you all.
Hello, I'd like to know why a message was posted in my
talk page about the fish portal. I just want to know if it was random. I'd be happy to give advice with the portal, but it seemed to me that it was mass-mailed spam. Did you post the message in my talk because I'm a member of Wikiproject Cetaceans? --
Belugaperson23:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Hi, Belugaperson. I don't do spam. I contact users who have demonstrated an interest in projects I work on. In this case, I'm working on the Fish portal for featured status, and you have offered feedback in the past on the similar Cetaceans portal. Nothing more, nothing less. Regards,
Rfrisbietalk00:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Marine life portal
The
Marine life portal is basically set up. All i was going to do was maybe change the selected article, picture, and bio to change one every two weeks (maybe). At the moment it is every month, i havent had enough time to think about this, and when term finishes in a week i can do more. Thanks for you offer.
Chris_huhtalk10:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)reply
It looks fine to me too, but if you want some help from time to time, just say the word.
Hi, Gustave. A number of editors, like yourself, have been helping out different designers get their portals up to featured status by offering tips on the talk pages, like at
Portal talk:Science. I thought it might be a good idea pull together a group of
portal review volunteers and add their names to a
list for easy reference. I hope you consider joining in on the fun.
That's closer. I was talking about the dark green "background" space under "Selected quote." Some/Most folks don't seem to worry about that too much. I just think of a portal like a magazine page layout and try to fill the space. Also, I'm not a big fan of "thumbs" at portals. I thought I saw a comment about it somewhere, but, of course, I can't find it now. In most cases, I just use a "mouseover" caption. How about posing the question to the group? Overall, I'd say folks are very impressed. Congratulations!
Okay, I fixed the image. I think it's fine for now. Overall, I think I've covered everything (I added one picture, and I fixed the the SA). Tell me if I'm missing anything. Nishkid6423:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)reply
These are all just personal preferences, so do what you want with them. If someone bugs you about nit-picky stuff like this on the talk page, it's usually better just to go along for a smoother FP review. On "Selected economy," pick left or right and let some text wrap along the side. I sort of liked the unboxed caption at the bottom of this one. The div in the "Did you know" section is supposed to top align the image and text. Unfortunately, it doesn't work with bullets. That's why I don't use them. I would take them back out and say, "Heck with the Main Page style!" :-) I also would get rid of most of the blank dark green background by some combination of shortening left column sections and lengthening right column sections.
On the "needs work" list, I expect you're still going to get dinged on the "more images" thing. Try to find something for the Categories and Topics sections.
Chemistry is one of the best examples of image usage. The Related portals box looks fine to me too. After you have answers to all the bullets on the to-do list and no new comments for a day or so, I'd say you're ready to put this thing up again...to a much better result!
Rfrisbietalk02:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Thank you for your input at my
RFA, which successfully closed at 58/2/0. I will think about the 10 questions and answers I had, and I hope that I will use the tools constructively and for the benefit of Wikipedia. If you ever need any help, don't be afraid to
drop me a line. I'm here to help afterall! 8) -
Royalguard11(
Talk·
Desk·
Review Me!)
23:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Congratulations! Maybe The System works after all!
Hey, would you mind terribly setting up tabs on Portal:European Union? It's been so long since you did em for
Portal:Military of the United States, that I'm sure I'd have to end up asking you after I try and fail misserably. :) Three tabs should do it(including the main one). Should be able to use the two blue colors on the main page. Thanks alot if you could. Oh, by the way, how do you use the similies at the bottom? Like this
? HA! That's great!
Joe I22:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Umm...Let's go with "Member states" and "Content structure". Wish I had a better name for the second, but...I want it to have cats, topics and lists, so...that sounded best. Thanks
Thanks for the update, and good luck on your finals! I'm sure the portal still will be there when you come up for air. By the way, when you substitute the smiley, it throws in over 20 lines of code.
I'm not sure what I screwed up :) I tried reverting, only added to the problem I think. Anyways, I was tryin to get rid of the refs in the info box, see if we can squeeze that down instead of the content on the left.
Joe I17:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I haven't looked at it yet, but the basic idea with the fixed-width infobox (270px) is to put it in the right side column of a table set to 270px, then the left column content can be "100%" of that column. That way, there won't be lots of "dead space" at resolutions over 800X600. I moved the sisterlinks below the infobox because the row of images was too wide next to the infobox. I'll take a look.
Rfrisbietalk17:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)reply
It wasn't too bad, but I did put back an intro box. That page has a lot of formatting going on, so it's harder to make everything work together. I'm sure someone won't like it, but it's pushing the limits of what I know how to do.
Sure, I usually start with a box I like and then change the image and message. I might change the colors after that. You also can try a "bolerplate" at {{
User:UBX/Boilerplate}}. Good luck!
Actually, I took all those pages off my watchlist. I assume it's bad enough to defy wikisense. I've just been basking in the lovey-dovey world of portal develpment lately.
Your contributions are many and notably a great asset to Wikipedia. I only ask that you show more finese in the choosing of your words, especially on a site that invites people of all ages and backgrounds to equally contribute. Every case is unqiue and a simple misunderstand can lead to negative conflicts between people. The case involving
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vancouver was misinterpreted but judged quickly. Please be more mindful, especially in community groups for you may not be accustomed to all that goes on, where ever it may be. Thank you for your time.
Mkdwtalk18:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Nishkid64 would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then
contact Nishkid64 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RichardF/Archive. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
I previously nominated
MCB,
Gogo Dodo and
AnonEMouse successfully to adminship. I feel you are a very qualified candidate, so please accept my offer! If you accept, I will go ahead and make the RfA page, and give you some tips and pointers if you'd like (like participate in some XfD's this week; I see you only have 1 in the last 500 project namespace edits). Nishkid6421:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)reply
By the way, do you think
Portal:Disasters is ready for Featured Portal status? If possible, can you fix any mistakes you may see. I know it's not completely there yet, but I just want to know what you think. Nishkid6422:42, 21 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Considering I just panned
Portal:Vancouver for having fewer than ten items per rotated section, I'd say it's a bit thin on content. The number of expected items is something I'd like to pin down in the criteria, so you always could put it up and see what happens. Anything else would be minor cleanups by comparison.
Rfrisbietalk23:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Hey Rfrisbie, it's Gphoto. I lost my password and have absolutely no idea what to do. If you could please direct me in the right direction, I would be sooo greatful. I am ashamed to sign my post,
63.97.52.10701:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)reply
My advice to you is write it backwards across your forehead in strawberry jam! Not that it would help, but at least you'll have something to snack on while you're fretting about what to do next! By the way, if you forget it again, just click on the "E-mail new password" button on the Log in page and they'll send you a new one. Just don't forget "Gphoto" or your e-mail!
subst:Smiley4.224.150.12603:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC) ← (a solidarity sig
subst:Smiley)reply
Ok i have a question since you were so helpful before i continue to make this tab here what ever color i want but when i save it and go back to the main page the background is white and the text is black any tips --
Wilsbadkarma16:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Well I think I finished the layout and I gotten alot more articles and added as well. I also put it up for Featured. Again thanks for your help I would probably still be trying to change the color. --
Wilsbadkarma02:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Thanks a lot, Rfrisbie! I couldn't have done it without you and the tips from other portal review volunteers! Happy Holidays, btw. =) Nishkid6423:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Lol...I'll figure something out. For starters, there's too many lists on the portal and I have to condense that. I'll try to play around with it this week and then get a review from other people. Nishkid6423:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Rfrisbie, I have created a new page that is transcluded to
Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates in the nice little box titled "Current portal improvement collaborations". I am asking you to update the subpage when there are new collaborations (this is basically so users like me can also transclude the page onto our own user pages). Do you accept? Happy editing (and an early happy new year)! —sd31415(sign here)17:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Looks good. At some point, I also hope we can "formalize" some type of collaboration/review process before folks nominate a portal. I think getting it's own complete page, loosely modeled after
Peer review would help.
subst:SmileyRfrisbietalk17:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)reply
So a it will be a portal polishing page... hmm... not bad. This will eliminate a long WP:FPCAN page full of discussion instead of votes. So, are you creating the page? And will the collaborations be discontinued and instead the reviewers will be asked to watchlist the portal peer review page? (Sorry to interrupt your setup of 365 subpages of the religion portal.) —sd31415(sign here)17:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I made a comment at
Wikipedia talk:Featured portal candidates#Portal improvement collaborations, but it hasn't gotten any replies. It probably would be better to start a new topic to find it easier. That's another item on my "real soon now" list, but since nobody was chiming in, I thought I would just do another thousand or so edits at the Religion portal while I waited.
subst:Smiley If you want to start a new topic on the talk page, that would be cool. Otherwise, I'll do it sometime and volunteer a first draft to go with it. Either way is fine with me.
subst:SmileyRfrisbietalk17:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I'm spacing a bit and not tracking which page you used to start your draft, but I would have started with
Wikipedia:Peer review. I then would have added an optional mock-up to transclude the same discussion on the portal's talk page with the corresponding to-do list. I'll wait to hear back on that.
Rfrisbietalk01:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I used
Wikipedia:Picture peer review. Guess that wasn't a good idea.
subst:Smiley By your second suggestion, do you mean that I should add this in the instructions section?
Transclude Wikipedia:Portal peer review/ExampleName onto the portal's talk page under a header called Suggestions for Featured Portal Status. Include the suggestions in brief in a to do list on the portal's talk page.
Hi, Sd31415. I'm ready to "go online" with the draft I proposed under yours. It follows the article peer review process, rather than the one for pictures. Is that okay with you?
Rfrisbietalk14:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Great work! I made some few minor adjustments. I moved the TOC up into the top box so reviewers can quickly see what portals need to be reviewed. However, if you do not like it, you can change it. —sd31415(sign here)16:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I just started with the basic rip-off from the article peer review layout. It uses transcluded instructions to keep them the same size and out of the "edit zone." That's why the TOC is below the instructions. Also, the "collaborations list" should be part of the instructions and moved/recreated as a PPR subpage. I though we could work on that from its new home.
Rfrisbietalk16:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I've added the Fish and Philosophy portals to be reviewed, and I deleted the portals on the list that were candidates (they have already passed the step on getting creative feedback and gone to the nominating step). —sd31415(sign here)21:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Wow-Wowooooooooo! I feel honored I got to help with an article by Wilsbadkarma that's on its way to featured status!
subst:SmileyRfrisbietalk14:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC) (Besides, every once in a while, I like to prove that I actually know where the main namespace is located. ;-)
Rfrisbietalkreply
I left messages for a couple of people who normally review featured list canidates but noone has responded I figure a day or so and ill just put it up for peer review instead. --
WilsBadKarma(
Talk/
Contribs)18:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)reply