Jump to content

User talk:G.A.S/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

The following has been moved here from the talk page on 22 July 2008, on 10 December 2008 and on 15 January 2009.

Welcome!

Hi, G.A.S, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. Before getting too in-depth, you may want to read the simplified ruleset. If you need help, feel free to use any of Wikipedia's hundreds of resources. I personally recommend the Wikipedia:Boot Camp, where in addition to standard posts, you can use an IRC to chat online with fellow Wikipedians willing to help! In addition, Wikipedia also has pages dedicated to the use of Wikipedia, for example, if you need help on how to title new articles check out the naming conventions, and for help on formatting pages visit the manual of style. Feel free to post questions on my talk page - I'm happy to help you with anything you need.


Note

I hope you don't mind, but Mizu seems to have stopped helping you with the copyediting. Alas, something Mizu has done with several other articles :( So I've been bold and asked User:Scartol, a very good copyeditor, if he might have time to follow behind your TMM copyedits to offer comments/advice. I know you mentioned being new to copyediting, and I think he'd be tremendously helpful in helping you get the hang of it if he does. :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I do not mind at all (I dropped a note at Mizu's talk page everytime I did a section; but was not ready after the last section yet.) I appreciate the help. G.A.S 20:25, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
It seems like he did not look at the article yet... G.A.S 06:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
He said it might take a few days. I'll drop a note if he doesn't get to it today. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 06:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I will continue once User:Scartol has looked at the article. G.A.S 16:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Alrighty. He left a note to let me know he will start reviewing today. Real life caused a delay :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:20, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, life did indeed intervene. But our friends from East Timor have returned home, the Emmy Noether FAC has been closed – successfully, yay – and I find myself in the unusual position of having some free time! Ergo, I have prepared this page of comments about some of your edits. The dedication you've shown is lovely to see, G.A.S, and I hope you'll devote this sort of careful scrutiny to Wikipedia articles for many years. (You're also lucky to have a trusty mentor like Collectonian watching your back.) Please feel free to send along any questions you might have, and let me know if you'd care to have me copyedit the article itself. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 21:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Great, thanks a lot! :) I've attempted to address the specific items you mentioned. The article is stable (except for the occasional dumb vandalism), with all sections ready for review. If G.A.S. doesn't mind, I wouldn't mind if you could do a full copyedit as it is the last thing needed before we can attempt GA/FA. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I would appreciate your copy-editing the article.
Please consider writing a "how to copy-edit" guide, as Tony's guide does not seem to cover all of the issues you have mentioned, nor do User:AndyZ/Suggestions, Wikipedia:Writing better articles, and especially not Wikipedia:How_to_copy-edit.
Regards, G.A.S 05:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

(undent) I'll consider it (and probably do it), but it'll be tricky, since – as I've said – many elements can't really be explained. I'll get started on the copyedit later today or tomorrow. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 12:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I've finished my copyedit; comments are on the article talk page. Please let me know if you have any questions. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 14:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the copy edit! We will address your comments as soon as possible—they are of utmost value. G.A.S 15:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

(Copied text: Thank you)

(User rursus copied text from his talk page, for intended ease (?) of communication)

WikiThanks
WikiThanks

Thank you for updating Image:Stellar evolutionary tracks-en.PNG to Image:Stellar evolutionary tracks-en-with-text.svg. The original picture really pains me, but I had to add the diagram to the article since it was really hard to understand without a diagram. To be honest, the Spanish original was the only free license original I could find, but it still took me hours to translate, as it had no labels in the article where I found it (es:Rama asintótica gigante — I eventually managed to find the labels in es:Evolución estelar) :)

Would it be possible to upload a version with numbered labels (Example: Image:M1 Abrams diagram num.svg — I would like to update the Spanish Wikipedia with it, if possible the others as well)? G.A.S 05:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

It would be possible, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better to keep the English abbreviations and remove the English explanations' table that I added, using the English abbreviations instead of numbers. In Swedish, which is my native language, this would be accepted, but I don't know about the Spanish linguistic culture. Anyways, if you have access to Inkscape, you may freely modify the image yourself, as you wish. But I can make a version without the English explanations table if you wish... (?) Said: Rursus ☻ 07:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I would appreciate it, thank you. Unfortunately, I do not know anything about the Spanish culture myself, but at least the diagram would look much better. They can then translate it themselves, if deemed necessary. G.A.S 07:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Have you had a chance to upload a version without the descriptions yet, unfortunately I do not have access to Inkscape at the moment. I will then update the other languages' Wikipedias. G.A.S 09:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hope I got it right now: Image:Stellar evolutionary tracks-en-with-text-no-explan.svg Image:Stellar evolutionary tracks-en-no-explan.svg. If the first one does not have editable text, I got it wrong for sure, otherwise maybe... Said: Rursus ☻ 09:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'll fix it. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Fixed that. More improvements L8R if requested. I'll fix inter-file links on Commons later. Observe how troublesome Image:Stellar evolutionary tracks-en-with-text-no-explan.svg looks as regards to Teff. This double handling in order to override the font conversion of commons bugs me. Said: Rursus ☻ 10:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Those other Wikipedias should look much better shortly. G.A.S 10:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
It looks nice indeed! And, I've actually once read that language, although I think I didn't learn much. I think removing some English text from the English originals might be a good thing. L8R! Said: Rursus ☻ 13:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:ANIME assessment drive

Hi Kirill Lokshin,

We at the Anime wikiproject intend to (re)assess all of our articles to have an updated view of the quality thereof. I have seen that you helped WP:MILHIST to create the necessary subpages to do so, e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008/100.

Can you give us some pointers as how we can set up similar pages, or help us do it?

Regards,

G.A.S 05:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The listing pages themselves are generated by a script. If you can tell me what articles you want in the listing, I should be able to generate it for you (provided the criteria are not overly complex). Kirill (prof) 00:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply, and thank you for the offer. The articles are all listed in Category:Anime and manga articles by quality. We have decided to work through all of them, so I do not believe that criteria is an issue per se: it would be preferred if the pages are in the same format as WP:MILHIST's, as that seems to work; and located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008. Your help is appreciated. G.A.S 04:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
We have now set up the assessment page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Assessment, and following some minor issues, we should be able to start with the assessments. G.A.S 07:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
That sounds reasonable. I'll try to put together the worklists when I have some time; hopefully, either this week or next week. Kirill (prof) 12:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

WPAnime Banner and redirect

When you merge articles together and create a redirect, please remove the {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} banner instead of changing the class as NA. That way Category:Non-article anime and manga pages will only be populated by actual pages instead of a bunch of redirects. --Farix (Talk) 14:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Refer to Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment for the description of NA class. I believe we need record of these. How about {{Redirect-Class}} instead? Then again, Category:Redirected fictional character articles will also do, but they are more difficult to find. G.A.S 14:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


Yaoi reassessment?

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I was wondering if you would be willing to expound upon your reassessment of yaoi at Talk:Yaoi, and give some extra hints as to how it could be brought up to C or B class. (aside from cleaning up the footnotes, I know they're inconsistently styled). I'm not so sure the citation system at Anekantavada would be helpful, as the "further reading" section in yaoi is used to identify potential sources which have not yet been included in the article, so that the reader of the article can know where to go. (I believe this kind of a section is supported by the MOS.) As such, it's different from the system at Anekantavada, where the references listed in the Bibliography are used as footnotes. Hope to see you at Talk:Yaoi soon! -Malkinann (talk) 21:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The article is C class currently, but I have not updated the assessment on the article's talk page. This discussion will be continued on the article's talk page. G.A.S 04:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Re: List of Air soundtracks

Regarding this edit on the talk page, I reverted it since I checked WP:MOS, WP:MOSMUSIC, and WP:MOS-AM and there was no mention of hidden sections in any of them.--十八 09:44, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe this is included in "Don't use techniques that require physical action to provide information" per Wikipedia:Accessibility, but I will look the specific guideline up. G.A.S 10:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect, that's under the text section of the page, and even follows up with the examples of "such as tooltips or any other "hover" text", which these hidden tables are not. Looking down at the tables section, there is nothing restricting hidden tables. Plus, I have seen this used before, even in GA rated and FA rated articles, which is where I got the idea. Not to mention that {{tracklist}} uses an example of a hidden track listing.--十八 23:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
On second thought, you seem to be right (I have found {{tracklist}} myself recently). G.A.S 16:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Assessment of articles

Hi G.A.S! I am wondering how you came to the conclusion that List of Bleach episodes (season 1), a featured list, needs urgent attention. Same goes for the other articles in the series, which I reviewed and none of them seem to require major cleanup. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 16:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The summaries are too short per current standards, but this is not severe enough to send it to FL review (in this case, the FL status makes it urgent, not the short descriptions), refer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 30#Reasonable length for plot summaries?. I have added in comment the reasoning where I said it needs attention. (If you require more details, please be specific, as I have assessed hundreds of articles by now). G.A.S 16:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I was mostly dazzled because, for example, you also said that 'some descriptions are too long' in the Season 5 list, which has only slightly longer descriptions. Also, it is my understand that only articles needing urgent attention should be tagged with attention=yes, certainly enough to immediately remove the FA star, not articles with minor problems like the 6 lists. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 16:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
More about season 5: it appears that the longest summary there is about 270 words (which is actually about 200 words if non-words like 'of' and 'the' are excluded, which they should be), so it's well within the guideline as MOSTV. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 16:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
When determining attention, I reckon that three factors should be taken into account: The actual problems; The quality, and the importance. Hence, issues on FL are more important.
When assessing, I look out for, amongst other things, consistency of lengths (Not just words, but also actual spacing). In this case, episode 100 seems much longer than the average due to the multiple paragraph breaks. In any case, if the lead is fixed, most of those articles can be listed at WP:ANIME/ASSESS, as they are much better than the average. Believe me, if the articles had series issues they would have been rated start, as I would not need to complete the B class checklist—it slows down my progress significantly to do so.
Regards, G.A.S 16:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

GA pass

Collectonian's quite right, I should have left one of these here too. I do apologise!

This user helped promote Tokyo Mew Mew to good article status.


Copy/paste: {{User Good Article|Tokyo Mew Mew}}

Thank you for your valuable assistance in getting this article to GA status ;) EyeSerenetalk 17:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much! G.A.S 17:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

B-class review

Well, that's certainly new since I've been gone. I figured the thing in the project banner was just a handy checklist so newbies would have some clue what they should be aiming for before upping an article to that level, not more bureaucratic red tape. But whatever, thanks for the constructive criticism on VS. --erachima talk 11:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

By monitor, I meant that I keep an eye over the log file, which has not quite yet been updated:) The review is not mandatory, though recommended. G.A.S 12:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Your Katsuji Matsumoto review

You just completed a B-class review of Katsuji Matsumoto and said on the talk page that the introduction needs more "meat." I'm not sure what you mean or what kind of material you think could be added. Can you explain? Timothy Perper (talk) 06:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Zombie Powder citations

Thanks for the review. What's specifically wrong with the referencing though? (I'm guessing it's either lack of quantity/variety or you don't like how I've arranged them in the text.) --erachima talk 05:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Nothing serious is wrong but the following could be improved;) Regards, G.A.S 06:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I recommend using {{cite web}} and completing (at least) the following parameters: |url= | title=| publisher= |date= | accessdate=
  • The article needs more citations, esp. the reception section
  • Make sure the references display neatly, esp with regards to formatting, and consistency of details.
  • Citations 11-13 is not clear to me, use {{cite book}}.
  • Those are web refs from the Viz site, and are incomplete because the referenced page, not being a "published article" in the traditional sense, does not contain the standard author/date info.

Alright, I'll keep working on it. Your advice is always appreciated. I'm really not looking forward to hunting down additional reviews though, since there are always 5 useless blog posts for every tolerably professional page and it ends up taking forever. I suppose I could solve this problem for myself by writing about better-known subjects, but where's the fun in that?

On the plus side it should be easier than Vinland Saga was, since ZP at least exists in English. --erachima talk 07:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Tuxedo Mask

Is two missing citations on Tuxedo Mask too much for a B-classification? One of the two citations is not critical to the article. We're currently looking for the originator of the other one via website. Thanks.--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 23:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done G.A.S 07:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion Closing

Hey, would you be willing to close Talk:List of Bleach characters#Kisuke Urahara this last merge discussion on the Bleach talk page? As I've weighed in, and its the more contentious of them, I do not feel comfortable closing it myself as I would close it as a merge, agreeing with the recent IP remarks that the opposes do not address the issues. That, however, would appear non-neutral. As you didn't participate in the discussion, I think you could close it either way without major complaint. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done G.A.S 07:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Tenjho Tenge's Importance rating

Right now Tenjho Tenge article has a importance rating is Low. I believe it should have a mid rating because the manga and anime has achieved wide commercial success outside of Japan. It has sold over 10.7 million copies (back in 2007). It is one of CMX's one of our best-selling titles. When the volumes are released, it usually is at the top both Tohan and Diamond Comic Distributors best selling manga. The anime has been broadcast in at least eight different countries. I know I could change it myself, but I would prefer some impartial editor to change it if they think it deserves to be changed. (Duane543 (talk) 02:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC))

checkY I believe that you are correct. Regards, G.A.S 04:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Shojo Beat

Hey, in Shojo Beat's B review, you mentioned needing to include info about the target audience. I've added some to the circulation section.[1] Is that what you had in mind? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a look tomorrow (in 8 hours) ... too tired right now. G.A.S 18:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Exactly. :) G.A.S 10:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Awesome! I'll apply the same to the Shonen Jump article...may be able to find a bit more. But first, some reception info to Shojo Beat...I have some links on the talk page just keep forgetting to use! LOL. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Any particular reason why you're not one? Ever had an RfA? --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

There is no particular reason why not, nor have I ever had a RfA, but I had some time to think about a detailed reply.
The short version is that I have never required the tools of the trade before.
The long version is as follow: I am mostly active in and around WikiProject Anime and manga, mostly with cleanup and other administrative tasks, such as reviewing articles; this leaves little time to participate in AFD and similar project wide tasks (usually associated with admins). I have also always found that administrators are usually quick in responding to requests for speedy deletions (usually CSD:G6), so I have never had to request the rights to do these things myself.
This does not mean that I am not willing to be an administrator, of course, and the associated tools do find a way to be useful: In the past I often considered using WP:AWB, but ended up doing the same items by hand, until such time when I had to categorise a few hundred redirects (an especially daunting task by hand). At that time I requested authorisation to use AWB, and have never looked back since, as I find it extremely useful. (Often performing tasks not usually associated with AWD, e.g. assessing articles for class and importance.) I have also performed tasks with it on request. I believe the same would go for admin rights.
Regards, G.A.S 05:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
OK, before I hike into your contribs, a couple more questions. 1) Would you therefore consider that if you got the tools, it would be mostly just for the convenience of being able to handle your own speedies, mostly G6s? 2) Any skeletons in your cupboard of the incivility/edit warring type? I think we only need worry about the last year or so, unless there's anything really truly significant in your (lengthy) back catalogue! --Dweller (talk) 09:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Consider, yes, I believe so.
Any skeletons: I believe not. I believe in always remaining civil, even when it is difficult, and I believe in 1RR (And have never broken 3RR).
Lengthy, well, that is more to do with the nature of my edits: Some of the administrative tasks affects a lot of pages, and there is easily enough work to double my edit count over the next few months;).
Regards, G.A.S 09:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


Dweller would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Dweller to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/G.A.S . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
Thank you very much, I feel honoured. I would have asked that you complete the process, as it seems that you are currently offline, I have completed the process. Regards, G.A.S 17:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Aww...crap. I saw this discussion last night, and was too tired to comment, or else I would have offered to co-nom. Oh well :p sephiroth bcr (converse) 18:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Userbox

Given the hoo-ha around User:SoWhy's userbox at his current RfA, I had a look at your userspace. I admit I don't understand the ANAL 4 userbox at all - is it supposed to be humorous? --Dweller (talk) 10:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah. Got it - Template:User anal-4. Hmm. Have you ever had a comment about this userbox? --Dweller (talk) 10:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Never—though it might need updating/fixing of some sort. See below. G.A.S 10:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Not quite sure about it-- I believe in the message, but have not looked at the "Icon", nor ever considered it. I originally found it here. I will replace it with this one. G.A.S 10:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Re:Assess

Probably B-class. Tell the author to cut out the genres and external links though. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 15:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Tough question

I should probably apologize for the tough question. That's a subject that there is no policy on Wikipedia for and I've run into 2 suicide threats this week. this one is what prompted me to ask it in an RFA (I believe Daniel couldn't be more incorrect). I suspect I'll ask quite a few RFAs that. You were the first. BTW, I liked your answer. Best of luck with the RFA. Toddst1 (talk) 18:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

Congratulations on becoming an administrator! Note that you're now obligated to send out thankspam to those who participated in your RfA. Now you can get all the grief I receieve on my talk page about edit wars and fun stuff like that. :p But seriously, congrats, and you'll do great with the tools. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 18:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, I'm pleased to let you know that I've closed your RfA as successful, and you're now an administrator! May I suggest you visit the Wikipedia:New admin school to get a few ideas on the best way to start using your shiny new buttons? If in doubt, feel free to give me a shout! Well done and all the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. I'm delighted. --Dweller (talk) 18:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats! I can't think of a more deserving and worthy editor :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, congrats! Ecoleetage (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations. seresin ( ¡? )  20:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats! And remember, when in doubt, WP:DDTMP. :-) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, brilliant! (Though the editor did not verify that the main page has >5000 revisions (which it does not[2]) G.A.S 14:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Mind you, I did wonder why only Stewards could delete pages with more than >5000 revisions—then I read this! G.A.S 14:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations G.A.S! Good luck^_^.Tintor2 (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 16:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
The admins' T-shirt.

Congratulations on your successful RfA! Do everything you're supposed to and nothing you're not! Make sure to check out the new admin school. Good luck and feel free to ask me if you have any questions. GlassCobra 18:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the link, I did not know about the new admin school:). G.A.Stalk 05:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! --Banime (talk) 20:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

CE Question

For something different, a quick (hopefully) copyedit type question. On all of the GAs, FLs, etc I've worked on, when discussing home video releases its always been phrased along the lines of "X was released to DVD on..." or "to VHS" etc. I did the same when doing a rescue clean up List of Record of Lodoss War episodes and fixing up its lead. Another editor, who has noted that English is not his first language, changed it to "on DVD" claiming that its more popular because of the number of Google hits. To me, "to" still seems more grammatically correct than "on" but I told him I'd check with someone else to see. Thoughts? -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I would strongly recommend asking User:Scartol, as he has a better track record with copy-editing. Personally, I prefer "on" (And I am not sure about "to" being grammatically correct). See also: wikt:to, wikt:on, and wikt:release. G.A.S 06:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Will do :) I generally use to myself, but also use on sometimes when talking LOL. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on your adminship.

What did you want to discuss? -- Logical Premise Ergo? 19:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

If you would like to continue the discussion regarding the oppose vote, and what it would have taken to a support vote, please do as I would like to understand your reasoning--I would like to take this opportunity to learn; though I presume actions speak louder than words; it will probably be better for me to prove that I am the right type of person for the task? Regards, G.A.S 19:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Let's just say that I used to be a pretty prolific editor on WP, and that events made me decide to quit, but I got bored and came back. And now I tend to look at things with a bit less of the wikipedia-centric blinders that I used to. My opposes in RfA are designed to reflect one thing only -- can I have complete confidence that this editor won't end up a) abusing the tools b) wasting time with the tools when they could be writing articles or c) get in the way of the proper operations of the encyclopedia. There are people I would never nominate for Admin or vote support for, not because they would be bad admins but because they are excellent article writers, and article writing > admin actions. In this case, there's nothing you can really say to change my mind because you *are* an asset to WP and the work you've done is of such a quality that you should be writing, not reverting silly vandals. The fact that you are more inclined to merge is a minor bother. But a lot of my "admin requirements" are fitting those who would be excellent admins because they don't focus on the article writing in the first place.
If it makes you feel better, I have no doubt you would never abuse the tools or do anything to harm WP. :) -- Logical Premise Ergo? 19:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the prompt reply I really appreciate it. Ps, if you ever need a second eye on an article, give me a shout. G.A.S 19:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats. Owned, Julian! Anyway, keep up the great work! — Ceranthor [Formerly LordSunday] 23:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Red blinking text?! Come on, gimme a break! ;-) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
No problem mate, thank you Ijanderson (talk) 23:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

(Vigorous hand shake, followed by dramatic tears) Congratulations! —Mizu onna sango15Hello! 02:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Card

Your welcome!

Note: I just noticed that your sig links only to your user page. It would be a lot easier for other editors if you could also include a link to your talk page. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:17, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Noted, and thank you. I just corrected it. (I usually use navigation popups to bypass this) G.A.Stalk 05:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Since you don't have a guestbook, I'll say thanks for signing my guestbook here. Thanks for signing my guestbook! Oh, and congrats on becoming an admin too. LittleMountain5 review! 14:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Need help with some articles in the assessment drive

Hi, sorry to bother you, but while going through the assessment drive, I've came upon these few articles, Japanese in Mangaland, Japanese Movie Database, and Japanese the Manga Way. I am wondering if you know they would belong in the project (I've removed the banner from the first one even), for the first and the third one, I got confused since that as it says in WP:ANIME's scope, "the project maintains an essential focus on media meant primarily for consumption in Japan. Animated or printed works produced for consumption outside of Japan that nevertheless draw on or are similar to Japanese media in terms of content or form regrettably do not fall under our scope", but while so, it does teach Japanese, which may make it falls under WP:JA instead. The third one also has the problem that, as far as what I can understand by reading the article, uses manga transcripts, which brings up if it falls under the project's scope, if that the first article doesn't qualify. For the second article that I've listed, as far as I can read from the article, it doesn't have anything that has to do with anime and manga, but by logical sense I think it would also lists anime, particularly movies,though seeing that Internet Movie Database doesn't fall under WP:FILM's scope I think it probably wouldn't fall under WP:ANIME. I am wondering if you can provide an opinion on these few articles.

Also, I am wondering if you can help moving Jean Carry (Gundam character) to Jean Carry, since as it appears, Jean Carry only exists as an redirect to the character article. (Even if it doesn't, it will still goes to Jean Carry (Gundam) or Jean Carry (Gundam Seed) anyways) Thanks in advance. -- クラウド６６８ 23:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I would put the first and third articles under WP:JA's scope due to "...produced for consumption outside of Japan..." (Though I believe this section usually refers to Korean works in the Japanese style.) Now, if these books were used as sources within our project, that would be different. I agree with your reasoning for the second article; but it was created and tagged by Nihonjoe, so I trust his judgement. Otherwise we should discuss this on WT:ANIME, as it was tagged a long time ago.
As for Jean Carry (Gundam character), I am a bit concerned about the character's notability, which means it should probably merged to a list of characters. I have completed the move. Note that Image:Jean Carry Insignia.jpg, requires the fair use rationale template. G.A.Stalk 05:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
That reminds me, I should really get back to assessing articles... G.A.Stalk 06:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Haha, I haven't worked on it a lot too recently (In fact I never really did except for the first few days perhaps). But yeah I am also concerned about the notability of those character pages, since there's just apparently too many of them, in even the Mobile Suit Gundam SEED series alone. But since I have only watched the Mobile Suit Gundam 00 series I really wouldn't know if this character would really weighs out compared to the others. Anyways, thanks for helping with the articles! -- クラウド６６８ 17:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
On the first point: the trick is pacing: Assessing a few articles everyday is more sustainable than wearing yourself out all at once: By assessing 10 or 20 articles daily, you can finish a list or two in a month; even 30 daily is not too bad (As opposed to doing 150 all at once (an example of what not to do)). On the third point, have you seen these two templates? G.A.Stalk 05:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
That example you showed me just totally shocked me there, as I pretty much never did get around assessing more than 20 articles per day after day 1, still I suppose I should get a bit more active I think, as I am moving quite slowly. As for the templates, I've seen {{WikiProject Gundam}} before, but it's really my first time to come across {{WikiProject CE}}, thanks for notifying me about that. -- クラウド６６８ 22:15, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I had a bit of time to kill, that does not happen often:(. If only I did 20 daily, 150 at a time would be unnecessary. G.A.Stalk 10:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I actually have quite some time to do 150 at a time too, but that will just be really exhausting and will increase my mental stress by 150%, lol. Usually my spare time goes to playing visual novels or watching/reading the anime or manga adaptation for the articles that I am hoping to improve on, except that really isn't going as fast as I had hoped. I suppose I should try getting to maybe assessing 30 articles per day and just stop playing that much games. -- クラウド６６８ 18:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
By "time to kill", I actually meant with no better alternative available;) Thanks for your help so far! I really appreciate it - and please, do not wear yourself out on this. G.A.Stalk 21:05, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I'm just glad that I can help (since I don't really have that much time recently on Wikipedia as I've been spending time on my visual novels which I'd hope that I can further improve the articles on). Thanks for your help on assessing the articles too! -- クラウド６６８ 13:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:
  1. Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
  2. Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
  3. Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
  4. Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
  5. Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
  6. and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.
KillerChihuahua?!?
DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.
Thank you very much! I needed that! G.A.Stalk 16:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm serious about the offer in #6, btw. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, and I never doubted you for a moment:-) G.A.Stalk 05:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


Talkpage message

You can edit User talk:G.A.S/Editnotice (like mine: User talk:Caulde/Editnotice) - adding either a template or templating the local wiki name of a page (e.g. {{User:G.A.S/template}}). Congrats on becoming an admin by the way. Caulde 16:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will look into the whole message idea. I wonder why almost no-one knows about it? G.A.Stalk 05:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Guess we're too clever. :) Caulde 17:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Tag & Assess '08

Bah, you overachiever... ;) —Dinoguy1000 16:25, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Suika (visual novel)

I see that you are back to assessing the articles again (again at a speed that I can possibly never achieve), and I see that you have assessed the Suika article (which I have on my watchlist ^^), but I am a little bit concerned if the article would really worth a Mid-importance rating, as it is a visual novel (which, by that sense, would be a video game), and would only qualify as a video game as according to WP:ANIME/ASSESS, or is there something else about the article that I don't know about :\. Thanks for your hard work on the assessment, by the way (I'll mention this again, at a speed that I can possibly never achieve). -- クラウド６６８ 17:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

It seems that you are right on the importance;) (Though it did seem more important at the time(?)) If you feel that I misassessed something, feel free to update it. Regards, G.A.Stalk 20:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Anime Tag & Assess '08

Out of curiosity, are you going through and rechecking everybody's assessments, or just mine? Seems like an awful lot of effort. Nutiketaiel (talk) 19:24, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no. The only ones I check are upgrades to B-class (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Anime and manga articles by quality log), to ensure consistency of quality. (Or are there other?) Regards, and thanks for the help. G.A.Stalk 20:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

How to improve Chaos;Head?

Hi, I noticed you've assessed the article as failing B2 and B6. How would you suggest we improve the article to get it to fulfill those two criteria? Thanks. --Remy Suen (talk) 16:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge close

Hi! As an uninvolved admin who has not participated in the discussion, could you review the merge discussion at Talk:List of Dragon Ball characters#Tien Shinhan - round 2/3 and close it as you feel appropriate. User:JJJ999 agreed that he would not argue the results (as he did earlier), so long as it was left open for at least two weeks and closed by a non-participating admin. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 17:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I will do so a bit later, I do not have time right now:(, just had to fix a small error. G.A.Stalk 17:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 Done G.A.Stalk 08:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

C-class articles -- thanks

Thanks for your input on C-class articles on WP:INDIA. Much appreciated. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. Regards, G.A.Stalk 04:28, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Ribbon

How is this? User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, shiny! It looks very good! Thank you very much:) G.A.Stalk 04:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Hell Girl Rating

If I may, could I trouble you to provide explanations for your ratings of Jigoku Shojo? Any thoughts that you can share would be appreciated.
--NBahn (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!
--NBahn (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
No problem! G.A.Stalk 13:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Restructuring List of licensed manga in English

Hey G.A.S, I was wondering if you would be willing to set up a script (or AWB) to restructure List of licensed manga in English according to the discussion on its talk page. Basically, we want the current columns collapsed into a {{nihongo}} format, with the new table structure containing columns for the series title, the author, Japanese publisher, and English licensor/publisher. If you need further clarification, feel free to ask at the discussion, and note that I'm also asking TheFarix, in case you're unable or unwilling to do this for some reason. Thanks in advance! —Dinoguy1000 21:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Seems like TheFarix have beaten me to it:) G.A.Stalk 04:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Yep, although I also have another project AWB would be perfect for... converting all the chapter lists which still use the old layout over to use {{Graphic novel list}}, if you feel up to writing a conversion script and tracking them all down. Just watch out for broken tables (extra rows, bad rowspan values, etc.) and the page or two that's half-n-half... —Dinoguy1000 19:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
If there is a way to have a script do it, I am unaware of how to write it:( But I would like to complete the tag & assess first. (I prefer it not running into the new year, and at the moment I am pretty much doing all of the work. — G.A.Stalk 05:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, it should be fairly straightforward... the old table format was actually pretty decently developed, and I haven't noticed any differences between lists using it (other than the occasional broken table caused by hardcoding everything). Basically, all you're doing is counting fields, scraping all the data in each field, and dumping it into the appropriate template field. I'd write up a script myself, but I don't know RegExes or anything, and would much rather start off learning with far simpler projects. As for T&A coming first, well, of course! ;) —Dinoguy1000 21:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Anime assessment

I'm more than a little confused by the rationale for the bot-editing as explained thus far at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Assessment#Requests_for_assessment. Could I ask for your input there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arimareiji (talk • contribs) 19:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Copyright issue for Kimagure Orange Road article

You've neglected to mention why you've decided to tag the article for a copyright issue, in the talk page. Simply tagging the article doesn't help editors try to resolve the issue. Quasispace (talk) 04:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

G.A.S. recently assessed the article [[3]] for Wikiproject Anime's Tag & Assess 2008. These assessments are done quickly we editors are trying to finish our lists of 1000's of articles, we simply don't have time to leave comments on every article we assess. But you did the right thing by asking him for more information! The reason it was tagged for copyright issues is because there are pictures for practically every single character on the page. Because these images are non-free images, use of more than a couple for illustration probably wouldn't qualify as fair use; it would be much preferable to find one cast shot with several characters in it, then remove all the other character pictures. Keep in mind that none of the images belong to us, so we must take care in our use of these images. --Kraftlos (talk) 11:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, yes, what GoodraiseKraftlos said; thanks for replying on my behalf. G.A.Stalk 08:18, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
You mean Kraftlos, right? Feeling a tad harried today? ;) —Dinoguy1000 20:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Um, yeah. I am under the weather lately. G.A.Stalk 02:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Ooh, I know how that can be... That would explain your recent hiatus from T&A '08, too, wouldn't it? —Dinoguy1000 05:07, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
It does. That and before that, the AWB bug (see recent contributions for the details). G.A.Stalk 10:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hope I didn't step on your toes, "image galleries" are one of my pet peeves. --Kraftlos (talk) 07:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
No, feel free to answer these kind of questions anytime. G.A.Stalk 10:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
There are a total of 10 images on the page. One is the imagebox of the boxset. The other images are three versions of the three main charactes. One representing them in the manga, one in TV series, and a final image of the characters in the 2nd KOR movie. Sadly, there isn't really a combined "cast" picture that would encompass the variations available. There might be a screen cap from the TV series, but the manga and movie present challenges in finding images that match the criteria. Quasispace (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
The infobox is justified; but a image of the original media is preferred, in this case, i.e. the cover page of the manga's first volume. Usually, variations in the appearance between the versions are trivial, though when they are discussed, they are shown side by side for easy comparison (see Belldandy), and are appropriately sourced. Note also that the reasons for the differences are discussed. Consider doing the same here. G.A.Stalk 05:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Gankutsuou episodes

Hi, you just assessed List of Gankutsuou episodes, an article that I have been working on and improving recently. You cited it as failing "Referencing and citation", "Coverage and accuracy", and "Structure". While I can agree that the "Coverage and accuracy" is inadequate as the episode summaries have not been completed, I would like to know how I can improve both the "Referencing and citation" and the "Structure" as I have been closely following the format shown by Featured Lists like List of Bleach episodes (season 6). Thanks! NOCTURNENOIRtalk 15:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

With regard to structure: the episode summaries should preferrably be of a more or less consistent length (between 150 - 250 words). The rest of the structure is fine; this is quite important when you attempt to go for FL status. The article might need a few more references depending on the nature of new content, but is fine for now. Hope that helps. G.A.Stalk 16:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm currently working on the episode summaries, so the later ones are still far too short. Isn't 150-250 words a bit too long though? Most of the featured Episode Lists I have looked at have episode summaries with around 100-150 words. In addition, is it correct to assume that the referencing and structure are fine for now? Again, thanks for the help! NOCTURNENOIRtalk 16:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Referencing, yes. Structure... If all of the summaries are about the length of episodes 1 or 2, yes. With regards to length, see this discussion. Using 100-150 words would be fine, but try to keep summaries' length consistent (WP:WIAFL-Visual appeal). Regards, G.A.Stalk 04:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Popotan characters

Need some clarifications on a few things after doing some edits.じんない 22:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Left a reply as to the problems with the standard usage.じんない 09:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I still think it may be a problem. I've gone and tried to explain the fundamental problem with using protagonist/antagonist method.じんない 16:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I think we're getting close here, but i have a question on formating per individual character.じんない 15:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For your most kind and beautiful gesture to me when I needed a little warmth and a smile, you've not only earned this starry gift, dear G.A.S., but a new friend too :) Thank you so much! Love, Phaedriel - 05:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me, and for your kind offer, dear :) I just updated my Barnstars section and moved all that were not listed at my userpage yet after you pointed that to me. I don't really have a criteria to carry them there, I just do it every now and then - but sometimes I forget, like now, and there actually was a backlog! :) I've put the one you gifted me at my userpage with pride. Once again, thanks for your kindness and the heads up! :) Love, Phaedriel - 04:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Your userpage is great!

Hi there, dear G.A.S.! Well, dear, allow me to tell you I am very impressed by your current userpage, and I love it just the way it is! The tables and layout are impeccable, and the color theme is most pleasant to the eye. I would personally be proud of that design, had I made it! ;) Of course, the contents of your current userpage are brief, so there isn't much more to work on; if you add more stuff in the future, some layout enhancements can be made. But as it stands, it's just - perfect! Great work! :) Love, Phaedriel - 03:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

A smile for you!

Smile a little, smile a little, all along the road;
Every life must have its burden, every heart its load.
Why sit down in gloom and darkness with your grief to sup?
As you drink Fate's bitter tonic, smile across the cup.

Smile upon the troubled pilgrims whom you pass and meet;
Frowns are thorns, and smiles are blossoms, oft for weary feet.
Do not make the way seem harder by a sullen face;
Smile a little, smile a little, brighten up the place.

Smile upon your undone labour; not for one who grieves
O'er his task waits wealth or glory; he who smiles achieves.
Though you meet with loss and sorrow in the passing years,
Smile a little, smile a little... even through your tears!

Ella Wheeler Wilcox

A little gift for my wonderful friend G.A.S.,
and an incredibly big "thank you!" for always being
a light of kindness and support whenever it's needed.
Love,
Phaedriel
21:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sandbox - FA cleanup checklist

  • Is logical quotation used (WP:PUNC)?
  • Are all links live (WP:DEADLINK)?
  • Are there hyphens (-) left to be replaced by en dashes (WP:DASH)?
  • Have dates been delinked (WP:MOSLINK#Dates, WP:MOSNUM#Date autoformatting, WP:OVERLINK#Dates)?
  • Are there unnecessary links i.e. common country names (WP:OVERLINK)?
  • Have all quotes been cited?
  • Does citations use pp. for plural and p. for singular?
  • Have disambiguation pages been bypassed?
  • Does the lead follow the structure of the article as a whole?
  • Is the serial comma used consistently, or not at all (except where its removal would confuse matters)?
  • Does the article contain the word "seems" (WP:OR)?

Last updated: G.A.S 06:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

A Barnstar!
The Anime and Manga BarnSakura Award
For your dedicated work in cleaning up anime and manga articles, and especially for your efforts at WP:ANIME/CLEANUP. Also, congratulations on getting Tokyo Mew Mew to GA status! --sephiroth bcr (converse) 05:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Being appreciated makes it all worthwhile! G.A.S 05:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
FYI, you should probably put your name down in the member list at WP:ANIME/CLEANUP considering the work you do there. Cheers, sephiroth bcr (converse) 07:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing the userbox on the clean up page! For the life of me, I could not remember how to get it to float right last night. *doh* -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
No problem;) G.A.S 13:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

You get a BarnLoli!

BarnLoli for invaluable project edits
For your continuous, prompt, and thoughtful work at WP:MANGA/ASSESS, I hereby award you the first ever WikiProject Anime and Manga BarnLoli award! Congratulations, nobody deserves it more.--erachima talk 06:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Why, thank you very much! G.A.S 09:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for signing my guestbook

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for signing my guestbook. LAAFan


Also, thanks for the nice userpage compliment :)--LAAFansign review 22:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much:-) G.A.Stalk 05:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


Cause I didn't do it alone :)

A Barnstar!
BarnSakura for excellent edits to anime and manga articles
I hereby award you the Anime and Manga BarnSakura for your valuable help in taking Tokyo Mew Mew from a mess to a featured article! ---- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 16:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much :-) (By the way, in case you wonder where we came from, or what we did...) — G.A.Stalk 16:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
And, of course, the comment I left for Collectonian also applies to you, GAS! Congrats on the FA! —Dinoguy1000 17:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of True Tears episodes

In future, try not to allow exceptions from our MoS like you did here by allowing a reception section in the episode list, as it convinced an impressionable editor to go forward with the rather major WP:TROUT-action described above. Remember that Smallville (season 1) is by far the exception and not the norm. The writers had enough coverage to write an article on the season as a whole, hence why it's a FA and not a FL. Let's stick by our MoS in the future, mmkay ;-) — sephiroth bcr (converse) 09:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

The purpose of the comment was that it is unusual for episode list to have reception, and that more work will have to be done if that content was to be kept in the existing article (As frankly; it did not fit), with the Smallville list being provided as an example of where it is done. (The problem, I was told, was that the main article is about the video game; not the anime.)
In any case, I rather that the reasoning given for the removal was invalid: #3 Comprehensiveness. It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing a complete set of items where practical, or otherwise at least all of the major items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about entries. It does not mention that alternative information should be given, only that the list itself should be comprehensive.
The other problem is that we do not have a manual of style for lists; so I cannot quite agree with it being an exception from the MoS :) or :( (?).
Regards, G.A.Stalk 15:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Tag and Assess

Hi G.A.S! I realized quite recently that there is just no physical way that I will be able to tag and assess two hundred articles quickly in the near future. As I am suddenly being crunched for time due to school, I will have to withdraw from this project. My deepest apologies, but would it be possible for you to pick up from where I left off? Thanks. DARTH PANDAduel 06:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to hear, but thanks for letting me know. I will see what I can do, though I will probably leave it 'till last :( Regards, G.A.Stalk 11:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
At least Jinnai seems to be doing some as well, that should help speed things up some. —Dinoguy1000 18:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, and I really appreciate the help. I just cannot find the time to continue myself, and am currently stuck with a slow internet connection, so even if I had time... There are about 18 hours of work left (Not too much if we had a few (active) volunteers, but alas!) G.A.Stalk 22:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:G.A.S/Archive_4&oldid=1144567930"