User talk:Steven Crossin/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

lectures

It is 15:00 UTC, and I'd like to start talking on irc.freenode.net, #wikipedia-en-lectures.

--Kim Bruning (talk) 15:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

uncivil

JAF1970 is swearing and not giving us any citations to his POVs but still deleting ours. see User talk:Steve Crossin/Spore Sandbox. Skele (talk) 15:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 12 hours for incivility. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 15:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

To do list

We really need a to do list for Wikiproject 24, I can create a page, but you will need to make it look nice, as I don't know how to do that, although I will try.--Lan Di (talk) 18:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, good idea. It's best to discuss this on MSN. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 19:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

24 project

Although users belonging to the project have contributed to 24-related articles, you are right in saying that the project needs some revamping. I don't there is organization within the group (i.e. tasks to do, organizing articles by level, importance) I think you can contribute to the project a lot, and I would also be glad to help out. мirаgeinred سَراب ٭ (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Heh, one step ahead of you there. Check out the project page, articles have been sorted by class, and all images have been sorted into a category. I'm writing rationales for non-compliant images. I know youre a good article writer and I would appreciate your input a lot. Check it out. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 19:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, nice job. I've been inactive for some time but I will try to come as often as possible to help out. мirаgeinred سَراب ٭ (talk) 19:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Actually, I really need your help. Could you trim down the plot info in Martha Logan? I can do the rest, I found some newspaper articles (and I hope to get it to GA status, so I'd like to do some of the article :)), but you're great with the trimming/sourcing, do you think you could trim it down? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 19:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Soham Merge

The main reasons I think that the Articles should be merged is that all of the content of the Maxine Carr article is because of her involvement with Ian Huntly. The only reason Hunlty has any form of notability is thorough the Soham case. Without the case neither one would be notable and the overlap between the Soham case and the other articles is immense. I also think that by having separate articles important information is lost from the Soham article which could, with some work be made into GA and possibly FA; due to the Bishard Inquiry and the Police Refornm act of 2002. I also think that one article would be less vulnerable to attack form annon's and POV pushing. I hope I have made myself clear.--Lucy-marie (talk) 19:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay Lucy, that seems reasonable. I've seen guidelines in the Manual of Style about non-notable criminals, and it may fall into that criterion, I can see how some could argue that as it was a high-profile case, that fact alone may assert their notability. I could go either way here. But, I'll definetly weigh in, that's not a problem. Also, did you see the 24 project page? Will you join it? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 19:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I have joined the 24 project.--Lucy-marie (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. At the moment, I'm writing fair use rationales for all 24 images. Some of them are really bad. Do you think our goals are good? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 19:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The goals seem to be sensible and rational. I would like to add that some form of definition of notability for these articles need to e drawn up once the Medcab has closed.--Lucy-marie (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they're rational because someone with a balanced view wrote them. :) Notability is something that needs to be drawn up, perhaps a guideline could be written up after the MedCab case? The thing I find important too, is the cutting down of plot information. Of course, a concise plot summary, as is mentioned in the Fiction MoS, can be included, with conditions. But adding massive plot summaries is something I will dissuade. Also, I'm working on having every image compliant with the WP:NFCC criteria. Images such as this are disgraceful, and I am fixing them ASAP. I'd appreciate your thoughts though. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 20:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Pitch Card Game Revisions

Hi Steve, back in March I edited the rules for playing Pitch (Card Game). I noticed that you reverted the page back to its previous version. My revision was taken directly from Hoyle and are the offical rules of the game. The original version as I found it on Wikipedia was written using house rules and are not the offical rules of the game. The offical rules as I have written them can be found in the following book. I spent a lot of time rewriting the offical rules for wikipedia and placed the house rules versions below the offical rules. Thanks for your help,Bernie
Offical Rules of Card Games Albert H. Morehead 1968 ISBN: 0-449-23417-3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Impalabern (talk • contribs) 06:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Archive of Spore sandbox talk page

I am a little surprised that you archived the section I commented in only 45 minutes after I posted said comment. Should you maybe have left my comment on the talk page? Dansiman (talk|Contribs) 13:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

After discussion with an admin, I decided to archive the aformentioned discussion due to civility issues. The alternative would have been to delete the uncivil comments, but we decided against it. As such, I archived the whole section. Feel free to re-post on the clean page. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

What's up with...

...brand-new user Whatsupwithstevecrossin? Any ideas? --Calton | Talk 14:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Either way, it doesn't matter. They've been indef blocked. Thanks for informing me. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 14:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Did a bunch of editing on military vehicles

I just did a whole bunch of editing on military vehicles and their related pages to make it better, I would like to inform you of this because I know Huggle likes to flag such edits as vandalism, even though it isn't. This is just a courtesy informing to prevent my work from being undone. Thank you.--Lan Di (talk) 21:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

24 WikiProject

I’m sorry, but I don’t think I feel like participating since I suspect it will end with merger mania yet again and this time with no way to stop it. I do not want to be part of destroying numerous articles. Sorry for being cynical, but I have lost all faith in this place. When you have nearly every edit reverted by someone who isn’t even an admin (and reverted simply because they don’t agree with the information, not because it was wrong) and then be threatened, it really isn’t a lot of fun anymore. --MiB-24 (talk) 23:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

If you’ve seen Lucy’s latest comments, I think you’ll know why I don’t want to participate. She immediately tried to torpedo the sources found about Martha Logan/Jean Smart. I don’t believe for a minute she is going to truly work toward improving the articles. She wants these articles to be merged regardless and I doubt she has or will back down from that position. She even asked for the mediation to be dissolved which would then free her to go on a merger rampage for the third time. I tried very hard to come to an understanding with her during the first part of the mediation and you saw how that ended. She refused to abide by the mediator’s suggestions and demanded that mergers be back on the table. Therefore I don’t really see a point in working with someone who has repeatedly expressed no desire to work with anyone (unless they agree 100% with her) and prefers to just ramrod her positions through by any means necessary. --MiB-24 (talk) 22:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

MiB-24, can we at least try it out :) mediation is never a simple process. I would grateful if you could stick at this :) Seddon69 (talk) 22:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I won’t quit the mediation as I already agreed to do it. However, I cannot work on anything else with Lucy that doesn’t have serious control on her. I just don’t see it leading to anything but another huge fight the instant she declares merger mania is back on. If I thought she was really serious about trying to improve the articles, then perhaps I’d make a difference choice, but I just don’t. Nothing she has said or done indicates to me she has changed her position on merging all but two of the “24” character pagers. --MiB-24 (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok i understand. At the moment the main thing is to search the internet for sources. That way we have a better understanding of how much real world notability exists. You don't have to edit the article themselves if you don't wish to but a help in the search for sources would be grateful. Seddon69 (talk) 17:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I’ll try to help when I have time, but right now it’s crunch time for me with school. I‘m working on a ~15,000 word paper on strategic bombing in WWII so that is sucking up a lot of my time. --MiB-24 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Steve, I haven’t said anything about Lucy in a long time, nor was I planning too. However, my position will not change. I don’t trust her which is why I won’t join anything else in which she’s involved. I just don’t need the additional aggravation. --MiB-24 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Query

Dear Sir,

I am a fan of Singapore's radio station so I go around editing their Wikipedia pages.

However, I have some questions.

How do I delete/remove redirect pages (which do not have accurate titles)? For example, there are a few webpages which redirect to one of the radio stations, Y.E.S. 93.3FM. These include "Y.e.s. 93.3fm", "Yes933", "Y.E.S. 933 FM", which are all inaccurate. The title of the article should be "Y.E.S. 93.3FM". I am also unable to rename the current "Y.E.S. 933 FM" to "Y.E.S. 93.3FM". Please help.

Same problem goes for the radio station "938LIVE". How do I delete/remove the page "NewsRadio 93.8FM" (which was the station's former name a few years ago) which redirects to "938LIVE"?

Lastly, I would like to update the station logo of "Power98FM". I have uploaded the logo but it doesn't seem to show up. I have received a note about the fair use rationale but I'm not too sure what else I have to add.

Hope you'll be able to help. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiisgood (talk • contribs) 05:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Final agreement has been reached.

Hi Steve, I'm glad to tell you that the final agreement of Ming Dynasty has been reached after so many days' seesaw battle. MingEmpire 1443.png is decided to be the lead infobox map. So Ming Dynasty could be unlocked and please watch this article to avoid someone from changing the map frequently. And Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-04-02 Ming Dynasty seems to be no longer necessary. Regards.--LaGrandefr (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks for letting me know. I've closed the case. And I'll keep an eye on the page. I'm glad I could help resolve this dispute. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Page in your userspace up for deletion

Hi Steve Crossin. I would like to inform you that another editor has nominated a page in your userspace (User:Steve Crossin/Vandalism) for deletion, along with several other pages, and the discussion is located here. Your input on the matter would be appreciated. --Pixelface (talk) 20:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Formatting needed to be done

Hi, if you have time, could you fix the page Gambier Islands and streamline and format it acceptable to WP standards, it's a good article, but the citations are outside of standards, it would be a great help if you could do it.--Lan Di (talk) 14:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hm, just wondering, what exactly is wrong with it, as in, what needs to be fixed? It would help a lot if you could be more specific. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 15:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the article, the citations are not all under the reference part of the page, which would make it a lot nicer to read. I don't know the markup to fix up the page and make it look nice, without all the references being next to the paragraph or it just looking out of place.--Lan Di (talk) 22:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

MedCab 24

Hey, I got you some sources for Martha Logan, I don't have the links, but I have the names of the articles, authors, dates, sections of newspaper pages, etc. I'm sure if you google them, you will find the articles that I found with the text within it.--Lan Di (talk) 13:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw. I have found already one of those articles already, I'll Google them and see what I find. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast, 5 minutes for a reply :P--Lan Di (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you jump on IRC? The #wikipedia-medcab channel would do. Or MSN, whatever suits you. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to use IRC, and I'm at school, It will take me at least 10 minutes to get on MSN.--Lan Di (talk) 13:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay then, I'll wait the 10mins then. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well I'm hacking through the school's firewall to do this, luckily I can't be traced, as I scramble where the hack is coming from, so it looks like normal traffic and they can't read it.--Lan Di (talk) 13:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Article

It's no problem. It's fairly short; I was able to read it through fairly quickly. Two things jump out at me: the writing is somewhat choppy, especially at the end, and it needs citations in certain places, especially that big quote in the middle. If it's repeated elsewhere in the article, you don't need to cite anything in the lead (see cannon for an example - nothing is cited in the lead.) If you can find anything more about her (besides what she does in the series,) that would be great. As for a rating, I'd place it at start or B-class, probably the latter.

If you're going for GA (which I hope you do, it's good experience for a potential admin,) here's a list of things you should do beforehand.

• Find more citations (and remove that ugly tag! ;) )
  
• Do a good copyedit for flow.
• See if there's any more (non-crufty) stuff about her.

That would probably get you through GA (or at least put it on hold with comments). If you want help, I'd be pleased, or you can find other opinions; WP:TSQUAD, WP:FAT, and the frequent reviewers at WP:GAN would be your best bets. Good luck! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 08:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• I'm going for GA at some point. That big quote will be broken up at one point, hopefully soon. I also want to have the plot summary re-written. I have sources, of which I've used to source the sections at the top, which are currently sourced. The thing I'm stuck with, is taking the info from the reliable sources I have, and incorporating them into the article. I'm a bit stuck there. I think though, with some good work, it could be improved to GA status. Do you think it would meet B class though? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 09:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• • Yeah, it's pretty good, as I said, it just needs the citations. Here's what I normally do. I'll first go through my links/books and try to cite everything from there. If there's still uncited material, I'll tag it with {{fact}} so I don't forget, then (if collaborating) ask around, or (if solo) go hunting on Google books, at the library, or the Web in general. If you can't find a citation for something, remove it, you can always add it back later. As for integrating material, you may want to read the sources, write what you want to say, then reference it. That may help the flow. (You are looking really good as an editor, by the way, keep up the good work!) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 09:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Well, once the plot info is rewritten, I'll have no problem sourcing that info. My take on plot info, is that primary sources can be used to cite background information, plot information, as is documented in WP:MOSF. I know the article still needs work however, I just wanted some indication of how it's coming along. Something to keep me motivated, would be, to see B class on the article. :) GA for the future, definitely. It's possible, no doubt. It may meet B class for now though, but that's really up to you. Any content I saw in the article that I couldn't see as sourcable, I've moved to the talk page. I can source the current plot info if you want, I just think it would be rewritten at some point, but I can still do it if you like. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 09:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

That sounds good, I'd likely call it B-class. As long as it isn't GA/A/FA, you can change it yourself if you think it merits it (e.g. expanding a stub for DYK.) I've already changed it this time; it is really coming along. Let me know if you need any more help. Best, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 09:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Steve

Thanks for reverting my talk page back. --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  11:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For his great work on reverting vandalism --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  11:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot :D It was no problem at all. I just wish I could have blocked them myself. One day i suppose...thanks again :D Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 11:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

How many more of the same barnstar are you going to get? I think the top of this page is getting a bit clogged form the same one over and over. maybe just have one of each type of award you get at the top of the page. Anyway keep up the good work.--Lucy-marie (talk) 13:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

Look at this Steve: Olympios their is no article, and the ip seems to just add content to the talk page --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  11:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Hmm, I think I see why they created the page on the talk page. IP's can't start new articles. I'll send them a message, and see if I can resolve the issue. I've never seen this problem before, however. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 11:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Page deleted, under CSD G8. If there's anything else, let me know. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 12:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Exactly what I thought, it failed G8. Just I'd never seen that before! Thanks --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  12:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Deadlocked

Extended content

Steve. G'day. I noticed you have judged the case on the Intifada 'deadlocked'. I'm sorry, but I fail to understand. The only outstanding issue is on the meaning of 'uprising'. One word. Two editors have done a huge amount of documentation to underline that the word simply is not controversial in Wiki articles on 'uprisings', in English usage (O.E.D.) and in the scholarly literature on the al-Aqsa intifada. To this large volume of documentation, supplied on request, there has been hardly any response (recently none) from those who think the word has connotations they admit they cannot document. Every proof for 4 months has been met by an attitude, and silence. Now I know Wiki administration and arbitration requires absolute neutrality. Wiki editing also requires, however, strict observance of rules. And one fundamental rule is that editors should not, like Humpty Dumpty, make words mean what they want them to mean, in the face of common usage. What is required is a call on whether the unique challenge, without any documentation other than personal inferences, to the commonplace use of 'uprising' as descriptive of the intifada has merits or not. If it has merits (which no scholar I am familiar with has noticed), then by all means state them, or get those in there to state them. One cannot 'mediate' a compromise between editors who work hard to prove the obvious, and editors who make a few vague objections, or keep silent when their objections are systematically disproven. I'm biased: I think it's a furphy that even Blind Freddie and his canine cobber could spot at a glance, but here I'm not asking you to wed my 'theory'. My point is, the two mediators could have helped by being a little more insistent on asking those who hold the page hostage with silence, and waffle, to actually come up with some proof or evidence for a position they have persisted in for 4 months, without showing anything stronger than a private conviction to justify what is lately, increasingly looking like wilful obstructionism. Regards Nishidani (talk) 12:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC) Okay, a case is marked as "deadlocked" when attempts at compromise have failed. It appears as some editors, are reluctant/unwilling to compromise, that the mediation is deadlocked. Additionally, mediators cannot make "rulings" or binding decisions. Our role is to discuss with editors the issue, and try to work on establishing a compromise. Other options as to what will be done next are currently under active discussion. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 12:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC) Of course they can't make rulings. They can of course elicit one side that is not forthcoming to state clearly, in the context of a voluminous amount of work done by their 'adversaries' in correct and courteous response to mediators' queries, why their objections remain. Editors hostile to 'uprising' don not appear to answer mediators request for 'responses', whilst the rest of us have worked our butts off to satisfy those queries. In science the burden of proof lies not on those who hold that the world is round (accepted view), but on those who affirm it is flat. The burden of proof on showing 'uprising' connotes approval lies with those who contest the English Oxford Dictionary, academic and natural usage. So far, the burden of proof here has been shouldered by those who support commonsense, common usage, and the state of the English language as that describes, journalistically or academically, the Intifada. Of course, this will go inevitably to arbitration. I suppose if some flatearther challenges the Wiki pages dealing with the physical characteristics of the 'earth', it will have to go to arbitration, as well. I thought the rules did imply that in a dialogue under mediation, 'silence' by one side, and a huge attitude, is not an option. Nothing personal of course. This is the way Wiki works, and it is comical when not Kafkian. Regards Nishidani (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Martha Logan

I am afraid I cannot talk over IRC as my operating system doesn't recognise IRC. pre-fixes to web addresses.--Lucy-marie (talk) 13:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any other similar program? Yahoo, MSN, AIM, Skype? You see, I'm trying to set up some sort of meeting with the Wikiproject members, and I think you should be there too. What operating system do you have? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I am currently Running on Mac OS X. I am very reluctant to give out any private contact details due to the amount of abuse that is hurled at me by some users on this site.--Lucy-marie (talk) 13:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

You can email the details to me privately if that would make you feel better. All emails i recieve, are of course, confidential. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying but what is the nature of what you wish to discuss.--Lucy-marie (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, some is related specifically to articles, other things are things I'd like your opinion about, and as I know you have been personally attacked quite a bit on this site, I thought you would prefer discussion elsewhere, to avoid that happening. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I can see the logic in that how do I contact you then?--Lucy-marie (talk) 13:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Click this link. Its a way of emailing me. You can email me your preferred method of contact there. If you have trouble with that, my email is stevenc2867@hotmail.com. Yahoo, or AIM or a IM program would be best, as it's a quicker way of communicating. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 13:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Steve, I'm having the same problem as Lucy-marie. мirаgeinred سَراب ٭ (talk) 13:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, what IRC client do you use? If you dont have one, go to mibbit.com, then, search for #Wikipedia-en. Once you found that channel, type /join #Wikiproject_24 . That should work. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 14:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Now I get it. Thanks. мirаgeinred سَراب ٭ (talk) 14:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Freenode linking

Hey steve, I got a problem linking /msg NickServ link Kanonkas_ [Password] I get a message saying The nickname [Kanonkas_] is not registered --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  15:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure the nickname is registered? Do this. /nick (your nickname), then /ns register (password) then /msg nickserv link (username) (password) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 15:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I have already registered the nick "Kanonkas" but when I try to register "Kanonkas_" Then it says "The nickname [Kanonkas] is already registered" I am using ChatZilla, just for your information --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  15:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, try registering Kanonkas_Alt. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 15:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh I think I know what was wrong, you know. I had my nick as "Kanonkas" when I tried to register "Kanonkas_" When I changed my nick to "Kanonkas_Alt" and registered it, and tried to link it, it worked :) Thanks --Kanonkas :  Take Contact  15:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I'm glad to have helped. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 15:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Spore mediation question

Hey, thanks for overseeing this. Things are kind of at a standstill now. Everyone except JAF1970 seems to be okay with the article in the sandbox. JAF1970 strongly disagrees with the sandbox, is going to self-publish a web article in order to have a reliable reference that would support a different version of the spore article. I'm wondering if you could clear up the WP:SPS policy? I know sometimes it's relaxed, and sometimes it's not. Seeing as you're mediating, I figure you might want to comment on this strategy. Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2008-03-17_Spore_(video_game)#Are_we_almost_there.3F_.28check-in.21.29 <-- helpful link. Randomran (talk) 17:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm checking it now. It may take some time, but I'll respond when I can. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 17:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Mediation request

There is (apparently) a dispute at Open mail relay over whether an article is disputed and/or POV. A dispute occured a while ago on the article's talk page, but the other editor, User:Deananderson has since not edited the article. The other editor in the dispute, User:Wrs1864, asserts that the article still is POV, but does not say what POV problems he sees with the article. Any thoughts? ffm 19:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

table markup

Article
Status:	Insert item value here
Parties:	Insert item value here

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.87.45 (talk • contribs)

how to huggle

Hey. I was just wondering how you would say "to huggle" and in "huggleing" or "huggling" e.t.c. It would really help if i could have your input ;p. Also could you please reply to this on my talk page as if i put it in my watch list i cctually wont notice it :S. Thanks. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 07:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)