User talk:Stifle/Archive 0408f

User talk:Vardeborcartadcodcar

Ref:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Contents 1 Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Thank you very much for the guidelines. God bless you.(59.165.135.78 (talk) 08:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)).

Biographical notes

'''Biographical Notes help to form Database''', which is necessary for research scholars at local as well as global levels. I fail to understand as why biographical notes are being deleted by Wikipedian adminsistrators. The biographical notes help to form database for all the researchers. In fact Wikipedian adminsistrators are scaring the research article writers. Thank you very much. God bless you. - Vardeborcartadcodcar [[(Vardeborcartadcodcar (talk) 14:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC))]]

Thank you for your message. In future, please use my message system to leave messages rather than messing up the headers of my talk page.

You don't need to put [[ and ]] around everything.

Please see WP:BIO for the criteria which a person must meet to be included in Wikipedia. Articles will be deleted if they do not indicate how the person is notable and important. Please also see Wikipedia:Manual of style which explains how to structure articles.

There are some alternative outlets which you might find useful for biographies of people who aren't notable enough to be in Wikipedia. Stifle (talk) 18:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Vardeborcartadcodcar

Indeed, you are quite an excellent, considerate and positive minded Wikipedian!

I know that the details I have given to build up are actual content, and in factual and verifiable manner. It is a biographical information with substantive content. The biographical note of the the person is important for those who are interested in the realm of Konkani language and Konkani Literature. The biographical notes help to form database for all the researchers. They are in Asia,and Europe as well. Goa and Konkani are not a small names, I believe.

If, still you insist on finding out a slot viz. alternative outlets, then, I will do so. This is the last attempt on my part of convincing you to not to delete.God bless you.(Vardeborcartadcodcar (talk) 09:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)).

If you can indicate, by reference to reliable sources, how the subject of any of the articles I deleted is notable, I will undelete that article. But you haven't convinced me yet. While you might know that the details you have given are good, Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that anyone be able to check that. Stifle (talk) 10:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

On the photograph of Bahram Bayzai

Dear Stifle, I notice that despite all my efforts, and despite the fact that I forwarded the copy of the letter that I had received from Payvand.com to Wikipedia, they have removed the above-mentioned photograph. Could you please kindly see to it that the photograph be restored? With kind regards, --BF 02:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but the permission has not been recorded. You would need to contact a member of the OTRS team to progress this. When you sent the permission email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org you would have received a reply with a ticket number, you should quote this ticket number in your email. Stifle (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, well I have never received anything from OTRS! I have a copy of my forwarded e-mail before me (dated 15 April 2008), but Wikipedia has never sent me a ticket number in response. I believe that there is simply something wrong with permissions-en@wikimedia.org (perhaps you have given me the wrong e-mail address), since, as I told you earlier, it is just impossible that I should have received a copy of the e-mail that Payvand.com has sent to the latter address, and Wikipidia, the main addressee, has not received that e-mail. Why is Wikipedia doing this to people? How much time have I to spend on a 40 KB of data of which the photograph at issue consisted? I should be most grateful if you would kindly bring this problem to the attention of the relevant people; as it stands, it does not make any sense that I send yet another e-mail to an address which evidently must be a dead address. Kind regards, --BF 12:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I have checked, and permissions-en@wikimedia.org is the correct address, as found at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.

Wikipedia is extremely conscious of copyrights and wishes to always make sure that they are not being violated. Nobody is saying that you are violating any copyrights, but we must take care to ensure that we have proper permission to use images or other content which is created by someone else.

I do not have access to the email address or the ticket queue. I am going to ask User:MK8, who does have this access and speaks Arabic as well as English, to look into the matter for you. Thank you for your patience. Stifle (talk) 13:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Please kindly let User:MK8 know that when I forwarded my copy of the e-mail from Payvand.com to Wikipedia (on your recommendation), I also forwarded it to a second e-mail address of mine on an altogether different computer system, and this forwarded e-mail has arrived. In other words, it cannot be that my present e-mail system were malfunctioning. Also, I have had two or three further e-mail exchanges with Payvand.com (of which one was to thank them for the permission), so that the possibility of Payvand.com's e-mail system malfunctioning is also ruled out. Kind regards, --BF 15:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Unfortunately, my access is limited to the Arabic-language "info" queue (Arabic Wikipedia's email). I apologise for not being able to help. However, you may try to contact one of the people listed here. --MK (talk) 15:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not understand this "Arabic language" thing. There must be some misunderstanding, as there is nothing Arabic about the photograph of Bahram Bayzai. Payvand.com has forwarded the e-mail at issue from California, USA; my e-mail (forwarding my copy of their e-mail to Wikipedia) was forwarded from Europe. In none of the e-mails there was a word of Arabic (which I suppose you mean Farsi) to be detected. --BF 16:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, the following text is the exact reproduction of the text send to Wikipedia to Payvand.com:

Date: April 15, 2008

From: Payvand.com

www.payvand.com

info@payvand.com

To: Wikipedia Editor

We, Payvand.com, confirm that we have indeed granted permission for the photographs on the following page

http://www.payvand.com/news/04/oct/1155.html

to be uploaded to Wikipedia. This applies in particular to the photograph of Mr Bahram Bayzai as is now used in conjunction with the biographical entry of Mr Bayzai on the English Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bahram_Bayzai.jpg

Please note we had already granted a similar permission to the Wikipedia contributor with the username “BehnamFarid”.

Regards,

Ali Moayedian

I hope the photograph can now be restored. Kind regards, --BF 17:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This does not supply sufficient permission for the image to be used on Wikipedia. Please see this official order from the founder of Wikipedia for a further explanation. Please see Wikipedia:COPYREQ#For_images for the best method of requesting the release under a free license.

I understand that this may be frustrating, but I am constrained by Wikipedia policy on images. Stifle (talk) 18:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, I am utterly confused! On the one hand you mention to me that Wikipedia has not received any message from Payvand.com. On the other hand, now you are telling me that something is not good enough. Evidently, when Wikipedia is unable to keep track of the e-mails that it is sent (please note the amount of contradictory things that I have been told thus far; I still do not know what that "Arabic language" thing was all about), it makes no sense for me to write to Payvand.com and ask them to send yet another e-mail to Wikipedia, with a different wording! Please note that Payvand.com has no obligation towards me to send out ten e-mails on my order, e-mails which even do not appear to reach their actual destination. Wikipedia is showing that its not taking the dignity of the people seriously: one of these days Payvand.com will just neglect my messages and will say go to hell. I cannot afford being seen by these companies as a nuisance, asking them every day a new thing; next time I need something from them, they will not take me seriously any longer. Apparently, Wikipedia is considering itself as the centre of the universe and expects that people should keep dancing to its tunes. Could you please tell me, for the last time, what can be done to resolve this simplest of all things in the world? The situation is not merely "frustrating", it is plainly stupid. How can Wikipedia keep doing this to people? --BF 18:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It is explained fully at Wikipedia:COPYREQ#For_images.

I do not know where the email ended up. I am trying to chase it up.

The Arabic language issue was my confusion. I thought that someone involved had Arabic/Farsi as their first language and would be more at home communicating in that language.

Please understand that I am as frustrated as you are with this matter — Wikipedia's policies state that permission to use an image on Wikipedia along is not sufficient because it is an attempt to be a free encyclopedia. It is required that images are released under a free license.

I hope that this issue will eventually be resolved; if you wish I can contact payvand.com on your behalf and Wikipedia's and save you from being considered a nuisance.

Regards Stifle (talk) 19:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, I should be most grateful if you indeed kindly contacted Payvand.com. The pertinent e-mail address is: info@payvand.com and the person with whom I had been in touch is Mr Ali Moayadian. You may wish to remind him that the heading of the e-mail they sent on 15 April to Wikipedia was: Granting Permission for use of Bahram Bayzai photograph. Please note that their permission covers all the photographs due to Mr Fakhraddin Fakhraddini that are displayed on this page: [1]. Many thanks in advance for the trouble. With kind regards, --BF 19:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC).

I've sent that email and I hope that we will eventually resolve all of this. Stifle (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --BF 20:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Everything is now fixed up and Image:Bahram Bayzai.jpg has been restored. Thank you again for your patience. The permission extends to all images on http://www.payvand.com/news/04/oct/1155.html, which should be tagged with the same tags and details as are on the existing one if you choose to upload them. Stifle (talk) 18:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Stifle, thank you very much for all the trouble! I knew that things were moving in the right direction when I received a copy of the e-mail of Payvand.com to Wikipedia sometimes in the course of this morning. It seems that finally I may have woken up from a bad nightmare — I do not hesitate to think that the same must also apply to you. With kind regards, --BF 20:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Maynard midget gems

Hi there. I think the article Maynard midget gems should really live at Midget gems but, as it's undergoing an AfD I don't know whether I should wait until the article survives (if it does... it should, in my opinion - I'll get source-hunting soon) or do it now? -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 09:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem in moving it now as long as you make sure that you don't break the link from that page to the AFD. Stifle (talk) 10:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser

Stifle, Meta is refusing to perform a checkuser.[2] What do I do now? User:Jorrit-H has not withdrawn his statement. Regards, Guido den Broeder (talk) 10:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I've asked for clarification of the steward's reply. Stifle (talk) 10:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

List of mergers in Miyagi Prefecture

All I wanted to do is make a page of articles of mergers of each prefecture that are needed to be yet complete. That's all. And I accidentally put Iwate Prefecture on the article List of mergers in Miyagi Prefecture. Now I fixed that part. Let me know if there are corrections for me to put or revert back to. jlog3000 (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

You've removed the proposed deletion template, as you're entitled to do. There's nothing else for you to do for now. Stifle (talk) 11:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect...

... reverting obvious vandalism and/or trolling doesn't fall under 3RR. The very aggressive troll operating from eight different IPs beginning with 77.78.19x is repeatedly vandalising the pages Bosniaks and Slavic peoples. I know that if you take only a very brief look it could look as an edit dispute, but if you look into the historyo of it, it's not only vandalism, it's vandalism with a severe racist stream in it. This has been discussed in great detail and the discussions can be found under the corresponding pages. The fact that multiple registered user has reverted this racist troll does not by definition make any of us guilty of edit warring, just of keeping Wikipedia up to standard. Cheers JdeJ (talk) 11:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I do not view those edits as obvious vandalism. Please see Wikipedia:3RR#Exceptions for an exhaustive list of exceptions to 3RR.

I have blocked the IP for edit warring and a range block should be considered if the situation continues.

Please note that I have not said that any of you were edit warring. Stifle (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

First of all, the block is worthless. The same troll has been blocked multiple times already but just changes to a new IP. He has used eight already. When any editor uses eight different accounts to push for something he knows is incorrect, it's more like trolling and not an edit dispute. At the talk pages of these articles, we have gone through this in great detail. If the user was earnest, he would hardly falsify sources, replace the content on many user pages, attack other users and definitely not need to use eight different accounts. Of course it's more clever for a troll to disguise the trolling a bit so that it may look like "simple" edit warring for an outsider looking at only a fraction of the story, but an intelligent troll is no less of a troll. Cheers JdeJ (talk) 11:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I've given the IP notice of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia. Next time he shows up, he can be dealt with under those provisions, and if I knew how to block 77.78.198.* I would. Stifle (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest looking in to whether JdeJ, Osli and the gang are clearly one user with some Browser header knowledge, as very misteriously they support the exact same views about unbelievable amount of issues. Indeed because of that gang of vandals, Serbia section doesn't even exclude Kosovo from it's borders, despite google maps doing so. Because of Admins like you, Wikipedia runs the risk of looking like a Russian encyclopedia of history. If you check out the Bosnian pyramids, almost every negative publication is listed and any favouring publication is either removed or discouraged, with support of Admins like you of course. This unfairness breeds bad behaviour on Wikipedia and a lot of people don't feel they should play fair quite understandably. 77.78.198.147 (talk) 14:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hello. Thanks for your warning about the three-revert rule. But, hey, I was only trying to get those two people on the article into a talk page rather than revert each other!! Please see this edit, where I first stumbled on this exchange while vandalfighting on Huggle. I undid myself, as I knew that I had no business in this case, as I dont know the details. When this happened by another user, I decided to look into the matter, and found that POV pushing is happening by an ip. That is when I made 2 REVERTS ONLY (this and this and left a msg at the ip's talk page which I notice you have rightly blocked! I do hope you look into this matter. If you still think I have violated the 3-revert rule, please justify. Thanks. Prashanthns (talk) 11:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not think you have violated the three-revert rule, I left you a message to inform/remind you about it. Just remember that just because edits are against consensus or undesirable does not mean that reverting them is exempt from the 3RR. Stifle (talk) 11:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. But, please do see the diffs I have given above. There were only 2 reverts! My next action was to directly engage the ip on his talk page. Where is the impending 3RR violation? Prashanthns (talk) 11:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

To further clarify, there is no "impending 3RR violation". Stifle (talk) 11:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I disagree with the tone of your warning (discouraging and aggressive), while agreeing with its content. Thanks however for quick clarifications and prompt action. Prashanthns (talk) 11:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Funny you should mention that. {{uw-3rr}} is meant to be the "discouraging and aggressive" warning, as opposed to {{uw-3rr-alt}} which is what I left for you. I'm open to suggestions as to how to better advise people that the 3RR exists and de-escalate a possible edit war. Stifle (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Less WP:BITEy version, it says! My suggestions to the 3 sentences - first one is ok. Third one regarding the talk page and consensus should come second and for the second one, I think the passive voice is better. "...If you continue reverting, you risk being blocked from editing" could become less bitey if it read thus: "Continuous reversions may result in blocking of accounts". This will also emphasize the preferences of the one who warns. Talk page and consensus require more emphasis than the possibility of blocks, especially, if you want to appear less bitey, and if you are warning people like me with a fairly silent profile! Appreciate your concern regarding tone and your request for feedback. Prashanthns (talk) 12:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, done. If you think any more changes would be appropriate, feel free to make them yourself :) Stifle (talk) 13:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Michellecrisp

Can you take another look at your 3RR block of Michellecrisp (talk · contribs)? She has requested an unblock on the basis that she was removing simple spam from the article and looking at the content + website that she removed, I'm inclined to agree - it's pretty much just spam. --B (talk) 12:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. I missed the bit where reverting spam was made 3RR-exempt, but I'll have to give myself a "nobody's perfect" exemption. Stifle (talk) 13:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

That was fast!

		The Special Barnstar
		For the quick actions that you took on the 3RR template. It will now discourage less people and will definitely help with improving collaboration on Wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashanthns (talk • contribs) 13:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Deacon of Pndapetzim unblocked

The block makes sense, however there was a discussion over at User_talk:Sarah777#British_Isles 2 about a small misunderstanding that caused the issue to escalate a little, and it was all sorted out before the block. Cheers, John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:42, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Stifle, you issued a block to me this morning for removing baiting comments/ personal attacks on a user at an article talk page. I assume you just made a mistake, but please can you be more thorough in future. WP:AN/3 requires more care than that, and really, I work on the hope that when — occasionally — events cause the necessity, I don't have to worry about other admins getting sucked in by 3RR reports like that. No hard feelings. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Bleh, I need to slow down when clearing the AN3 backlog. Thanks for assuming good faith. Stifle (talk) 15:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

"cute creatures"

I apologise for my mistake. I belive I created cute creatures when trying to experiment on my userspace. T.Neo (talk) 14:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I've messed up!

Hello yet again! Sorry to keep hassling you - your username is too easy to remember so, when I need an Admin's help, I immediately come here! I've nominated International Virtual Aviation Organization for deletion. I've created a number of AfDs in my time, but this one has already been nominated twice before, and I think I've cocked up the AfD nomination. The one I created can be found here but I think it also needs to include the two prior ones (this one and this one) which it doesn't... it just inclueds itself! Could you either correct it for me or, better yet (so I don't make the same mistake in future) tell me what I should have done! Many thanks! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 15:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Wasn't your fault because it used be under "Organisation" rather than "Organization". Stifle (talk) 15:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh cool. Thanks for that. Damned US/UK spellings! :-) I wonder if the article will survive this time. From what I gather there was some canvassing the first time it was nominated. -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 16:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Texas Rollergirls article, please restore, pretty please?

Re: Texas Rollergirls article deletion. Hello, I think your speedy deletion was unreasonable, as I have been working on the article for less than twenty minutes!!! I also followed your request to insert "hangon" and give an explanation on the talk page, but you deleted the article before I could go any further. I fully intend to insert references, but you make it very difficult to do so by inserting speedy deletion tags and deleting the article before I even get a chance to finish it!!! Please try to understand that I am not a very fast, skillful, or fluent wikipedia editor, but I do understand the principles of Wikipedia. Please don't make the editing experience a race against a speedy-deletion editor!!! It would be reasonable and fair if you would give me time to insert the required references and complete the article. The topic is noteworthy and the tone of the article is not promotional or self-aggrandizing in the least. Thank you.TxMCJ (talk) 16:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Please work on incomplete articles in a user subpage rather than the article namespace. Would you like me to restore the article to a subpage for you? Stifle (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please -- and I cannot work on this any more until later in the afternoon.TxMCJ (talk) 16:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, moved to User:TxMCJ/Texas Rollergirls. Stifle (talk) 16:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Stifle (perhaps the most appropriately named Wikipedia user ever?): don't you have anything better to do than "speedy deletions"? I can't see how giving an author ample time to develop an article is hurting anyone, or anything. The world will not come to an end if an article exists for a couple of hours without sufficient references, while the author assembles them. Taking it upon yourself to implement speedy deletion and complicate the process seems sort of bull-ish, and I can tell from your talk page that it's one of your pet hobbies... I sure can think of more valuable uses of Wikipedia editors' time.24.206.111.16 (talk) 22:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Jodi Explodi

I dont understand how you can say whats important. Just because the band isn't huge and touring all over the world all the time? I don't think Hillary Duff is important but I'm not complaining about her being on this website. Please just let my page be. I'm United States Airman in South Dakota trying to start my own Record Label and these guys are on my label. I'm just trying to get their name out everywhere I can. Maybe it is promotion and it isnt important. But then again you could say that about any band on your website. So please help me out! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beerandpotatorecords (talk • contribs) — Beerandpotatorecords (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~~~~ at the end.

Please read WP:NMG for details on when bands may have a Wikipedia article. Stifle (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Der Leikach

why did you delete the Page: Der: Leikach —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ro09 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

It was impossible to determine what it means. Stifle (talk) 20:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of BlueFish TV

You deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueFish_TV due to A7.

However, I sited CBS News, USA Today, and Christianity Today. Bluefish has been featured on Nightline and Focus on the Family.

[3] [4] [5]

They've also been featured on Fox News. [6]

They work with very recognizable Christian speakers and authors like Erwin McManus, Don Miller, Margaret Feinberg, Doug Fields, Jars of Clay, Mercy Me, and Les Parrott.

They've also produced products for over 92,000 churches. [7]

They are a similar to Nooma

In most Christian circles they are very well known. If I need to supply more information or sources please let me know. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hodgedup (talk • contribs) 21:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~~~~ at the end.

I'm not sure that they meet the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability but I'll pass it to the community to decide at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BlueFish TV. Stifle (talk) 08:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Evolution of Physics

Hi there, does your deletion mean that there is a policy against asking for essentially a random act of kindness on Wikipedia? This is in regards to your speedy deletion of Evolution of physics. Why not just add the requested redirect tag instead of deleting it? --Firefly322 (talk) 02:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Evolution of physics has never existed. Are you sure you have the right article title? Stifle (talk) 08:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

IVAO AfD and other strange acronyms!

Am I the only one who thinks it odd that the only edit 63.17.15.226 has made so far is to contribute to this AfD? Do you think someone has been canvassing? -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 10:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, but the closing admin should ignore comments from IPs anyway. Stifle (talk) 10:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh really? I didn't know that. One learns something new every day! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 10:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Very Large Hadron Collider

Whoops, sorry. I did actually know that, my bad, sorry. Thanks for reiterating it to me. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paramax

I note that you deleted the this article around 25 minutes after I had rewritten it to address concerns of length and referencing. I would ask you to undelete and reopen the AfD so that my changes could be taken into account. Thanks. Espresso Addict (talk) 13:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess I will, since you asked. Stifle (talk) 13:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Espresso Addict (talk) 13:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for a much-needed lift. Guy (Help!) 14:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Carl McCunn

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Carl McCunn. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ecoleetage (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

regarding this change

Indeed there is a rationale there. According to wikipedia policy Wikipedia:NFCC#10c (which I mentioned in the article and in my edit summary) there needs to be a separate detailed rationale for each use. There is no rationale on the image's page that corresponds to Bahram Bayzai. The only rationale there deals with Bashu, the Little Stranger.--Rockfang (talk) 19:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

My bad, I was looking at something else entirely. Stifle (talk) 19:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)