Talk:North Macedonia/Comments to FYROM name support position

Comments on FYROM name support position
Please post your comments in this page. An exact copy of the rationale that follows has been pasted in the special sub-page: Talk:Republic of Macedonia/FYROM name support position. Feel free to post your comments here, under the respective arguements, for discussion.

Every sentence which is underlined below is from the Naming conflict guideline. The rest are the comments that support renaming the article to Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Proper Names
The three key principles are:
 * The most common use of a name takes precedence;
 * The most common name is apparently "Macedonia" (see google test -175M results. However, it is not more common because it addresses the country; it is more common because it generally addresses to the historical background of other ethnic groups in the region (for example see here in WP: Alexander the Great, Macedon, Macedonia (Greece), Philip II of Macedon, Ancient Macedonians, Ancient Macedonian language, Bulgaria etc). Therefore, a simple google search is not clear to see how often the names are used. One needs to eliminate all possible mentionings of the name "Macedonia" for purposes that do not refer to the country. Also, since this is the English version of WP, one has to search for pages written in English. Such a test has been conducted below (as described in ). The results are obvious, please compare:


 * Result: Clearly Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is 63% more common than Macedonia (when referring to the country).


 * To illustrate this further, check below what the term Macedonia is used for more:

vs
 * When it is used for Greece: 137 million hits
 * When it is used for Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: 63 million hits
 * Uninformed readers will be dazzled when they are presented with the term Macedonia referring to the country as a more common name!!

Discussion about Google test
Comment copied by User:E Pluribus Anthony:


 * One of the counts presented, and concomitant logic, is highly misleading: there are 1.35 million references to the "Republic of Macedonia" (less FYROM spellout) online, not zero as presented. As well, there are 2.38 million for the FYROM spellout. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 10:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Answer: Thank you for supporting my arguement (2.38M>1.35M, so FYROM is still the winner), but I think that this is highly misleading. The word "Republic" is NOT excluded from the test, so the test for "macedonia" includes the sites that mention it as "Republic of Macedonia". Therefore, I think you wanted to mean to examine the term "macedonia" rather than "Republic of Macedonia". In that case, please illustrate how it would be fair to include: Thank you. N i k o S il v e r  (T) @ (C) 12:49, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Greek sites, references to the Greek Macedonia etc.
 * Bulgarian (same)
 * Several states in US
 * ...Artists
 * The Bible
 * The rest of the variants of FYROM (specified above in the table).

Another Problem with the Google Test: When searching for "Macedonia", by leaving out things like "Greece", "Greek", "Hellas", "Cyprus" etc., it not only cuts out sites that refer to Greek Macedonia (as desired), but ALSO sites that are referring to the Republic of Macedonia and happen to mention Greece. I don't know how many sites that is, but presumably a significant number. On the search "Greece +Macedonia -Wikipedia", the 7th hit is "Macedonia Versus Greece" on the United Macedonians of Canada website, http://www.unitedmacedonians.org/macedonia/stefov1.html, a webpage using the name "Macedonia" that would have been left out by your search. Fokion 15:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You are 100% right. The same applies to vice-versa, i.e. many sites that refer to the FYROM option, will be left out because they happen to have one of the exclusions above. I am not trying to oversimplify this with the simplistic approach "let's call it even", but indeed, I suppose this is a highly complicated issue, and I tried my best to illustrate it and find a solution. I suppose that counting all those millions of sites is not an option either. This is one more example why I believe that the name issue has to be solved with a clear disambiguating factor (but this is another's decision). See, we wouldn't have this problem! •N i k o S il v e r•  16:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Conflict between common and official name

 * If the common name conflicts with the official name, use the common name except for conflicting scientific names;
 * Since Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is more common, the question about the conflict with the official name can be rephrased as which is the official name? Is it the name of the country under its constitution (Republic of Macedonia), or is it the name of the country under most international organizations (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia —see international organizations below)


 * Result: Subjective. One must judge what is more important as an official source. A country's constitution (which under extreme circumstances could also be "Killneighboursland") or the name specified by most international organizations?


 * If neither the common name nor the official name is prevalent, use the name (or a translation thereof) that the subject uses to describe itself or themselves.
 * Inapplicable, since the common name (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) is clearly prevalent. Furthermore, it is subjective which the official name should be (constitution or UN etc). However, let us continue the reasoning, just for the shake of the arguements that follow:

A number of objective criteria can be used to determine common or official usage:
 * Is the name in common usage in English? (check Google, other reference works, websites of media, government and international organisations)
 * 1) Google was tested above. Result: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (10.6 vs 6.5 million results)
 * 2) Other reference works. Result: Republic of Macedonia (3 vs 1)
 * 3) Encyclopedia.com: Republic of Macedonia plus Naming Dispute text with Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia mentioned
 * 4) Britannica online: Republic of Macedonia plus Naming Dispute text with Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia mentioned
 * 5) Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-05: Republic of Macedonia plus Naming Dispute text with Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia mentioned
 * 6) Encarta: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia plus Naming Dispute text in intro paragraph with Republic of Macedonia mentioned.
 * 7) Websites of media. Result: Generally Republic of Macedonia, (about 3 to 1). Most websites use both names, depending on the context of the article. Below are the results for Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in:
 * 8) Google News
 * 9) BBC News
 * 10) CNN
 * 11) ''Guardian Unlimited
 * 12) Country's government Result: Mixed.
 * 13) The country uses the name "Republic of Macedonia" for all internal purposes.
 * 14) The country uses the name "Republic of Macedonia" externally for the strict bilateral relations to (and from) those countries that have recognised its constitutional name (—see other governments below).
 * 15) The country uses the name "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" externally for all relations to (and from):
 * 16) Those countries that have not recognised its constitutional name (—see other governments below).
 * 17) Most international organisations (—see international organizations below)
 * 18) The country has explicitly agreed that their final name should be reached after deliberations with Greece: "Henceforth the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has formally accepted that the name of its State is an issue for negotiation as provided for in UN Security Council Resolution 817 (1993)."
 * 19) Other governments:
 * 20) Worldwide. Result: Republic of Macedonia (about 2 to 1)
 * 21) Major English speaking countries. Result: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (3 to 1)
 * 22) USA: Recently recognised the constitutional name (RoM) under the explicit provision that it will recognise the name that will emerge from the bilateral talks between Greece and the country.
 * 23) Canada: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
 * 24) UK: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
 * 25) Australia: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
 * 26) International Organisations. Result: 100% Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Examples:
 * 27) United Nations: UN. Paradox in WP article:
 * 28) *United Nations member states plus templates et.al.
 * 29) International Monetary Fund: IMF. Paradox in WP article:
 * 30) *United Nations member states (same members as UN)
 * 31) European Union: EU. Paradox in WP article:
 * 32) *European Union
 * 33) *Image:EU map names isles.png plus templates et.al.
 * 34) European Bank for Reconstruction and Development: EBRD. Paradox in WP article:
 * 35) *European Bank for Reconstruction and Development et.al.
 * 36) North Atlantic Treaty Organisation: NATO. Paradox in WP article:
 * 37) *North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
 * 38) *North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
 * 39) *North Atlantic Treaty Organisation plus templates et.al.
 * 40) Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe: OSCE. Paradox in WP article:
 * 41) *Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe et.al.
 * 42) International Olympic Committee: IOC. Paradox in WP article:
 * 43) *List of IOC country codes et.al.
 * 44) World Bank Group: WB
 * 45) Please observe the paradox that with the current name of the article and the WP policy for keeping the same name everywhere, the above mentioned WP articles include the wrong name (based on how the international organization calls the country, and how the country itself addresses to that organization) when they refer to it!


 * Is it the official current name of the subject? (check if the name is used in a legal context, e.g. a constitution)
 * Result: Mixed. The country uses both official names, depending on the context (—see above). Also, for the term official, it is subjective if it should be considered strictly under the suggested example (constitution), or under the UN.
 * Also: In this case, both countries (Greece and fYRoM; Bulgaria uses Blagoevgrad Province) call their territories in that region "Macedonia". It would be impossible due to Wikipedia's technical limitations to have the self-identifying term in both respective articles (currently Republic of Macedonia and Macedonia (Greece)). Therefore, there needs to be a disambiguating term next to both Macedonias [sic]. In this case between the terms former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Republic of Macedonia, the most common disambiguating term for the country is clearly the first (without any exceptions in the search). Check the results by Google:


 * former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: 4,000,000 hits
 * vs
 * Republic of Macedonia: 1,110,000 hits


 * Users supporting the short term, claim that the long term is offensive to them (for including "former Yugoslav"?). However, no Greek user has used such argumentation regarding the disambiguating "(Greece)" next to the "Macedonia" name in Macedonia (Greece). This is because, naturally, the name of the country that the province belongs (or formerly belonged) cannot be offensive (unless ofcourse there was extensive confrontation between Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and its own state Socialist Republic of Macedonia, which is not the case).


 * Is it the name used by the subject to describe itself or themselves? (check if it is a self-identifying term)
 * Result: Mixed. The country uses both official names, depending on the context (—see above).

Subjective criteria (such as "moral rights" to a name) should not be used to determine usage. These include:
 * Does the subject have a moral right to use the name?
 * Result: Mixed. The Greek position is that the country has no moral right to use the name due to historical reasons. The country officially acknowledges the connection of the name to the Greek history, but the country resides on the Macedonian region as well.


 * Does the subject have a legal right to use the name?
 * Result: Definitely not under UN. Otherwise any country could choose a name of a broader region (fictional eg. Norway to Scandinavia and Portugal to Iberia).


 * Does the name infringe on someone else's legal or moral rights?
 * Result: According to the Greek position, definitely yes.


 * Is the use of the name politically unacceptable?
 * Inapplicable

To determine the balance of these criteria, editors may find it useful to construct a table like the following:
 * {| border=1


 * width=70% | Criterion
 * width=15% | FYROM
 * width=15% | Macedonia
 * 1. Most commonly used name in English
 * 1
 * 0
 * 2. Current undisputed official name of entity
 * 1
 * 0
 * 3. Current self-identifying name of entity
 * 1
 * 1
 * colspan=3 | 1 point = yes, 0 points = no. Add totals to get final scores.
 * }
 * 1
 * 1
 * colspan=3 | 1 point = yes, 0 points = no. Add totals to get final scores.
 * }
 * }
 * Final scores: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (3 to 1)

Mark each box with 1 for a yes, or 0 for a no. Add the totals of each column to get final scores for the options. The option that has the highest overall score should be used as the article name. In case of ex aequo score, criterion 1 takes precedence, except for conflicting scientific names, in which case the (most) undisputed (of the) "official" name(s) is best used (see above).
 * Repeat: Final scores: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia:3 — Republic of Macedonia:1

Where a choice exists between native and common English versions of names (e.g. Deutsch/German), the common English version of the name is usually preferred (see also below).
 * Inapplicable

Do not invent names as a means of compromising between opposing POVs. Wikipedia describes current usage but cannot prescribe a particular usage or invent new names.
 * Inapplicable

Identification of common names using external references
A number of methods can be used to identify which of a pair (or more) conflicting names is the most prevalent in English.
 * 1) The Google test. Using Google's advanced search option, search for each conflicting name and confine the results to pages written in English; also exclude the word "Wikipedia" (as we want to see what other people are using, not our own usage). Note which is the most commonly used term.
 * The test instructions above were followed by the book.
 * 1) International organisations. Search for the conflicting names on the websites of organisations such as the United Nations, NATO, OSCE, IMF, etc.
 * Point well covered above (100% Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia).
 * 1) Major English-language media outlets. Use Google News and, where possible, the archives of major outlets such as BBC News and CNN to identify common usages. Some media organisations have established style guides covering naming issues, which can provide useful guidance (e.g. The Guardian's style guide says use Ukraine, not the Ukraine).
 * Point well covered above (Republic of Macedonia 4 to 1)
 * 1) Reference works. Check other encyclopedias. If there is general agreement on the use of a name (as there often will be), that is usually a good sign of the name being the preferred term in English.
 * Point well covered above (Republic of Macedonia 3 to 1)
 * 1) Geographic name servers. Check geographic name servers such as the NGIA GNS server at http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp.
 * Result: Geographic name servers, such as the NGIA GNS specify both names: here
 * 1) Major English-language media outlets. Use Google News and, where possible, the archives of major outlets such as BBC News and CNN to identify common usages. Some media organisations have established style guides covering naming issues, which can provide useful guidance (e.g. The Guardian's style guide says use Ukraine, not the Ukraine).
 * Point well covered above (Republic of Macedonia 4 to 1)
 * 1) Reference works. Check other encyclopedias. If there is general agreement on the use of a name (as there often will be), that is usually a good sign of the name being the preferred term in English.
 * Point well covered above (Republic of Macedonia 3 to 1)
 * 1) Geographic name servers. Check geographic name servers such as the NGIA GNS server at http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp.
 * Result: Geographic name servers, such as the NGIA GNS specify both names: here
 * Point well covered above (Republic of Macedonia 3 to 1)
 * 1) Geographic name servers. Check geographic name servers such as the NGIA GNS server at http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp.
 * Result: Geographic name servers, such as the NGIA GNS specify both names: here
 * 1) Geographic name servers. Check geographic name servers such as the NGIA GNS server at http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/GNS/index.jsp.
 * Result: Geographic name servers, such as the NGIA GNS specify both names: here
 * Result: Geographic name servers, such as the NGIA GNS specify both names: here

Conclusion
The most common name for the country is definitely Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Even if we disregard that fact and proceed into examining objective and subjective criteria, the name should still be Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia In view of all this, the name "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" should be used as the name of the article. Any other solution is an obvious violation of WP:NPOV and the Naming conflict guideline.

A diagram that summarises the above follows:

|--Google test (6.5M vs 10.6M)--| |(internally)The Republic(externally)*---| |(externally)---Greek Govt--(internally)--| |--UN-EU-NATO-IMF-EBRD--| |---Major News sites-| |Other referenced works--| |---Geographic sites-| |---Some (many) countries|---Other(fewer)countries-| |--Major English speaking countries (1 to 3)-|

Name 1:        |"Republic of Macedonia"---| Name 2:        |"FYROM"---| Name 3:        |--"Republic of Skopje"|

Current debate: |area of debate--|-|

that have recognised its constitutional name.
 * Except strictly bilateral relations of the country with those (many) countries

General comments

 * Comment copied as is by User:E Pluribus Anthony:


 * Moreover, I suggest addressing this title issue (if at all) through a usual move request or the like after the poll is resolved, since the currently preferred option (#2, noting RoM) is garnering a plurality of support. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 10:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Answer: (a) There are 14 more days for that poll to end. I wouldn't be so sure about option #2 in view of this reasoning. (b) If the poll does not resolve this, I will follow your advice and chase it down to ArbCom.  N i k o S il v e r   (T) @ (C) 12:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Nice.
Nikosilver, you have made a nice review of the usage of the terms for the naming of my country. And I say that, finding NPOV info but presenting it with PPOV you might succeed to persuade other people to take the name FYROM.

But that's lame. I don't want my country to be called FYROM and you won't call it that way. Period. ''


 * As you see, I have even used all sources that do not match what you call my PPOV. Furthermore, the proposal is not for renaming the article to FYROM, but to Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Finally, as a personal note, I hate the FYROM term (or its spellout) as much as you do. My personal view on the matter is along the lines of: New Macedonia, Slavomacedonia or Vardar Macedonia. Unfortunately though, Wikipedia is not the place for inventing names...  N i k o S il v e r   (T) @ (C) 11:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

What

 * 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... Absurd. Your attempt to re-frame the debate will get you nowhere. FYROM is not the most frequently used version and no amount of your google-rigging attempts will prove it. Give up. - FrancisTyers 16:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually Francis, I am not trying to re-frame the debate (it is already evident from the votes so far that FYROM will be included in the intro paragraph); I am trying to rename the article. I am not trying to rig the google test either. I am just trying to follow the Naming conflict guideline by the book. The guideline says (among other things):

So before proposing a name change poll via WP:RM, consider whether the odds are worth it: you'll need to build a strong case if you propose a name change that strongly goes against a *clear* Google test result (but it happens, and also, as said above, the Google test frequently has no *clear* result).
 *  *check* whether there is bias resulting from multiple meanings of the same (combination of) word(s). If such bias occurs it can *sometimes* be filtered out, but there are more cases where it can't: Google testing has its limits!

If you can think of a clearer google test that excludes sites like the ones below, feel free to enlighten me. For example, please check the results for "+macedonia +greece" 151M!!. Do you see any results that account for the country? Browse further if you wish. The fact that "Macedonia" is more common is indisputable (that is why people may think "Ah, yes! I know that!"). I dispute the fact that it commonly refers to the country, as opposed to the Greek part and the Greek history.

So if you definitely want the article to keep the current name, I think that the only thing you can do is... change the guideline. Still sounds absurd? Prove me wrong! N i k o S il v e r  (T) @ (C) 22:02, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not really in a position to go into much detail on this (I'm on holiday at the moment, and I'm typing this in an Internet cafe!) but the key part of the guideline that applies in this case is Naming conflict. The sections that Niko has been quoting relate specifically to conflicting geographical names, such as "East Sea" v. "Sea of Japan". In such cases there is no obviously "right" name, hence the importance of using a Google search etc. to decide which variant is the more common in English.


 * It's much simpler in the case of political entities such as cities or countries. We don't make any judgement about whether they are right to use a particular name; we just recognise the fact that they do use that name. If there is a more common English version (e.g. Munich rather than Munchen) we use that. If not, we use the local name. Many mainland Chinese, for instance, would obviously not agree with Taiwan calling itself the "Republic of China" but we don't take a view on whether either side is right or wrong; we just describe rather than prescribe, as the naming policy guideline says.


 * It's because of this reasoning, by the way, that the Republic of Macedonia article is where it is right now. There was a long-running move war between pro- and anti-FYROM editors in which the article ping-ponged between "Republic of Macedonia" and "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia." That ended after the naming conflict guideline was worked out; Ed Poor then moved the article to Republic of Macedonia and I locked the page move option, to prevent further move wars. The current name of the article reflects the naming conflict guideline and a move back to Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia would be a step backwards, in my view. I would certainly strongly oppose it. -- ChrisO 19:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks but WHAT???
Thank you ChrisO for explaining this just now, and have a nice time in your holiday. Your explanation would really bring an end to the debate if you hadn't endorsed the previous poll (with the exact same reasoning) about the name of the inhabitants of this country, for which there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that their self-identifying name is Macedonians, rather than the other option Macedonian Slavs and totally unlike the present poll, where there are two huge differences: Furthermore, if what you say was the case, then I strongly suggest that you or somebody else, alters the wording in the Naming conflict policy to reflect the following: If that was the wording, then I wouldn't have bothered creating this, you wouldn't have endorsed and closed the previous poll with the exact same reasoning, and my points above would be invalid. Moreover, if WP wants to be:
 * The country does self-identify as Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia under certain circumstances
 * The name Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is more common in English, as proven above.
 * "Self-identifying name" as a term, must be re-examined. I propose "preferred self-identifying name". (because FYROM in this case indeed is self-identifying under certain circumstances).
 * that the (new) preferred self-identifying name must "...be the name of articles", rather than merely "...used within articles".
 * ...descriptive, not prescriptive. We cannot declare what a name should be, only what it is.

...then I propose that since any article will be named after the preferred self-identifying name, there should be a sizable box, on top, with the following information (with the ROC/current example): Something along these lines is descriptive, NPOV and complete, much like the intro in Republic of China and like the versions you wanted to upload earlier (with this comment supporting it). Much like the one that the designers of this poll were opposed to. Again and again and again and again and again. And now something else: To E Pluribus Anthony and the others who designed this carnival of a poll:
 * Preferred self-identifying name: Republic of China / Republic of Macedonia
 * Local Official name (e.g. constitution): Republic of China / Republic of Macedonia
 * International Official name (e.g. UN, other int'l organizations): Chinese Taipei / Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
 * Local name(s):
 * Hanyu Pinyin: Zhōnghuá Mínguó / Macedonian: Republika Makedonija
 * Tongyong Pinyin: JhongHuá MínGuó / Albanian: Republika e Maqedonisë
 * Wade-Giles: Chung-hua Min-kuo / -
 * Other Specific names:
 * China: Taiwan(?) - / Greece: Republic of Skopje

WTF would Option #4 and Option #9 still be doing in this poll? After 10 whole days from their creation and dozens of apparently "invalid" votes that would otherwise certainly fall in Option #2?

Why did you allow these options that start with "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", so as to imply that the name of the article would be changed as such?

Is there a fraction of logic in naming an article Mobile phone and then starting the intro paragraph like "Cellular phone is..."?

Or didn't you know about that? Didn't you even find out after the long debate in Option #4 between FlavSavr and Avg (creator of #4)? Not even after my repeated comments about the many relevant options that exist so as to divide and conquer the supporting votes? And why didn't you dissallow it (or should I say "dissavow it") right after its creation? Wasn't that interpretation of the policy active then and it is now? Shouldn't you have deleted them at sight, then?

Actually, I think you are wrong about your interpretation of the guideline. The key paragraph to this article naming issue (it's even called "Article names"!) precedes both paragraphs mentioned by the two sides. The text follows word by word. Bolding has been used to illustrate the parts that make the difference:

Quoted from Naming conflict:

Article names
Wikipedia's technical and practical requirements mean that one particular name must be used as the definitive name of an article. If the particular name has negative connotations for a party, the decision can be controversial; some may perceive the choice as being one that promotes a POV with which they disagree. Wikipedians should not seek to determine who is "right" or "wrong", nor to attempt to impose a particular name for POV reasons. They should instead follow the procedure below to determine common usage on an objective basis. By doing this, ideally, we can choose a name in a systematic manner without having to involve ourselves in a political dispute. The procedure for determining article names differs somewhat between the two principal classes of names – proper nouns (e.g. George W. Bush, United Nations) or descriptive names (e.g. GNU/Linux naming controversy, 2005 Atlantic hurricane season).

End quote.

I guess "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" obviously falls in the "proper nouns" category, rather than the "descriptive names" one (like the United Nations example, rather than the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season one). The underlined text within my rationale above is an exact copy-paste of the Naming conflict section with no omissions whatsoever.

I could understand people who disagree with my reasoning, but it is another thing to reinterpret the guideline according to the preferred end result. Especially when the guideline text is accurate and in clear English.

Finally, I think it is a huge mistake to write an article about the UN or EU and include within these articles names of countries that do not conform with the UN or EU standard appellation. This is like "putting words in UN's mouth!" It is highly unacceptable, biased, POVish and confusing. Check above in my rationale to see many other examples of that fallacy with all international organizations! Maybe, since Wikipedia is now prescribing new international appellations, we should change it's slogan to: "It's your world..."

N i k o S il v e r  (T) @ (C) 17:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)