User talk:Dravecky/Archive 3

January 2008 - March 2008

Jo Walton
Why insert the goofy thing about her kid? She's denied the allegation in her LJ, and indeed says the idea creeps them out. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  15:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Insert it? I didn't insert it.  I tagged the line for review after a couple of other people went back and forth inserting and deleting it.  Knowing Jo and her books, I figured it wasn't true but I was in the middle of something else when it popped up on my watchlist so I tagged it for a fresh pair of eyes to review. - Dravecky (talk) 03:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Proportion
I am doing tagging and assessing on the Texas project, and mistakenly deleted the blank tag, that hardly qualifies as vandalism, had you checked before labelling it vandalism you'd have seen that it was not an act of vandalism, but perhaps a mistake. With over 3000 T&As in the past couple of weeks, its possible. Don't be so quick to jump to conclusions, you serve no one well by accusing people of vandalism without bothering to check. Jacksinterweb (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You blanked the page and it popped up in the midst of a long watchlist of actual nonsense, deletion, and childish curseword edits to the many articles I keep an eye on. (For example, Dwight David Eisenhower is attracting a lot of goons today for some reason.)  I'm sorry I didn't take the time to check out your whole edit history and see all the good work you've done for WikiProject Texas before reverting your page-blanking and moving on to the next crisis.  - Dravecky (talk) 00:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the barnstar, it's my first! I'll go back and try to help some more with the others after I take a break.  Altairisfar talk  23:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

URLs in radio station infoboxes
I notice you've edited several radio station articles replacing a shorteded version of the station URL with the complete version. For example: WKGA‎. I'm curious why. I've created those infoboxes with shorted versions to keep the infoboxes from getting too wide. Also, why the capitalization of watts? --Rtphokie (talk) 14:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * On watts, I was taught back in the day that units named for people (Hertz, Watts, etc.) should be capitalized but I see from the article you cited that this is no longer the standard practice. Somebody changed it while I wasn't looking, apparently.  Now that I know I'll adopt the standard practice.  On the URLs, I've been trying to reveal the actual web address when practical and not too long.  That's why the webcast field usually gets obscured as "Listen Live" instead of showing the whole long url.  I'll confess that the WKGA url is a borderline case and wouldn't object to it being changed back but also think it's acceptable to leave it unobscured as the box isn't too wide that way.  - Dravecky (talk) 06:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WJAB-image10.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:WJAB-image10.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 09:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Fixed. The image was pointing at a disambiguation page instead of the actual WJAB (FM) article.  This has noe been corrected as the tag was removed. - Dravecky (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Current and Past Radio Personalities
I noticed that you updated several radio station articles in the Providence, RI market, including WPRO-FM and WWLI. You changed the "Personalites" section to be in paragraph form instead of being an bullet point listing. Before asking you this question, I did some research and found that most articles showing current and past personel do itemize each person (for example, see the article to WHTZ in New York, NY). Before I modify these articles to this format, I wanted to ask you if you had any objections or a particular reason for changing them as you did.

Thank you in advance, RJ Cabral, On-Air Personality, Lite Rock 105, Providence - Rjcabral 27 January 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 16:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Some articles do still use lists but the preferred style for reading and formatting purposes is generally prose over bullet points. This is especially true with lists of otherwise non-notable people or program elements. Per WikiProject Radio Stations policies and Wikipedia guidelines, station schedules are to be removed entirely from these articles as unencyclopedic and it smacks of advertising. I'm a little more moderate on this and try to rewrite these schedules into a paragraph about "current programming" instead of simply deleting it entirely. Please do not restore the alumni listing at WPRO-FM to a long list format. It's an unsourced stream of names of otherwise non-notable people that would more likely be deleted in that format. It would be useful and helpful if you could provide sources for the names in that paragraph or expand the station history with references to reliable sources.  Any positive contribution to radio station articles is always warmly welcomed. - Dravecky (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of WXHQ-LP
An editor has nominated WXHQ-LP, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of WBLQ-LP
An editor has nominated WBLQ-LP, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Radio station stub categories
Assuming your ultimate goal includes the 50 states each having their own stub category, am I wrong to assume that once that happens it would make sense to eliminate the regional stub categories (i.e. Category:Southern United States radio station stubs)? I think the way the US is divided into these categories is already kinda wonky, so seeing them get disposed of is certainly something I'd be all for. Thanks! JPG-GR (talk) 02:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I could only support eliminating the regional categories if every US state and territory had its own stub category. Some places (Delaware, Rhode Island, Washington D.C., U.S. Virgin Islands, etc.) won't hit that magical 60 total but perhaps as we get closer to have the 40+ "possible" states completed the stub sorting folks could be persuaded to go along with a few small stub cats for the sake of simplicity and geographical uniformity. Until then, I can't support eliminating the regional cats. - Dravecky (talk) 00:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No, no - I meant once all the were done. At that point, it just seems silly to have a bunch of regions when everything is sorted into better defined sub-categories. JPG-GR (talk) 02:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI
I'm running through all the state radio lists looking for station articles for the redlinks which are mis-titled. I've found quite a few so far and have also been implementing dabpages where needed. This should help with your "Project Visine." JPG-GR (talk) 03:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You rock. Thanks, JPG-GR!  - Dravecky (talk) 03:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad to help. I think I'm through Indiana now. Hope to get a little farther today, that's assuming I won't continue having to revert the same vandalism on Rhode Island's page over and over. JPG-GR (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Dabpages and out-of-place articles fixed through Michigan. JPG-GR (talk) 00:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Dabpages and out-of-place articles fixed through Nebraska. The biggest problem I've been noticing while checking the redlinks is that there are many bluelinks which are pointing to redirects, as radio station articles are being created and/or moved to the wrong place, leaving redirects behind. Granted, it's good that the redirects are there, but the articles are still in the wrong place. I'll probably knock out a state or two more tonight before bed. Happy editing. JPG-GR (talk) 05:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Dabpages and out-of-place articles fixed through South Carolina. JPG-GR (talk) 02:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
...for cleaning up my wiki tables on Marquette University Radio. I appreciate it Johnl1479 (talk) 17:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The intersection of MOS:DAB and Category:Lists of radio stations
Hi, Dravecky. I hope that you have been well since our paths last crossed. So, in my on-going disambiguation work, I ran across the article 97.3 FM which is both a radio station list and a disambiguation page. I would like for you to take a look at the page now that I have done formatting work on it to more closely approach mos:dab. I don't want to mess up any standardization that you guys have for your list articles, so there may need to be some cross-project discussion. We start to get into a similar overlaps on Q92, Q107 and 102.7 FM where those articles have both article-ish content, tags for expansion and disambig content, too. Let me know your thoughts on this area of overlap and, of course, feel free to revert my edits. -Gwguffey (talk) 03:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Lists by frequency? Oy.  I had no idea.  I recognize a few names from the WPRS as having edited those lists (and at least one who put a prod tag on 97.3 FM) so I'm not sure how much support we're giving to these lists.  I'd suggest asking on the project's talk page and dropping User:JPG-GR a note as well. He's dealt with these pages, or so says the history. - Dravecky (talk) 05:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Byron Jones (Welsh organist)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Byron Jones (Welsh organist), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Byron Jones (Welsh organist). Deb (talk) 17:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:KLAMlogo2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:KLAMlogo2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Gah. I've corrected the link from KLAM to KLAM (AM). - Dravecky (talk) 23:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Kathleen Stephens
Category:People from Montana ? Do you have a source I don't, or did you mean Arizona? Cheers, cab (talk) 01:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Good catch. It was in her State Department bio. "Ms. Stephens grew up in the American Southwest and now calls western Montana home."  I have updated the article, with reference, to reflect this info. - Dravecky (talk) 06:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:KOKK-AM logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:KOKK-AM logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Oy. One of my fellow WPRS members moved the KOKK article to KOKK (AM) to make way for a disambiguation page but then didn't update the rationale for the image.  I've fixed it. - Dravecky (talk) 06:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

rail-bio-stub
Looks good. Caerwine Caer’s whines 23:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

something weird with internet-bcast-stub
Seems to have added versions of other articles to this one with your edit here: 86.44.6.14 (talk) 11:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It seems some guy whose multi-level marketing article keeps getting speedily deleted as an advert thought it would be a good idea to spam hundreds of articles by editing his text into that stub. It only happened yesterday and as of a few minutes ago I've fixed it, warned the editor in question, and restored the repaired tag to the GTFU article. - Dravecky (talk) 12:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oooh, naughty fellow. Thanks, editing templates kinda makes me nervous, so i didn't look into it. 86.44.6.14 (talk) 14:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

WKPT-TV
Thank you kind sir, for catching that typo on WKPT-TV! I try to watch those, but sometimes difficult. - Csneed (talk) 04:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries as the actual typo was mine. I was disambiguating links to WVLT and set this one to WVLT (FM) before quickly realizing that WVLT-TV was called for. (Oops.) - Dravecky (talk) 10:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:BraveComboSimpsons.jpg
I have tagged Image:BraveComboSimpsons.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 15:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I have addressed the issue. - Dravecky (talk) 03:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: 10 costliest US tornadoes
The source is a bit old (1999) but it is up-to-date, as of last year. The reason you see Huntsville Alabama as $250 million is because the old system for official tornado records was from the days when computer space was very limited, so damage "tiers" were thought up so that the damage of a tornado could be recorded as just one number. There were several tiers, 0, 250, 2500, 25000, 250000 dollars etc. Thus the $250 million figure you see for Huntsville is just the closest tier to the actual amount of damage, which was around $100 million (see November 1989 Tornado Outbreak). If you have any other questions let me know. - Running On  Brains  00:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I appreciate your time and effort. - Dravecky (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of "G" Is for Gumshoe
An editor has nominated "G" Is for Gumshoe, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hilarious. Both of these AfDs closed as "keep" more than two hours before the bot got around to notifying me of the discussion. Even funnier when you note that 1) I was the first one to weigh in on both discussions and 2) I only started editing the files to extensively improve them after the AfD began. Ah, bots, how I love you. - Dravecky (talk) 00:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of "H" Is for Homicide
An editor has nominated "H" Is for Homicide, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Airdates
Thanks for letting me know, some times I get a bit over zealous when editing. I've been trying to contact radio stations directly for air dates lately. I'll keep what you said in mind when I edit from now on. Milonica (talk) 11:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

A favour...
Hi Dravecky - since you're handy using AutoWikiBrowser (as with Austin-TX-stub), I don't suppose there's any chance you could have a go at using it on the other renamed templates listed at Stub_types_for_deletion, is there? It'd save a lot of manual work... Grutness...wha?  23:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I could give it a whack later tonight. At the moment I'm on the laptop which doesn't have AWB on it (yet) but I'll be back at the properly-equipped desktop later tonight. - Dravecky (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Great :) No hurry, it's just one more manual chore that's easier automated. Grutness...wha?  11:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Whew. That's the last of them.  Would have gone faster if not for the massive storms in Dallas today.  (The darned phone kept ringing with one crisis after another.)  So feel free to delete away. - Dravecky (talk) 23:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers for that - that's cleared most of SFD's giant backlog now. I got half way through the China radio ones and started getting edit conflicts, so I guessed you were on the case with it :) Grutness...wha?  00:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

KZMT
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of KZMT, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: KCAP. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There are similarities as they are sister stations with similar paragraphs about ownership but they are otherwise substantially different articles. - Dravecky (talk) 04:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:KOBB-AM logo.png
Thank you for uploading Image:KOBB-AM logo.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Time for sleep now, I guess. Licensing info added. - Dravecky (talk) 07:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the listing!
Thanks for your hard work in creating articles for stations. My family owns three stations in Elko, NV that have pretty limited web presence and you managed to find our sites, the FCC history, sister stations and logos. It was a pleasant surprise in a search today! -Lisa Sutherland Kirkman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisakirkman (talk • contribs) 04:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You're quite welcome! - Dravecky (talk) 04:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Good Job Dude!

 * Thanks! - Dravecky (talk) 05:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
I looked at the vandalism page, and I have not vandalized the Big O and Dukes page.

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, or the insertion of nonsense into articles.

Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism. For example, adding a personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful attention needs to be given to whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well intended, or outright vandalism.

Committing blatant vandalism violates Wikipedia policy. If you find that another user has vandalized Wikipedia, you should revert the changes and warn the user (see below for specific instructions). Users who vandalize Wikipedia repeatedly, despite warnings to stop, should be reported to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, and administrators may block them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.77.67 (talk) 07:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Adding me to the Big O and Dukes article as a character named "Douchenozzle" is a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia through crude "humor" and the insertion of nonsense into an article. It's textbook.  Indeed, the majority of your edits over the last month would easily be classified as vandalism. - Dravecky (talk) 07:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Project Visine
Hooray! I already declared that a long time ago (though you coined the phrase) on Wyoming and some of Utah. Together, I think we're only of a handful of editors "getting the red out" as you said. Keep up the good work, and thanks for going through all of my edits. If you hadn't noticed, I am using a script (from another Wikipedia editor) to generate radio station articles much easier but it still has flaws and isn't perfect. Onward to California's radio stations I go! Milonica (talk) 03:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Excellent! It's nice to have as many WPRS folks working on this as possible.  One note, if you could look at the changes I made to the last few articles of yours that I edited, some of those changes should be made in your template for future articles.  Especially the part about call letter assignment vs. "going on the air" since it's the former instead of the latter that the FCC is tracking. Good luck with the Golden State!- Dravecky (talk) 03:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Big O and Dukes
An editor has nominated Big O and Dukes, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ha! At this point, I'm so frustrated by the amount of energy being put into vandalizing or junking up the article and the near utter lack of energy from people trying to improve it that I'm half-tempted to flip to "delete" just to be rid of the article and its attendant headaches. - Dravecky (talk) 19:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks, Dravecky. It does have a certain rhythm. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Splitting radio station articles
I note that you are adding to some radio station articles. Can you give reasons for this on the associated talk pages? -- Alan Liefting- ( talk ) - 03:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll gladly do that for any future tagged articles. The reason is always the same: One article covering two or more radio stations with separate programming, usually an AM/FM combo sharing a set of call letters.  Instead, these need to be distinct articles at WXXX (AM) and WXXX-FM with a disambiguation page at WXXX. - Dravecky (talk) 07:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Correcting typos
You changed "Belarusian" to "Belorussian". Belarusian is also correct, maybe preferred, I think it is modern term. Or maybe you mean "Byelorussian"? Both wikilinks go to same place.--MajorHazard (talk) 12:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh. Oops.  This is what I get for believing the Firefox spellchecker.  Apologies. - Dravecky (talk) 17:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Awards Center Newsletter
I'm pleased to announce that the Awards Center will be getting its own newsletter shortly. If you want to receive the WP:AWC newsletter, put your name here. -- Shark face  217  20:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Gayelle
Gayelle (lesbian), I have added many new RS to the article and therefore I would like you to reconsider your vote that was based on a previous version that did not take your WP:NEO or WP:N and WP:RS and WP:V concerns into account.NewAtThis (talk) 04:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)