User talk:Fvasconcellos/Archive 24

Hey
Hi Fvasconcellos! Thanks very much for going over the lead and for the SVG. The edits look great to me. Would be delighted if you had a chance to go over HRS -- but I understand if RL finessing takes priority (hope the personal issues get sorted through soon). And congrats on linezolid, just saw it was promoted! Best regards. -- Samir 18:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your kind note from August, Fvasconcellos; have been away for the past couple of months and just noticed it. Hope all is well. -- Samir 02:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

FAC comments
Hi Fvasconcellos, I responded to your comments and made some corresponding edits. Thanks again, Crum375 (talk) 19:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I see the FAC has been closed—what's up with that? There was only one oppose, and Andy appeared to have been responding to your edits... Oh well, I hope you'll restart as soon as possible. The article was already in excellent shape, I can't see why it shouldn't have been FA-standard with a few more tweaks. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

If at first...
Hi Fvasconcellos, I have resubmitted the article. Hopefully it will do better this time. Thanks for all your help. Crum375 (talk) 21:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

EW
Well, it would be nice if that helps bring the silliness to an end, so the adults can get back to actually writing an encyclopedia ;) - Nunh-huh 18:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Top note for The Alienist
Please see the talk page post I made, at Talk:The Alienist. Cirt (talk) 19:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Your note
Yes, you were. I assume that clairvoyance is on your resume. :-) Thank you for all your help, from early on, plus the recent review, edits and support. All are very much appreciated. And congrats on your own recent FA. Thanks again, Crum375 (talk) 04:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I wish I could add that to my resume—freelance work can be a pain sometimes :) Let me know when you've got another FAC in the works, I'll be more than glad to lend a hand (or a pair of eyes). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's better to keep it a secret, then. :) Not sure about my future plans, but thanks for your kind offer. Crum375 (talk) 18:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for July 2009
SoxBot (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:WA 9
Thanks for the heads-up. I will make sure to do that in future reviews. Dough4872 (talk) 00:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Help with viewing deleted page
Would you care to send me the code of Heteroclite? I was going to create it on a user's request, but don't want to without knowing what was there first. Thanks --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 13:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, here you go. There were two major versions, so I restored the code of both. Let me know when you're done! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 18:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Levamisole
If Ergamisol is just a trade name, I would prefer this expression: Ergamisol®. Best regards, --Jü (talk) 20:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello Jü, we don't normally use trademark and registration mark signs in the English Wikipedia; instead, trade names of drugs are specifically noted as such and set in boldface when they are in the article lead. I've edited the Levamisole article accordingly. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this information. --Jü (talk) 19:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Taxil
Taxil is on account that it is the tropane homolog of Paxil.

The P = piperidine is simily swapped with a T for tropane.

Regarding the sandbox, I regard what you have said about me needing to use it more.

Also, concerning why it is important, this is due to the fact that the molecular rearrangement is expected to happen and if people are not aware that this is a possiblity then they will get bunk products and possibly not even know the reasons for it.--Nuklear (talk) 13:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah but the other reason is to do with the N-demethylation and how this added to DAT affinity. That at least makes it worth considering.

The name is one I made up. It was not sourced by anyone else than me. I can try and contact the relevent people. It will probably will have a name such as RTI-678 for example.--Nuklear (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * The compound is certainly notable, or at least I've seen it referred to in multiple papers about phenyltropane SAR and it continues to be used. However I could not find a code number for it on a quick search. Tried to move the page to the chemical name but it says the title is forbidden so an admin will have to do it, the chemical name is a bit long though so a code number would be better if it can be found. Meodipt (talk) 23:28, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've moved it to the IUPAC(-ish) name. Brackets are forbidden in article names, so I couldn't move it to the correct title either. If there's a published codename, that would be great :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi...I don't suppose you could move it again to 2β-((3,4-Methylenedioxyphenoxy)methyl)-3α-(4-fluorophenyl)nortropane? Just noticed this compound doesn't have the N-methyl group so is a nortropane instead.Meodipt (talk) 08:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Why the protection on Evolution?
I saw that you reverted an IP edit that was not what I'd consider vandalism, and then semiprotected the page. I'm not following your reasoning here. It hadn't been getting hit hard enough to warrant protection recently (I know, surprising considering the subject matter); default should be to unprotection. It just seems a bit harsh to do that after an IP made a good faith edit. Auntie E. 23:45, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi there. You probably missed this edit, immediately preceding the one you did see, by the same user—certainly not made in good faith. If you look at the article's history, all but two of the IP edits made this month were either blatant vandalism or unconstructive contributions. This is a top-quality, highly visible article on an inherently controversial topic, and the presence of vandalism on content like this is particularly damaging. I also have a concern of a more practical nature, although it wasn't a reason for my protection: in an article as long as this (almost 150 kB), it's very difficult to revert vandalism quickly. I'm not fond of "default" semi-protection either, but some articles do require this sort of action. Have a look at Rough guide to semi-protection for a bit more of the rationale behind my choice to protect. Best wishes, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Saying hello
Hi mate, thanks for welcoming me to wikipedia. I'm still learning the ropes, especially with citations, so I hope my contributions are overall useful! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benweatherhead (talk • contribs) 03:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD
I have nominated list of diseases and conditions with unusual features for deletion, and, if available, your comments there would be appreciated. ---kilbad (talk) 20:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll pop in later. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Picture for Science Friday
I ran into this and I'm not aware if you realized your picture was were credited here. Good work! -Shootbamboo (talk) 22:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That is really cool. Too bad I didn't get to polish it up a little, that's one of my old structures! :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Icos FAC
I've nominated Icos for FA status. Your suggestions at the peer review were helpful, and I'd welcome any comments at the FAC. Shubinator (talk) 16:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, will do. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. As long as it doesn't get closed due to lack of reviews, any time is fine. Shubinator (talk) 03:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I should have thought of that myself! Shubinator (talk) 23:45, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Shubinator (talk) 02:26, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Nelio Guerson and Carlos Guerson
Hi, I'm contacting you because you speak Portuguese. I started Articles for deletion/Nelio Guerson and Carlos Guerson because there were no online sources; however, the creator has no posted some sources (which he scanned and uploaded to Flickr), which are all in Portuguese. Could you please evaluate the sources and see if they are reliable and are in-depth? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 19:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll check the sources. I've never heard of them, but that doesn't mean a thing. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments at the AfD. Best, Cunard (talk) 21:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Anytime. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Rough draft
I have put together a page outlining the Bolognia project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine/Dermatology_task_force/Missing_articles. How does that look? ---kilbad (talk) 15:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Great. I would change "every existing cutaneous condition" to "every recognized cutaneous condition", though :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:35, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Done ---kilbad (talk)
 * Don't forget to add your name to the participants' list as well. ---kilbad (talk) 15:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, done. I'll start with "Z" and work my way backwards :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Article history
Thanks for the help. I didn't know how to fix it but I knew deleting the thing entirely wasn't the answer. I was trying to figure that out and I noticed you got it working. --Kumioko (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks, my mistake I didn't know that and it isn't really clear on the template usage instructions. --Kumioko (talk) 20:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Much better thanks.--Kumioko (talk) 20:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Images
This puts the image looking out of the text. What do you mean by accessibility? SlimVirgin talk| contribs 17:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you. :) I don't know what the result of the Priestley thing was, but I don't like images looking off the page. I'll read ACCESS and see what it says. I'm trying to get the article ready for an FAC, so I already feel as though I'm losing my mind, what's left of it. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 18:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Gol 1907
Hi, I just wanted to let you know I submitted the article for TFA consideration. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks, Crum375 (talk) 19:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Supported. Good luck—having an article on the main page is not for the faint of heart. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support. You are right that main page exposure will apply a lot of new pressure on the article, but hopefully it will only result in improvement. Thanks again, Crum375 (talk) 21:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Clickable images
Hey, Fv! I seem to recall you understand this territory, but if you don't, I imagine you know someone who does. I hope you can help!

See the article Red River Trails, and the clickable trail map.

I have several different computers, with differing configurations in terms of operating system and browser. A dot on the map is supposed to lead to the Wiki article about that settlement, and in a former incarnation of that map, they always worked. What I'm finding now is that they work on some computer configurations and not others, and on my kitchen computer, they don't work when I'm logged in to Wiki, and they do work when I'm logged out, suggesting it's a problem with Wiki browser compatibility. When they do work, they go to the article; when they don't work, they go instead to something like File:Red pog.svg. Do you have any ideas? I'll ping Dr pda as well. Saludos! Sandy Georgia (Talk) 18:43, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'll check it out. I only have Windows (XP/Vista) machines at the moment, though. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * OK. I've tried it on three different computers, on the latest versions of Firefox, IE, Safari, and Chrome, while logged in and logged out, clicking on different waypoints each time. The map worked fine on every try. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:22, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I also have XP on some machines, Vista on other. What version of IE?  I'm having fits with IE8, wish I'd never allowed it to be installed here  ... (don't tell Eubulides and Tony) ... any ideas what could be causing this?  Would it be something installed in my monobook that interferes with css ?  For example, right now, I'm on IE8, Windows Vista Business, and it doesn't work either logged in or out.  Thanks ... you're a dear !  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if this has anything to do with your map error, but in April a clickable map was taken off of DYK because of bug reports at WP:ERRORS. Shubinator (talk) 23:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I have the same issue, both on Red River Trails and List of Minnesota state parks. On one computer the links work; on the other (and newer) one, they don't.  Both use IE.  It does not matter whether I am logged in. Kablammo (talk) 23:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

It may not be a browser issue at all. The way these clickable images work is that the person making them specifies the location of an image, e.g. a red dot, the size of this image, and a rectangular region around the location of the image. Thus in order for the dot to be appropriately clickable the rectangular region has to be as big as the dot. If you have a look at the mess intricate coding at Template:Red River Trails Locator Map cropped.PNG you may notice that some of the rectangular regions are smaller than the images. For example the big red dot for Saint Paul, Minnesota is 8px wide, but the clickable region surrounding it is only 5px by 5px. So the times when it doesn't work for you may just be when you have the bad luck to be clicking outside the "clickable region" of the dot. Actually I should be able to reproduce this here. Here we go.     If you move your cursor slowly from the left over the dot without clicking, you should see a tooltip which says Saint Paul, Minnesota, but if you instead move your cursor slowly from the right you will instead see Red pog.svg, when you're in the part not covered by the clickable region, which stops roughly half way across the dot. In fact let me see if I can be cleverer and actually show this region.     Or perhaps a bit bigger:       The preceding two dots should be partially covered by a hollow black square. If you hover (or click) inside/outside the square you should get Saint Paul or Red pog respectively. If this is not happening for you, maybe there is some other explanation. One things that springs to mind is that these clickable images rely on CSS positioning/width/height etc, and in the past IE was notorious for using a slighly different defintion of these (although actually that was more to do with padding and margins). Dr pda (talk) 23:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Both of my computers use IE, yet the box is displaying below the pog on one, and on the pog on the other. So if I move the cursor below the pog on the one I was having trouble with, I can get the link.
 * We noticed another (or is it related?) issue on the parks article-- Firefox was displaying locations differently than IE. See Talk:List_of_Minnesota_state_parks.  An inquiry was made at Village pump (technical) but I don't believe anyone ever answered.  Kablammo (talk) 00:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Dr pda hit it on the nose. If I hover slowly over the largest marker, for instance, I will eventually get a link to Red pog.svg (not Saint Paul, Minnesota), although in my case at least it's over such a small area that it doesn't affect... "clicking behavior". Sandy: I tried both IE 7 and 8. I don't believe in IE. I only used Firefox for a few years, but I've started using Chrome since it was released and I'm quite happy (though it's a little unstable at times, particularly when there are Flash elements on the page). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It does not appear to be strictly a product of box vs dot size (although that contributes); the box is actually displaced from the pog on the examples above on some computers but not on others. It appears in any event to be outside our control here.  Kablammo (talk) 00:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks everyone for the help! The box is below the pog on both for me, and I can see that I got lucky on my computer that has the bigger screen, while it's very hard to hit on my laptop.  I can only get the links by approaching the pog from below ... guess this can't be fixed ?  Thanks again, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Such problems also relate to the screen resolution (the higher the resolution, the smaller the hot spot becomes) and color quality settings on the computer you are using, your browser settings regarding active x controls, the type of video card you have, (and related drivers) the type of monitor you are using, and whether or not you have Java or other web based software installed on your computer. Not to mention the skill of the programmer who created the hot spot to begin with. All of which play a part regarding the location of the screen elements found within a website and the related hot spots associated with them. So this becomes a combination of software and hardware interpetation of the original code which varies from one computer to the next and from one platform to the next. As well as the actual size and location of the hot spot the programmer created and the code used to create the hotspot to begin with. Close counts in most cases as Dr pda points out, so this is just something you learn to live with for the most part.Davidtfull (talk) 03:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Request
Hi, I would to make use of your copyediting services for the A Weekend in the City FAC. I'd appreciate the help especially as one user wants a third party look at the prose. Thanks. Rafablu88 13:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'm a huge fan of Bloc Party, though, so I'm biased :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it'd be fine if you reviewed. It's mostly about the prose issues. You don't have to support if you think it's unethical. Rafablu88  22:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, phew! As for the CAT, I think I might have taken it out a loooooong time ago by mistake. Rafablu88  23:06, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, do you mind if I change the -ing verbing back? They're not big fans of it at FAC. Rafablu88  15:08, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, in both previous FACs. They've become really anal this year. Rafablu88  15:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Could be, but I prefer to be on the safe side as they keep picking and picking and picking at minute things. Rafablu88  15:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A sense of humour wouldn't kill some of them though. =P Rafablu88  15:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, the present to past tense WAS needed. Good spot. Rafablu88  15:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That is definitely a flaw of mine. Every time I aim to do it, I always go into an editing trance and forget. Rafablu88  15:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

DONE. Do you think everything is now sorted so I can beep Brain Boulton? Rafablu88 15:24, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, the rationale and caption are super solid. Do you think it's viable to upload a slightly bigger shot considering that? Rafablu88  15:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and thanks for all the help. I so can't believe I forgot to say that. I need a good slap. Rafablu88  16:00, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


 * As a hypothetical riposte: The point says-Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.

"The set-up was highly unconventional and unique and is a major precursor to the development of the album's special sound on top of showing pictorially Jacknife Lee's highly stylised methods. The adjacent text is technical enough without the reader failing to fully comprehend the set-up and methods. The photo clarifies a large chunk of the album's conception."

Your hypothetical verdict, your honour? Rafablu88 16:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Why, thank you. As an aside, do you think you're in a position to give a verdict on FAC? Rafablu88  17:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Rafablu88  17:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers) I assumed from the title that they would be included even if the text is not that explicit. User:Garden seemed to agree. Ultimately, I doubt it's a massive deal. It probably improves reading in the end. Rafablu88  17:41, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, spoke to User:Dabomb87 and confirmed MOS not having an explicit requirement. But some editors like to do it for the month and date. So, I sorted the couple of instances in the articles. RB88 (T) 14:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Explained bonus tracks. RB88 (T) 12:15, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, nice edits (sorted a couple myself), and yes, the photo always seemed to be doomed but you can't fault a guy for trying. RB88 (T) 15:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

There aren't really any crit guidelines apart from "state what they said". I created my own template a while back to spice up it a bit as it can be dull, but even that keeps getting culled by reviewers with each GA/FA. They're not even allowing me synonyms in prose these days. What has the world come to?! But to get to your point: At first sight it looks good, but after reading it I'm getting a disjunct feeling, i.e. making readers jump from the Feb 07 stat, to the Nov 07 award, to the end-of-07 awards, and then back to the reviews from Feb 07 that form part of the stat. Ultimately, I think the way it is, i.e. historical, is in the end better. So, stat -> +ve -> -ve -> end-of-year. I appreciate the effort though. If you have any other new ideas in general, run them by me cos I'm slowly turning into a robot. RB88 (T) 20:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * DONE. Although, I'm sure they are. They've expanded considerably like AMG with allmusic, allmovie, allgame etc. Still, never miss a chance to add a bit of Irish charm. ;) RB88 (T) 19:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Any closer to a decision? RB88 (T) 19:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Right:

That's it from me, too (hopefully). Thanks for everything. I owe you one. RB88 (T) 23:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Checked BrEng after Hometowngate. Didn't find any more.
 * 2) "using a MiniDisc player"
 * 3) Reworded
 * 4) And yes, it is about the genre. Moakes said so.

Happy Labor Day!
Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 05:39, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you! We're celebrating Independence Day over here. I hope you and yours had an excellent weekend. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for August 2009
SoxBot (talk) 15:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh no, not again
The Chinese zodiac cretin is busy again, Temazepam, Nimetazepam, 15/93 etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.57.77.186

Greetings 70.137.161.38 (talk) 19:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice to see you. Have warned him, next step is a block if he keeps it up. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

GAR and ArticleHistory
Yah, I had too many tabs opened at the same time and forgot to update info after copy and paste the old one. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Bulk insertion of nonsense
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.57.16.163 without reference. This is one of several alternate IPs of Chinese zodiac, see VeronicaPR and Goodson. 70.137.161.38 (talk) 09:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I don't see any edits from that IP since June, although VeronicaPR returned for an edit (which was quickly reverted) yesterday. Again, I'll try to keep an eye on things... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Why hello again
Hey dude. Could I ask you to take a look through BRAZILIAN CRUISER Bahia and tell me what you think? Thanks! :-) — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  20:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll have a look :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks good so far, though I'm not sure why you haven't used the English-language equivalents for ranks? I'll have a look at the sourcing later. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoops, missed this on my watchlist. I used the Portuguese ranks to be sure that there was no mistranslation between languages, but if you think the article would be better with English ranks, feel free to make the switch&mdash;I wouldn't object. Thanks for the help! — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  05:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I do think English ranks would be better. Sorry about not posting to your Talk page; I'll leave my comments at the article Talk instead (probably easier for both of us :D) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You're probably right; you seem to be Mr. Popular here. A barnstar, Wikipedian of the Day (congrats 'bout that, by the way)... :-) — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  04:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * One last favor: could you look over the Portuguese source and assuage Brad's concerns? I used Google Translate, and while I think it was accurate enough for me to add correct information, he is right in being concerned. Thanks in advance and cheers, — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  05:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. Ah, Google Translate... the number one reason I'm behind on my rent... :P Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Sorry about Google Translate; next time I'll just ask you to translate it for me for free. ;-) (just kidding) Cheers dude, — Ed   (Talk  •  Contribs)  03:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Here...

 * Why, thank you, sir :) Let me know when you have another one in the works. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)