User talk:Infrogmation/Archive June July 06

Archive of discussion from User talk:Infrogmation for June and July of 2006.


 * Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive March May 06
 * Next newer archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Aug Nov 06

The images you uploaded
Hi, it depresses me to hear that many of the images you uploaded have gone. I think it would be worth the effort to try and retrieve them from wherever they have been saved privately. (I guess you are talking about pictures like the one of Rudy Vallee). Whenever I came across a page containing such an image that's what I liked best. I may have saved some of them myself, but there is no way I could tell without knowing which images are missing. Could you compile a tentative, incomplete list so that other Wikipedians (or maybe even you yourself) could search their hard discs?

By the way, why do many of them no longer exist? (I mean the paper originals.)

All the best, &lt;KF&gt; 10:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Al Hirt page edit
hello, just wanted to know why my update of family names was deleted yesterday from the Al Hirt page. how do these need to be verified so that they stay?

IP blocking

 * 1) 212.135.1.53 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log)
 * 2) 212.135.1.57 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log)
 * 3) 212.135.1.186 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log)
 * 4) 212.135.1.185

Hi, The above IP addresses belong to a school in London, is there anyway you can take more substantional action to block it, but still allow those people with user accounts to log in and edit. Otherwise i imagine you will continually be blocking it. for a long time to come.

Barnstar Awarded!!



 * Thanks. -- Infrogmation

Fats Domino's Alternative Date of Birth
Hey Infrogmation. I am not a huge Fats Domino fan but still a fan nevertheless. I have also never spoken to the man personally. I noticed the date of of his birth as May 10, 1929 in the biography pages of a 1971 vinyl collection put out by United Artists titled "Fats Domino" - the number of the record collection is UAS-9958. I see you live in New Orleans. I find it strange that a collection of his music put out in 1971 would mess up his birthdate like that...I could understand if it was a typo or something - but May 10, 1929 is completely different from Feb 26, 1928. I suspect there is some story behind it. Either that or the guy who wrote this vinyl had it mixed up. I've never read the biography you mentioned - as I said - I am into Fat's music alot but never really read up about his personal life (aside from the news when they had found him after Katrina). Perhaps you can get a hold of the writer of that biography or else Fats Domino himself or his family. I live in Pennsylvania and have no way of asking him personally. I'm not going to change it back, though we should definately get to the bottom of this. Thanks alot. -Ryan M.
 * Thank you for responding. Yes, it's interesting that the LP gives another birthdate. If you like, you could put a mention of that in the article talk page. However unless there is some other reason to question the birthdate I don't think it merits being put in the lead of the article. By the way, as a fan of Domino's music or just New Orleans music in general, I'd reccomend Coleman's biography "Blue Monday", as it is not just well researched, it's a good read as well. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 15:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I emailed the fella who did this write-up as well to see if he has any idea. http://home.att.net/~uncamarvy/Fats/fats.html. I won't put it on the talk page until I see if this guy knows anything about it or just saw it on the same record as well. I realize, yeah, it's the first thing that catches your eye when you see the article.

Sorry for wasting your talk space with this. I talked to the guy who wrote the article which put May 10th first and Feb 26 as the alternate. He said his guess is as good as anyone's but he made that point that perhaps Fats lied about his age at some point, maybe to get a driver's licence or something, and the birthday he made up stuck with him. None of this is known to be true. IF that is the case (we don't know - it could have just been an error that United Artists made in his biography pages) then May 10, 1929 would make Fats younger, and so you'd think the age in which he was younger would be the true age. I don't really care about it that much - this is just what Marvy had to say on the topic. By the way - I plan on picking up that biography soon - sounds very cool. Good luck with everything.

-Ryan M.

WikiProject Mesoamerica
Hi there Infrogmation. As one who's made a substantial and long-standing contribution to Mesoamerica-related topics (there's barely an article in the field that does not bear your imprimatur on it somewhere along the way), I was wondering whether you'd be interested in checking out and commenting on/assisting with WikiProject Mesoamerica. This has been recently set up with the overall coordination and improvement of content and coverage for Mesoamerican articles in mind. I've made a reasonable start at setting out some consistent structure, guidelines and strategies, but would greatly appreciate any input and comment/suggestion from others with an interest in the field, if you've the time and inclination. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK  15:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Article not appearing in index
Throw me something, Infrogmation!

I wrote my first article last night, and still have some work to do on it. It is about the MV George Prince ferry disaster, which happened up the river from us (I'm in Marrero) back in the 70's.

I wanted to see how it would do in the index, but when I enter various terms in the search that should bring it up, my article doesn't show up! What gives?

Macmedic892 23:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Question re: reversion spatting
Infrogmation --

When I started my irregular wikipedia career, you welcomed me with these words -- "If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page." I took a quick peek at the Questions page and the FAQ; unsatisfied, I've come to you. Also, I wanted a cheap opportunity (as a former New Orleans resident) to commiserate about the McHardee's news.

I made some edits to the College of William and Mary page, and I have ended up in what appears to be a war of reversion. I tried to work things out in the talk page and with comments next to the revision on the history page, but so far I only get revisions in response, and always from IP editors who do not appear to be reading their talk pages.

What should I do here? I could yield to the revisions they want, and I could continue reverting, but I am hoping there is a better way to facilitate more of a dialogue to reach agreeable text.

One concern: I made the revisions I made because the prior version created a false impression that a booster might like, and I would hazard that most of the page's visitors are partisan. Cka3n 23:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed punctuation because that is the direction of Wikipedia lately
It's removed because it clutters up the most important part of the article, the hook or beginning. However, you can restore it as it is your article. I'm sorry I removed it and I apologize. KarenAnn 18:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant pronunciation!
Very sloppy of me. KarenAnn 18:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Katrina percentages
Hi. In answer to your question about 97%, I refer you to Wikipedia! :-)


 * By the time Hurricane Katrina came ashore early the next morning, approximately one million people had fled the city and its surrounding suburbs by the evening of August 28, while about 20,000 to 25,000 people remained in the city, taking shelter at the Louisiana Superdome, along with 550 National Guard troops.

I simply divided 20,000 to 25,000 into 1,000,000 to get 3% (rounding up generously). Does that leave 97% or is that "original research"? If the latter, where can we check it? BTW, where did you get "more than 80% of residents evacuated" from? --Wing Nut 16:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, wait a sec, did that sentence only refer to people in the Superdome? *blush* --Wing Nut 16:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

New Orleans Rhythm Kings
Thanks for the note on the talk page. Just out of curiosity, where are you getting your information regarding past mixed-race recordings (jazz or otherwise)? --cholmes75 (chit chat) 14:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I've been researching New Orleans jazz and hanging around with other 78 collectors for many years, so no single source for everything. If there's a particular point you wish documentary collaboration for, ask. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I do. The sources I've read (not as many as you, no doubt), indicate that New Orleans Rhythm Kings was actually the name of Leon Rappolo's old band (when he toured with Bee Palmer), which seems to be a separate entity from the group started by Rappolo, Mares and Brunies, circa 1921. Thoughts?  --cholmes75 (chit chat) 20:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Mostly right; the band leader I believe was actually either Palmer or her husband Seigel, but it included not just Rappolo but also Emmett Hardy and Santo Peccora, both of whom were also in other later incarnations of the NORK. Yes, in some ways seperate from the band that first started playing at the Friars Inn. However the name seems to have been used rather fluidly by a group of musical friends and associates, no one of whom was in every incarnation of the band under that name. -- Infrogmation 20:44, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Louisiana Creoles
I am happy you are using this category I created a little while ago. Very fast use. You might also want to look at the talk page notes I left in the 'List of French Creoles' article and the 'French Americans' catogery. If you have time, you might also want to get the 3 articles and 3 categories all in sync with each other. Three: French American, Cajun, and Louisiana Creole. I just work on categories in general and noticed this category was missing from the lists I was looking at. Thanks Hmains 04:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

White Maya
Sources are provided for. This is in no way controversial info. Didn't you see the sources? That stuff is going back up pronto amigo. White Maya anon author 2 July 2006


 * Here is what Google scholar shows: nothing. The "medium" history I'm using to edit does not index this.


 * OR until proven otherwise and reverted as such. Marskell 08:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Je demande une apologie immédiatement. Les sources, ils sont vrai, verifiable et veridique. Les mayas blanc retournerant! White Maya anon auteur 2 juillet 2006


 * Please take the debate (if there is any) to Talk:Maya people or somewhere else more appropriate than my talk page. Anon, I think if you wish more respect a better course would be to choose a user name, log in, and be willing to provide citations if asked. -- Infrogmation 20:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

They've killed the List of famous failures in science and engineering! You Bastards!!
Mmx1 is taking the fight that I have over the F-14 and F-111 to the failure page, and he has nominated them for deletion. The wiki-thugs are all voting to delete the page. Mmx1 has reversed the F-14 page to state that it is not, and has never been designed as a maneuverable air superiority fighter, and is not accepting any contrary citations up to and including a F-14 test pilot, Janes Defence, and Aviation Week. He is apparently taking revenge against other pages. Please go to the deletion page and tell the administrators what is going on. Look at the patterns of MMx. He regular accuses others of gross misinformation and summarily reverts most edits as a self-appointed judge of all truth, but in fact should not be allowed this leeway. --matador300 11:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Jazz music
I recently added a proposal for WikiProject Jazz music over at WikiProject/List of proposed projects. I'm letting you know about this because of our brief chats about the New Orleans Rhythm Kings. If you'd like to participate, by all means sign up! --cholmes75 (chit chat) 17:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Admin abuse
You reverted an explained, good faith edit of mine using the rollback feature (intended for fighting vandalism). Quite frankly I'm astonished that you are not only an admin but a bureacrat - how can you be in this position and not understand a) what the tools are for, b) the concept of disambiguation?! --kingboyk 08:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The reversion (of an edit which removed material which had been in the article for years, without consensus to do so) was the first in a short series of edits to rewrite the article in light of new material turning up and discussion on the talk page. This process has continued, and now we have at least starter articles on both of the two companies called "Swan Records" -- which I consider a much better outcome than removing all mention of one of the two. I think emotions have run too high in the editing of the "Swan Records" article (for reasons I do not completely understand-- my motivation is simply that if there were various companies making records, we should try to have articles on them.) I am quite familiar with disambiguations-- if you look over the history of the article, it took a while to develop enough information to disambiguate the two "Swan Records" companies. If you wish to turn "Swan Records" into a disambiguation page, propose that on the article talk page, and if there is consensus I'd be happy to help with page moves if asked. Feel free to review my edits if you think I am irresponsible, and if you think my behavior should be a case for arbitration please submit it. However I don't think I've been misbehaving. If I have somehow offended you, it was inadvertant and I appologize. Please, if there is any confusion or disagreement about articles, let us try to discuss them calmly on the article talk page with no personal insults nor accusations. Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 12:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No no, there's no need to escalate things, just don't roll me back like a vandal please! :) I think the current arrangement should stay. It would appear that whilst neither label is especially famous, the one currently at Swan Records has the incoming links and is more notable. When there are only two disambiguation choices and one is better known than the other a dab template like otheruses4 is better for the reader than a dab page (as you no doubt know). One thing you might want to attend to: the jazz Swan Records has no incoming links, not even from the artist whose 78rpm record is pictured. --kingboyk 12:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Split RCA Records from RCA article
There is a desperate need to split RCA Records from the RCA article because of the infobox being used for active record labels. Since you initiated the redirect, I'm hoping you'll help in initiating the split of RCA Records from RCA. Steelbeard1 03:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I see the RCA Records article has already been split, which is fine by me. (When I made the redirect over 3 & 1/2 years ago, we had much stubbier info.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 16:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Courtesy note
Just a courtesy note letting you know I unblocked 132.33.132.19 due to collateral damage. I've asked the affected user to report the problematic behavior to a superior (it is an US Air Force IP, and they should be far more able to handle the problem than your average ISP); if nothing comes from it, I'll call the base myself under WP:ABUSE. Yours, Essjay  (  Talk  •  Connect  )  15:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Georgia Move
As a past participant in the discussion on how to handle the Georgia pages, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:Georgia (country). Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. --Vengeful Cynic 03:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Mesoamerica ratings
Thanks, Infrogmation, and I am very glad to have your input and insight for this collective project- were it not for the prior efforts of editors such as yourself we should have barely a fraction of these articles to consider in the first place. And it's doubly pleasing that the recent momentous events in your home town have not too-significantly impaired the opportunities and drive to contribute, despite what must be difficult circumstances to have lived through. Hope that all is as well as it can be.

I am quite fine with that reassessment, I'd overlooked the comparative importance of that site. I am sure that there are others whose assessments (either for importance or quality) are perhaps inconsistently applied and could be reassessed, so please do amend or comment as and when you come across them. My general thinking has been to get the initial batch of assessments completed for the articles identified so far, and then to go through each of the by importance and by quality categories to see which ones look 'out of place' and remark those, as appropriate. For sites, my general guideline (not consistently followed) has been to consider the half-dozen or so major, 'famous' sites as "Top", a selection of other high-profile and historically-significant sites as "High", other large or mid-sized sites as "Mid" and the rest as "Low". It is important however to identify (as you have done) those sites which might lack the public profile of a Tikal or a Palenque, but in the scheme of Mesoamerican history are important nonetheless.

As for the procedure, I think that your suggested practice of briefly commenting on the article's talk page is a good one, and that in most cases a rating can be adjusted on sight if someone thinks it appropriate. It'd probably be more in the case of by quality reassessments (say, to consider whether after improvements an article could be considered to have reached A-Class) that prior consultation could be beneficial.

I had added the functionality of a reassess optional parameter to the project banner, so that when set ( |reassess=yes )it adds it to category:Mesoamerica articles needing reassessment which the project could then monitor - this could be used either to propose a reassessment, or to flag a recently-reassessed one for validation. I'm not sure at this stage whether this would prove to be a useful feature or not, or whether we'll need some sort of working list for reassessment reviews (maybe added to the priority tasklist?), or whether a simple talk page or user talk note will do. I guess it rather depends on the eventual volume of these, and the number of folks interested, and at this stage I don't think we'd need to be overly-bureaucratic about it. I'd welcome any ideas or suggestions on this, or indeed on any other aspect of the project. My attempts to get things started may or may not prove useful in the long run, I'm sure there are other ways and means I've not thought of which will help to generate some consistency and impetus for improving content and coverage. Regards, --cjllw | TALK  00:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks good. -- Infrogmation

Happy Birthday!
Have a great day :) -Ladybirdintheuk 06:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Hope things are well down there in New Orleans!

Thistheman 04:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Lame Link
Infrogmation - I still can't get the link from the article Moe Jaffe to Category: American songwriters to work. His name has never appeared in the list though the link seems to be OK. Any suggestions? Oh, and a belated Happy Birthday! Apace361 20:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The article appears in the category to me. I just edited the article so it would be alphabetized by his last rather than first name. If things aren't appearing for you, try reloading or refreshing the page in your browser. If there is some other continuing problem, detail it on the article talk page. Hope this helps, -- Infrogmation 22:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Brunswick Records
There is no question that Brunswick Records has a long and rich history. But the current Brunswick Records is basically a soul music label. Is the infobox for the record label as it is currently or for the company in its different incarnations? The current Brunswick Records does NOT own the music issued on the Brunswick label before Jackie Wilson and Nat Tarnopol came along. Steelbeard1 17:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like we gotthat resolved via the article talk page. -- Infrogmation

Nebaj
Hi Infrogmation. In your comment at talk:Nebaj, I'm not clear if you mean that there's another locality in Guatemala also called Nebaj, apart from the settlement of Nebaj/Santa Maria Nebaj nearby to the Maya site of Nebaj. If not, we could go with your original proposal, and have Nebaj for the site and Santa Maria Nebaj for the nearby village, with top dab texts on each.
 * If there's a third alternative, then I guess Nebaj would be a dab, and we can put the site at Nebaj (Maya site).--cjllw | TALK  00:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Tuscumbia-Courtland-Decatur Railroad
I actually went by the Decatur-Morgan County Historical Society today and was shown the actual charter of the railroad in February of 1829. I was told that construction was begun in mid-1829, the first segment between Tuscumbia, and Leighton was complete in November of that year. Traffic between those two cities began at the day of completion. The second segment between Leighton and Decatur was completed in June of 1830. Construction was speedy because of the large cotton industry in North Alabama. Barges could not pass through the rapids cause by the Shoals along the Tennessee River between Florence, and Decatur. The Shoals Canal was congested and the state pursued funding for a railroad between The Shoals and the calmer waters in Decatur. AlaGuy 00:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply, but such details might be better on the talk page of the article on the railway or Talk:Oldest railroads in North America. (I get the impression that a lot of early railways like claiming "first" this or that that might be so if one specifies exact details, but some of the details sometimes get lost when the claims are repeated. Oldest railroads in North America seems an attempt to sort it out-- adding info and sources is encouraged. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 00:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Haha, operative word being "attempt" AlaGuy 18:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Jimjones5
Hi there Infrogmation. He is a sock of User:Jimjones005 and User:Jimjones05. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 01:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC).
 * And Jimjones0005 as well. Thanks -- Infrogmation 11:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Brunswick
Brunswick: Hi there: I think this with brunswick and braunschweig does not work quite out. Braunschweig was somehow an error in history-a bad joke by some overly zealous German civil servants. The City should be called Brunswick, and it is listed as Brunswick in the Enyclopaedia Britannica, and as such in the OED. Mind you that what counts here is not how a few German speakers call this city in their native language, but how the English speakers call this City: Brunswick. Even the city council of Brunswick thinks of changing the cities name back to Brunswick http://www.brunswick.de since it is a well know name all over the world and their city is easier to associte with this name- a term you would call branding. Cheers mate, but please let us go by the way English speakers woudl call this place: brunswick.

merleauponty


 * Please, discuss this on the article talk page. I am fine with whatever name is decided upon, as long as it is decided with advance talk and an effort to reach a consensus before changing the name. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 01:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Clemenceau.JPG
Hello, can you please provide a source for Image:Clemenceau.JPG? Conscious 17:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Will do. I scanned & uploaded that back in 2002, before detailed info was usually included on image pages. -- Infrogmation 12:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your detailed answer. I have deleted the Wikipedia copy of the image, it is now accessible as Image:Clemenceau.jpg. Conscious 20:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
I come on tonight to fix my mess and you did it for me... thank you very much! Vizjim 19:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your attention. -- Infrogmation 12:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Blocking
Regarding the user 203.49.175.90 (link to talk page of user) and their recent edits, this IP is my school's (Aitken College) proxy IP Address. Is it possible to get an block put on it so that it can still read pages, but not edit pages (unless the user logs in [for people like me with an account])? In the mean time i will notify the school administrator and see if they can be traced and see what action can be taken from there (from memory it breeches the Acceptable Usage Policy). Alien- 11:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It is currently under a 60 day editing block, set for anon (not logged in) editors only. This should only prevent editing from that ip#, and not affect ability to read Wikipedia from that address. Let me know if this isn't working like it should. Are you suggesting that the editing block should be longer term? -- Infrogmation 12:03, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, i kind of got confused, the signatures added to user pages are in UTC time, yet the times displayed in History in a page are not UTC for me (unless someone edited the Aitken College article 10 hours after you set the ban and then reverted the edits). If you resolve 203.49.175.90 it does show that it's the Proxy for Aitken College. I think it would be better for that editing ban to be permanent from the school IP though, simply for the fact that it's an educational instution (so most users would just be accessing information) and if they need to edit the can sign up for an account (e-mail addresses shouldn't be a problem either since all staff and students are provided with a free e-mail address. I'll see what the response is from the LAN Administrator in charge of the network though (probably sometime tomorrow [at least 16 hours away]). Or if you'd like to e-mail him about it, the address is admin(at)aitkencollege.edu.au (ask for the LAN Administrator or just say it's for the LAN Administrator at the start) and just say that it's in relation to WikiPedia edits from the school IP that Rowan has sent him an e-mail about (he knows who i am, i hope :P ). Alien- 13:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:ColumbiaHerself.jpg
I see that you have undeleted Image:ColumbiaHerself.jpg. If there any reason for this, given that there is a copy on Commons, Image:ColumbiaHerselfSmall.jpg? Conscious 19:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. Originally, "ColumbiaHerself" was a larger version, and "ColumbiaHerselfSmall" was a smaller one (a relic of the era before Wikipedia had image inline image sizing, and images had to be uploaded the size they would be in the article). As it said that "HerselfSmall" had been moved to the Commons while "Herself" was deleted with the statement that it was the same as "HerselfSmall". I undeleted as from this it appeared to me that the larger higher resolution version was deleted with only the smaller version moved to Commons. Do you know anything about the various versions and which was actually moved? -- Infrogmation 19:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like both versions are the same size now, so redeleting the non-Commons version should do no harm. -- Infrogmation 19:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was going to say just the same, the user who placed the NowCommons template knew what he was doing. (No harm except for a slightly confusing name, but the image isn't very large anyway...) Conscious 19:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:YellowTerror.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:YellowTerror.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Komdori 19:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Sorry I didn't put it here, but clearly you knew about the issue since you made a comment before I! :)  Anyway, take a gander at the talk page over there, and we can figure out what's going on with the image.
 * I think what's going on is that the "PD" (proper by Wikipedia procedures at the time) now has a "This tag is obsolete! Please use instead:" notice. Editors presumably thinking they're being helpful have more than once changed it to a tag claiming author dead for 100 years. I have asked such editors for confirming information on what you have noted is a questionable claim, and reverted when none is provided. (At least one more recently created tag would be appropriate for the image, but no one has added it yet, nor asked me to. Similar things must be happening to a great many Wikipedia images uploaded 2 or more years ago.) -- Infrogmation 19:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that; I'll be keeping a closer eye on images that have undergone the process you described. The current tag for this particular image is quite nice; it might work for many of the ones you described (specificially, if we have publishing information). Komdori 19:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

WatchlistBot
Thanks for the heads up. I'm working on finding and removing the references now. Sorry for the inconvenience. Ingrid 22:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Footer

 * Next older archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive March May 06
 * Next newer archive: User talk:Infrogmation/Archive Aug Nov 06

Current discussion: User talk:Infrogmation