User talk:Jmundo/Archives/2009/January

Wall of Honor
It is with great pleasure that I present you Jmundo, with this "plaque" upon your induction into the "Wall of Honor". Tony the Marine (talk) 01:53, 1 January 2009 (UTC)



Question
Did you see the format the new format that I am using for the "military" section of the "List of Puerto Ricans"? What do you think of it? I think that it would be best if we organized the other sections in alphabetical order by surnames similar to what I did in the military section. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:43, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Great, do the religious section. I would do it this way:


 * Cruz, Nicky, Reverend Blah, blah.

That is how I did it with the military, what do you think? Tony the Marine (talk) 05:09, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * i'll do the "sports" section. Tony the Marine (talk) 19:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Filiberto3.jpg)
You've uploaded File:Filiberto3.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 14:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Disregard above message, image is no longer orphaned, it has been placed in his article. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The Switching Show 2009: With Sara Cox
I noticed your prod2 on a similar article. Could you please look at the above article and give any comments. Thanks! --Stormbay (talk) 17:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The prod on The Switching Show 2009: With Sara Cox was disputed. Are you interested in taking it to Afd? I will watch...thanks! --Stormbay (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Neuro-immune fatigue
Hi Jmundo, Can you consider putting the prod back on this or should it go at Afd? I am thinking the references actually do not show the notability, they are just references for those two doctors helped discover CFS, i do not understand why this sentence is there. The term does not get used in the medical literature, it is used in a self-published book by a doctor. Thx, RetroS1mone   talk  05:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you!! RetroS1mone   talk  12:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

RFA !vote
Hi there. Just wanted to check what your intentions were at Enigma's RFA - looks like you were stiking your support but as it is not indented it is still counting as a support vote. If that's what you meant to do then fine but otherwise you'll need to #: indent it (leave the # so as to maintain the numbering). Didn't fix it myself as was unclear what you wanted! Cheers, Nancy  talk  15:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

How do you do
I liked what you said at Articles for deletion/The Ongoing Adventures of Rocket Llama -- succinct and to the point. Dr.Who (talk) 05:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

List of PR's.
The "List" is finally done, it is now organized and it looks good. I want to thank you for all of the help and work that you put in it. Now, we have to make sure that all future additions be sourced and placed in a proper way. Gracias, Tony the Marine (talk) 04:46, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Spanish Wikipedia
I have recently started editing there and am amazed at the capricious workings of the administrators there. It appears that they block for things that are not even listed on their list of blockable offenses. I am absolutely amazed. Please notify me on this wiki if you have anymore trouble there or want a sympathetic ear.Die4Dixie (talk) 21:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This for your understanding. I was treatened with a block for calling something a "pedejada", not calling someone a "pendejo". []. Our politics are very different, but WTH, I don't think politics is that important to the project.Die4Dixie (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the box and the advise. One more question: Was saying "esto es una pendejada" a personal attack??? As a non native speaker, I might of course be missing something. Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks again.Die4Dixie (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm a little abrasive sometimes. The place has a surreal quality, all the Sysops are bureaucrats. Their blocking ploicy isn't even official. I have seen Single purpose accounts blocked because they only edit one article ( also not even listed in their not offical policy). Its crazy. Anyway, thanks for the box ( I already added it) and your comment. I don't expect that I will be allowed to edit there much. Nos vemos.Die4Dixie (talk) 22:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The end of the Spanish wiki experiment []. One of the Bibliosicarios even made an oblique reference to the "censura" box. Won't bother you again. You were right, tthat project is best avoided like dogcrap on a sidewalk on a hot sunny day. You step in in, it sticks to you.Die4Dixie (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Flag of Puerto Rico
Jmundo, see my proposed introduction for the article at:Proposed introduction Tony the Marine (talk) 04:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

January 7th Riots, Oakland, California
Thanks for pulling January 7th Riots, Oakland, California out of the fire. It was certainly notable, having been all over cable news and other national and international news media.Critical Chris (talk) 05:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Would you mind explaining the policy basis for your closing of that AfD? None of the entries under WP:Non-admin closure seem to apply. Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 05:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree, and I don't understand how "Speedy Keep" is possibly the conclusion. And your talk-page comment doesn't even mention the issue of the Merge. THF (talk) 10:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Anthony Lozano
The articles you found might help, but my Google translation doesn't. Based on the translations I got Lozano might be a bench player rather than a starter and the second article would imply it was speculation before the fact. Could you expand your AFD comment by providing relevant quotes from the article in English to evaluate. - Mgm|(talk) 11:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Jersey Paranormal Research
I write to you following the guideline in WP:DRV. Can you take a second look at this Afd? In my opinion consensus for deletion was not reach between established users (not all !votes were from new users). Can you relist the article so consensus can be reach? Thanks, --J.Mundo (talk) 13:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?
 * In my opinion, the circumstances for relisting provided in WP:RELIST were not met. On the other hand, there were ten people suggesting deleting the article, and of the eleven people suggesting keeping it, four were SPAs (SusanSJPR, Tom Butler, JennaBugg, and Twostars n saturn), and four were weak. As such, my feeling is that the consensus of established users was that the article should be deleted.
 * You are, of course, welcome to list the matter at DRV. Stifle (talk) 14:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

January 7 Oakland riots
"Speedy keep per obvious consensus"? I'm sorry, no. It bears explaining that when people are using the word "merge", it means that they do not want a separate article to be spun off from an existing topic and that they want it put back where it came from. If people wanted the article kept, they would have written "keep". As an administrator, you cannot say "speedy keep" or "obvious keep" simply because you would prefer that an article remain in existence. Instead, an administrator must make an accurate summary of the consensus based on what people have written. In the future, please do not close discussions as a speedy keep or a speedy delete unless there is an obvious unanimity of opinion. Mandsford (talk) 15:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I speedy keep the article per WP:SNOW, "where it is absolutely obvious that no other outcome other than keep is possible."  The task of merging doesn't require an AfD discussion, WP:BEFORE.  --J.Mundo (talk) 15:53, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Where you've gone wrong is the idea that "no other outcome is possible". Debates get closed with the decision "Merge" all the time.  You should probably compare notes with some other administators, but there are more choices besides black and white.  It doesn't matter whether an article can be merged without a discussion.  The fact is that there was a discussion.  I think you're approaching this from the inclusionist idea that anything that is not a delete !vote must be a !keep vote.  A deletionist could say that all merge !votes are "obviously" signs that people want the article to be removed at the end of the discussion.   Neither of those propositions is true, of course.  Please consider relisting this, becuase your decision is in error. Mandsford (talk) 17:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Can you at least correct your conclusion? The consensus was merge, not speedy keep. THF (talk) 20:28, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Your decision was incoherent: you said both "speedy keep" and "merge" and that's two different things, and is now creating arguments what you actually decided. People are complaining that it shouldn't have been merged because you said "speedy keep."  The way you phrased the decision is creating disruption.  THF (talk) 21:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Marc Chandler
Apparently the text of that article was copy and pasted from another webpage. But I saw that you voted to keep the article and put work into sourcing the article. If you would like to keep working on the article, and re-write it completely in your own words, I could give you access to the deleted version if you need it, or copy your references or anything else you may need. If you don't want to work on the article further, then sorry to have bugged you ;) Good luck!-Andrew c [talk] 22:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

That mystery
Thank you for bringing that DRV to my attention. I think I'll add that article to my watchlist to see how much time passes before the next assassination attempt. I'm growing curious as to what would have inspired that manner of anonymous assault against an article on what should be a controvery-free webcomic. Dr.Who (talk) 23:42, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Filiberto3.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Filiberto3.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Joelito (talk) 13:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008-09 Israel–Gaza Foreign involvement
hehehehehe, this is classic WP:POVFORK.--Cerejota (talk) 19:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Palestinian fatalities resulting from Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip in 2008
Should be deleted too, see my reasoning. This is a trollish doing coatracks/povfork.--Cerejota (talk) 00:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Possibly, but there is a need to bring the Coatracking under control. It could get out of hand, as it has on the past, leading to poorly written, crappy, redundant messes no one can fix. Sounds like the actual IRL mess hehehe ;). Still, the principles on editing are important, because they affect how controversial articles are handled. Its a slippery slope if we start letting narratives to emerge that even have the appearence of supporting one side. It already happens, but there is no need to continue now, and certainly I am not going to be on record supporting coatracks ;). --Cerejota (talk) 02:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD on Cuisine of Dominica
The article, Cuisine of Dominica has been nominated for deletion as being non-notable. You can participate in the discussion here. --Jeremy ( Blah blah... ) 03:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your 2 messages. I have added information on Tibet national football team as well as on Category:Tibetan footballers, and gave my points on the deletion page. I guess the deletion is not closing the issue, on the contrary.--Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 12:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Riff driven songs
Hi - someone has nominated the entire article on Riff driven songs for deletion. Please see Articles_for_deletion/Riff_driven and vote whether to delete or keep the article. Thanks! Geĸrίtzl (talk)

RfA thankspam
Denbot (talk) 22:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Manuel Olivieri Sanchez
That was funny about your history teacher in Mayaguez. I believe that history teachers should stop relying only on what is written in the history books and should be required to research what they teach.

You see, history books are often written by biased historians who are influenced by the political powers of their countries, who determine which texts are going to be distributed in the educational system. That is the reason that many truths are often omitted and hidden. The Nazis' did this and so has every government. When I was in school, the history books made no mention of the Afro-American contributions, much less those made by Hispanics. When the United States took over Puerto Rico, the new government eliminated the history texts written by Brau and instead introduced the Americanized version written by the appointed head of education, Paul Miller. No wonder our own people are under the impression that we are underachievers who can only live of the American welfare system.

That is why I have made it my mission to write the truth and unbiased historical facts of our people. I love writing about people like Manuel Olivieri Sanchez, who had the "cojones" to do what he did, yet he like many others have fallen into the cracks of history and been forgotten. I just hope that our people by reading what we have written will say: "WoW! We are much more then entertainers and sportspeople."

Sorry for taking up so much of your talk space amigo, but I just wanted to share my believes with someone. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities
Thanks for putting the Copy to Wikisource template on that article; I didn't know that such a template existed. --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 20:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Boot Camp (film)
Your words here were much appreciated. Thank you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:13, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Island Country
Hi. The delete proposal is restored. If there are references to support that the term is not a neologism, please provide them.Wotapalaver (talk) 11:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

A centralised discussion which may interest you
Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
Hiya. I've fulfilled your request for rollback. Please review WP:RBK or ask me if you need any help with the tool. Thanks, and happy editing. Pedro : Chat  16:46, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Indie Hardcore
Hi. Regarding your speedy tagging of this article. I think the context is clear and enough to identify the subject. So I feel the tag is inappropriate. Thanks. --Efe (talk) 07:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Bernie mac redirect
It didn't work anyway. in the history, while my edit was the most recent and said 24 bytes-redirected.... it didn't work. typing bernie mac into the box went to bernie mac as it appeared before the vandalism. Why? 192.156.234.170 (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

14th Dalai Lama
Dear Jmundo. The contents of 14th Dalai Lama include number of incorrectness and deneutralize contents.


 * Wrong: Japan's government had been relatively quiet about the violence in Tibet
 * Correct: Japan's government declared the anxiety for "both side" violence in Tibet


 * Wrong: out of deference to Beijing,
 * Correct: Japan's government is not under P.R.C.


 * Wrong: Tokyo does, however, grant visas to the spiritual leader, who has visited Japan fairly frequently.
 * Correct: Tokyo does, however, grant single Transit visas only for a "passenger" who will visit United States.

Also, The 14th Dalai Lama has close relationship between Shoko Asahara whom a cult guru in Japan. ja:ダライ・ラマ14世

I hope those contents must be correct up ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.150.154.247 (talk) 05:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

nice get ;)
User talk:72.209.181.219 - destroy them vandals! BTW, if you want me to I can setup a talk page archive like mine... just say the word...--Cerejota (talk) 06:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * On it!--Cerejota (talk) 06:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I am done. It is set to archive every 30 days, but I am not sure how it will work it now. Lets see. If something breaks just let me know and I can fix it.--Cerejota (talk) 07:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Latin Europe
Hey, I replied to your comment. Cheers 84.13.166.159 (talk) 20:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Puerto Rican Campaign
Jmundo, after studying the situation from every point of view, I have come to a conclusion in regard to the infox discussion which I believe may be a just one. Please check it out and express if you agree. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

LDS section
Hello J, thank you for your recent edits on the discussion page for the LDS article. Upon further review I see no need for any pictures. Given an article devoted to Prop 8 and the very limited manner in which the article addresses this topic, I see no need for a picture. However, I do appreciate your participation. Duke has a history, but I will let you experience first hand. Compromise is not a strong suit for him. I doubt he knows you so you would be a good neutral party to continue participating. My comments, even when we agree, will only goad him on if history serves. -- Storm  Rider  20:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:My apologies?
I don't understand, you haven't done anything wrong. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * You have done the right thing by translating the article. Too many people hide behind false truth's and what we have done is provide the real truth which has been omitted by baised historians for too long. I am not going to put up with that users nonsense anymore. I am just waiting to see if Caribbean HQ and Cerejota will express themselves once more to put the matter to an end. Tony the Marine (talk) 06:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I want to apologize for my actions during the Puerto Rico Campaign situation. My intentions were to act as mediator and instead I became frustrated with Durero. I would be totally unfair if I do not give credit to his valid observations. Even though we at times got off the main topic which was the contents of the inbox, I believe that the final addition (caption) to the infobox is justifable and will help clear any misunderstandings. By Durero pointing this out in the first place, I think we will be able to aviod future edit warring on this particular topic in the future. Gracias a todos, Tony the Marine (talk) 20:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Bandera
Gracias por avisarme. Ya me he puesto a ello. --Durero (talk) 17:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Menudo dropped by label
With Charlie Walk the former president of Epic Records fired, the Menudo (band) group has been officially dropped by the label. Walk who tried to reinvent the group failed. The two singles "Lost" and "More Than Words" had only meger record sales. Sony BMG took the failed Menudo attempt out on Walk and did not renew his contractNY Post Article and dropped Menudo from its label effective Dec 2008

The story is verified through the NY Post link and also the www.epicrecords.com site shows Menudo removed from the roster of Artist plus Billboard magazine announced it.

If you disagree lets talk before removing the sourced information or place it for a vote dispute.

I wish you well and thanks for reading.--66.229.250.178 (talk) 00:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I am now under this account thanks.--APCEdits (talk) 01:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Puerto Rican citizenship
Wonderful and much needed article. I just wikified, but the last sentence "Certificates of Puerto Rican citizenship are issued ..." will need a citation. This is great because after it is done we wikilink to other articles and categories. What would be great is if we could upload images of the acts in question. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to share with you the following: It is in the Section VII of Foraker Act of 1900 where the creation of a Puerto Rican citizenship for the residents of the island is stated. This citizenship was reaffirmed by the United States Supreme Court in 1904 by its ruling in Gonzales v. Williams (Isabel Gonzalez one of my favorite people) which denied that Puerto Ricans were United States citizens and labeled them as noncitizen nationals. As I have always stated, the Jones Act of 1917, imposed United States citizenship upon the citizens of Puerto Rico, since the people of the island were not consulted nor asked if they wanted siad citizenship and the only reason that the U.S. implamented U.S. citizenship upon the people of Puerto Rico was to fill the military with manpowere upon the U.S. involovement in World War I. Puerto Rican citizenship was again reaffirmed on November 18, 1997, by the Puerto Rican Supreme Court through its ruling in Miriam J. Ramirez de Ferrer v. Juan Mari Bras. Mari Bras, however, through his renouncing of U.S. Citizenship, sought to redefine Section VII as a source of law that recognized a Puerto Rican nationality separate from that of the United States. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Pope John Paul II
A revert error from my side, thnx for fixing it. --> Halmstad,  Charla to moi  16:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Smiles!


Cerejota (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Carlos Vélez Rieckehoff
‎

Ever hear of Carlos Vélez Rieckehoff? not too many people have, but he stated before the U.S. Congress that the very seizure of Puerto Rico through the Treaty of Paris of 1898 was null, since Puerto Rico had already been granted autonomy from Spain. He compared the invasion of Puerto Rico to the attempt of Russia to take over Finland in the 19th century. He pointed out that an international conference examining the issue had determined that "the rights of a country to national liberty is free from war conquests and diplomatic treaties." Interesting person. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

PR citizenship
Here is a note that User:Pr4ever left in my talk page which my interest you:

"Several observations about this interesting subject. I don't think that Ferrer vs Mari Bras is the definitive last word on this subject. Days before that opinion was published, then Gov. Rosselló signed into law a bill introduced by then Sen. MacClintock that reaffirmed the domiciliary nature, under the U.S. Constitution, of the Puerto Rican citizenship. Although lack of knowledge of a law does not excuse one from complying with it, the truth is that the justices did not really have any knowledge of that new law as their opinions were being released. Thus, there is no reference to a law, that may very well dispose of the issue, in the Court's opinions in Ferrer vs Mari Bras. Now, the bill's author is the new Secretary of State and, within a few weeks, the Court's 3-1 PDP majority will, for the first time in history, become a 3-out-of-7 minority! According to a radio news story I heard, MacClintock has continued issuing PR citizenship certificates, but has delegated signing them to his Deputy Secretary (very much in keeping with MacClintock's diplomatic way of dealing with issues---fulfilling his legal obligations without violating his personal convictions!). If a test case were filed to enjoin him from issuing future certificates, with his law and with PDP'ers about to be in the minority on the Court, who knows what will happen! Pr4ever (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)" Tony the Marine (talk) 05:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 22:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; February 16, 2009


You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 06:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks


r ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Thanks for digging up those extra sources for Rare Disease Day. That helps a lot. If you have a moment, would you be able to help with adding the IntraMed source a bit to the second paragraph of the article (about the 2008 rare disease day), just because I don't read Spanish very well? r ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs 18:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, never mind, I have just tried adding it. But could you double-check my translations (of the article title and of the relevant quotes) when you have time? Thanks again, r  ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs 18:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

helpme I just received this email: "Someone from the IP address 67.163.188.156 requested that we send you a new login password for the English Wikipedia." Should I worry about this? --J.Mundo (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * nah, nothing they can do with it, all password emails go to you, worst they can do is send it a few more times-- Jac 16888 Talk 15:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Rare Disease Day


r ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Thank you for taking the time to dig up so many sources at the Rare Disease Day AfD. Your efforts are very helpful, and I will try to incorporate as many of the references as I can into the article soon. r ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs 15:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

no hay por que agradecer...
Be more patient, you are not alone... bullies have to be faced upfront. HAPPY EDITING!--Cerejota (talk) 19:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)