User talk:Mrtea/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Mrtea/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions; I hope you like it here and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:


 * If you haven't already, drop by the new user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages with  so others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Our policies, guidelines, and simplified ruleset
 * How to edit a page and write a great article
 * The Wikipedia tutorial and picture tutorial
 * The handy Manual of Style
 * And finally, remember to be bold in updating pages!

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian. Although we all make mistakes, please keep in mind what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

-- Sango  123  21:53, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)


 * Wow! Your work on that article was excellent! I made a few adjustments and removed the tag since you did such a nice job on it. I can move the page for you, if you explain your reasoning for the new title. Regards,  Sango  123  01:14, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

re: help desk question
Hi - You're quite welcome. I hope you like it here and continue editing. There seem to be an infinite number of things to do. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:38, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

HRPS
Hi,

Thanks for your advice. I've been a Wiki reader for a long time, but only started editing the other day. I'll definitely follow those guidelines next time.

As for the picture, I took it myself. I do believe it's the 2003 model, but I may be mistaken. I'm pretty sure we have 2005 Police Interceptors as well, but they don't look that much different to the naked eye. What newer models are you referring to? I'm very curious.

Let me know, I'll try to snag up some more pictures then.

Take care!

E. Peters 15:22, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: The Office (US)
Thanks for the compliment. I am always hesitant to make major changes, because I am unsure on their reception.

--vossman 20:24, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


 * In response to a note left on User talk:Vossman


 * You had me going there for sec; I doubt my reply was very helpful. We could make a   type comment for people. I approve of all the changes you've made, so you got my blessing.
 * --vossman 00:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Deletion process
You stated on Articles for deletion/Fred J. Abood Sr. that you were unfamiliar with the deletion process. If you are doing new page patrol, you should probably read Guide to deletion and Criteria for speedy deletion. Regards, howcheng   [ t • c • w •  e  ] 17:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

HRCA
Thanks for your work on the HRCA Blacknail 23:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Have you considered joining WikiProject_Ontario which I am soliciting help with? Blacknail 21:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

External links vs External link
I have to say that I wasn't aware there was a debate on this. I've seen plenty of edits changing a plural to a singular, but yours is the first I've seen going the other way. Needless to say, I tend towards the singular for a single link argument. Yes, I should archive my talk page. Never seem to get round to it. Cheers. -- Necrothesp 00:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Exit summary missing on non-minor edit
Thanks for the comments concerning a non-minor edit of mine that was missing a comment. I can't find it in my recent edit history. Can you give me a specific article? - Bevo 16:48, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem. Replied on your talk page. Mrtea (talk)
 * Regarding your comments about edit summaries for minor edits. Sometimes I see "sp" as the comment for simple spelling corrections, and I'll start adding "fmt" for minor spacing edits. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_summary_legend#Cleanup - Bevo 18:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

"link spam"
There is nothing wrong with adding a link to another site. The links I've been adding are not spam but helpful resources. Please use the talk page of the articles I've edited. Perl 04:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I would instead direct you to the article's talk page- especially the heading "External links - drawing the line". Your forum has ten posts. Your web site is certainly not a helpful resource. Familiarize yourself with WP:EL and stop adding it back into the article. It is considered vandalism. Mrtea (talk) 04:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok. But the other links I've added were to a high traffic website that I visit. Also, I've been an admin for wikipedia projects since before you joined wikipedia, so you don't need to direct me to the "welcome" page. Perl 04:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that- I was using the template which seems to be directed at newcomers. I was only referring to your The Office (US) and The Office edits (as mentioned on your talk page with the warning.) I'm not familiar with the other articles you've added links to so I'll let users with more expertise in those fields judge those. Even if you are an admin for another Wikimedia project you should certainly familiarize yourself with the policies here. Mrtea (talk) 04:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I should also apologize for the spam thing. It was very tempting to try to link to that site and I guess I wasn't thinking clearly. I have been away from wikipedia for a while and I should brush up on the policies. Perl 05:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Water under the bridge. Thanks for the apology and don't worry about it. I must apologize if I was little pompous myself :) See you around, Mrtea (talk) 05:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Mozart and the Whale
One point: yes, there's a way to verify that it's Jerry Newport- at least, I'll (rather, should. anyway, still, will) check before finishing this sentence, but I believe he's not that secretive about his e-mail address. Will get back to you. Schissel-nonLop! 14:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Unhappy
I am extremely upset that you have removed my post regarding my publications. As far as i am aware Wikipedia is free information and i was posting regarding a few of my works which are not very well known. It would be nice if you would refrain from removing them please. Sincerely Martin Rawcliffe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.240.229.66 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 21 January 2006
 * Hi Martin. Thank you for your contributions. You're right, Wikipedia is "free information" but we do have our limits. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Please read Notability. Let me know if you have any questions, Mrtea (talk) 20:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Chaaban.info
chaaban.info on motivation topic wasnt a spam !

its a plugin, free open source code , for wordpress that display motivational quotes!

correct your info be4 saying its a spam link .. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.246.64 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 21 January 2006
 * The Motivation article actually has nothing to do with motivational quotes. Your link wouldn't be useful to readers wanting external links regarding motivation quotes anyway. Please read External links for our policies. Mrtea (talk) 02:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help ... i was just not happy with the spam issue.. because i hate spam .. Thanks anyway . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.246.64 (talk • contribs) 10:18, 22 January 2006

i signed with my username ... sorry.

Sprouses' pic
I'm not so good at adding pics, so maybe u can help me. I add that pic with copyright notes. Isn't it fair use ? Also there's a tag at the bottom of the pic (website and don't remove this tag). I think it can be used in that way. Thx--Doctor01 12:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

wpspam invite
Hey there! I saw you reverting or removing linkspam. Thanks! If you're interested, come visit us in WikiProject Spam so we can work together in our efforts to clean spam from Wikipedia. --Winter 01:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Haha, thanks. I'm already signed up :) Mrtea (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey There Marc
Hey Marc. It's Anthony. Good to see you're working in part on an article about our high school. Laters. Codernaut 01:16, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Sprouse twins' page
Clean up and formatting don't mean loss of informations. I try to find as many info as it's possible. I mean, add informations is not spam. Pls if u want to change the page, change it better without losing info. That's wikipedia project. Message me if u got any problem.--Doctor01 14:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Grrrreat. I've replied on your talk page. Mrtea (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I replied too. --Doctor01 10:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

re: chuck norris corrections
Hi there...this is Ian from 4q.cc.

My intent was never to advertise or promote my site through Wikipedia. What's happened lately is that another page (chucknorrisfacts.com) has sprouted up and has just been copying and stealing my content without permission and because of this has received unwarranted attention. Check the WHOIS on it and then my own site, and hopefully you'll see that my efforts were not in an attempt to promote myself, but to properly inform people where this phenomenon started and continues. If for whatever reason improving the accuracy of Wikipedia is not one of your goals as a moderator, I would love to hear your reasoning as to why this is the case and I encourage you to send me an email at ian@4q.cc. Otherwise, I would appreciate it if the "chuck norris facts" and "chuck norris" articles were revised to reflect the correct information.

Thank you.

Ian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.27.148 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 26 January 2006
 * Hi there. I'm actually not a moderator of Wikipedia, just a contributor, like yourself. We all have certain guidelines to follow, including ones about external links, like External links. I do appreciate your concerns. I see you've raised your points on Talk:Chuck Norris which is the right thing to do. Like a user already stated, "While your site might be the original random fact generator, I don't think that the facts themselves are "owned" by anyone; it appears that they were a collaborative effort by anonymous and disparate individuals." It appears that even you, yourself has admitted that the phenomenon started on the somethingawful forums and not your site. We'll try to come to a concensus on the talk page of Chuck Norris. I've replied over there with some points. For now, and in the future though, don't add your links right into an article. If you operate a web site post the link on the talk page so other contributors can ethically determine if it should be listed in the article. (See WP:EL for more info.) Mrtea (talk) 07:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * It appears that the WHOIS "created date" of chucknorrisfacts.com may not be displayed properly. If you check the WHOIS of a "copycat" site (chucknorrisfacts.net), it shows a created date several weeks "earlier" than chucknorrisfacts.com. It doesn't seem logical that someone would register the .net over the .com address. It is possible the chucknorrisfacts.com address was transferred from another domain registrar and the date was "reset". There's discussion of this subject here  Hamilton burr 08:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Please note that my submission page mentions that all submissions become the intellectual property of my website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.16.27.148 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 26 January 2006


 * Okay. I can't do anything about someone stealing content from your web site. Contact the site's web host instead. Mrtea (talk) 02:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Dwight Schrute linx
1. I had not considered the offensive portion of the ytmnd.com link. 2. The offensive link has been removed. 3. You did not give an acceptable explanation why the other link isn't appropriate. 4. I do not operate any Web sites. 5. I had already been to the external links portion ofthe stylebook. 6. You're quite brash and uncaring in your talk page messages. BabuBhatt 01:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * My primary reason for removing the ytmnd link was not because it was "offensive". I was trying to get across the point that it was simply very unhelpful for the reader. I'm sorry you've taken messages not addressed to you the wrong way. No one else has seems to have taken my messages as brash- try to assume good faith. Mrtea (talk) 01:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC) PS: What messages are you referring to? (Just for my sake ;))

Beg to differ: "Dwight Kurt Schrute, played by Rainn Wilson, is a fictional character on the US television sitcom The Office. He is based on Gareth Keenan from the original BBC program, though the characters differ in several ways." BabuBhatt 01:16, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Why not add content instead of links? (We drive for print or DVD publication.) The site doesn't offer much quality information. I still object to its listing, but won't pursue its removal any more. Mrtea (talk) 01:26, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * To totally change tack on this thing, I was referring only to the tone of the message on my talk page, and after reading it again, feel it is not brash. I disagree that O-UK wasn't mentioned, since it was the lead of the article. Nonetheless, the site isn't helpful, I will agree. I don't know what "(We drive for print or DVD publication.)" means, even after visiting the link. BabuBhatt 01:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah right, I misunderstood you earlier then, sorry. You're right the UK version is mentioned, I guess I was focusing on the sections of the article. What I mean is that we should instead incorporate that web site's content, then cite it as the source, instead of just linking to it. If we managed to release a print or DVD publication of Wikipedia, the external links would be rather unhelpful. Essentially, I was trying to say we should strive for content over links. Mrtea (talk) 01:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

RE: Anti-recycling
Hi. You asked me Why don't people like recycling?" Honest question, this has always bugged me. I know. It was shocking to me as well at first, it's so ingrained in our culture.

The short answer is that recylcing itself is wasteful, and the modern recycling movement is based on bad research done 30 years ago. The anti-recycling argument revolves around the following ideas: - the chemicals and processes involved in recycling actually do more harm than good to the environment, - it actually costs taxpayers millions of dollars in subsidized funds to recycle (iow, it doesn't make money), - it's cheaper and cleaner to produce goods from new materials, - there is no shortage of landfills for our trash, - modern landfills utilize environmental planning/engineering that make landfills absolutely safe.

This is kind of summed up by the recycling Wiki, specifically this paragraph:

- Skeptics believe that, with the exception of aluminum cans, recycling is wasteful. In particular, the market for recycled materials is limited, and using recycled materials may be more expensive for manufacturers than new raw materials. However, recycling becomes relatively cheaper when externalities associated with raw material extraction and landfill (or incineration) are included, especially environmental and health effects. Recycling may still be socially efficient even when carried out at a financial loss - although an alternative to avoid this would be to tax raw material use appropriately so that prices fully reflect all the costs involved, instead of subsidising recycling. -

If you really want a crash course on the reasoning, there is an episode of Showtime's "Penn & Teller's Bullshit" on Recycling that does an excellent job of going over the history and facts. It's a fascinating, mind-blowing episode!

Chernicky 23:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Sprouses
Thanks for the heads up. So should I put in a "Biography" subsection with ==, and have "Early life"/"Career" with ===? I do know about citing sources (I recently cited the heck out of Amanda Bynes), the Sprouse page should have more citations eventually. JackO&#39;Lantern 20:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

ok, that's cool!
Hi. Although the content on Wiki was good, I felt it was lacking the content as to what "new users" would expect of this site, and took into concern the common questiosn they would ask. Instead of taking the time to re-iterate everything here that was there, I thought a simple link would do it. Sorry if you thought it was a problem. :)
 * Thanks for understanding. Another one of the reasons your site was removed was because it contained referral links. We've got some guidelines for external linking here. Still, you added the site in good faith and I hope you stick around to contribute to Wikipedia! Mrtea (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

External linking
[Heading added my Mrtea]

Thank you for volunteering to edit Wikipedia content.

I take exception however, to your deletions of my links on certain articles. In particular, you removed a link to a webpage on an article that I wrote for Wikipedia (RUOK). The particular webpage you removed is the authoritative page from which the Wikipedia article was written. You however, selectively, did not remove a link on this article from another commerce website.

I have been contributing original articles for the last few months and have found the linking policy to be very arbitrary. On some articles, there are numerous links to commercial websites, some of them are Fortune 100 companies. Other articles are monitored by individuals who remove ANY external links.

Perhaps Wikipedia would consider using the rel="nofollow" option to eliminate spammers who wish to use Wikipedia for website ranking, if that is your concern.

If your policy is absolutely no external links to commerce websites, then please enforce it universally.

I went ahead and removed the other commercial link on the RUOK article that I wrote to be consistent with your policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgillman (talk • contribs) 11:43, 22 March 2006


 * Spamming is about promoting your own site or a site you love, not about commercial sites at all. Links to commercial sites are often appropriate. Links to sites for the purpose of using Wikipedia to promote your site are not. Your edits are suspicious because I have a feeling I could easily get a hold of you by calling "(602) XXX 5968 for a FREE analysis and quote". (The similar phone number that is mentioned on all the web sites you've been adding.)


 * Also on second look, RUOK doesn't actually appear to be notable enough to merit it's own article. In the article you wrote (with no sources) it claims it "is the common name for a service offered by many local communities". However it appears to be a registered trademark, that doesn't turn up many related results on Google.


 * I did not have much time, and wanted to remove as many commercial web sites you had added to those related articles. It was my mistake not to check RUOK.com to check if it was the official site and not a commercial one. I do not believe rel="nofollow" would solve many of our problems, but you might want to ask for more information at the village pump. Sorry I can't help you out there.


 * I'm not sure I quite understand about the Fortune 100 company spam, could you offer some examples. It would appear you might not be familiar with External links. The policy actually does not state that links to commerce websites are not allowed.


 * Let me know if you have any other concerns and let me know about that Fortune 100 thing. Mrtea (talk) 01:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Edits To Pgillman Entries
Thanks for your input. You removed all of external links to the article entitled "Automatic Call Distributors". Included in those links were Avaya, Genesys, and other large US public corporations who were listed as suppliers of this technology. Avaya is a Fortune 500 company (correcting my initial statement) with over $5B in annual sales.

RUOK is a common term for services provided by many small communities in the US for ensuring senior citizen well-being. If you search using Google, you will find dozens of communities who provide this service and who use the term RUOK in the first several pages of search results. RUOK is a generic term used by several companies who provide the technology that supports this service.

Yes, I am affiliated with the company that you can contact at that phone number. The field of experience of this organization (among others) is emergency communications. We provide this to communities, churches, schools, and corporations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgillman (talk • contribs) 22:47, 22 March 2006


 * Wikipedia is not not a mirror or a repository of links. It is not a B2B directory or intended for users looking for suppliers. We strive for content- not external links. Looking at the article, I see no pressing reason that manufacturers or distributors should be externally linked (especially not a list of 5 or 6 different companies.) From What Wikipedia is not, "There is nothing wrong with adding a list of content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia."


 * I encourage you to comment on Articles for deletion/RUOK. Please don't list sites you are affiliated with. If it is relevant and informative, mention it as a possible link on the talk page and wait for someone else to include it, or include the information directly in the article. Mrtea (talk) 03:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Also please sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~ ). Mrtea (talk)


 * Here are other articles that mirror the "Automatic Call Distributor" example I gave above that contain many links to commercial websites. They include IBM, Microsoft, etc (Fortune 100 companies) as well as small to medium companies.  I have only looked at a few technology terms that I'm familiar with and there appears to be an inconsistency in Wikipedia enforcement (some include commercial company links, some don't).  I'm not trying to be argumentative, just pointing out that in the 2 months I've been on Wikipedia, the application of Wikipedia standards appears to depend upon who is monitoring each area.  Here are two examples: "Speech Recognition", "mainframes".


 * Pgillman (talk) pgaz 13:24, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Again, I have to encourage you to read External links. "Articles about any organization, person, or other entity should link to their official site." A link to Microsoft.com in Microsoft isn't really controversial. Keep in mind (most of us) are human, and Wikipedia has more than one million articles. We can't possibly watch them all. The fact that we haven't gotten around to every article, yet, does not mean that the sites belong in Wikipeda. If you catch some spam (click that link to learn what spam is first,) then certainly remove it. I really encourage you to read our welcome guide. It has everything you need to know. For example to link to internal articles, simply type two square brackets around them.


 * If you still need more help after following those links, or you need more clarification, I would be glad to answer your questions. Mrtea (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know
I replied back to your V for Vendetta comments on my talk page. What is the proper etiquette on Wikipedia? When someone writes something to you on your page, do you reply on your page on the person's page? (I'm new).

--P-Chan 07:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * (Replied on user's talk page Mrtea (talk) )


 * Hello Mrtea. I can't seem to find out how to reverse a person's post all at once.  For example, if an individual posted many changes all across an article in one single post, and you want to reverse them all in one quick command, is there a way to do this?  I have a feeling there is a way.  Thanks for your time Mrtea!

--P-Chan 05:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Notredame.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Notredame.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 18:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * (Opted for speedy delete. Mrtea (talk) )

Template:to do
Reply to your comment on my talk page : I was recently looking into the to-do template and priorities and whatnot, when I noticed you had added the empty template to a few talk pages and left them there. I removed the ones I came across but was wondering if there was a reason for adding them? Maybe you were planning to come back to add content but you forgot? Regards, Mrtea (talk) 08:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * If you check the history, I was actually replacing the old todo3 and todo9 templates (and their siblings) with todo priority. Whether the todo list actually had any entries was not within my remit: this is entirely up to the active contributors to any given page. At some stage, my intention is to replace all instances of todo with todo priority, and persuade somebody to create a bot which will update the priority according to the guidelines at Category:To do, by priority. Thank you for your contributions, which I note include creating a new todo list using my template, which is somewhat gratifying :-). HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 09:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the revision.
Hello,

Thank you for updating the House party entry. The thought had crossed my mind that the manner in which I introduced the House Party entry was tacky, but I was not privy to any better solution. Hopefully, I will remember to use the template you added in the future when there is such a need.

Cheers. Folajimi 12:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Re message for useful information
MrTea,

Thank you for your feedback. My apologies for mis-interpreting the guidelines. I assumed that adding a link to show the local restaurants for each area would be of use to Wikipedia users.

It's a great site, and one I will be using again and again.

Thanks and Regards Niall

Straw Poll on Charities
Hello Mrtea, since you've recently edited on the article Charities accused of ties to terrorism, I thought I'd invite you to express your opinion on a straw poll for an article title change now setup over at Talk:Charities_accused_of_ties_to_terrorism. Thanks! Netscott 18:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm...
Hmmm.. I think we are bumping into each other while editing the Shedden massacre article :-( - Abscissa 23:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry! :) I think I'm finished now. Just wanted to clean up the intro. See Help:Edit conflict. If you're making big changes on an active article, you might want to use the tag! Mrtea (talk) 23:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No prob, just hadn't used the ref tags before, so I wanted to make sure I got it right; they were pretty minor changes. I think it's all good now. :-) - Abscissa 23:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Photos in Clown Article
All of the photos that I've added to the clown article are old publicity photos dating back to the 30s and 40s which I understood as being alright to use.

Is that inappropriate use?

~Cashincomedy
 * Before you upload images you are sent to this page. Read it hroughouly because most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not appropriate for uploading to Wikipedia. "Almost all work published after 1922 may have an active copyright". You should read through Image use policy then decide what to do with the images. Are they all really fair use? Dont' forget to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). Mrtea (talk) 15:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

hi
thanks Ω Anonymous anonymous Ψ: &#39;&#39;Have A Nice Day&#39;&#39; 23:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

re Image:Kellestine2clean.jpg
I was across the street with a long lense ; ) Mike McGregor (Can) 03:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

toothpaste for dinner userbox
The info box is inspired by this comic, one of the first "toothpaste" comics and also how the website got its name. The userbox is just a humorous homage to the webcomic site (I categorized it with the "all your base are belong to us" and "chuck norris" userboxes). As for the ID box, I tried to make a face that resembles a typical toothpaste character, with the lopsided eyes (haha). However, I'd like it to be a real picture of one of the characters, so if you could get permission to upload a picture of just a character's face and then put it in the template that would rock. Anyway, glad to see a fellow "toothpaste" fan, and be sure to put the userbox on your userpage! :-) -EdGl 16:13, 23 April 2006 (UTC) Bold text