User talk:Wjhonson/Archive9

Frederick Glaysher
Another editor has added the  template to the article Frederick Glaysher, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 03:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Philip H. Farber
An article that you have been involved in editing, Philip H. Farber, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Philip H. Farber (2nd nomination). Thank you.

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

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

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Genie
Hi. I checked out the ongoing discussion and I still feel that it's fairly clear that the Wikipedia biography of living persons and privacy of names applies to this particular instance in the manner that For An Angel suggests. The Googleable current information online does not use her name. I'm happy to participate in some sort of mediation on this point if you'd like to bring this higher up the Wikipedia food chain, but I still feel that the policy leans to the side of keeping her name out. Jessamyn (talk) 14:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Genie
That is certainly something to consider (and you continue to do excellent work with your site, by the way). I'm going to suggest we seek additional input on this matter at the talk page as to whether or not we should keep the name.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your pro-active approach. Wjhonson (talk) 20:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Genie 3
Hello Wjhonson:

I have replied on my talk page to the note you left there. Wanderer57 (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Genie
Hello Wjhonson:

There has now been considerable discussion in talk:Genie about including the real name of this person in the article. I count seven editors who say the name should be left out, and one who thinks it should be included. I believe that by Wikipedia standards this is a good consensus to leave it out.

There is no necessity for you to agree with the other seven, but my understanding is that Wikipedia practise is to respect the consensus. Do you not agree that there is a consensus?

I ask you to reconsider your changes this evening to the article and the talk page in the light of the consensus to leave out the name.

Thank you, Wanderer57 (talk) 05:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Ruth White
Most likely. T'would help if editors would read the article before posting changes, ¿no?. Might help them hit the right century on a topic. Ciao, MARussellPESE (talk) 17:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

re: BLP
A prior RfD discussion had already concluded differently. You can object to the original decision. I implemented it under speedy-clause G4. If you want to appeal the original decision, I recommend taking it up at WP:DRV. Rossami (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * See line J.32 of List of administrators/G-O. You could have known that because he actually deleted the page as a result of that discussion.  If you think there were process problems with the discussion, the appropriate remedy is through WP:DRV, not recreation.  Rossami (talk) 16:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #CC9966; text-align: center;" |The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter  {| The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XV: June 11, 2008
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * colspan="2" valign="middle" style="width: 60%; border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; background: #ffe4e1" |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |

Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! I'm not one to be writing newsletters, but I miss our cruise director, Miss Julie, and our project is drifting along with a few leaking plugs in the bottom of the boat. Hey, it happens. Every group we join goes through changes. If Wikipedia weren't so interesting it wouldn't also be so frustrating sometimes. And vice versa. More than one Wikiproject has tumbleweeds blowing through it, but this is one that can't afford to let that happen. Even if you pop in to the talk page of the project, you can let us know you're still around.

{| style="font-size: 90%;"
 * valign="top" |
 * valign="top" |

WP:LGBT's Role in HIV / AIDS articles
It wouldn't be a proper gay community without a li'l bit o' drama! That's right. If we aren't arguing about something, then we should be asking if we're still queer. Maybe that's for the best, since we know we're still kicking. Our most recent topic is how far the role of our project should go in dipping our toes into HIV/AIDS articles. The main AIDS article was delisted as a Featured Article last month, sadly. (Sending a swift kick to WP:Medicine.) A spirited discussion is available for your entertainment on the WP:LGBT talk page about just how much of HIV and AIDS should we take on. As ever, we'll take your opinions under advisement. We're going to have to, because it doesn't seem to have been settled.

Is Pride POV?
We have a pretty cool sidebar that identifies core LGBT articles. Its symbol is the iconic gay pride flag, much like other Wikiprojects have iconic symbols denoting the topic is a core subject in a series of articles. However, a question recently arose asking if the symbol itself is not neutral. Should a pride flag show up at the top of the article on Conversion therapy? How else would anyone know the article is about queer issues? Is there another symbol that is as widely recognized and that includes all our many splintered facets? At what point do we stop asking ourselves all these questions and just go have a mint julep on the verandah and stop caring?

Harvey Milk and Jim Jones
For the love of all that is holy, no Kool Aid jokes. However, an editor involved in pioneering San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's article has included a section about the late supervisor's support of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. While it may be accurate, there is a Request for Comment regarding how much emphasis the section places on Milk's support in light of his overall political influence on the city, and indeed the rest of the United States. Milk's article is a sad one in more ways than one. It lacks the detail and heart that honors its subject. Anyone want to do a barter with me? I'll bring Harvey Milk to featured status (give me a month or two so I can read stuff), if you do something of equal value to WP:LGBT?? Make me an offer...

Queer Studies is offensive!
The established branch of study known as Queer studies was brought up as an category for deletion because an editor was offended by the use of "queer" in the title. It was overwhelmingly rejected mostly by the usernames I see here on our Wikiproject page. (A clue that I know you are out there, hiding...biding your time...) So, I wish I could congratulate you, but now I'm all confused by my sympathy for the editor who was offended. So, if you're reading this, Moni has a short memory and can't remember your username. Don't be put off by our demonstrative pushiness. Join us. We can always use involved editors.

Lambda Literary Awards
What can you do to help the project out? Be a wiki-fairy, on many levels. There are all kinds of articles that need help. Why, just this morning I removed those ugly wikify and cleanup tags from four articles at random. If you can put  around stuff, you can clean up articles. There's a list of articles that need attention at the top of the WP:LGBT talk page. Or you can start with the Lambda Literary Awards, where the goddess of my altar received a pioneering award, and was "reduced to rubble" by Katherine V. Forrest's wonderful speech. The 20th ceremony of the Lambda Literary Awards, which celebrates LGBT literature, took place in West Hollywood on May 29th. The page needs to be updated with the new winners, to be found on the official website.


 * valign="top" |

Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Arthur C. Clarke and Bernard Montgomery
Why on earth would someone want to delete material about homosexuality? 'Tis truly a mystery. But these embattled articles have some random evil gnomes removing information that places these folks under our queer umbrella. Help us keep an eye out for the deletions. Take a peek at the articles, familiarize yourselves with the info, and be handy with the undo function in the article history. If tempers flare, take it to the Hall monitors and let them sort it out. Best solution is to make sure your sources are immaculate.

This month's Wiki stars
This is what I get for opening my big fat mouth and suggesting the newsletter should be revived. Here I am writing it. So, to pat self on back (*cough*) Mulholland Dr. became a featured article in May. This is A Good Thing since it is my personal declaration that there is no such thing as lesbian porn. I don't care what Benjiboi says about the video collection at goodvibes. Instead, we have hot women who connect on a deep, personal, soul-touching level, so this film should qualify as some of the skankiest porn available for lesbians. Plus, it's completely confusing and surreal! D'you think Laura Harring would care that the article is featured? I don't think so either... (Call me, Laura!)

Compulsive hoarding of templates
Once I saw a harrowing episode of Animal Planet's Animal Cops where this guy had, like, 250 cats in his house and it freaked me right out. I'm drawing a parallel between 250 cats and, well...three, really, templates in articles involving LGBT issues. Can we stick to one, maybe? In the aforementioned Harvey Milk's article there's a core LGBT template, a link to the LGBT portal, and a sidebar for LGBT rights. Jiminy! You'd think we weren't the folk to set industrial grey carpeting and track lighting in vogue. An LGBT footer was designed to link to articles of interest that aren't the aforementioned core articles. What do you think, can we have either an LGBT template for core articles, a footer for LGBT articles that are high profile but not core, or an LGBT rights template? As ever, anything's up for discussion on the WP:LGBT talk page.

The Violet Quill and magazines
Zigzig20s suggests we create an article on The Violet Quill, as it seems such a milestone in the advancement of gay/queer literature. Members of the Quill all have pages of their own (Edmund White, Christopher Cox, Robert Ferro, Michael Grumley, Andrew Holleran, Felice Picano, and George Whitmore). We need to find more info on the Quill per se to reference the page that we create. Perhaps Google Books - and libraries? - can help.

A number of magazines also need articles, perhaps most notably QW, LGNY, and Lesbian Feminist Liberation.

Mom's nagging for Pride Month
It's June, Pride month. Wear sunscreen, stay hydrated, get a designated driver, then go half-dressed in the streets find a girlfriend or boyfriend, or some homo who's standing there looking lonely and kiss 'em up real good. Remember, it all started 39 years ago when a bunch of drag queens just got fed the f*ck up by the cops raiding the bar and dragging them all out to the pokey again. Rock on, queens! Enjoy your celebrations. My town's is in October, and 200 people attend. I miss Denver.

Fresh faces to brighten our pages
Hey, I've seen you around! Sorry there seem to be so many—it's been a while. But we welcome you all: Cheezisyum21, Taineyah, Dustihowe, Avesta69, RachelSummers77, Vivekgopinathan, AMK1211, Staffwaterboy, Ted Ted, Joe5150, Leahtwosaints, Robapalooza, Arthomure, Confusionball, Affinity likely, PrinceOfCanada, Yobmod, Npd2983, Neagley, Bvlax2005, Bvlax2005, Rhullsf, Textorus, Kieran.casey, Tyciol, Meojive, Sappho'd, Bookkeeperoftheoccult,  Gaywarrior, Aujourd'hui, maman est morte, and Balin42632003.

It looks like we've picked up a lot of talent lately. We have no doubt you'll be making your indelible mark on LGBT knowledge as we know it, here at Wikipedia.

- In the immortal words of Miss Julie, "May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon."
 * }

We miss you, Miss Julie, as well as all the others who have graced our project and are on wiki-breaks or just got fed up with all the nuttiness and went to live their lives. Get your stupid houses built and hurry up and come back. --Moni3 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC) To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * }
 * }

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Solomon Trujillo‎
.. suffice it to say, they weren't "juvenile insults" at all. Juvenile insults, as a rule, don't get oversighted - A l is o n  ❤ 18:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Ethics/User:Wjhonson
If you do not want the page Wikipedia:Ethics/User:Wjhonson, you can ask for it to be speedy deleted as a test page. Bebestbe (talk) 23:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

What's up?
Per your suggestion I've enable an email account, I don't check it so ping my talk page if you send something. Banje boi 19:10, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  13:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Richer
On the mailing list you appeared to say that we didn't have an article on Richer of Reims, so you'd written one. I agree on the first point, we don't, strangely enough, but I can't find any sign of the new article. As for the DNB/ODNB test you proposed, it's not even worth starting it. We don't have all of the articles from either the original DNB or the newer ODNB. I'd guess around half, and two thirds at most. Anyway, can you have a look and see where Richer went? If he's escaped, I can cobble something up easily enough. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I started one on my own site at http://www.countyhistorian.com. I just wrote up a few bits, you can see them here Richer of Rheims Wjhonson (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Makes sense now. Regards, Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Dorothy Hardy
I'm having trouble finding the year of death of the English illustrator Miss M. Dorothy Hardy, fl. 1891 - 1925 (prior discussion here). Is this something you could, in principle, find out? Haukur (talk) 15:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Sample here: Image:Odin and Fenris.jpg Haukur (talk) 10:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry I've been doing a bunch of research the last few days. Illustrators are difficult in general to research.  And a name like Dorothy Hardy is just common enough to confuse her with someone else of that same name.  Illustrators also don't tend to make the newspaper articles unless they are also famous artists of other kinds of art as well.  It would probably take a great deal of work to pin her down.  I mean on the order of perhaps ten to thirty hours of work.  Of course if she had any close friends, with happen to have left diaries or autobiographies, that would help.  Wjhonson (talk) 05:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Never mind, then. Haukur (talk) 06:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Shawn Hornbeck
You may remember that during the DRV discussion last year (see the DRV log for May 28, 2007), you and other editors had started to change my mind concerning the BLP rationale for my deletion of Shawn Hornbeck. During the past year, it has become even more apparent that this individual is voluntarily holding himself out as a spokesperson for victims of crimes like the one he was subjected to, and is granting interviews etc. for that purpose, at an age where he is clear that this has been his own personal choice. A full-page article in today's New York Post is only the most recent incident in which I have seen attention drawn to this individual in an article obviously published with the full cooperation of the subject himself.

As such, it is now even more clear that, unlike the other person who was the subject of the companion deletion, there is no longer a viable BLP reason for this deletion, even under my own fairly conservative view of how policies should address articles concerning minors who are crime victims.

Please take this as consent by me as the deleting administrator to the re-creation of Shawn Hornbeck. Any administrator may feel free to unsalt or to provide a copy of the deleted material for use for this purpose. If process such as a DRV needs to be opened, please feel free to link here. Note that my personal opinion, for what it is worth, remains strongly that the name of the other victim, who was missing for a far shorter time and who has not voluntarily sought any comparable publicity, still should not be publicized. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Heritage Network Wiki has been spammed
I've just visited the above site and found that some of the pages including the Main Page and the Talk:Main Page have been spammed, so I thought you'd like to clean it up. Kathleen.wright5 00:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I know they've been spammed, but apparently the owners of that wiki are dead or something.  Who knows.  I just use it sometimes as a white-board now. Wjhonson (talk) 06:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

William Willoughby, 3rd Baron Willoughby of Parham
Thanks for your attention here William Willoughby, 3rd Baron Willoughby of Parham. One reference is indeed as you indicate a personal site with no real provenance; your astute recognition is well received. The other I agree is simply a title page that requires input, however, I would really like to continue to use this source if only I could get it to function like some others, for example John Sackville, Esq.. For some reason, however, the example given seems to be an anomaly. Again thanks for your attention and input which I am certain to value in the future. Daytrivia (talk) 02:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Go to my jump page here "Sources" on CountyHistorian.com and you will find a great number of printed sources on the British Peerage that would be acceptable. Some of these are free on Google Books, such as Burke's Peerage.  Be sure to cite to the page number where you find the relevant factoids.  Thanks! Wjhonson (talk) 02:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Outstanding. Many many thanks. What a page!!! Daytrivia (talk) 03:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hi! Please note that I have filed a request for appeal here. Comments welcome! Best regards PHG (talk) 16:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Maulana/Miller as a source in Baha'i articles
I wanted to open this up here rather than on a dozen or more pages at once. That would be underhanded as well as a bitch to follow.

One of the sources used in the Baha'i biographical & history articles, such as Mírzá Muhammad `Alí, is this one from Maulana Muhammad Ali. Another is W.M. Miller's book.

The problem with the Maulana book is that it's a self-published source (see the title page on the pdf) used in articles not about itself. I'm looking specifically at para 2 of the policy ("Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable …"). Maulana doesn't get over this bar. To my knowledge nobody (MacEoin, Cole, Smith, etc.) uses him as a source. The Encyclopedia Iranica articles significantly do not cite him as a source, which is what this paragraph from the policy addresses.

Miller's book should be viewed similarly as it has the same flaws. Outside of Christian apologia, this book isn't cited by any third-party sources.

I think these do belong in their respective authors' bio pages, but I think that their self-published status is a fatal flaw in their inclusion elsewhere. ("For this reason, self-published books, … and similar sources are largely not acceptable to cite in Wikipedia.")

MARussellPESE (talk) 18:25, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/PHG
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/PHG/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/PHG/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 23:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Requests_for_arbitration
Hi, I've initiated a request for amendment in an arbitration case where you were a named party. You may wish to comment. Best regards, Durova Charge! 06:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine motion passed
The Committee's decision in this case and the preexisting community ban of are modified solely to the extent that Bluemarine is unblocked for the limited purpose of his making contributions related to increasing the accessibility of Wikipedia to users with handicapping conditions. This includes uploading encyclopedic audio files, formatting audio file templates, and captioning those audio files, as well as editing his userpage and talkpage, all under the mentorship of. Except as expressly provided in this motion, the ban on editing by Bluemarine remains in effect. If Bluemarine violates the terms of his limited unblock, or makes any comment reasonably regarded as harassing or a personal attack, he may be reblocked for an appropriate period of time by any uninvolved administrator. If Bluemarine complies with these conditions for a period of 60 days, a request for further modification of his ban may be submitted.

For the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 09:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

An article you edit is now up for deletion
RE: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Kmweber/Servantship Reform

Thank you. travb (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

RFC at WP:NOR-notice
A concern was raised that the clause, "a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge" conflicts with WP:NPOV by placing a higher duty of care with primary sourced claims than secondary or tertiary sourced claims. An RFC has been initiated to stimulate wider input on the issue. Professor marginalia (talk) 18:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney
Yeah... unfortunately, it is his association with the fringe theories that makes him notable in the first place... Without the fringe stuff, he is just another non-notable dead Scottish Earl. This is a common problem with the articles on all of the Sinclair family... the entire family has become closely associated with various fringe theories concerning the Templars, the Freemasons, and Roslyn Chapel. As soon as some new fringe theory is invented, someone ties a Sinclair to it. I completely agree about Robert Lomas being unreliable. I have attempted to mention that many consider his work to be "pseudohistory" at the articles on his books ... and even to clearly label him as a "pseudohistorian" at his article, but have met with resistance (I suspect that his publisher has PR people watching these articles). Blueboar (talk) 18:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/PHG
The above-linked Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published.

PHG's mentorship and sourcing arrangement is both revised and extended; the full list of new conditions are available by clicking this link. Furthermore, the original topic ban on editing articles related to medieval or ancient history has been rescinded. PHG is prohibited from editing articles relating to the Mongol Empire, the Crusades, intersections between Crusader states and the Mongol Empire, and Hellenistic India&mdash;all broadly defined. This topic ban will last for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion.

Any particular article may be added or removed from PHG's editing restriction at the discretion of his mentor; publicly logged to prevent confusion of the restriction's coverage. The mentor is encouraged to be responsive to feedback from editors in making and reconsidering such actions. Furthermore, the Committee noted that PHG has complied with the Committee's restrictions over the past ten months, and that PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. PHG should be permitted and encouraged by other editors to write well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons, and to build trust with the community.

For the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 22:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to Meetup/Seattle6, a focus group
Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington (Seattle campus), and my group is reaching out to Wikipedians in the Puget Sound area. We're hosting a focus group designed to gather information on what Wikipedians would like to know about each other when interacting on Wikipedia. Our end goal is to create an embedded application that helps people quickly know more about others' history and activity on Wikipedia, and we feel our design will be much more useful if it's based on insights of users like you.

I'm hoping that the chance to help out local researchers, to engage in lively face-to-face discussion with other Seattle Wikipedians, and to contribute to Wikipedia in a new way will entice you to join us. The session lasts 2 hours and snacks are provided. Sessions will be held on UW Seattle campus - directions will be sent after registration. Your contribution will be greatly appreciated!

Willing and able to help us out? RSVP here. Want to know more? Visit our user talk page. Please help us contact other local Wikipedians, too! Commprac01 (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  17:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Message from Patrick Guinness
I don't know how an editor is addressed, but a friend has (amusedly) pointed out my wikipedia page and your comment on the talk page. For the record, a) Kingdom of Jerusalem: I am the senior descendant via the Urach-Württemberg line, most of which is French, as it has run conveniently by male and female descent. That is all we claim. It is not fluffery to me, and in these egalitarian times I shouldn't feel more or less "well placed" than anyone else. But, in practical terms, I believe the Kingdom pertained only to its Latin subjects and I don't think there are any there now. b) Lithuania was an invitation made and withdrawn in 1918 and none of my von Urach cousins maintain a claim. c) The claim to Monaco was assigned to French cousins in 1924, in terms of sovereignty, and again nobody in the family claims more than that we are the senior legitimate-by-marriage descent of Florestan I. If you want to discuss this further, put your email address here and I will reply to it.

Sacred prostitution
I've reverted the edits you've just made to Sacred prostitution, because I don't think any of them are helpful or appropriate. If you do feel that they are, please can we discuss them first on the talk page. Jheald (talk) 09:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)