Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Edward Drinker Cope/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 23:20, 10 January 2010.

Edward Drinker Cope

 * Nominator(s): Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 19:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Imagine, if you will, a time when white men with lots of money and facial hair traveled the country and ruined their health, all for the love of some old rocks? Such was the life of Edward Drinker Cope, a brilliant and occasionally arrogant man of science who discovered literally thousands of new species. His personal feud with one Othniel Charles Marsh resulted in the greatest expansion of American paleontology ever: the entire United States wasn't big enough for the two of them. Read on, chaps. The article recently went through a pretty thorough peer review, and I believe it meets criteria. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 19:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments --an odd name 20:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No dab links or dead external links, and ref dates look consistent. Cool.
 * Alt text looks good. Given the length of some of them, I think the text of the handwriting with the whale could be added to its alt (see WP:ALT).
 * I've added to the alt text of the handwriting with the actual words per WP:ALT. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 17:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment regarding File:Joda canidae cope1884.jpg: copyright term of p.m.a. +70 is for unpublished works. As this is a published work, it should be using a publication-based license tag (e.g. PD-US).  Эlcobbola  talk 23:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed, sorry, can't believe I missed that one. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 17:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ts ts. Von Dir bin ich so enttäuscht, Herr Fuchs. :)  Эlcobbola  talk 19:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

 Oppose Support I've made a handful of changes to the prose to make it a bit more readable; they should probably be checked to ensure I haven't changed any meanings or misunderstood anything. All in all it's an interesting article, but it needs some work on the prose, the structure, and in some places perhaps a little more detail. Nev1 (talk) 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * "Cope's financial fortunes soured after failed mining ventures in the 1880s, and was forced to sell off much of his fossil collection": awkward phrasing, it sounds like Cope sold his fossils because he was doing well financially.
 * The sentence still reads strangely, I think the problem is with the word "soared". How about something like "In the 1880s Cope invested in mining to support his work. Though initially profitable, the mines stopped producing in 1886 and Cope was forced to sell off much of his fossil collection"? It's a bit clunkier, but I think clearer. Nev1 (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The word in question is "soured", not "soared". Is the issue just a misread, mayhaps? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 20:45, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I could have sworn that said "soared" last time I looked. Long day. Oh well it's not the first time I've made a fool of myself and won't be the last :-) Nev1 (talk) 20:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * On the second occurrence of "Society of Friends" it is mentioned in parenthesis that it is associated with the Quakers; this should be done on the first occurrence.
 * It might be worth using Template:Inflation for the monetary figures to give the reader a rough idea of how much it would be today.
 * "but in letters to his father later on in the war": what war? This comes out of nowhere.
 * "Edward considered working in the South to assist freed African-Americans" is this the American south or south Europe? It's not clear especially given that the title of the section is European travels
 * When letters are burned, the implication is that they no longer exist so "Many of Edward's journals and letters from the time period do not exist, for he burned them upon his return from his European" could be simplified to "Edward burned many of his journals and letters from the time period upon his return from his European". Also what does "the time period" refer to? Just his travels through Europe? Would it make more sense to put this sentence at the end of the section as a way of rounding it off rather than at the start of the second paragraph? As it is, the narrative jumps around a bit. The same is true for much of the section as after Cole burns his journals at the end of his travels we are told of the possible reasons he left.
 * "Though Marsh had two university degrees in comparison to Edward's lack of formal schooling past sixteen, Edward at the age of twenty-three had published 37 scientific papers in comparison to Marsh's two published works" a bit long-winded and there's some repetition.
 * When it is mentioned that Marsh and Cope initially seemed to be friends, it might be worth reminding the reader that they would later become rivals.
 * I think the reader is left wondering for too long how the "feud" originated, especially since it is mentioned that Marsh tried to damage Cope's reputation before their disagreement is mentioned or even explained. The implication of mentioning Cope's prolific output (especially when comparing it to that of Marsh) is that it was professional jealousy, and I was surprised to learn that it was because Marsh rubbished Cope.
 * It is a tricky situation to deal with, perhaps a line could be added explaining that the rivalry stemmed from Marsh showing Cope up one time, but I'll defer to your judgement.


 * When Marsh is mentioned I think it would be helpful to explain why his friendship with Cope is important. What was he studying at university, would he later become a prominent palaeontologist?
 * It feels like in places there are details missing, for example why did Cole stop his cave visits? Was it because he no longer had time or did something in particular put Cope off? Oh well, if it’s not explained nothing more can be said about it. Nev1 (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Could you explain what he was looking for when "In the autumn of 1871 Cope headed farther west to the fossil fields of Kansas", or was it simply any fossils he could find?
 * "he maintained this pattern from 1871-1879": including the break downs from exhaustion? This could do with a little more explanation (even just something along the lines of "he ventured into the desert every summer and wrote up his findings in the winter from 1871 to 1879").
 * A note about why Thomas Henry Huxley is significant would be useful; it could be as little as saying "…little impact on anyone save palaeontologist Thomas Henry Huxley" so readers know he was relevant.
 * "Cope's relations with Marsh turned into a competition for bones between the two, known today as the Bone Wars": repetition of "bone", would "fossil" suffice on the first occurrence? Of course, fossils doesn't refer exclusively to bones, so I don't object too much to this repetition.
 * "While Lakes sent Marsh some 1,500 pounds of bone, he also sent Cope some of his found specimens": "some of his found specimens" is awkward.
 * "one of the most recognizable dinosaur recreations of the time period": awkward phrasing again, is "period" necessary?
 * The last sentence of the Bone Wars section seems tagged on as an afterthought, can it be linked back to Marsh's position as chief palaeontologist?
 * "[Marsh's] position at Yale meant he had guaranteed access…": what position at Yale? This is the first time it is mentioned.
 * Unless it was proven, I'd recommend adding "alleged" before misallocation to the following: "No congressional hearing was created to investigate the misallocation of funds".
 * Was Marsh removed from his position with the Survey as a result of Cope's actions or for some other reason?
 * "[Cope's] wife cared for him when she herself was not ill": did she return to be with Cope or did he go to here? Was she often ill? Nev1 (talk) 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for the review. I believe I have addressed most of your points above, adding bits to clarify and whatnot. I've rearranged the European travels section to two paragraphs, hopefully the flow is more logical and clear now. I've also tried to elaborate on some of the questions you had; as to why he never went cave-trekking again, Osborn only mentions it and doesn't give any clues; I suspect it's simply because Cope's attentions wavered, but there's no elaboration either way. As to the mentions of Marsh... they really can't be crammed in elsewhere, but I think it's still important to have them outside the Bone Wars section (because the Bone Wars really focuses on 1877-1892, although the wider feud lasted until the death of Cope.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 22:37, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, it looks like you got everything. The only outstanding issue is the first point, but it's pretty minor so I'm switching to support. Nev1 (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * What makes http://dml.cmnh.org/1994Oct/msg00196.html a reliable source?
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I've replaced with citation to original AP story. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 19:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the Belladonna dab  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  11:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Well-written, meets all the criteria, I have no issues that haven't already been resolved.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  11:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I'll do a check on 1b and 1c. Am wondering why the following sources are not mentioned in the article. Sasata (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Jane P. Davidson. "Edward Drinker Cope, Professor Paleozoic and "Buffalo Land"". Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science (1903-), Vol. 106, No. 3/4 (Autumn, 2003), pp. 177-191
 * Jane P. Davidson. "Bonehead Mistakes: The Background in Scientific Literature and Illustrations for Edward Drinker Cope's First Restoration of Elasmosaurus platyurus." Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Vol. 152, (Oct. 14, 2002), pp. 215-240
 * Theodore Gill. "Edward Drinker Cope, Naturalist-A Chapter in the History of Science".The American Naturalist, Vol. 31, No. 370 (Oct., 1897), pp. 831-863
 * Peter J. Bowler. "Edward Drinker Cope and the Changing Structure of Evolutionary Theory" Isis, Vol. 68, No. 2 (Jun., 1977), pp. 249-265
 * Walter H. Wheeler. "The Uintatheres and the Cope-Marsh War". Science, New Series, Vol. 131, No. 3408 (Apr. 22, 1960), pp. 1171-1176
 * Benjamin S. Creisler. "Why Monoclonius Cope Was Not Named for Its Horn: The Etymologies of Cope's Dinosaurs." Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Vol. 12, No. 3 (Sep. 3, 1992), pp. 313-317
 * Alfred S. Romer. "Cope versus Marsh Cope versus Marsh". Systematic Zoology, Vol. 13, No. 4 (Dec., 1964), pp. 201-207
 * Edw. Anthony Spitzka. "A Study of the Brains of Six Eminent Scientists and Scholars Belonging to the American Anthropometric Society, together with a Description of the Skull of Professor E. D. Cope". Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Vol. 21, No. 4 (1907), pp. 175-308
 * "[Obituary: Edward Drinker Cope] [Obituary: Edward Drinker Cope]". The American Naturalist, Vol. 31, No. 365 (May, 1897), pp. 412-413
 * "Edward Drinker Cope". The American Naturalist, Vol. 31, No. 365 (May, 1897), pp. 414-419
 * Henry W. Fowler. "Special Anniversary Features: Cope in Retrospect". Copeia, Vol. 1963, No. 1 (Mar. 30, 1963), pp. 195-198
 * Philip P. Calvert. "A Bust of the Late Professor E. D. Cope". Science, New Series, Vol. 51, No. 1315 (Mar. 12, 1920), pp. 264-265
 * Henry F. Osborn. "Edward D. Cope". Science, New Series, Vol. 5, No. 123 (May 7, 1897), pp. 705-717
 * Theo. Gill. "Edward Drinker Cope, Naturalist--A Chapter in the History of Science". Science, New Series, Vol. 6, No. 137 (Aug. 13, 1897), pp. 225-243
 * I have not looked at all the sources you describe (The T.Gill cites are perhaps useful, I will have to check) but many are already incorporated by other sources--Davidson and Osborn's papers are part of their respective larger works, Spitzka is mentioned in Jaffe, et al. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 21:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I figured most of them would be incorporated in other works like you said, but the Davidson papers are published after the 1997 book you used in the article... perhaps she uncovered some other material, or has revised her interpretations of events? Sasata (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * True, I'll double check. I've added in a bit from Bowler, Romer and Fowler; I will take a look at Davidson and the others tomorrow or Monday (I've got a final school project that's diverting my time.) I will ping you when I've scraped the above. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 22:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added a tad from Gill (it also had a pic I've added in as well). The Davidson items are really tangental to Cope himself (the Buffalo Land one is about how some of Cope's research was used in a book and I don't think really fits the article.) Osborn's obit isn't really much different from his book in terms of any additional nuggets.  Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 20:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking out those sources, I'm content with regards to 1b and 1c now. Sometime later this week I'll actually read the article and put up a proper review. Sasata (talk) 21:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Image review: Everything looks good to me (very good, actually; this is probably the best FAC I've ever reviewed as far as image description pages go). I'll note that File:Edward Drinker Cope’s study in 1897.jpg is listed as being in the public domain only by virtue of the Library of Congress asserting "No known restrictions on publication", and I've seen editors claim that that's not sufficient information. I disagree (especially given that the creator died in 1917), but am mentioning it here in case anybody else wants to take issue with it. Steve Smith (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Jappa brought that up. I'm thinking to be safe, I'm ultimately going to remove it, but I'm just waiting to hear from the original uploader if he/she knows any additional info about publication. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:22, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments: David, this looks very good. However, I made some adjustments and have some additional questions.
 * 1. Where is the first Bakker reference? It appears to be missing. I added Bakker et al. (1990), but your text refers to a second Bakker source. Is it the Bakker and Dodson interview?
 * 2. What is the "Elanliosaur" mentioned in the text? I've commented this out because I've never heard of this and it gets no Google hits outside of this article. Firsfron of Ronchester  03:15, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The first Bakker ref is with Dodson. As for Elanliosaur, it's definitely what was written up in Osborn. Why it doesn't appear anywhere else is beyond me. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This appears to be a text error, as no other source anywhere (that I can see) supports this. I get nothing on the Paleobiology Database, nothing in my books, and nothing in Google. Also, the name itself is malformed and almost certainly should not be italicized ("-saur" endings are common names, not scientific names). I highly recommend removing this altogether. Even though the one source verifies it, nothing else does. Firsfron of Ronchester  08:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * removed. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 13:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Was there a reason you ditched Elasmosaurus, too? Firsfron of Ronchester  02:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, my mistake, for some reason I thought you had added that in as a possible alt. to the Elanliosaur bit, I've tweaked it now. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 05:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing it. I have another observation, and you may want to kill me, but here goes. As we well know, and as you wrote above, Cope "discovered literally thousands of new species". However, the text itself only mentions five taxa: Amphibamus grandiceps, Monoclonius, Elasmosaurus platyurus, Laelaps, and Camarasaurus. Five out of thousands seems very paltry. What links here indicates that between 500 and 1,000 articles link to Cope, and many of these are species he worked on, discovered, or named. There's no mention in the article of the dinosaur genus Amphicoelias, possibly the largest dinosaur which ever lived, both discovered and named by Cope. There's no mention of Allosaurus amplexus, Coelophysis, or non-dinosaurian taxa like Edaphosaurus, Champsosaurus, Lystrosaurus, and Peltosaurus. While many of Cope's discoveries have since usually been "sunk in" to other names, these last four have not. Nor has Camarasaurus, possibly Cope's greatest contribution to the Dinosauria. But the text only discusses Camarasaurus in one sentence. Coelophysis gets no mention at all, despite being the type taxon of a well-known family of theropods. WP's article on the Bone Wars (a fine article you wrote!) is much clearer about Cope's discoveries. In this article, though, the reader is left to wonder what Cope discovered, because it's clear from the text that he was very prolific, but almost nothing he described gets any mention. I would like to see more detail on his discoveries, and I'd be glad to assist (starting tomorrow night), if you're amenable. Firsfron of Ronchester  08:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course. Mi artículo es su artículo, and all that :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I was just going to add a paragraph enumerating Cope's major taxa discoveries (with a sentence like "Cope described X in 18xx,[ref] Y in 18xy,[ref] and Z in 18xz.[ref]"), but then I realized you're using a different style of reference formatting than what I'm used to. Firsfron of Ronchester  13:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * ←Just add it in, and I'll worry about prettying it up and standardizing the citations. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 19:17, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've added a bit on Cope's publication of Amphicoelias, Lystrosaurus, Champsosaurus, Edaphosaurus and Coelophysis in two areas which appeared able to support the added text. I left out others, though, that just didn't fit where the text was going. The little I added, though, could help illustrate his discoveries to readers. Feel free to rework as needed. Firsfron of Ronchester  05:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Formatted your additions. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 13:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * After a few additional minor adjustments, I'm ready to Support this article's FAC. Firsfron of Ronchester  23:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support: Great job! --Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 20:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Conditional support: I was involved in peer reviewing this article and made many comments, much of which Dave has resolved. What is left would not significantly affect my decision to support this document, as the prose is good, the article comprehensive on Cope's life, and the sources are reliable.  I originally pointed out in the review and agree with Nev1 that Marsh's feud with Cope could be better introduced than the sudden "Marsh's attempts to sully Cope's reputation ..."; however, it is not a sticking point.  As mentioned, I am a bit more concerned over File:Edward Drinker Cope’s study in 1897.jpg (and this is where my conditional support comes in), but not opposing since Elcobbola and Steve Smith are not that concerned over it (it seems more likely it was unpublished until recently).  So unless someone else points out that the photo has been published during 1923-1989 and is still copyrighted, I will support this article.  On another note, would this alternate angle shot (http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cph.3b37400) be a better cluttered study photo?  Jappalang (talk) 01:51, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the current image is better. While I like the greater prominence of the specimens and skulls on the cabinet, I think the other one is better in terms of overall composition (I'm not sure how easy it would be to reduce the white areas in the alternative image, or whether those areas are too blown out to be properly corrected in post. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 16:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, like I said, unless someone brings up evidence or convincing argument on why the study image is not public domain, my support stands. Jappalang (talk) 23:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments—parts are beautifully written, but there are many glitches, particularly after the lead. I started at "Support", then drew back to "Concerned".
 * "rapidly published"—ok, but it has an odd feel. Was it the negotiations or the printing presses that were rapid? Was it just the rapid publications that were debated? (That is one implication of the wording.)
 * Chain-like sentence structure: "His theories on the origin of mammalian molars and "Cope's Law", on the gradual enlargement of mammalian species, are among his theoretical contributions." The second "on" folds back into just Cope's law, or all of the preceding?
 * "His notebook, including this page, survives and contains copious notes and drawings of his travels." Perhaps "His notebook survives, including this page, and contains copious notes and drawings of his travels."
 * His mother died at the age of three?
 * "maternal" rather than "motherly" is better, I suspect. "have had".
 * "Alfred was also ..."—I know I'm an incorrigible "also" deletionist, but ... does it add anything here?
 * Comma after "Fairfield" could go (personal view).
 * acres convert to hectares, please. Thousands of square metres are very hard to visualise.
 * "Exotic" gardens were "a natural landscape"? "Natural" occurs again a few seconds later; this is yet more evidence that we need a script/bot to flag close repetitions of non-grammatical words. I've asked at the bot page and have been ignored ... :-(
 * The school was "the site" of much of the family's education? Bit odd. "... provided much of ..."?
 * "costing Alfred $500 tuition each year,"—add "in".
 * Old-fashioned to capitalise the initials of school subjects. I see "comparative anatomy" in full lower case below.
 * Logic problem: "Edward's letters home requesting a larger allowance show he was able to manipulate his father"—only if his dad acquiesced.
 * Remove "of time".
 * "Despite complaints about his schooling, Cope returned to Westtown in 1855, accompanied by two of his sisters." Who was complaining? The parents (typical nowadays) or the boy? Please go through every sentence defensively: try to extract double meanings or the wrong meaning, and fix where you can. That is how I'm reading/analysing.
 * "Biology began to interest him more"—more than his other subjects, or more than in the previous year? (See?)
 * The bot that doesn't exist yet picked up "prestigious school" twice in 15 seconds' of reading.
 * "Cope frequently obtained bad marks for quarrelsome and bad conduct." So if he'd tried harder at bad conduct they'd have given him an A for that subject? (Sorry, but I can't switch off my ambiguity antennae.) Also, "Cope" refers to the boy, but "Alfred" the father was also a Cope. I'd tend to use the boy's first name when in the vicinity of his dad.
 * "wholesome" needs to be in quotes to show that it's not WP's judgement. Perhaps I think farming isn't wholesome, no matter how profitable.
 * "Up till 1863"—"Until ...".
 * "Though Alfred resisted his son's acceptance of a science career, he paid for his son's private studies."—Would "pursuit" be better?
 * "scientific exploits"—bit pejorative, that second word?
 * "He also had a job during this period recataloging"—During this period, he took a job recataloging ...".
 * "over the next years he published almost solely on reptile and amphibians"—how many years?

Needs work from both the nominator and an independent party. I got down to the end of "Early life". Tony  (talk)  13:10, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have addressed most of the above listed, and will try and go through the rest hunting for redundancies and such when possible. I'll see about getting an uninvolved person to look over it too. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 20:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * David, what's the latest status on this? Have you gotten the uninvolved person to look through and has Tony been asked to revisit?  Thanks! Karanacs (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The people I've talked to have been busy, and weren't able to give me a definite time they'd be able to assist. I've gone through the article again myself and have asked Tony to take a look whenever he has the time. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 16:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Spot-check
 * "Due to his background in taxonomy and paleontology, Cope focused on evolution in changing structural terms, rather than Darwin's emphasis on geography and variation within populations." Keep the grammar parallel? "Due to his background in taxonomy and paleontology, Cope focused on evolution in terms of changing structure, rather than emphasising geography and variation within populations as Darwin had." Check please for content accuracy ... it looks better grammatically. Something had to be done.
 * Is this grammatical? "His original view, described in the paper "On the Origin of Genera" (1868), held that while Darwin's natural selection may affect the preservation of superficial characteristics in organisms, but that natural selection alone could not explain the formation of genera."
 * Nicer without the comma? ... through what Cope termed, "a continual crowding ...
 * Strictly "In fewer than 40 years as a scientist".
 * Minor issues: "Cope is today known as a herpetologist and paleontologist, but his contributions extended to ichthyology; he catalogued 300 species of fishes over three decades". Word order, sh .. sh.: "Although Cope is now known as ..., his ..., in which he catalogued 300 fish species over three decades". Was it exactly 300?
 * Some of the pics were tiny. Why?

I didn't oppose, above. I still don't, but the prose needs to be tightened up in such FACs. It's been here far too long, David. Tony  (talk)  11:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed the above. As for image sizes, I've been leaving things at default in the hope that they'll be fine once the image thumb defaults get changed (whenever that will be.) As for how long this FAC has been open... I sure haven't asked for a stay of execution. It's up to them dastardly delegates to close, and lowly mortals such as me know not the hour and all that :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.