User talk:Kingturtle/Archive7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Thank you for your support 2 Wikipolicewatching 2.1 It does NOT an anti-Wiki-Thought-Police Thought Police Make! 3 How about a rename for ... 4 Request for trouble-shooting 5 Deep Throat 6 Deep Throat 7 Protected pages 8 Survey 9 Article Licensing 10 AINA 11 September 15 12 Presidents of the United States 13 Revert on Ralph Nader 14 Linking dates 15 Villain quotes 16 References 17 Partial-Birth Abortion Image 18 Lincoln 19 List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people 20 WikiProject New York City 21 Chickenhawk 22 About Rod Kanehl 23 United States Senate 24 Thanks 25 14 Jan Detroit revert 26 Surrealism 27 More Surrealism 28 Purge in the main page 29 The left sock of vampires? 30 Arthur Miller 31 Hi 32 Deletions on day pages 33 Policy re: day-of-the-year articles? 34 Deletion on Vomiting 35 Thank you! 36 Amanda Coogan 37 article on Jimmy Carter 38 Congrats on the wired article 39 Selected Anniversaries 40 Puzzled 41 Kurdish timeline article 42 Talk:Provinces of Afghanistan 43 Republics 44 About RickK, me, and user blocking 45 DYK 46 Terri Timeline 47 Democrat/Republican 48 The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn 49 Boogie Down blocked

[edit] Thank you for your support

Hi there! Just a short note to let you know that your vote in my favour in last week's sysop election meant a lot to me. Wikipedia is the most exciting internet project that I've ever touched, and I have great dreams for its future. I feel honoured to be able to participate in a small way in building it. Thank you so much for voting for me. David Cannon 10:39, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipolicewatching

[edit] It does NOT an anti-Wiki-Thought-Police Thought Police Make!

"I'm having my own network of friends off-wiki who monitor the Wiki thought police quite closely"...in other words, you've created your own thought police. Have you become what you fight against? Kingturtle 23:21, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Negative :O) Watching the police is not policing the police ! Police should only know that every single gesture of brutality they commit is monitored, filmed, documented and deposited in trusted archives for later times and better times of full accountability. Truth is ALWAYS the LAST thing to appear, but it DOES appear EVENTUALLY. If they care to think this monitoring activity is thought poolice, they either can't read or they can't understand the word watch. Anyway, how they choose to solve the quies custodiet ipsos custodes apparent pseudo-fallacy is their own problem now. But Kingturtle, I much appreciate your subtle, ponderate, free attitude. This proves what I see here that institutions that are lousy as a group can have extremely wonderful and valuable individuals working for them. Without you, and a few other true believers, the Wiki ship would sink the very next day. I am banned (perhaps by mercy, as not to see it happen :O). So now, it's up to you now to maintain, issue, reinforce or only contemplate a "Do not ressuscitate" order from the Wiki Hospital's select committee on ethics :O) - irismeister 16:40, 2004 Jul 24 (UTC)

[edit] How about a rename for ...

I am searching for the correct person to address this issue: The infobox on terrorism lists Islamic .. rather than Islamist .., which I believe is a more precise and respectful label. That way it is possible to distinguish the adjective ( Islamic ) for a religious group from the adjective (Islamist) for a political group with an agenda. That puts the label more in line with the ism article as well. I realize that involves some page moves as well. Ancheta Wis 18:56, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I took the initiative and put your suggestion into action. I changed the name of the article in question, and I posted my reason in that article's talk page. Cheers, Kingturtle 19:58, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Regards, Ancheta Wis 04:50, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Request for trouble-shooting

Maybe you can help find a problem here - Mattingly23 has been adding a number of bio articles for baseball players, but for some reason the pages seem to link to themselves (they're always listed under "What links here" for their own pages). Neither of us can figure out what he's doing to cause this, but it's somewhat annoying. Any ideas on what the problem is and how to prevent it? MisfitToys 23:41, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

• Strange. I deleted it and re-created it, and the same thing happens. I have no idea why. Maybe Tim Starling could take a look. Fortunately, this strange occurance is causing no harm. Kingturtle 23:09, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the look. MisfitToys 23:46, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

Note: I got a bug in my head and removed the {{stub}} notice on Jimmy Archer. For some reason it appealed to my antique programmer's brain that that might do the trick and it did! No more self-link. Go figure. -- Cecropia | Talk 08:33, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Deep Throat

I've posted a reply to your question about revealing Deep Throat's identity at Talk:Deep Throat (Watergate). Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 15:58, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Deep Throat

I've posted a reply to your question about revealing Deep Throat's identity at Talk:Deep Throat (Watergate). Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 15:58, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Protected pages

Alright, sorry about that. I thought that only applied to content - I merely moved about the whitespace. Newbie admin mistake. –Andre (talk) 00:51, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• No problem :) . be well. Kingturtle 00:52, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

There is a survey regarding a disputed paragraph in the PNAC article that you might be interested in. Kevin Baas | talk 19:31, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 23:46, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] AINA

Aloha. I am the process of disambiguating AINA, and trying to fix what links here. The link on your User page should be changed to AINA (ngo). Thanks in advance. --Viriditas 05:46, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ack! I knew I forgot something! Ok, instead of having an admin merge the two histories, and since there aren't any updates yet, I have merely moved to a new disambig. You will find your history preserved at AINA (organization). Sorry about that. I will fix all the links. --Viriditas 01:03, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] September 15

Hey! I'm not sure why you reverted my changes, but I didn't touch anything substantive that you did. I just erased the top of the article, which was nothing more than a repetition of the septembercalendar section and about 15 events that were duplicative. I've re-erased them. Katefan0 22:21, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Presidents of the United States

Why did you revert the recent additions on numbering in this article? After looking at whitehouse.gov and carefully counting the names a few times, it appears that this information is correct. Our article on Grover Cleveland even seems to say the same thing. - RedWordSmith 04:33, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Revert on Ralph Nader

Why did you revert 151.200.182.26 vote tally update on Ralph Nader? I ask because s/he also updated Green Party (United States) and U.S. presidential election, 2004, so if his numbers are wrong, those should be looked into as well. RadicalSubversiv E 07:23, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Linking dates

Sorry about the edit war brewing at Dimebag Darrell but it is correct that all dates should be linked. To quote the page you mentioned in your last edit summary (Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)):

Note that linking dates like [[25 March]] [[2004]] permits the date preferences of the reader to operate. Both day-month and year must be linked for the preference to work correctly.

To allow users to choose their date preference all dates should be linked, overriding the standard rule of not linking the same thing repeatedly. violet/riga (t) 22:16, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• This is a development that I was not aware of. I've made a slight edit to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) to make this newer rule more obvious to readers. Please refer to the change i made, and if it needs to be re-worded, please do. thanks, Kingturtle 22:26, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Looks good to me - nice work. Cheers. violet/riga (t) 22:35, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Villain quotes

Have the quotations removed from Villain been incorporated into Wikiquote? I don't know a great deal about editing Wikiquote myself, or how the cross referencing system that perhaps should be there ought to work; but if it is possible to put one of the tags that says that Wikiquote has a set of quotations by or about villains, it might be valuable to put it on the Villain page itself. -- Smerdis of Tlön 02:45, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I don't know how Wikiquotes works. Feel free to create an article over there. Kingturtle 03:36, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] References

See Wikipedia:Cite sources. :-) Johnleemk | Talk 09:44, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Partial-Birth Abortion Image

I added the section explaining the procedure, which nobody ever seems to be able to do fairly. I feel an image is important to explaining any complex procedure, and it's so rarely found in any objective literature on the subject. You removed the "POV" image as biased because it shows the baby as normal and healthy. I don't think that's true (the image is pretty simplistic, the most I could tell was that it was a fetus, a catheter, a birth canal and a doctor) but I rooted around trying to find an image. Unfortunately all of the abortion provider sites neglect to provide such images (it would be a bit like a meat pacvking company showing us how sausage is made or how chickens live) and it's difficult to find an unbiased abortion opponent's image. I found a heavily cropped version on somebody's home page, and I'm adding it in.

Please do not remove the image; please simply replace it with one more to your liking if you find this one unacceptable. Hell, draw your own if you want. I feel our inability to deal with the images of abortion maturely and objectively is linked to the controversy itself and I'd like if wikipedia offered a thorough, rigorous view on this and every subject. It's aggravating enough having to deal with pro-choice people who often want to ignore the science and pro-life people who rarely address the science in objective terms.

Please work with me to add an image you find appropriate. I'd like to take away the subject from the screaming fanatics on both sides and explain it in a direct, scientific context. Cwelsch 13:44, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• I will gladly track down some images of the procedure that are more realistic. the problem with the image in question is that it portrays a healthy and cute looking looking fetus - which creates a POV that the procedure is used flippantly. Kingturtle 15:42, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Pardon me for butting in, but perhaps you can also find an image that doesn't create the opposite POV that something human is not being killed. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:51, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Perhaps there could be a series in a gradation of gruesomeness? I take Cecropia's point, of course, but there's no way out of the problem. No picture is POV, picture is POV. This picture is POV, that picture is POV. Perhaps there could be two or three photos, illustrating the different sorts of late-term termination?Dr Zen 03:37, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Lincoln

Hi, I was wondering why you removed Abraham Lincoln from the debated section of List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people. Another user has restored him to the list but I was wondering if you actually disputed the fact that his sexuality is debated. There is a section on this in the article about him.

[edit] List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people

I'd like to thank you for what you've done with List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people. There's a difference between "rumored" and "debated", and that list should reflect that. -℘yrop (talk) 06:05, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject New York City

Hello, I've started WikiProject New York City, and from your edits it seems you might be interested. See its talk page for the beginning of a discussion on the standardization of neighborhood names, and bringing New York City up to featured status.--Pharos 13:44, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Chickenhawk

Thanks for your kind note. If you have time, we need to check all the article links to Chickenhawk to see which should be changed to avoid the dab page. I'm starting at the top, so if you want to start at the bottom and work up, we won't trip over each other. JamesMLane 23:01, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Addendum: Well, I got to the end of the list, changing all the article links except the one in Vietnam War. I'm not familiar with Mason's book, so I think it's safer to let that reference link to the dab page, so the reader can see the possible meanings. In titling his book Chickenhawk, Mason may have intended some ambiguity. JamesMLane 23:40, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] About Rod Kanehl

Thanks for your motivation. I wish you enjoy it. Good luck, and have you a happy new year. MusiCitizen 05:04, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] United States Senate

In the Senate page, you reverted the markup changes that were made. Is there any reason for that? It seemed to be a good way to decrease the bandwith.--sebmol 02:24, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• The changes made by User:68.126.255.210 looked to me to be awkward. If you see it differently, change it back. I will not revert your edit. :) Kingturtle 02:29, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Those headers on day pages really annoy me. --mav 03:53, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• i've decided to spend a few days a week removing them. it will take a while, but it'll be worth it. i find them very annoying. Kingturtle 04:20, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 14 Jan Detroit revert

I disagree with the revert you made to Detroit, Michigan yesterday (14 January). I asked for opinions on Talk:Detroit, and would greatly value your input. foobaz·✐ 08:23, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surrealism

I'd like you to consider removing page protection after reviewing the discussion there. I feel it is possible to move forward and complete the article with the range of contributors.

Stirling Newberry 17:14, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More Surrealism

Could you review the talk page? I am RFCing both Boyer and 24. because there is simply no way to work on this article with both of them treating it as a personal web page, and their constant attacks and rants. In addition, Boyer is making edits to other articles based on his intent to promote his own work, including attacks on known scholars etc.My own POV is that both should be banned permanently, as their contributions, such as they are, are far outweighed by the problems the create. Stirling Newberry 19:15, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Purge in the main page

After your removal of the word purge from the news section, I looked up the web to find different connotations (or are they denotations?) of the word. I would like to point you to this and purge. -- Sundar 08:32, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

• I fully understand that. however, in an international news listing, the word tends to drum up Stalin's Great Purge notion. that's why i changed it. Kingturtle 01:22, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The left sock of vampires?

I did a google search. It appears the nonsense with the left sock of vampires isn't nonsense (or nor more nonsense than the rest of vampire myths). Poor 66.82.9.37 is probably a legit newbie wondering why the addition isn't allowed. Revert your revert? -- A D Monroe III 02:43, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arthur Miller

There's a WORLD of difference between the Miller article and a stub. Even assuming that your "rationale" that because we don't allow stubs we shouldn't allow "sloppy" articles was legitimate (which, I don't believe it is), you have not explained WHY the Miller article is sloppy. What needs cleanup? I've removed the cleanup tag from the article, as no one has given any reason for it being there. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:29, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

• THIS is the version i put the cleanup notice on. it was in serious need of cleaning up - and not the sort of article we want to show off to someone who happens upon wikipedia. since that edit, Lukobe and Hajor did some marvelous copyediting, and now the article is something worth seeing. Kingturtle 02:41, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hello, Im a friend of Karl (grazingshipIV) he talks about you a lot so i figured i'd say hi.--SPOC 03:05, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deletions on day pages

Hi there,

Is there some sort of guideline which people should be included in Wikipedia, but not on the day pages?

I feel it would be preferable if you would just expand the short summaries a bit. --05 20:57, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Policy re: day-of-the-year articles?

is there somewhere in wikipedia a written set of guidelines about what and not what to include on the individual day-of-the-year articles? or are we just using gut instinct to discern what should and shouldn't be there? Kingturtle 22:02, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion on Vomiting

Please do not simply delete material that you may not like. Please engage in the discussion page your views and concerns. Regardless, a link styled with a caution has been placed on the page which should be acceptable; however, this is an ilistrated work, and one should expect to see a photo of vomiting when going to an article on vomiting Glen Larson

[edit] Thank you!

Just a quick "thank you" for voting me for admin. Now all I've got to do is find out how to use these worrying new powers... Grutness|^hello? 06:13, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Amanda Coogan

I don't understand your copyedit of this article, you removed the place of birth and

"Coogan utilizes video and photographs in her live perfomance."

is not true, she produces video and photographs from her live performances, not the same. Why remove the Irish Times quote? Notjim 22:40, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I paraphrased the quote because I couldn't tell what the quote was from. It said "In (Aidan Dunne 2005)". If you can re-write it with the correct syntax, i support you doing so. Kingturtle 01:04, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You have now changed it to "Coogan she produces video and photographs from her live performances." What was wrong with the reference (Aidan Dunne 2005) refered to an article in the reference list using what I understand to be the house style. Why remove her place of birth?Notjim 10:41, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

like i said, (Aidan Dunne 2005) is confusing. i've not seen that syntax used in wikipedia. if you know what it is supposed to mean, then make the appropriate fixes, but use standard wikipedia syntax. Kingturtle 18:03, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Cite your sources:

In addition to listing a reference at the end, you may choose to embed a pointer to a particular reference within the article text. To do this, cite references parenthetically as "(Author-Last-Name, Year)". Use the original publication year for a re-published work. If the cited information is not easy to find with just that information (for example, it's a poorly indexed topic in a large book), add chapters ("chap. 3") or pages ("p. 15" or "pp. 12–23") after the year (separating the two with a comma). When a reference is used as a noun, put the year in parentheses, e.g. "Milton (1653) says..." For two authors, use (Author1 & Author2, year); for more authors, use (Author1 et al., Year).

So I was almost right, it should have been (Dunne 2005).

Also it seems wrong to just delete information as you did in this case.Notjim 19:46, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that syntax is appropriate in this case. let me give it a shot as to what i think it should look like - if you disagree, please change it. Kingturtle 21:57, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ok I agree with this, thanks a million for you help. Notjim 23:02, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] article on Jimmy Carter

I was wondering why you took out the line mentioning Carter's sister Gloria. While she is probably not as news worthy as his other sister or his brother, one line doesn't seem unreasonable, and I thought it looks sort of funny listing only two of his siblings.

Best regards, Morris 18:25, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

• I switched it back. it was written by an anonymous user, and the claim seemed far-fetched, so i thought it was vandalism. Kingturtle 21:52, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats on the wired article

Stirling Newberry 23:05, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Oh thanks! i was wondering when it was going to be out. i have to go read it now! is it on the website? is it on news stands now? cheers, Kingturtle 23:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Yes, it's out. I too would like to add my congratulations. →Raul654 19:06, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Selected Anniversaries

Hello, Kingturtle. Thank you for cleaning up my "mess" at Selected Anniversaries on back to back days. I should've been more careful with things on the Main Page ..... Thanks, again. :-) -- PFHLai 01:47, 2005 Feb 18 (UTC)

• aw geez. don't worry about it. you didn't make a mess. i just touched things up a little :) Kingturtle 03:12, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Puzzled

I'm puzzled by your edit in Housatonic River. The kind of phrasing is fairly standard in the river articles. Just wondering. -- Decumanus 08:41, 2005 Feb 18 (UTC)

• From what I understand, in the case of a river, rise as a noun means place of origin, while rise as a verb means to increase in size, volume, or level. But I may be wrong. And although the weather service occassionally uses "extreme western" to describe the area, it is not common. I am not opposed to reverting my changes, though. Kingturtle 22:01, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kurdish timeline article

Its rather excessive theire isnt much happening regarding the compunity, I am merging it with the actual article. Most items there are portions of news articles which belongs to wiki news. I moved and merged all items to the existing artile and linked the thing togeter for you :P --Cool Cat| My Talk 07:34, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Provinces of Afghanistan

thanks for maybe having a look there. Tobias Conradi 20:51, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Republics

Need your help and/or advice. The British Wikipedian Republican Party sought fit to delete Wikinfo:Classical definition of republic from Wikipedia. There is a terrible brouhaha at Talk:Republic. They won't even allow an external link! SimonP really doesn't know what he is doing. They deleted the Classical definition of republic and created mixed government and politeia instead. The official title of mixed government is a Republic and the Romans translated "politiea" as Republic. And then to top it off the new article Classical republicanism doesn't refer to the Classical republics of Crete, Sparta, Solonic Athens, or Rome but to Machiavelli's ideology. How can that be when Venice in the 13th century instituted a mixed government and called herself a "Republic".

With Jwrosenwieg and Kim Bruning there was a tacit agreement a year ago to have republic be the modern meaning and a [Classical definition of republic] to describe the ancient republics of Hellas and Rome and their influence. To say the least the "Republic section" is all messed up. We need some clarification. I have new information but User:Snowspinner won't let me bring this back up for undelete. (I do grant that a little bit of the Classical definition is original but the rest is not.) I will not let Sparta be called anything but a republic! I will not let the British wikipedian modern republicans strip Sparta, (my heritage and roots) of her rightful name. She is a Classical republic and needs to be called such! At the least, where is the damage in having an external link?WHEELER 15:11, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] About RickK, me, and user blocking

Note: Please read this carefully and thoroughly, as this is important.

RickK, one of the admins, blocked my former accounts "User:Hil Duff" and "User:Hil Duff star". He didn't give any reason why and totally ignored my comments on my talk page just because he thinks my user name would be something like imposting or vandalizing. I wanted to discuss things over with him, but he just deleted my account immediately without reason. I just want to be a happy Wikipedian here.

I AM NOT A VANDAL, and I won't be Hilary Duff, just Cool Cat886. I won't tell anybody that I am famous or a pop star. I just want to contribute in peace here, and YOU CAN BLOCK ME ONLY IF YOU SEE ME VANDALIZING OR ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING BAD, BECAUSE I DIDN'T. Would you support me and be my good friend, or should I just get blocked for eternity because I didn't do anything? Cool Cat886 07:19, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

[edit] Terri Timeline

Hello, it was agreed in Terri Shiavo talk page to keep the timeline for atleast one week. can we revert the "timeline move" action? --Oblivious 00:26, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Democrat/Republican

On John F. Kennedy, you removed mention that he was "the last Democratic President elected from the North", stating in the edit summary "nixon was born in california - reagan was born in illinois, ghw was born in massachusetts; gw bush was born in connecticut". That seems unrelated, somehow. Nixon, Reagan, and both Bushes were Republicans, not Democrats. And California is not the North. Not saying that the factoid is so noteworthy it should remain, but it isn't wrong... - Nunh-huh 21:22, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• oh yeah. good point. i seem to have missed the part about "Democrat"! Kingturtle 00:40, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Hi there. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been nominated for a page move. Being a recent contributor to that article I'd like to invite you to have your say – if you have time please go to the talk page and join in the discussion. Thanks. violet/riga (t) 19:20, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Boogie Down blocked

I have blocked Boogie Down for repeat vandalism. FearÉIREANN 20:55, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)