Welcome to roadinet.com on July 6 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

User talk:Jmabel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

I am currently only moderately active on Wikipedia. I've been uploading a lot of my own photos (and occasionally some other images) to the Commons, writing the occasional article, participating in other articles mainly on a "hit-and-run" basis, and maybe doing the occasional translation, but for the foreseeable future, that is my level of participation. I am not being one of the "mainstays", as I was from November 2003 to April 2007. - Jmabel | Talk 04:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Archived

[edit] Stray barnstars

I've moved my barnstars, etc., to User:Jmabel/Barnstars. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cough

Have a look at how Safire addresses the subject. Uncle G (talk) 20:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Protest tactics

Category:Protest tactics, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page.

Hi Jmabel, it's been quite a while since our paths have crossed. I well remember when you departed Wikipedia (and the circumstances), so I'm glad to see that you've resumed activity (at least to some degree). As it happens, I'm arguing against the CFD proposal for Category:Protest tactics, but I like to notify creators whenever possible if the nominator hasn't done so. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 14:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] hmm (Re: your remarks on my talk page)

I didn't realize certain users' opinions were more valid on Wikipedia than others. Sounds kind of counter to your mission. I'll have to remember that the next time you all ask for money. Prell (talk) 05:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I assume "you all" means the Foundation, since I've never asked you for money. I don't remember ever commenting on any of your opinions, but feel free to point me to somewhere I did so. I did comment on your incivility to another editor, and I stand by that remark. I also commented on the requirement to provide sources and that the burden of evidence is on the person who wants to add material, not the person who wants to remove it. Neither of these had anything to do with your opinions. One had to do with your conduct, and the other had to do with how the fact that this is an encyclopedia, not someone's blog. - Jmabel | Talk 06:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seattle has been nominated for FAR

Seattle has been nominated for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --Bobblehead (rants) 17:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Music

Well, the problem is that, whether an artist represents a particular genre is 100% opinion. If what you're after is proof that a group of professional critics support a given genre claim for an artist, then I guess you're right, and I won't bother trying to contribute that information anymore.

My edits were from my own experience, and I didn't even add anything; I just restored something that someone else added because a bunch of artists that were favorites of that genre were deleted. So if the encyclopaedia requires third-party validation of a given claim, it seems to me that it was provided. As I understand it, this is an encyclopaedia of the people. If that claim only extends to editorial capabilities rather than providing new information, then I don't see the value, because all that's been accomplished is that a group of amateurs are doing things that other people get paid to do. Prell (talk) 17:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

None of that has to do with your making abusive remarks to another editor, which is the main reason I stepped in.
Other than that, sorry, I don't recall the substance of the matter you were initially arguing about. It doesn't matter who added something initially. What matters is that the burden of evidence is on the person who wants to keep it in. From your description here, if you have citations from generally reliable sources that some artist is part of some genre, cite them explicitly. If not, the rules are on the side of the person who wants the statement removed. I personally think that Wikipedia puts too much emphasis on citability, but it's a policy that the community agreed upon, and I'm here to participate in this community (and, as an admin, to enforce its policies). If you (or I) want to change policies, the policy pages (or, more precisely, the talk pages of the policy pages) are the place to do that, and I've certainly fought a few battles there and won some of them (notably that foreign language sources are acceptable, that online sources are not inherently "better" than print sources, and that old pages in the Internet Archive are exactly as citable as current pages on web sites). - Jmabel | Talk 17:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comet Lodge Cemetary

  • I don't actually have time to review your edits but wanted to take a moment to say "How awesome are you to have responded to my issue?" The last time I got tagged for notability I asked "why?" (as it felt it was CLEARLY notable) and no one responded. For you to take the time to say, "I did this, removed tag and hope it is enough" was very appreciated. I am still finding my way through Wiki, and as a Seattle resident I question a number of entries that have a "spam" feeling to them...I have lived here for nearly 50 years and been very active in history and culture and cringe when there is something that seems petty. I would ultimately like to find names of important people in Comet Lodge Cemetery, and may indeed look myself because I want to advance Wiki and make it informative and useful...but for now will not contest article further. I just think existing in Seattle with minor ties to significance diminishes the true rich history this city has to offer. I hope people do not go to pages like "X- park" or "X- Cemetery" or "X- parking lot" and think..."what a crock of shit, this is boring" because I think there is a lot out there that needs more. I have not written many articles, but each one I have is filled with sourced details because I think any article worth writing is worth writing well. I want to stimulate interest...and frankly the single sentence about some cemetery I never heard of was of no interest...so I thank you for adding more, tis all I thought it needed. You rock! OneHappyHusky (talk) 07:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] PM and Ingersoll

Greetings JMabel - we meet up again (PM (newspaper)). Happy editing! --Technopat (talk) 09:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

The embarrassment of having cited the wrong source added wings to my fingertips... Regards, --Technopat (talk) 17:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vince Mira

Apologies for taking so long to reply to you (I have been off wiki for two months). I have restored the Vince Mira article as you requested on my talk[1] some time ago so that you can develop it further (I have added a couple of references to help it along the way). Kind regards, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lafayette

Thanks for picking up the edits to Lafayette. I usually watch over the article; but, I've been inactive for a few weeks. Thanks for the notice, and I'll look into it. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 00:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Elinor Smith

Updated DYK query On 22 December 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Elinor Smith, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 00:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Surveys at Talk:Valencian Community

Hi! I'm addressing you because you had participated in some way at Valencian Community article. I've started several surveys regarding to naming conventions about the Catalan language, the Spanish language, and about the name of the country of Valencia. I think there's no a real consensus about that and (also because of it) it may help to stop endless polemic disputes. --Joanot Martorell ✉ 17:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Graciasland.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Graciasland.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 18:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Circus Maximus 1967 album.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Circus Maximus 1967 album.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Circus Maximus Neverland Revisited.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Circus Maximus Neverland Revisited.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 18:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] reorganisation of 10 August (French Revolution)

Courtesy call: I have today moved the above article from 10th of August (French Revolution), as being a title more consistent with WP's acceptable date formats. In the same vein, I have created the following redirects:

  • August 10, 1792
  • 10 August 1792

Ohconfucius (talk) 03:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I would think that this issue isn't how Wikipedia writes dates, but what historians call the event. As far as I know, "10th of August" is pretty universal, just as "18 Brumaire" is for Napoleon's coup. Surely we aren't going to remame the latter 9 November or some variant on that? (but as long as the redirect works, this move is not that big a deal. Moving "18 Brumaire" would be.) - Jmabel | Talk 05:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

  • I agree. 18 Brumaire is a well-known date even in English, and what's more, there is no conflict in terms of entries or style, so it's best kept. The universality of '10th of August' means that the other redirects you put in for the article will stay, regardless of how often or seldom these terms are typed. Cheers, Ohconfucius (talk) 05:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Pssst

Talk:Pike Place Market#Back to work. I began gutting down the history section, and asked SandyGeorgia, the FAC coordinator, about the citations thing I was worried about. No worries at all, there. rootology (C)(T) 03:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for History of the Pike Place Market

Updated DYK query On January 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of the Pike Place Market, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 03:08, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Roma as a Romani group

There are some discussion for the creation of an article about Roma as a Romani group, but there are some problems about the best way to do that. Can you take a look, if you have the time, please? The discussion are mostly at Talk:Roma people. Thanks! AKoan (talk) 10:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Microcredit

Dear Joe: Thanks for your very constructive edit yesterday microcredit. You are precisely the type of person who could make this article -- which acts as an edit magnet for many people with extremely narrow interests -- work for the general reader. I believe it is a common search term -- at least in the context of international development in which it functions. Last year I fixed microfinance which had until then simply been a hodgepodge of promotional remarks by NGO people who wanted the world to know that their NGO was doing way better work than the next one. It has subsequently been considerably more stable, though still occasionally spammed. The same disease is still afflicting microcredit, and yours is the FIRST constructive edit I've seen on it in months. It is not, and never has been, an article. It needs someone to make it one. Can you do it - please!?Brett epic (talk) 11:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, no. It's not a topic where I'm particularly expert. I simply happened to read a good article from a source I trust. It seemed to provide some criticism from a source not wholly opposed to the idea, which is usually stuff I find useful: non-fanatical, but skeptical. - Jmabel | Talk 18:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Yuri Rytkheu

Although it falls outside of your usual edits, could I interest you in reading my translation of this article? Particularly for bad English and illogical statements? The various wikipedia articles were not all in agreement on some things, so I've left comments in the text and taken out other conflicting elements. But a good read-through by someone like you would be extremely welcome. Thanks if you decide to! -Yupik (talk) 01:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Afrofuturism

Hello Jmabel. Your comments would be appreciated on the Talk:Afrofuturism. --Loremaster (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tenerife

I see there's still one untranslated passage in this article's text, in the Museums section: <<un fondo museográfico integrado por more than 2,600 registros de elementos of the Guanche culture>>. May I suggest: <<a museological [or research or archival] collection comprising more than 2,600 specimens of items from the Guanche culture>>? Unconventional (talk) 02:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, certainly something like that. Feel free to go for it. - Jmabel | Talk 06:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Empire of Brazil

Thank you very much for improving the text of the section "Representation" of the Empire of Brazil article.

It was I who wrote the portuguese version and translated to english, although I mut admit that sometimes, is quite hard to find comparable words and expressions in english that match the original in portuguese.

You wrote that some words or expressions you couldn´t quite understand. I´m going to try to help you out so that you may use what better fits you.

1) For comparison, the civil employee with the lowest wage at the time, the utility maid of service public

Utility maid of service public: the word in portuguese is "servente de Serviço Público". It means those employees that works cleaning the walls, floors, bathrooms, taking care of the public buldings, etc... The most similar term in english are "keeper" or "janitor". I´ve used "utility maid" because that what was written in the Dictionay.

2) Beyond these new features, it was forbidden that public officers concur in its own districts

It means that judges, policemen, secretaries, anyone who was a public officer could not campaign in its own district.

3) as a measure to prevent them from using the public machine

In the portuguese original text, it meant that it was a measure to stop those public officer of using their influence, or public money, or public workers to help on their campaign. It´s like a Dean from a School that uses its employees, or print panflects from the school´s print, or use money from the school to help them campaign.

4) What happened was that many presidents of province, as well as provincial secretaries, military, judges and chief of police had been hindered to be elect or at least in its districts of origin

It means that they were not allowed to campaign anymore at the districts where they lived or worked. So, if they wanted to campaign to become Senator, for example, they would need to do it in a town other then its own.

5) when the expressive reduction of the election of public officers was seen

It means that before, public officers were the majority of newly elected politicians at the Parliament. But, as the time went on, and new restrictions were made, their numbers diminished considerably.

6) allowing that the "real country" could enter “directly in the Parliament"

Its an expression that says that electoral frauds were diminishing and at least, the politicians that were being elected were truly the people´s representatives.

I hope I´ve helped a little bit! - --Lecen (talk) 11:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Thanks, that helped a lot. I've rewritten that paragraph accordingly. I also had flagged some issues in the next paragraph, similar help would be welcome. - Jmabel | Talk 21:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

entrepreneurs of public works and vicars and bishops in their own parishes could concur

Trade “concur” with “campaign”. It means that these people could not campaign for political positions in the places where they lived or worked, so to preven them from using any inluence to change the outcome of the elections.

and established that elect public officers elected in other districts that not yours could not exert their positions, receive wages or be promoted while their mandates lasted.

It means that, for example, if a Judge was elected a provincial deputy, he would not exert his position as a judge, neither receive wage or be promoted until his term as deputy had finished.

Again, thank you, --Lecen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.172.83.132 (talk) 00:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Thanks, fixed. - Jmabel | Talk 03:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Here goes another tips to the article:

Overview

1) Between them, these facilitated better commercial exchange and communication between the country's distant regions.

This is not totally correct. Not only the roads helped the economical exchange and communications between distant brazilian regions, the ports helped doing the same with other countries.

2) International trade, that is, the sum of both imports and exports, amounted to a total value of 79.000:000 $000 between 1834 and 1839 and increased every year until it reached 472.000:000 $000 in 1886

You should put “Brazilian internation trade” to make it clear that the numbers are related to Brazil´s international trade, and not the world´s internation trade.

  • I think this is already clear from context, but it would be OK to be more precise. - Jmabel | Talk 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

3) For the purpose of comparison, between 1850 and 1900, Brazilian export of agricultural goods varied between 73% and 83% of the United States' total exports.

This is a mistake. What a did was compare both Brazil and USA´s exports at the period. What it means is that the USA between 73% and 83% of all north american exports were agricultural goods. I was trying to show that both countries relyied on agricultural good´s exports at the time.

  • Ah. Then the previous wording was so confusing I didn't even understand it! I'll fix. - Jmabel | Talk 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Industry

4) Other incentives arose, such as the decree on 8 August 1846 that exempted manufactured products from the direitos''

You´re correct, the word “direitos” is related to taxes in this context. It means that the factories did not need to pay taxes for the transportation of their products.

  • OK, I'll write accordingly - Jmabel | Talk 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

5) The Alves Branco tariff underwent modification in 1857, reducing by 15% the tax on imported products

It is not “by 15%” but instead “to 15%”. Before the law, taxes to imported goods were 40% over its price, after this change, it became 15% over their price.

  • OK, I'll fix accordingly - Jmabel | Talk 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

6) Ao iniciar a década de 1850, havia cerca de 50 fábricas com capital superior a 7.000:000$000 This sentence is not translated. It means “In 1850, there were 50 factories with a capital superior to 7.000:000$000”

The currency of the time was called “Real” (in english it would mean “Royal” and not “Real” from “reality”) and when called “Réis” in the plural (“Royals”) which is the archaic portuguese to the modern “Reais”. This is also the same name of the modern currency of Brazil, but we do not call “Réis” but instead “Reais” in the plural.

  • OK, I'll fix accordingly. Yes, I knew about the currency, but if we don't currently spell this out in the article, we probably should. - Jmabel | Talk 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

7) devoted to estamparia and paper, by a decree of 26 June 1826

Yes, the correct is “stamping”.

  • Yes, but stamping of what? "Stamping" is very vague. - Jmabel | Talk 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing, you wrote the name of historian Fernando J. Devoto as “DeVoto” like in “McCain” but the correct is “Devoto”.

  • I'll fix. Interesting, in the U.S. that is almost always “DeVoto”.

- --Lecen (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

The word "estamparia" is related to "estampa" wich in english it would be something similar to printing, engraving, etc...

About the point raised by you at the article´s discussion, about the possibility of the existence of another view about the Empire´s economy, it happens that the matter is realted more about the history of the Empire´s historiography than with the history of the Empire itself.

From 1890 to 1920s, the republican that ousted the Emperor out of power "re-imagined" Brazil´s history. Names of streets, parks, towns and others were changed for "republican" names. Instead of a "Rua do Príncipe", there was a new "Rua XV de Novembro" and similar. The same happened with history, facts were changes, new "heroes" appeared. As Pedro I was an Emperor, they needed someone else to represent the country´s independence. At first, they choosed José Bonifácio, but he was a monarchist and a friend of the Emperor. So they picked a very obscure character called "Tiradentes" that lived at the end of the XVIII Century. As a hero of the end of the Slavery, they replaced princess Isabel with another very obscure character, "Zumbi dos Palmares", and african that lived in the XVII Century. And so and on.

The problem is that the First Republic (1889-1930) also known as "Old Republic" was a very problematic period. Revolts, coups, military uprising, dictatorship (1889-1894) and others occured. The country deeped itself into debt as the economy went down too. What happened was that the politicians started to blame the Empire for what was happening at the time.

But, from 1920 to now, historians have shown that the Empire was a very progressive period for the country, not only in matters related to economy, but also related to freedom of expression, elections, politics, military, etc...

- --Lecen (talk) 19:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's about how I understood it (but more concrete). In that case, perhaps the article as now written "doth protest too much". If the historiography being confronted is nearly eight decades old, we don't need to so often suggest that it is the conventional view. And where we do write in that mode, we should probably be clearer that the counterpoise is to historians who wrote during the First Republic or to those who sympathized with the governments of that era. - Jmabel | Talk 19:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

> The word "estamparia" is related to "estampa" wich in english it would be something similar to printing, engraving, etc...

  • So perhaps we would do better to say "paper and printing" than "stamping and paper"? - Jmabel | Talk 19:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Yep! Anothr issue: wouldn´t be a good idea to make an article only for the economy of the Empire: it´s quite long, and a I believe it would be better to make a simple resume and a link to the actual article that would contain the text that is presently there. Oh, and one last thing, there is a small topic on the article called "Coffe and Industrialization". It has quite a few mistakes in there and I believe it should be erased as the the one about Economy already talks about the same subject and with much more details. - --Lecen (talk) 20:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I would say you should feel free to remove redundant material yourself. As for factoring out an article specifically on the economy of the empire: my usual approach in these cases is to get things sorted out in one big article, they work out what is best factored out to separate articles. - Jmabel | Talk 21:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Jmabel, I´m now on Rio de Janeiro and I´m going to return to Fortaleza only on next saturday. As soon as I get back, I´ll look at every issue. Don´t worry! - Lecen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.29.248.237 (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Marra Farm

Updated DYK query On January 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Marra Farm, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 20:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review for the Spokane, Washington article

Hi, Jmabel. I was wondering if you would be up to peer reviewing the Spokane, Washington article. The article recently reached good article status, but didnt do so well as a featured article candidate. Anyway, I know your busy right now doing the Seattle FAR stuff, so dont feel rushed; but if you are interested in reviewing the article sometime in the not-too-distant future, just holler back on my Talk page so I can stop scouting out reviewers. Thanks! Anon134 (talk) 08:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not working particularly on the Seattle FAR, but I'm very busy on other stuff. Also, I don't particularly know much about Spokane, and I haven't kept current with the constantly shifting FAR standards. - Jmabel | Talk 15:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks anyway Jmabel. Good luck with that other stuff! Anon134 (talk) 21:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Washington Talking Book & Braille Library

Updated DYK query On January 31, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Washington Talking Book & Braille Library, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 02:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Pretty certain this brings me up to at least 75 DYKs I've created or expanded (wasn't counting early on). - Jmabel | Talk 22:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Request for proofreading

Hi! Sorry to bother you with this, but it's really hard to find anybody who's es-4, listed on Proofreaders-es, and still actually contributing to WP. Could I persuade you to check a translation for me? It's a short excerpt from Lope de Vega's Isidoro de Madrid, in Homo unius libri#Interpretations. My translation is in the footnote. The language is a little archaic, and it's in verse, so this was a challenge for me and I could use your input (especially for the line «como van dejando atrás», which I translated to maintain the meter rather than literally). Thanks, if you're willing to help! --Unconventional (talk) 22:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I think most of what you have is reasonable. I think you were a bit thrown by «como van dejando atrás»; I'd go for

For a noteworthy student is he
Who is [the student] of a single book.
For when they were not filled [Or perhaps more clearly For were they not filled]
With as many extraneous books
As they leave behind,
Men would know the more
Because they studied from fewer.

- Jmabel | Talk 22:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Definitely, "were they not filled" is better. Thanks! I didn't see tantos...como that way because of the comma after agenos, but punctuation is less stable than spelling, even, so you're probably right. Also, I had chosen "less" rather than "fewer" for the meter, but "fewer" really is better. Thanks again! --Unconventional (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Empire of Brazil - again

Hello! I´m back! I´m going to read the Empire of Brazil article´s discussion to see what are the issues, but if there anything else that you would care to tell me, I´m glad to help! - --Lecen (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I´ve noticed that there are some untranslated sentences. I´m reading all the text to see all possible issues. I´m going to work on them, don´t worry. Thanks once more for your help with the translation and proofreading! Good day! - --Lecen (talk) 10:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey, hello again! I have translated a new section of the Empire of Brazil article. It´s the "Imperial Armada" section on "Armed Forces": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Brazil#Imperial_Armada Could you help me out with this one? If yes, once you´ve fixed any mistakes, I´ll put the sources. As always, thank you very much, - --Lecen (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your views

Hey Jmabel, it's been a while. I appreciate your giving your views regarding GrizzledOldMan's complaint about my deletion of certain comments I considered to be soapboxing - I've always respected your thinking. In light of that, what do you make of these very recent edits by GrizzledOldMan:[2] [3] They look suspiciously like WP:POINT to me. Jayjg (talk) 04:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely. He is doing exactly what I criticized you for. Please feel free to quote me on that; do you wish me to revert his edits and restore your remarks, rather than do so yourself? In any case, though I still urge you not to expunge other people's remarks. You have not put yourself on the best footing in this matter. - Jmabel | Talk 04:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, he's not doing exactly what you criticized me for. I removed comments that actually were soapboxing, whereas he removed my comments merely for the purposes of WP:POINT (or perhaps tit-for-tat). In any event, I appreciate your offer, but I've already reverted him. Jayjg (talk) 04:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
And he continues:[4] Jayjg (talk) 05:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I failed to see how your comments added anything to the discussion - hence soapboxing. You have no right to claim superiority in being able to judge what is or isn't soapboxing. GrizzledOldMan (talk) 11:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me: if that was addressed at me, I made no comments except those on personal talk pages and on the admin noticeboard telling you both to stop deleting each other's comments. If that was addressed at Jayjg, please take your attacks on each other elsewhere than my talk page. He came here with an appropriate message to show me that the issue was not entirely one-way. You came here to take a swipe at him. The latter is out of line. - Jmabel | Talk 15:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Terry Pettus

Updated DYK query On February 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Terry Pettus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 10:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

76 - Jmabel | Talk 15:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] German nature parks

Hey amigo. Thanks for the translation on that one! Cordialmente! Dr. Blofeld White cat 23:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment

Hi Jmabel. Thanks again for commenting on my Talk: page, but I'm not really sure what it was in reference to. Did something happen while I was away from Wikipedia? Jayjg (talk) 03:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Novel

Hi Jmabel. Nice to see that you are still on board. Actually I feel like quitting - not wikipedia but my present job under the burden of too much correcting work. Over the past weeks I have re-written the old Novel-article. The quality standards had improved so much, and I had always regretted how I ended this article around 1750. I had also felt: this is difficult to continue with all the national literatures popping up around 1800. Should I open different strands or should I assume universal periods - all which I did not like. Giving lectures on the history of literature I finally felt I could give it a new try thinking of the interaction novelists could reach in the field of literature and its debates during the last two centuries. One could step into the 19th century with its debates of national literature and from there into the 20th with its market of global debates and see how authors of fiction addressed these debates. Eventually I rewrote the entire thing. This is the present version novel and this is the one with the last headlines still giving their original statements [5] (I am in a discussion here on these last headlines, that does not need to bother you...)

What I want to ask you (and hardly dare) is, whether I could have your help again as a copy editor to change my awkward German (and by now all too academic) English into something high schoolers, will understand. I'd again try to state things clearer wherever I remained opaque. Yet often the intelligent reader immediately realises what I wanted to say (whilst I do not realise that I did not). This thing has been a bit of work, but eventually I enjoyed the risk to step beyond what I had done. I'd be really happy if it became something entirely wikipedic - an article on the importance of novels in the discussions that surround us. Ah, awkward, it's snowing outside. I should get home and return to my correction work. Hope you are well, --Olaf Simons (talk) 14:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to take a shot some time in the next week or so. - Jmabel | Talk 15:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I'll enjoy looking over your shoulder (was borne with the wrong language in my mouth, sorry for that), --Olaf Simons (talk)

[edit] Unhelpful talk page comments

Hi Jmabel. Regarding our previous discussion, I noticed on another page that the editor in question appears to make a comment that was mostly a gratuitous personal attack on two editors, one of whom wasn't even active on the Talk: page.[6] In this situation what would you recommend doing? Jayjg (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have enough context to really know the significance of that, nor enough time right now to work it out, but it looks like he's taking a completely egregious swipe at you. I guess in your shoes I'd either ignore it or take it to AN/I as a civility issue that he's going around randomly insulting you. - Jmabel | Talk 00:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, it was at around the same time he made this extraordinary comment, parts of which he subsequently struck through. I'm not sure it would be worth taking him to AN/I. He has his rabid defenders, who view any attempt to get him to stop insulting other editors and continually soapboxing on Talk: pages as a political attempt to muzzle him; notwithstanding the fact that his comments only detract from the credibility of their positions. Sigh. Jayjg (talk) 01:44, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Again, just ignoring him could be the best choice. But assuming that Isarig was not your "meat puppet", I think it would also be reasonable to bring it to AN/I and say that you want him either he substantiate his accusations (e.g. via an RFC) or refrain from making them, since they amount to personal attacks. On a few occasions (though it hasn't come up recently) I've done just that with someone who was attacking me. - Jmabel | Talk 02:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not worth the effort. I take heart in the fact that even his defenders are getting tired of him. Jayjg (talk) 04:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Purse Seiners

Hi, this is in reply to your questions on my talk about, regarding purse seiners being in the category of fishing ships. First, the definition of a "ship", as I understand it, is related to this saying: "A boat can carry another boat, but a ship cannot carry another ship". So the size of the vessel is the determining factor, in this case. For example, the fishing boats I worked on commonly carried other (smaller) boats, and a ship could be loaded up with a number of the large fishing boats as well. However, you could not load one of those ships onto another ship (too large to be supportable out of the water).

A "purse seiner" is a vessel that does a specific job: purse seining. In Alaska, the sizes of our seiners is regulated by the state, they cannot exceed a certain length. In Peru, however, the restriction either isn't there, or it allows for a much larger size of vessel. They have ships that are purse seiners.

So there are two different dimensions here, what the vessel is primarily used for, and how large it is. These are not necessarily related in this case.

I hope this helps! Wadsworth (talk) 20:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. So there are seiners that are ships. That's all I needed to know. (Living in Seattle I'd seen only the ones on the same scale as for Alaska.) - Jmabel | Talk 22:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Oriental cockroach

You have new messages
Hello, Jmabel. You have new messages at Rehman Abubakr's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[edit] Gas Works Park in Seattle on NRHP?

Hi Jm ... Many moons ago (September 2, 2007), you added Gas Works Park in Seattle to National Register of Historic Places listings in King County, Washington (here's the diff). I searched the NPS NRIS database and can't find this site. Do you know for certain that it's listed on the NRHP? If so, can you provide a source? I realize that this goes back a ways and that you may not recall, but I figured it couldn't do any harm to ask. Any information you could provide is appreciated. Thanks in advance. --sanfranman59 (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. Perhaps it is not on the list. http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/WA/King/districts.html says it was added in 2002, and I would have thought that would be reliable. Says "Also known as Seattle Lighting Co." if that's any help. On the other hand, Preservation Seattle says it was nominated in 2002, but "The nomination was well-received but did not meet the technical requirements of the National Park Service at this time." I don't know who to believe. - Jmabel | Talk 02:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com is a commercial site and not official. Their list seems to include any site for which an application has been submitted regardless of whether the application ultimately resultrf in the site being listed in the register. I thought perhaps that was your source. Given that the Gas Works site does not come up in a search of the NRIS database and the quote you cite from historicseattle.org, I'm going to remove it from the list. Thanks again for the information and happy editing! --sanfranman59 (talk) 04:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nazi, Swastika References Being Purged from Syrian Social Nationalist Party

Would you mind having a look at the problem of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party's Nazi history and swastika flag being systematically deleted/vandalized? This removes an important aspect of neutrality from the article. References from many reliable sources are provided. See its talk page. The edits are being done by users with IP addresses from very similar domains. Thanks, Histopher Critchens (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK nomination of Dave Lewis (musician)

Hello! Your submission of Dave Lewis (musician) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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 - one is April 8 (Wednesday) starting at 6 pm and the other is April 18 (Saturday) starting at 10 am. (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) 00:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] invitation

You're invited to sign up as a founding member, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#WikiProject Historic Sites ! :) doncram (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Historic Sites is opened up. I took the liberty of assuming your support for the wikiproject meant you wanted to join as a member, and I copied your signature to the Members list on the main page. Please visit and add to, or remove, your listing there. It would be great to hear about what you're interested in the Wikiproject becoming, in your member comment and/or at the Talk page, shortcut wt:HSITES. Thanks for your support! doncram (talk) 17:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Rajiv Lather

An article that you have been involved in editing, Rajiv Lather , has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajiv Lather (2nd nomination) . Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jay (talk) 03:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Real Change

Hey Jmabel, thanks for adding this recent info to the Real Change article. I noticed, however, that a number seems to be missing (I guess through an editing typo): " has declined somewhat, to __ percent." Would you be able to fill that in if you still have the report handy?

Best, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 04:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed. - Jmabel | Talk 04:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nicolescu

I cut what seemed an extraneous detail on his exam score; moreover, we don't use his quoted words, so it's now plausibly not a copyvio (at least it's as acceptable as you can get using only one source). Granted, that source doesn't seem to meet WP:RS, but a quick search turned up nothing more useable. I don't mind further cutting, but right now it's fairly basic. - Biruitorul Talk 05:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

All righty, good to hear. - Biruitorul Talk 05:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Synagogues and Jewish congregations in Washington

Wonderful page. I do hope you will add the appropriate buildig and congregation to Oldest synagogues in the United StatesHistoricist (talk) 14:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Did what I could there. I wasn't particularly looking for "oldest" when I had a reference book in hand, so there may be other candidates by other definitions. - Jmabel | Talk 16:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Greenwater, Washington

Thanks for the heads up regarding the map. It was caused by a little quirk with a few communities that straddle county boundaries, where the program I used to create the maps misreads a part of the city as being within the neighboring county and creates a map of it, even though it doesn't really exist. I replaced it with the correct map of the city in Pierce county. The incorrect map should be nominated for deletion on Commons. Shereth 03:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Vintage seattle

http://www.vintageseattle.org/ Not sure if you've seen this, for possible leads on stuff, or just to enjoy. I just found it, and thought of you and another friend that might enjoy it. :) rootology (C)(T) 05:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Yup, I know these folks, and have intermittently used their site. But thanks for pointing it out: if I hadn't known it, I'd certainly have wanted to. - Jmabel | Talk 16:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Writing world history

i didn't no the authors on Writing world history and added some. 81.106.67.236 (talk) 18:55, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the picture

Meridian_Playground_(Seattle) SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

[edit] Thank you...

...for your hard work translating List of Latin American cities by population. Much appreciated here. --Wavehunter (talk) 17:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. It was actually an easy one. - Jmabel | Talk 17:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Duwamish (tribe)

Hi, I got your comment on my talk page and looked at the article. It certainly is vastly improved. Good work! Gr8white (talk) 05:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] German Unification article

Hi Jmabel, I'm in a quandary about the German unification article. It needed a lot of work, and I read your comments on its discussion page. I've done a bit of "tweeking" I guess you could call it...it's vastly longer, and more elaborate. I'm confused about what else to do, however, how to get it "approved," etc., and then what? as an experienced wikipedia person, can you help me? It is on my user page....Auntieruth55 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC).

Responding at User talk:Auntieruth55. - Jmabel | Talk 00:20, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm still confused about how to do some of this stuff. But there is a problem still with the unification article. The map that includes some of the German colonies also includes a notation about "Little Venice" in present day Venezuela, and the dates are some time in the 16th century. This seems a bit (more than a bit) odd to me, and that map should be edited, or removed. I couldn't figure out how to remove it, or edit it. Possibly the map is in a template? How and who do I go to re that? Auntieruth55 (talk) 14:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Pete_Seeger#90th_birthday

I responded to your comment. Bearian (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Selleck, Washington

A vivid and fascinating article. Regards. Haploidavey (talk) 22:25, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] English to Spanish user warning request

Hello, User:Academic Challenger suggested that you may be able to help with a language barrier problem I have. There is a discussion at Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents regarding a spanish speaking user uploading copyrighted material in bulk. Rather than simply block the user (which I would do if I was sure the multiple warnings had been received clearly), I would like to be able to establish some contact before escalating the situation. Could you post a message at User talk:MRDU08 explaining our copyright policy and the situation he or she is in? I think that the most recent message left could serve as a good template. Thanks in advance for any help you can render. Protonk (talk) 22:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Done, to the best of my ability. I'm not as solid on English-to-Spanish as vice versa, but I think it should be clear, if perhaps imperfect. - Jmabel | Talk 00:31, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Protonk (talk) 01:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ashkenazi Jews

Not sure how active you are these days? We have a troll over on Ashkenazi Jews. Would you have a look? Metzenberg (talk) 01:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I made a couple of comments, but I don't really want to wade in with both feet. - Jmabel | Talk 05:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Selleck, Washington

Updated DYK query On May 16, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Selleck, Washington, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 17:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That should make 77 confirmed DYKs for me. - Jmabel | Talk 17:57, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Joseph Wicks

Updated DYK query On May 19, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joseph Wicks, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Shubinator (talk) 15:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

78! - Jmabel | Talk 16:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK nomination of Lincoln High School (Seattle, Washington)

Hello! Your submission of Lincoln High School (Seattle, Washington) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Shubinator (talk) 14:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] DYK for Lincoln High School (Seattle, Washington)

Updated DYK query On May 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lincoln High School (Seattle, Washington), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 08:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

79. - Jmabel | Talk 15:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Request to participate in University of Washington survey based on ideas gathered during the Wikipedia focus group you attended

Hello again! As we mentioned when you attended our focus group back in April, our goal was to use your feedback to help design an embedded application that could quickly communicate useful information about other Wikipedians. We have now created a few images that we feel represent some of what you thought was important. We would appreciate it if you took a few minutes of your time to complete an online survey that investigates whether or not these images would be useful to you.

To take the survey, click this link.

Please feel free to share the link with other Wikipedians. The more feedback, the better! The survey is completely anonymous and takes less than 10 minutes to complete. All data is used for university research purposes only.

Even if you are unable or unwilling to take this survey, we want to thank you for attending our focus group. Your generous contribution of your time and ideas was greatly appreciated! Commprac01 (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

Hi! I have found your following question: "Is there a relevant distinction between the Crown of the Polish Kingdom and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth?" Of course it is. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów, the Republic of the Two Nations) was created as a single state, by an union of Crown of the Polish Kingdom and Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1569 (Union of Lublin), and existed formally until 1791 (Constitution of May 3, 1791), and as the First Republic of Poland (Rzeczpospolita Polska) from 1791 to 1795. Similarly, Austria-Hungary, the Dual Monarchy existed since 1867 until 1918. - Warm regards, Mibelz (talk) 15:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fascism

I am contacting you because you commented on this topic a while ago.

Following a recent RfC, there is currently a proposal regarding the issue of whether or not it is appropriate to characterise fascism as "right-wing".

Even if you don't have much to say, it would be useful if you could let your view be known in order to help guide the discussion towards some sort of conclusion.

Please take a look: here.

Thank you. --FormerIP (talk) 23:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rainier Club

You have done work on the National Register of Historic Places in King County list and saw the Rainier Club article in the Seattle Times today (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009366972_rainierclub22m.html). It looks like it is not on the national list but is on the state list. It may need to be removed from the list at National Register of Historic Places listings in King County, Washington (unless I am reading it wrong) but at least there is an easy source to create an article off of. Wanted to run it by you before deleting anything since it looks like you have researched it far more than I have. If I was to start an article for it, would you suggest doing it for the club itself or the building? As a side note, the image you uploaded of Qwest Field during construction (File:Qwest Field (Seahawks Stadium) under construction - 2001.jpg) is awesome.Cptnono (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The article you cite does not say it is not on the National Register. It does say it is not considered "nationally significant". Places can be on the National Register without being listed as "nationally significant". See http://www.nps.gov/history/NR/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_5.htm. According to http://www.preservationnation.org/take-action/advocacy-center/lobby-day/sample-documents/projects/Rainier-Club.pdf, the Rainier Club is on the National Register, but listed only as being of "state significance." - Jmabel | Talk 16:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Sweet. Thanks for clearing that up.Cptnono (talk) 20:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Apartment buildings in Berlin

Hi, I have reverted the categories as you have suggested (referring to User_talk:Beek100)

ps I wonder if Tenment Houses might be better than Buildings

--AnRo0002 (talk) 20:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I know how the word "tenement" is used in the U.S.—it's a pretty specific type of apartment building—but I'm not sure how international that usage is. - Jmabel | Talk 04:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fujitaro Kubota

I've pulled together the beginnings of a stub article about Fujitaro Kubota. As you may know, the information which is available on the internet is sparse. I wonder if you might have access to relevant material which is otherwise unavailable to me.

In any case, I wonder if a gallery of Kubota Garden photos might be appropriate at the bottom of this article which focuses on the gardener rather than the garden. In part, this notion was inspired by the images you captured showing kanji inscribed in stone. Does this seem like a good idea ... or is it perhaps too much of a stretch ...?

What do you think? --Tenmei (talk) 23:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

No strong opinion on the value of a gallery: it's easy enough to find the one on the Commons. I don't have any special access to any material on him, but you might contact the Kubota Garden Foundation. The Seattle Department of Parks and Recreation would probably give you some help, too, if you ask. (I just looked, and these are precisely what you've already linked!) - Jmabel | Talk 23:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jmabel"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs