August 2010[edit]

Wow![edit]

So much info is being released right now, grab an umbrella cause its an epic downpour of Saw! I think its fucked that PA2 can scare Saw into a later release date but i think itl help raise the nums cause of an actual halloween weekend opening again for the first time in a few years (rather than the friday a week before as in VI) I hope that; increase the numbers. holy shit that trailer blew my mind! Jill is going to get creamed i can tell. I like the garage trap and the cage the guy dropped from. did you catch the flashes of the red spiral and hoffman in mask? i like the table saw trap too omg it like was attached to a bungee cord. stupid people were holding up camera phones all around the outside tho hahaha. Flannerys garage trap was looking gritty great, did you see the guy chained behind the car? I think the opening scene will be Jill just getting fucked for not making sure Hoffman is dead, im getting that feeling. And I cant wait for the Gordon scenes here we come Saw! Keep me updated Ground Z3R0 002 06:38, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the double post but i feel the edit war is about to hit the fan so we need to watch this article religiously. Case being, I'm about to make some relatively large changes to the article and I thought i'd let you know. Im capitalizing on views so i want to get this up to date as quickly as possible, but feel free to revert my edits that detract from the article, I won't begrudge that :) I'm going to add Chester Bennington of Linkin Park to the cast list. No, I didn't believe it at first either, I thought it was Flannery. But his official website has the trailer up there and the internet has taken a field day with it so I guess its true. Next, I'm going to add a stint about the trailer being released in the promo sections. And finally, we should find a source describing all the things found in the trailer and put it in the trap or plot section. Can we put ref 21 in the traps section with the description of the public tablesaw trap? Looks like were busy for awhile. Cheers, Ground Z3R0 002 10:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, the article is protected until October! On your changes, I tweaked some. Like the World Record, it's already on the franchise page. Since they were honoring the franchise as a whole and not just Saw 3D. There was a "twitter rumor" months ago that Chester was in the film. I guess we know now. LOL. Yes I thought about adding the first 8 minutes into the plot, since I mean.. it's available. Some other sources have a better summary of it though. I know Wikipedia is not against spoilers, but do you think it's too much? (I don't) Mike Allen 07:56, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually going to ask you the same thing. I see no reason why we shouldn't add other than rage from the people who don't understand WP:SPOILER. go ahead and add it. there was a rumor? oh cool i was worried he got mistaken for Flannery, who has a striking resemblance. and good move i shouldve thought about the records section. ive got a bit more info of SDCC for the game as well, only a brief snippet and a promo photo though but its something to fill out the dev section. Ground Z3R0 002 08:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's Flannery in the cage trap. I hope they play a 3D theatrical trailer in front of Resident Evil: Afterlife in September. I don't think it's a big "spoiler" since it's the beginning of the movie. LOL. People that saw it at Comic Con (no one recorded it) say the clip really wasn't "done". Like the music hadn't been added (Clouser has just recently started to score the film), the lighting was off, and there was a dub voice in place of Tobin's (playing with the Billy doll). So Lionsgate probably won't release it (if ever) until they edit it. I've forgotten about the game at Comic Con! LOL I'm so glad they are finally going to show the original Saw ending (Zepp, Adam, Jigsaw and Zepp's tape) again. It was missing from Saw II. Saw III-Saw VI has all had the ending of the previous film played at the beginning of the next one. It's about time. Mike Allen 23:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that would be a good idea since its a similar audience, Im going to RE:A also. Oh really? bummer but I think I wouldnt want to see the scene until the full movie in October anyways, idk. Yeah the game didnt get many previews that ive seen but it did have that large poster hanging by the konami booth. Yeah the ending will bring a nice, full circle feel to the franchise. What happened to all that casting section that was there before? I like that table by the way :) Ground Z3R0 002 08:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retired Wiki Film Project coordinator, Erik gave me some advice, here. He suggested that a table would work for something like that (returning characters/actors). He also said that the other casting info would become dated once the film was released. Btw, Saw VI is in peer review (working my way up to a Feature article review soon, *gulp*). But it's lacking some offline sources (magazines, like Fangoria). Do you happen to have the 2009 Fangoria magazine when they featured Saw VI?? That's about the only magazine/book that would have Saw VI in it, I would think. Mike Allen 08:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good idea. I hope it can make it i;m not familiar with the current standard of FA for films but i think VI is a fantastic article. no, i dont have that Fangoria, but wouldnt they post it on their website? or maybe we could find scans of the article and source it offline? I don't know your preference of music, but it seems Avenged Sevenfold is getting a good debut next week, I'm gonna work on that article until new Saw info is released. Ground Z3R0 002 08:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may be fantastic, but it's not the best work ever... yet. :P I found some scans of the Fangoria article on a Saw forum. I got some interesting details, like Kevin was promised if he edited Saw V that he would be able to direct Saw VI. Saw 3D will be featured soon in a the new issue and I plan on getting it. I think it'll also have Resident Evil: Afterlife in it. No, they don't keep articles on their website for long. That's when if you reference them in an article, you need to WebCite the link. I've never heard of that band. I don't really have a strong preference in music; I just listen to what's popular now and from the early 2000's (but not any rap or Justin Bieber or Miley of course). LOL. Mike Allen 07:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hah yeah and good find. Let me know if the new Fangoria has anything good. How do you webcite? Ive been trying to figure that out for the video game articles which are getting more and more dead links :( could you help me out on webciting those articles? hah yeah me either bieber is the aaron carter from our generation i cant listen to that crap lol Ground Z3R0 002 07:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let me know the articles and I'll see what I can do later today. Mike Allen 06:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's mainly the Saw (video game) article because it relys on alot of BD and other refs from sites that delete articles after awhile but i figure might as well do the Saw II: Flesh & Blood article as well to prevent future workload. Wow, that "book" is a shamble and offensive to our edits. They didn't even bother to come up with a title, or a background to the cover. That is ridiculous, that is the lowest form of legal thievery. Blah. Did you catch this? I'd like to get the original Saw film article to get a development, production, and other sections to expand it, what do you think? Ground Z3R0 002 08:48, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMS July 2010 Newsletter[edit]

The July 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:06, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Writer credits in the film infobox[edit]

Hey there! :-) The discussion on the writer credits in the film infobox has really picked up in the last few days (basically all comments starting from July 30th), and we're now getting closer to a consensus. Currently, we are trying to determine if there are any objections to adding the fields "Screenplay by" and "Story by". The discussion is still located here. If you have read up on the suggestions and have any objections to these two fields, please post here. If some time goes by without objections, we will take these additions for granted and move on to the next solution. Thank you in advance! Prime Blue (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So funny[edit]

By this edit I guess some random IP doesn't like us for some reason LOL. Red Flag on the Right Side 23:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! Why is it that when an IP vandalizes me, it's always about me sucking cock or something. I don't understand it! It was pretty funny though. It irritates me when you have no idea who it is. That's what pisses me off. It's got to be someone that we had contact with in the past, why would they randomly pick us to say that. Oh well, they just a haterz! Mike Allen 00:23, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol I found it so funny cause its not like I reverted his vandalism or anything he just randomly goes to our user pages and puts "horrible" things D: lol but these vandals are never origional its always about sucking cock lol. He also said I was the lover of Adam Lambert WTF, does he think Lambert the gayest man on earth or something? LOL. Red Flag on the Right Side 00:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hah wow and he had to edit the Saw award too, way to be stupid IP editors. Ground Z3R0 002 06:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw.[edit]

Hey Mike, sorry. My Internet was down for a long time. When I was able to get on for some brief periods, I had focussed on other things besides Wikipedia. Hopefully I'll be back in full-swing soon. Let me know if I can help with anything. --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 00:25, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I was looking at the history of the Saw VI article from this time last year and the talk page (where I first started contributing) and there's was quite a few regular editors. Now I don't see them anymore. Saw VI is a GA and is going through a peer review to get ready for a FAC. It would help if there were anymore offline sources to add. I added some of the bits from the Fangoria. Do you know if there were more magazines that had any Saw VI info last year? Saw 3D is shaping up nicely, it's protected until October (can you believe that), so I don't have to worry with that much. If you haven't been keeping up, Dr. G is back and is confirmed to be the last one. :-D Mike Allen 00:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I actually just got Saw VI on DVD, haven't watched it yet though. And I did happen to see about #D, with G/being last. I haven't really checked the article for VI, but, do we have sources from maybe the bonus material (commentaries, interviews, etc.)? --H E L LØ ŦH E R E 00:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What? You didn't see it in theaters?! I rented the DVD in January and didn't really hear anything worth adding. I miss Daren's Diary and James and Leigh's commentaries. Sigh. Mike Allen 02:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oz, The Great and Powerful[edit]

We have only three sourced sentences to consider, so how about a merge/redirect to Adaptations of The Wizard of Oz#Film adaptations until such time (if ever) that this might merit a stand-alone? --Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:07, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the response at AFD. Occasionally a politely and well-reasoned BOLD redirect might be reverted... but not too often... and then we can always come to AFD to thrash it out. Nice job though. Nice job. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a quite of bold redirects lately. This recent one comes to mind. Mike Allen 02:49, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which is supported by the May AFD for that article: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Men in Black III-D. The IP brought it back too soon. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Denlon?[edit]

I was away from editing the characters page for a few months so you might know more than me but I thouight Jeff had been Jeff Reinhart on the page for a long time, when did he become Denlon? Or is that someones mistake? I dont know for sure so won't correct itDarkwarriorblake (talk) 00:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently someone submitted "Jeff Reinhart" to IMDb before Saw III was released. [1] Kevin Greutert commented about this on the house of jigsaw forums (he said he wondered where that last name came from), but I can't find it, since the forum database is corrupted. Also, Jeff and Lynn were married, so it makes sense for them to have the same last names. On the other hand, I removed "Tara Abbott" because who knows if she remarried from the time Harold died and the current events of Saw VI. Also, I know Wikipedia includes spoilers, but come on that's a cheap shot. Mike Allen 01:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What#s a cheap shot? And ok, I figured the same, that Lynn probably went back to her old name but don't know for sure.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:05, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To have Tara's last name listed. Mike Allen 21:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar issues[edit]

Wass sup? lolz, anyways people are complaining about my grammar issues for the Bad Girls Club (season 5) episode 1 summary, so can you help by fixing my problems thanks? --AJona1992 (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have the articles off my watchlist, trying to improve those articles is impossible so I just gave up. Looking at the season 5 page, the whole reception is copied word by word from here. Which is pretty much a copyright violation. The plot summary is way too long, it should just be a brief summary of the episode. I have too many articles in my watchlist and also have one prepping for a featured article. I can't devote my time on those articles anymore, because in the end, it's just a waste of time. I'm sorry and good luck. Also, the season 5 section of List of Bad Girls episodes is copied from TVGuide.com, so I went ahead and removed the copyright violations. They need to written in your own words. Mike Allen 23:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AWWW you was such a great contributer there lolz, and ok I will re-write those sections again ;) and for the List of BGC Ep's wasn't me, I only added the "main" template lolz. Thanks for looking out Mike. Hope everything turns out good for your FA article! --AJona1992 (talk) 01:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you take a look at this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AJona1992/Sandbox) I am trying to move it to the "List of the Bad Girls Club episodes" (season 5) but as I move it, the section goes blank. Am I doing something wrong? AJona1992 (talk) 21:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How are you moving it? Also the summaries shouldn't be a recap of the episode, just a basic summary. Mike Allen 22:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FLC nomination[edit]

JuneGloom07 Talk? , Courcelles (talk) and I nominated the article List of awards and nominations received by Up in the Air for FLC. This list is a child article to Up in the Air (film). I would appreciate your considered comments regarding the nomination on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of accolades received by Up in the Air/archive1. --Dan Dassow (talk) 13:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the answer...[edit]

A minus sign preceding any word removes results that include that word. For instance, a "-Wikipedia" removes the Wikipedia results from the search. And if not wishing to use a Find sources, one can always go to Google Archives and create one's own special search parameters. If results are too confusing, a "-" in front of a term can begin clearing unwanted results... just as a "+" before an additional search term can also act to refine a search. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:17, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips! :D Mike Allen 14:08, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Objectivecorrector's long version of the expanded plot for Salt[edit]

You are right, and for the plot of the Salt movie, I should not have exceeded the maximum number of words allowed in the guidelines for movie plots. You have my apologies, and I am not a professional writer, but please note that according to the Wikipedia guidelines, there are exceptions for those movies which deserve a longer plot summary. In this case, I will refrain from further interference other than possible spelling errors, since you were the original writer, but to do more justice to the movie, please make an effort to add a few more sentences to the "summary" . The plot of Salt is rather complex and deserves more details, or else the movie will look too ordinary and worthless, doing injustice to both the director as well as the writer of the plot. Since you are in charge of this article, I must emphasize that those who read this plot summary in its brief from may not be sufficiently motivated to see Salt. This was my complaint.

In fact, even by being more laconic you can further clarify the movie just by adding a bit more, without my verbose method of writing, but if you see Salt more than once (or Equilibrium written and directed by the same author Kurt Wimmer) I am sure you will agree that the article deserves more justice.

Regards, Objectivecorrector

I don't think people will want to read the "plot" before they see the film, especially if it's a blow-by-blow detail of what happens. On the the other hand, if they do read the plot before watching the film, then it makes sense to keep it as concise as possible. There's many films that are more complex than Salt and gets by with 400-700 words since you're just summarizing the film, though there are rare exceptions. I don't see this as one. Also, I'm not "in charge" of any articles here, I and most of everyone else just tries to keep things within guidelines and policies. See WP:FILMPLOT and WP:PLOTSUM on how to write a more concise plot summary. :) Mike Allen 07:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, in this case, in the future I would only add a few sentences to the plot, no more than 50 words approximately. I just want to indicate how various events are related so that the coherence in the plot is not obfuscated.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Objectivecorrector (talk • contribs) 22:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This time you were perhaps too intolerant, this is what I don't understand. This time, as I had promised in my last message, I have added a lot LESS sentences, and I did not bring the grand total of words too far from the original. Note that you have even deleted another person's work (Siddharta). I have only clarified the story, which in its current form looks incoherent and chaotic, and this is injustice to the film. OK, this time I have only clarified two sentences, and I have also corrected a crucial fact which was incorrect. It really does look short this time.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Objectivecorrector (talk • contribs) 05:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although I complied (with your interpretation of the law), please note that other people are more flexible than you in their interpretation of the guidelines: Please click here to see that the plot "summary" of the Equilibrium movie (written and directed by Kurt Wimmer, who also wrote Salt) is much longer than Salt's summary, and there are indeed many details, because without these the originality of the film cannot be understood:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium_%28film%29

And please note that I was NOT one of the people who wrote the plot of Equilibrium, as I have not made any contribution to the plot of Equilibrium whatsoever! On the other hand, what I was trying to do at Salt's summary was just to add some aesthetic coherence to it, I was not repeating the whole film. A "summary" does not have to denigrate and debase the movie, it can have some soul! You keep saying "it's not you", but you are immediately deleting text en masse, without saying why you think such and such sentences are irrelevant, I could have shortened my additions if you had sent me a message before deleting it en masse.

Anyway, to change the subject, I have a question on a separate subject: How can one create a new sub-section in the Salt movie page, so that it can be edited separately. For instance, I would like to create a short sub-chapter in the Salt page, mentioning articles that show how Kurt Wimmer's previous movie Equilibrium was similarly written like Salt. I do not see how to create a new sub-section of the Salt page, so that it has its own "edit" icon. Regards, ObjectiveCorrector.

OK, but in that case at least the Schneider character needs credit, as this is an important part of the film. I will not put the parents of Salt, etc. Regards, ObjectiveCorrector

Why is it that editors seem to care more about the plot than the article itself. Also the WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS argument is not valid. I don't care about other articles, guess what they're wrong too. A good concise plot summary is 400-700 words. The plot (for now) is at 663 words. Mike Allen 07:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although I concede that a maximum of 700 words should be used for the plot summary, the cast can be made a little longer than just 8 actors. Here is the German edition of the Salt article at Wikipedia, where the father and mother of Salt are given credit. Also the older Orlov in 1975, and the 12-year-old Salt are given credit. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_%28Film%29. On the other hand you were right when you said that inside the cast I should not add plot details while mentioning actors, but this time at least please let me add the parents of Salt, and Orlov in 1975, and the 12-year-old Salt to the cast, in a briefer manner.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Objectivecorrector (talk • contribs) 05:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the German Wikipedia and they have different guidelines. I do not see the point in adding a character that is in the film no longer than 5 minutes. Mike Allen 00:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mike[edit]

Hey can you look at this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AJona1992/Sandbox5) and tell me what do you think? Should I create it, put it in the Bad Girls Club main page, or shouldn't bother with it? Thanks! AJona1992 (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is the page aiming at? Mike Allen 00:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help Please?[edit]

Hey Mike, I am about to embark on an epic adventure editing the "Chronicles of Ancient Darkness" wikipedia pages, as they are all stubs. I have been editing the "Wolf Brother" wikipedia page and was wondering if I could get your opinion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf_Brother It is of course not done but since your like the master of wikipedia i was wondering what you could tell me to do with the page. What should I add and whatever? I want to maybe even get it up to GA status. What can you tell me about editing pages for books? I am also going to be editing the book series main page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronicles_of_Ancient_Darkness and all of the other 5 books in the series pages as well. (Moviedude346 (talk) 03:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I'm not familiar with the Book MOS. Though looking at it, there's many places missing a reference. Prose could use some more work, and the plot summary is a tad long. I would recommend you get a Peer review before nominating it for GA. Mike Allen 00:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyways :D The book series has a wide array of charcters and I was wondering if it would be all right to devote an entire article to the charcters of the COAD universe. Right now the main COAD page only has a few sentances about the series three main heros, but there are loads more charcters the page doesnt even mention. Thought id ask you before i went ahead and did anything because i dont know if it would just be deleted :P (Moviedude346 (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

September 2010[edit]

WP:FILMS August 2010 Newsletter[edit]

The August 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILM September Election Nomination Period Open[edit]

The September 2010 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting five coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next year; members are invited to nominate themselves if interested. Please do not vote yet, voting will begin on September 15. This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you on board! :) You do not have to limit yourself to the scripted questions. In the past, I've added a question for myself to explain better what I hope to accomplish as a coordinator. You can see what I've written for this election! Cheers, Erik (talk | contribs) 15:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was going to write more but didn't want to bore the reader, lol. I see that I need to do some copyedits to my part and I will try and expand some more. I think I should make it clear that I do not want to be the 'lead' coordinator if it comes down to it. I think Nehrams does a great job with that, but I think I've read that he would like to step down this year. So.... Mike Allen 02:02, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010[edit]

Hello. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Scream 4. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. — Miss_HollyJ^Talk 22:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um, then let's discuss on the talk page like an editor should. Let's find out what the mess is and get it resolved. See you there... Mike Allen 03:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Cinema of" templates[edit]

Hello! A discussion about the use of {{Cinema of XXXX}} (like {{Cinema of France}}) in individual film articles has opened here. Your input would be greatly appreciated! BOVINEBOY2008 08:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Michael![edit]

It's been too long. Of course I know the warnings remain but it fills up the talk page. I suggest you stop obsessing over me too, kid. Oh and please send my regards to your dog. She's cute. --70.127.205.86 (talk) 21:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use my birth name like you know me. Please... Mike Allen 21:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now I have that you are using different IPs to be disruptive to Wikipedia. ~~A nice addition to add to your upcoming report. ;-) Mike Allen 21:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

When you come back in 3 days (on this IP that is), why don't you be civil to people? You call me a kid like your 50 years old or something---act like it? Perhaps create a username too? Mike Allen 21:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please, spare me your snide remarks, Michael. My original IP address was clearly similar to begin with. My comment about your dog didn't make a difference. And I was quite serious, I like your dog. She is cute. Anyway, congratulations on your "strike" and "report". They clearly got rid of me. Cheers! :P --72.20.28.54 (talk) 21:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw VI[edit]

Hi. I'm not sure if you saw my new comments on the FAC page from yesterday. I saw no response. DeWaine (talk) 12:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]