Jump to content

User talk:Crisco 1492/Archive 34

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 32Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36→Archive 40

Keremeos, British Columbia

Hi Crisco! I tried to move Keremeos, British Columbia to just Keremeos, as per WP:PRECISION and WP:COMMONNAME, as there is nothing to disambiguate from, which is supposed to be "British Columbia". On the move page, it says I could "ask an administrator" to help, and since your are an admin, could you help me with this? Thanks so much, TBrandley 01:14, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Deletion request

Hey Crisco 1492. I created Wikipedia:WikiProject Grey's Anatomy A-Class review/Into You Like a Train/archive1‎, Wikipedia:WikiProject Grey's Anatomy A-Class review/Oh, the Guilt (Grey's Anatomy)/archive1, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Grey's Anatomy A-Class review/As We Know It/archive1 to test a new closing feature for ACR. Now that the tests are complete, can you please delete the test page ACRs? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Theory of Literature

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for William P. Didusch Center for Urologic History

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang

Hello! Your submission of Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Prioryman (talk) 09:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 November 2012

Have you seen THIS?

Oh, can't believe it, but we must find a way to stop this, its very tragic --TheChampionMan1234 06:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Oh for Pete's sake. More Draconian slander laws. Reminds me of Indonesia: publish anything negative about a company, no matter what the facts supporting it, and they'll try and get you for defamation. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:21, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
  • This is unacceptable, in my point of view, its normal for something like this to happen in a country without freedom of speech, but NOT for one like Italy, honestly, what's wrong with that, the admins of itwiki will remove things like that without any trouble, honestly, people publish stuff like that on Wikipedia, regardless of what language, I'll add this to the Italian Wikipedia article --TheChampionMan1234 06:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Ezra Pound

You made an edit, I reverted, the next step is to discuss on the talk, so please do so. Also, please review File:DorothyPound.jpg. Although subsequent images have been uploaded, I found all these images, worked with museums, etc., and know them very well. Please take it the talk page now, since you've reverted my revert. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:02, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm not aiming at getting you to go. In the end this will, hopefully, make your FAC go much more smoothly. Better to have comments when you are not under a time limit. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:24, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Crisco that so much bullshit. It's had multiple image reviews from the best of the best image reviewers and you know full well it's not going to FAC and full well why not. I haven't a chance in hell with people sharpening their knives, but please please don't patronize me like that. Btw - just a suggestion, but the next you support a lit page at FAC, have a look at the sources first if the person who is submitting has a history of problems. I won't take this fight any more and I'm fully aware of where it's coming from. If you want to rape [denude (added 11/5) Ezra of all the images be my guest b/c it's amply clear to me that I have no chance of getting it through FAC. That doesn't hurt me but it does hurt the readers. Keep that in mind. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:28, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Wow, TK, how about a little faith? I don't know your background with Pound, nor have I read the FAC. I was looking at the article after checking out the Parable of the sunfish at GAC and saw a couple non-free images which seemed to be in a weak position. Nothing more. I'm not out to get you or anything, I didn't even know you were involved with the article until you reverted me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
  • For removing a non-free image which does not, in my opinion, pass NFCC #8? Erm, no. I'm sorry if I treaded on your toes there, but I'd do the same at any article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
  • So you're saying you don't believe in BRD, just as you told Liz that templating regulars was okay. I'm shouldn't be shocked, but yeah, I am. There have been more image reviews of these images than I can count, and if I manage to set foot here again will maybe link to talk page. First let's see what others have to say. I need to step back from here. Seriously. Just a single question before I slam the door behind me: it's okay to misrepresent sources and in fact to support articles on FACs with misrepresented sources but not okay to have images with FURs in articles that aren't even GA! and represent more writing and research and work with museums and publishers than you can imagine? Truthkeeper (talk) 23:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I did not check the sources at Kafka, had I done so and found issues like you did I'd probably have opposed. I believe in BRD, but not as something that must be done. You said you wanted discussion on the talk page, I've started one outlining my concerns. As I noted with Liz, essays are not binding. Making them so is rule creep.
As for the images, those are something which I know fairly well and thus feel comfortable checking on every GAC and FAC that I review, unless the images have already been reviewed. The issue with the Pound images is not that they don't have FURs, but that they are not relevant to the textual discussion in a way that cannot be represented with text alone. Maybe I'm reading it too strictly, maybe others will disagree.
I think that you need to take a short wikibreak, try and breathe some fresh air, read something new (if you can find it in translation, Seno Gumira Ajidarma has some interesting and thought-provoking stories; another user said she liked Sitti Nurbaya as well). I am not, once again, out to get you or anyone else. Please realise that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:55, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Yep, well now the article has a star and I've had zip in the way of support on the talk page from everyone who lined up to support. The ironic thing is that I haven't even read the page yet, I've been spotchecking and that with an almost 100% rate of problematic edits. Somewhere along the line it would have been nice for someone else the have the guts and say, yep, maybe TK knows what she's talking about. Maybe we need to take a closer look. Anyway, I'm taking a break per your advice. Dunno who will tend my FAC given all the editors there have decided to pack it in. Truthkeeper (talk) 00:59, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Yes, not editing content at all since Gerda told him to go back to content, as though he was sent to the corner or something. Look, I came here, out of politeness, to ask you to discuss and was met with a abrupt "BRD is an essay" suggesting that a., you don't believe in it (though you did in fact discuss with SV); and b., that you reject established ways of doing things around here. That's fine, but please consider why these kinds of answers are upsetting. Now two good editors (female both) have decided to leave because of your actions. Truthkeeper (talk) 11:19, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
(excuse me, help my memory: I said what when?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
  • My apologies if I came of a little rough, but I was in the middle of working on the Signpost article and, to be honest, a little put off by "the next step is to discuss on the talk" (which implies that bringing things to talk is required). I will be happy to watch the FAC for you if you wish and fix grammar issues which come up, if you wish. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
  • In lieu of reverting again, yes, bringing things up on talk is the best next course. Thank you for your offer - I think I can muddle along grammar-wise - nor do I particularly want to take a break at this time. Or if I do, it will be my choice, not because an admin tells me so. I could use help with Franz Kafka though. This is not an issue of picking on anyone, it's an issue of source integrity and being certain that what we're serving to our readers as our best work is indeed that and that in fact sources are represented as precisely as possible. As I wasn't involved with the FAC (I would have opposed), I think it would helpful for those who were to dig a bit. It's entirely possible that only a small amount of work is required, but I don't think it's wise for me to be involved there anymore as it's obviously being misinterpreted. Truthkeeper (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
  • It was a suggestion, not an order. At the risk of sounding patronising, you've done really good work (and helped me a couple times) and I'd rather not see you burn out. As for Kafka, I can try to drop by when time permits... my master's programme is really sucking my energy. I've edited more in the past two days than the week before that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:47, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Let me just get this clear: real life is really sucking your energy (and presumably time); you tell a highly educated, female, well-established content expert that, as an admin, you believe templating regulars is okay - she leaves the project; you tell me, another well-educated, female, content expert that BRD isn't necessary - I'm tempted to leave the project; you don't have time to look a page that clearly lacks source integrity but you did have time to support it at FAC. And you tell me I'm burned out. Do you feel any remorse at all? Truthkeeper (talk) 23:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

As I told Liz, I don't mind being templated. I'm not going to be bugged by it. I also did not say "not necessary", I said "not required" as in it is not imposed upon us. I already started looking at Kafka. Here you go ABF-ing again. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

@Truthkeeper, what does being female have to do with any of this? Mark Arsten (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
The whole thing about how there's a gender gap and you ("you" being established male Wikipedians, not you personally) are meant to be making the wiki a more welcoming place for good female contributors. Crisco, I don't think your good intentions are coming across here, and it would really help if you could follow best practices for collaborative editing (which include things like not templating regulars and discussing when you're reverted, even if such niceties are not actually required). TK, I realize you're upset, but I think Crisco isn't quite understanding why - it might help to slow down and assume he hasn't done his "homework", even if you think he should've. Mark - you mean well, but your post to TK's talk is not going to help. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation Nikki, I was a bit confused after reading over this earlier today. I think we all have a responsibility to make the Wiki more welcoming to other contributors, and I will endeavor to do so. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Also, I hadn't seen this earlier, but criticizing Crisco for not "making the wiki a more welcoming place for good female contributors" is just plain nonsense. He told someone to AGF after she posted this edit to another contributor. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:21, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
He didn't tell her, he templated her - different concept. I haven't checked the background of that dispute, so don't know what prompted the initial comment...but templating an experienced editor, after they've just requested that they not be templated, and edit-warring with her over a questionable-but-not-blatant-PA comment is unlikely to promote AGF. (As an aside: I disagree with the gender-gap argument for reasons I'm not going to get into here - I was just clarifying the relevance of gender to the discussion - but would object to Crisco's actions in that case no matter the genders of the editors involved (though again, I'm sure it was well-intentioned)). Nikkimaria (talk) 22:37, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
I suppose I technically agree with your point about best practices, and I suspect that we agree on templates and gender gaps to a large degree. But it seems misguided to criticize Crisco for leaving the template a couple weeks after the fact, especially considering the reason the template was given. In my view, Crisco does a very good job welcoming contributors. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Look, let it go please. I apologize to Crisco. Truthkeeper (talk) 23:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, let's put all this behind us and work on some articles. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:21, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks everyone for the feedback. I'll try and apply it more in my editing. I'm not saying I agree entirely about templates, but they seem more widely condemned than appreciated so I'll try and avoid templating the regulars if I recognize them as regulars. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
  • <butting in>User Tomcat7 did not "explain" anything he templated incumbants on a featured article, and when they said "stop that", he reverted them, and then templated again. None of his own words, but wikipeak. Now *thats* just plain rude, and not a little offensive. But its in the letter and not a PA, but whatever. Crisco I had though you were ok, but was deeply dissapointed that you then went to Liz's page wagging your finger. Very poor call, imo. Ceoil (talk) 20:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I am not supporting Tomcat's action at the page (and quite honestly fail to see why anyone would force an infobox on a page... the whole debate astounds me, although not as much as {{Main}} debate at IT). As for Liz, looking at my talk page history I have yet to apologize to her. That shall be rectified shortly. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:21, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Its not so much a debate, its faily one sided, we dont go looking to remove them, and this was part of a campain on FAs around that time. There is other specific history I wont bore you with. But there are clues here. There is less randomness on wiki than you would think. Ceoil (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Give me strenght. Are you not aware of the positions you are taking and the tactic you are defending. Read all the above again, but more broadly. Ceoil (talk) 00:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
  • "I think those forcing infoboxes [on articles] should grow up. If the main editors want an infobox, fine, if not, fine." - How are you reading this as me supporting adding infoboxes where consensus is they are not needed? I disagree with the Rabbit's actions on Ian Fleming, for example, and could not possibly get behind Tomcat at the article you're referring to. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

So did I. A more complete sentence would have been "Don't worry, no offense taken." Alright, back to class for me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:51, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Whatever. In future before you go around pontificating, and ahem templating, know what your stepping in. Its all very well saying "I didnt know", once, but ive seen it a few times now, recently. You are aggrivating and upsetting people. Ceoil (talk) 02:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Pontificating? I beg your pardon. I am not "pontificating", nor am I trying to upset anyone. No, I did not know the history between Liz and Tomcat at the time of the templating (a situation which has been rectified); I have also apologised to her and hope that she stays on the project, iff it is not too stressful for her. As TK said elsewhere, Wikipedia is a wonderful project, and we should not lose sight of the forest for the trees. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Eek, I got caught in a ec with you from about my 20 minutes ago (hello from 12:am!) and what was posted was after Id vented. Back on planet earth, I do think your a fairly good admin, just need to develop a few senisitivities is all. And thats it. Eeek, sorry you got the brunt there, was not intended to be posted. Ceoil (talk) 02:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Kwee Tek Hoay

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Indonesia Malaise

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:21, 8 November 2012 (UTC) 00:02, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Sino-Indonesian theatre

Hi, I'm a fellow Canuck, currently Bandung-based, otherwise Nanjing-based. I'm in Indonesia doing research on Sino-Indonesian theatre and performance. The focus includes wayang potehi, wayang gantung, and spoken or musical theatre scripts in Malay, Indonesian and Chinese. Looking at your Wikipedia work, I think I might get some further tips from you on points of interesection between performance and the Chinese community. Any chance I can pick your brain next time I'm in Yogya? Or via e-mail? Njnu-ban-xueshenghao (talk) 14:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Nice to know there are other Canucks here! I don't have much personal or professional experience in that field (much of my work here with Chinese-Indonesian screenwriters is because they were directors too). However, I'd definitely suggest looking at how the stage barons ended up drifting to film (Tio Tek Djin tried and failed, but Njoo Cheong Seng had a much better time...). You could also look at the role of these would-be theatre personnel who ended up in film (Teguh Karya [who was also in theatre] and Wim Umboh come to mind, although the Wongs and Fred Young had nice, long careers). Sorry I can't be of more help. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
    • No, that's very helpful thanks. There's definitely a lot of crossover theatre/film especially in that generation, but if I go too much into film my project will get bloated. I'm having a hard time getting my hands on many scripts from that time, though. Like do you know of any modern (or otherwise available) editions of Njoo's theatre? That's too much to hope for, right? Njnu-ban-xueshenghao (talk) 12:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
      • Gramedia reprinted a couple of his novels / novellas in the early 2000s, but I don't have a copy here so I can't tell you which ones. You may want to try the Lontar Foundation; they've published a couple collections of dramas (I know for sure one included Andjar Asmara's Dr Samsi, admittedly not a Chinese author but from the right era) and may have included some Chinese works. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
        • Thanks--the Lontar edition I have, it has good material for me (Kwee Tak Hoay--The Lontar site actually has a downloadable doc for Allah jang palsoe if that interests you-- and Lie Kim Hok) but still missing Njoo as dramatist. I have Battalion Setan in the Kesastraan Melayu Tionghoa, and I see there's another (novella?) in volume 9: http://books.google.co.id/books?id=5WfLuxiBz4IC&pg=PA330&lpg=PA330&dq=battalion+setan&source=bl&ots=PYpSZpX8rd&sig=kmkh1bXJMVRghKi6zrPimnkHQ0g&hl=id&sa=X&ei=fOeXUPmTF4zVigKzzID4Bw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=battalion%20setan&f=false. But you mean Gramedia produced separate reprints as well, or did you mean this series? Theatre texts are proving harder to find for Njoo. Can I ask what you mean exactly when you write "His screenplays are accredited with revitalising theatre in the Indies."? You think the advance of cinema wasn't detrimental to popular theatre? Just wondering if I'm missing something...Njnu-ban-xueshenghao (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
          • Yeah, that's the series I meant. I've got Volume 2 here, but that doesn't have anything from Njoo. I think I saw Volume 9 at a book store a few weeks ago. The series is really nice, but can get pricey. (If I remember correctly, Rp. 70k per volume... next to nothing back home, but here...)
          • I don't doubt that the film industry made the theatre a less economically viable form of entertainment. They could (not saying they always did, but could) show the same show at the same time throughout Java and in parts of Sumatra and Kalimantan, yet only pay the actors once. As opposed to a theatre troupe, in which the cast has to be paid every month and you can only perform at a single place at any given time. As Tom Clancy is fond of writing, "talent goes where the money is".
          • Based on what I read in the source, it seems he was able to draw theatre audiences to the cinemas. If you look at List of films of the Dutch East Indies, you'll see that Njoo entered the industry while it was in really poor shape. He and Andjar, both fairly talented dramatists, began working with films and were fairly successful. They may have helped draw audiences who initially preferred the theatre, and generally more viewers = more money = more people clamouring to join the industry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:56, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
            • Right, so...do you mean that "His screenplays are credited with revitalising cinema in the Indies."? Because based on your explanation, I still don't see how his screenplays can have revitalised theatre...? No? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Njnu-ban-xueshenghao (talk • contribs) 04:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
              • Scratch that whole paragraph. This is what I get for answering early in the morning. Njoo and Andjar were working towards a more realistic form of the theatre, drifting away from the romanticised bangsawan and stambul; these forms had begun losing patrons and were viewed as dens of sin (Cohen's The Komedie Stamboel: Popular Theater in Colonial Indonesia, 1891–1903 discusses the wild sex lives of stage troupes). Siregar and Cohen (although he focuses on Andjar) note that the other troupes began using the tonil format, which was really popular until the mid 1930s - Andjar with Dardanella and Njoo with Riboet Orion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
                • I got my hands on Volumes 6, 8, and 9. Vol. 8 has Njoo's Battalion Setan (written under his pen name M. D'Amour), while Vol. 9 has his R. A. Moerhia. Both are novel(la)s. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:20, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
                  • In which case, isn't screenplays the wrong word? Either his screenplays are revitalising the cinema, or his scripts (or stageplays) are revitalising the theatre, or both (which is the case you make, and sees reasonable, though it still seems theatre loses out)--but I still don't see screenplays revitalising theatre, unless you are using one of the words more broadly than I usually understand it...Or maybe you want to change to "his scripts are credited with revitalising Indonesian theatre and cinema/stage and screen" or something similar. Re: Njoo, yes I knew Battalion was fiction, and figured Moerhia was. Still no hot leads on finding his drama. :( Njnu-ban-xueshenghao (talk) 09:25, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
                    • Have you seen any of the Njoo films? I've only seen stills or posters in articles and the IFC website. But is there a way of actually getting hold of them? Not to be greedy, haha. (and with continuing thanks for your help) Njnu-ban-xueshenghao (talk) 09:36, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, apparently the cited text was fine but the lead had been poorly written :-( . The earliest Indonesian film I've seen is Lewat Djam Malam, which is contemporary to Njoo's later work. The vast majority of films from before the 1950s (perhaps even from before the 1970s) are lost. I don't know if any of Njoo's survived, but if they did they would be at Sinematek Indonesia in Jakarta... now, in what kind of shape they're in... filmindonesia.or.id sometimes records what films are stored at Sinematek; The Teng Chun's Alang-Alang, for example, is supposed to be there.` — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Joanna Clapps Herman

Hi there! I'm back - I was very much affected by the hurricane, it was crazy. I lost power for a week. That's cool you're in Indonesia, are you from there or did you move there? Can I go ahead and publish Joanna's article and see what happens? I'd really appreciate it!! Srdemuro (talk) 01:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Atheis (film)

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:02, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Slamet Riyadi

Unreliable source ? Indonesia's national Archive is not a unreliable source And I was still editing but I was so abruptly disturbed before I could finish — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaungSiliwangi (talk • contribs) 12:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Poorly or unreliably sourced. You, quite simply, changed a neutral paragraph to a POV one and did not immediately include a reference. That which you intended to use wasn't even a reference in a Wikipedia context, just a location where information could be found. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

and you call socalled resources that are written by foreigners reliable ??? For instence you revere to "officer in the sultan's army" kesusuhunan Surakarta doesn't have a Sultan Susuhunan Pakubuwono is not a sultan there is a strict distinction the title of Susuhunan is Higher placed than the lesser rank of sultan, There for Kesusuhunan Surakarta is not kesultanan Surakarta tentara Kesusuhunan is not Tentara Kesultanan

RMS was a Dutch organized rebelion to bring down Republican forces to reestablish Colonial opression This is my resource : (http://www.anri.go.id/index.php) Indonesian National archive /(http://www.tni.mil.id/)Indonesian Ermed forces which is most reliable more reliable than some article written by foreigners whom have read propaganda articles by other non Indonesian resources,

I have information from the Indonesian government which is not my own analysis but the actual only truth version Before you accuse people and call their resources reliable are you calling my government unreliable ? (IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 17:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC))

They were rebels ! Not an army not a organisation It was the best most relevant word to describe them , it is not a political phrase or opinion but a fact but a fact , Using the describtion of traitor or enemy would have been but I did not use these terms due to that reason , My personal opinion on these traitors , is inrelevant and I did not mention to remain subjective,

Honestly I see no reason to credit these people with for their crimes against The people of Indonesia but I do not show my opinion on that subject If I was to show my own opinion I would need 500 blanc pages to fill in, Rebels is theonly nuetral term to describe there kind, IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Your personal opinion is quite clear, and it appears you do not yet understand English well enough to see that yes, "rebels" is POV. They wouldn't have thought of themselves as pemberontak, but pejuang kemerdekaan. Pemberontak is from the government's perspective. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

No the term pemberontak is not from gov perspective but from historic fact , RMS is rather a Terrorist organisation who strangly under Dutch protection even though they have comited various crimes in the Netherlands in the same fashion Palesinian plane hijackers do , And even fone so far as trying to abduct the Queen of the netherlands , which are acts of terrorism the only reason the Dutch them selfs tollorate them is because they would have to acknoledge their own mistake by doing so , Further more pejuang kemerdekaan does not qualify to such cathergory, well then again Al-Qaeda also reveres to it self es liberation front ,The proper term would be pengkhianat /Antek antek Belanda for they were/are they are traitors who betray their own people and homeland to serve the enemy And than go into neo-Colonialistic preservence with their fantasy land which only existed in the heads of the Dutch With the promis they would be granted if the Dutch were to win the war , Guess what Colonist lost there for this rebelion was an ilegal manifestation and was crushed in order to rstore order thats writting an opinion (incase you didn't notice i'm being sarcastic) IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:57, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Who wrote the history? The victor (winner). And the winner was...? The government. Had the Moluccans won they would have painted themselves as freedom fighters. Had the Indonesian revolutionaries lost between 1945 and 1949 they would have been depicted as pemberontak by history as well, at least until Indonesia obtained its independence.. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes indeed the victors get to decide history,

No I don't belief the Dutch would have even considered that if they would have won because even than they were to weak a people If we did not win the Revolution th Dutch would have created autonomous puppet states like RMS as Mr van Mook originaly planned The so called signing of sovereinity was only a ceremonial act , because in reality sovereinity didn't belong to to the Dutch since they surrendered it to the Empire of Japan in 1942 whom have given it To the Soekarno in 1945 thus making the Dutch efford to recolonization illegal, Seeing the Dutch lost in every possible way and tried to create the puppet state of Maluku selatan, in 1950 after they've lost the war made it fuetile, As they tried in Irian Jaya in 1962 when they've tried to create the puppet state of Irian Barat as a llast resouce to maintain the upoerhand But Atonomous states are uneccepteble an autonomy is still dependent , is still opressed, is still under the bloody queen Wilhelmina, It was either full independence or (Death) total annihalation , for Indonesian were prepared to fight JIBAKU something the Dutch weren't Dutch retreat when a single unimportand soldier dies , Indonesia engages and fights on to the last man and honour the sacrifice and Jibaku Of it's herous where as the Dutch mourn the loss of a forpral not honouring their sacrifice and death even alternate history wouldn't have changed the facts IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 08:43, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  • "The victors get to decide history". We, at Wikipedia, are not meant to take the side of the victors or of the losers. As for how Indonesia would have fared had the revolution failed, I actually think it would have done better if it had received political autonomy without a revolution. The infrastructure built by the Dutch could be maintained and they could have assisted in a transition to a modern economy; they could have, at least, maintained strong trading ties. Essentially, the Dutch could have taught Indonesians to help themselves. Malaysia is, economically at least, much better off than Indonesia... I think it's partly because the British continue to help them build their country. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:29, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Thats not the same Autonomy is not independent it's still cononial dependency , Accepting and receiving aid /maintaining ties with the Colonialist opressors makes a nation still dependent Soekarno's Panca Azimat Revolusi was to rebuild Indonesian glory as it was in pre-colonial era wich did not include europeans Rebuilding Indonesia included reestablishment of complete homeland controll The concept of a free a restored Nusantara as was realized by Heroes such as Tan Malaka, Tojo Hideki, they knew that the only way to do it is to vanquish western influences and start over with the power of own people and own resource to reestablish complete Home rule and in home rule there is no place for foreign occupiers the price for freedom was all or nothing (Freedom or Death) as BungTomo stated in the Battle of Surabaya Indonesia was fed up 3centuries of European Tyrany, Dutch infrastructure was only for the white man They kept us dumb to mantain upperhand over the Natives, they used racial Slogans such as Geen Honden en Inlanders (No Dogs And Natives Allowed) There was no progress or things to be learned from the Dutch , they tought us to hate and that There is difference between the Races and that there for they sould be deviced, When the Dutch Capitulated in 1942 we were free, free of Imperialist Tyrany, During the Asia Timur Raya era Indonesia was free 

But when Dai Nippon agreed with a Scees fire wih the Allies and signed a truce agreement we were free as Dai Nippon promised,

Than the Dutch came and stole invaded our homeland and violated our sovereinity,

Malaysia is a Puppet of The Empire of Great Brittain, Teuku Abdu Rachman was a puppet (Antek antek Britis) that is why we lounched confrontation (Operasi Dwi Kora) To Liberate Sarawak&Sabah from British imperialist occupation and establish non corrupted foreign influenced free region , With no western influence corrupting the Homeland, their presence is a threat to Asian sovereinity there for a autonomous state was out of the question That is why Van Mook's dream of Indonesua Serikat was crused for it was a Dutch concept violating our sovereinity corrupting the people , Soekarno build Indonesia to Southeast Asia's Big Brother with rhe Largest ground air & Naval Devence, the Teachings of Marhaen kept Indonesia pure The establishment of the Non Alighned Movement made Indonesia the most prominant post Colonial Nation , It was the Western propaganda and conspirecy which sabotaged The self Dependent Guided Democracy of Indonesia, IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 22:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

  • And this is why we're not getting anywhere. Your POV is serving as a pair of blinders. I know Indonesians hate Malaysians (and vice versa), but please note that their country could be a good model for Indonesians. You call Malaysia not truly independent: would Canada be the same? India? Neither gained their independence from Britain through a war, although India was admittedly more confrontational. But this is already outside the realm of Slamet Rijadi. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

My point of View ? Like I said before when I edit or post a certain topic I dont reflect my POV just factual Truth, But seing the conversation (Discussion) we are having I reflect it abit more obvious No canada isn't independent at all Her Majesty Elisabeth II is still head of State they are still a dominion Their just self governed

Yes It is indeed oftopic but bringing uo the comparison was oftopic, (Of the Record we do not Hate Malaysia we just have certain tensions, the creation of the malay federation was a violation Southeast Asian Sovereinity for the creation of the Malay federation is a continuation of Colonial governing system ) IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 01:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

  • "Malaysia is a Puppet of The Empire of Great Brittain, Teuku Abdu Rachman was a puppet (Antek antek Britis) that is why we lounched confrontation (Operasi Dwi Kora)"... if you think this is NPOV, I don't think I can help you. You've been warned already, by two editors, that your edits have not been NPOV. I've tried to explain why, but it appears you are not trying to understand. Pemberontak, puppet state, terrorist, hero, and such are loaded terms. Janatin would have been seen as a terrorist by Singaporeans, but he's a national hero in Indonesia. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually I understand dowhat you mean, This no a my pov it is actually what I've been tought on State school (State school), 

I know people wouldn't agree on my view on the Confrontation no one accepted the Confrontation it self and always have been against it,

But like I said I now only speak about this to You But I when I publish /edit an article I use a more filtered version which should stand politically corrected in a nuetral non provocative way, I know many of views are in accordination with the government,

Singapore did not see Harun & Usman as terrorist but as sabotours end were tried on base of espionage and sabotage, The Reason for that is that they were cought and tried as KKO spies trying to sabotage Singapura if they were not members of KKO they would have been tried fornterrorism they were named national heroes because their trial and executions made them martyrs of the confrontation, Were they they to have been shot at sight and not tried they would have not been considered National heroes but contibution of the Confrontation, The fact that Lee had them publicly tried and axecuted nd send their cascettes back for Indonesia made the KKO give them a National burrial and proclaim them heroes, IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 11:08, 8 November 2012 (UTC) 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaungSiliwangi (talk • contribs) 10:50, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Fair point about Harun/Usman. Terrorists was too strong a word. Had such an event happened nowadays, however...
Anyways, the main thing to remember is that the schools and curriculum push the government's POV. If you read works by scholars, independent of the government, you'll find completely different views of certain events. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes indeed the State schools are government doctrined where as public schools would teach from perhaps more liberal views, All my research and all my knowledge is in accordinence with the Indonesian Government because that is how I have been tought in that order but I always try to keep a nuetral perspective and not from the Government view and I know that acurate considered information is always acurate in acrodence to one party, than there is the question to which perspective do we stick like we discussed earlier the victors write history There for I gues the most Generaly acceptable information would be the version which goes in accordinence with mainstream intel thats how the world works in reality so there for I belief my point of view is a npov it is the most commonly accepted , due to the political correctnes, IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 21:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

  • It may be the "most commonly accepted" view in Indonesia, but that doesn't make it the right one. Think of G30S... the Suharto government's depiction has been shown to be wrong by numerous independent historians. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes I know all about the lies from the ORBA regime on the tragedy of G30s I have personal knowledge on this subject my father was one of the Hunters tracking down traitors & Communist For over 40yrs He's been hunting down Traitors and reading Classifed doccuments and testimonies by key figures like Subandrio The reason why the truth about G30s is to remain a mistory is because it will expose Suharto's involvement and foul play Making Him guilty of High Treason which in Indonesia is unthinkable ,

But our War history I personaly like to belief that our actions are justified for we did everything for the Just cause where as the Dutch /British/Portuguese Caused nothing but centuries of Colonial tyrany , I know Indonesia isn't perfect and how at certain accationaly certain details are being censored for various resons as do I at certain momets also censor to protect the reputation and name of my beloved Homeland to be honest many subjects we consider Propaganda are truth based (Not completely) and we cover it up with yet more propaganda thats how the world revolves IR.ARI.WAHYU.MARTADINATA (talk) 14:29, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

  • I agree with you on this... we (humans) cover propaganda with more propaganda, thus making "history" a fiction written by the victors. Now, as for Wikipedia... we try and cut through this propaganda where possible. This is, naturally, not something that is 100% successful as most of the sources (and history) are written by the victors. I don't doubt that the article on Sudirman would have looked quite different if the Dutch had succeeded in killing him during his guerrilla campaign; information would have been withheld (as I'm sure Indonesian sources did too, although not necessarily the same information), and different aspects of his life would have been emphasised. What we can do is avoid non-neutral wording, even if history itself is not neutral. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I have been watching - pity we dont have a blunderbuss clause where the caps turn into explosive warning detonators at the bewitching hour :( SatuSuro 12:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

For your help on Church of the SubGenius; it is now a good article. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Ndash

Kak, sy melihat artikel id:Perang Jawa (1741–1743), disitu sy lihat judulnya pake ndash. Bisa nggak kakak pasangkan di artikel sy, id:Pengepungan Konstantinopel (717-718)? Soalnya sy mau tahu cara memasang ndash itu gimana. User:Adi.akbartauhidin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:06, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Monas

top tight band box and its attendant miseries needs your eagle eye SatuSuro 00:12, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

oh and another problem [1] - I see no prima facie evidence that the current spate of tags and the claims of conversion from one thing to another are actually from citeable sources... watcha think? (I always like to be proved wrong btw) ie was cephas actually known to be that before he then went to be the other? SatuSuro 12:08, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs recorded by Adele/archive1

Hello, if you would like to leave comments which concern you or would cast a vote in support or opposition based on your findings, I would much appreciate it. The list has garnered several good (and resolved) reviews, but no votes have been cast. Thanks. AARON• TALK 12:40, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Sounding board needed

I have some questions about 2-3 photos which look to be sort of "involved" ones. Would you be willing to go over them with me? Thought I'd ask before just laying it at your doorstep. :) Thanks, We hope (talk) 15:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

  • OK, first off is Kovacs. Taken from a 1952 kinescope at Paley Center for Media (was Museum of Broadcasting previously). Have checked copyrights for the show-no original and no renewals. Don't know when this was taken from it and believe the name on the back is the employee who made the print. (Didn't know Gertrude made the cut to the Big Apple until I saw this; she was last seen in Philly.) There's a second Kovacs also. Derivative of the 1952 work and PD or not?
  • Copyright status "default". Found a dated but unmarked photo I knew I'd seen elsewhere, so prowled the net to find out where. NYDN slideshow credited Michael Ochs Archives/Getty. They have another copy from the Magazine Metronome with no copyright details; the magazine went out of business in 1961. My interpretation of the "default" notation is that the holder failed to renew the copyright within the 28 year time period, so it defaulted or reverted to PD status. There are quite a few more Jo Stafford photos there listed as such which would also possibly be of use if my idea of default is correct. If this is right, it would also open the door to many other photos they have listed as default. Thanks again!!! We hope (talk) 16:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Alright, as far as I know any licensed (i.e. legal) derivative work of a copyrighted work published in the US also needed a copyright notice. As such, the Kovacs image should be PD. That is, of course, assuming the person had the right to reproduce it.
The other one will require some searching. Am on that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Type of Work: Serial Registration Number / Date: RE0000166737 / 1983-05-02 Renewal registration for: B00000518016 / 1955-01-03 Title: Metronome. Vol. 71, no. 1, Jan. 1955. Copyright Claimant: Robert Asen (PCW)

Variant title: Metronome.

There's the 1955 renewal for the magazine, so that's apparently out. Re: Kovacs, Paley Center is the holder of the kinescope and would have the right to reproduce it. We hope (talk) 16:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks much! Will upload the clearly marked Kovacs. Would still be interested in knowing what's meant by copyright-default for future reference, if you get a chance. We hope (talk) 18:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for getting that information for me! We hope (talk) 23:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey

Hey Crisco. I was wondering of you could take a look at [[3]] and leave some comments there. Your review will be very much appreciated. Thanks! — ΛΧΣ21™ 02:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Nablus (1918)

Hi, this article's GA symbol has not been reinstated although protection was lifted some days before 4 November on all the articles concerned. I know you would like to see a clear consensus, but the earlier comments by Jim Sweeney and his like minded editors were slightly misleading in that all the articles cover a number of engagements, not just one battle as was implied. I pointed this out on 5 November but there has been no movement on the Talk:Battle of Sharon (1918) page since. Can you please let me know what else can be done? --Rskp (talk) 04:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Signpost

I hope I didn't come across as too demanding here. Administrative and non-article work like the Signpost is sometimes a thankless task, so: Thank you. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 20:08, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Lewat Tengah Malam

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 November 2012

Can you promote a DYK prep?

We're currently overdue for a replacement of the main page DYKs, but there aren't any queues with hooks in them. Any chance you can promote Prep 2 into Queue 4? Thanks if you can! BlueMoonset (talk) 08:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Tjitra

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Great job on the successful FA quality work on Frank's Cock. — Cirt (talk) 01:52, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

April fool DYK

The DYK appearance will place it in an automated category of things that have been DYK, GA and FA. I will see it once it runs. You can ping me if you like just to be sure.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan

Hi, any chance you could have a look at Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Prime Ministers of Pakistan/archive1? Regards, Zia Khan 20:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Question

How could List of songs recorded by Katy Perry not have been 5x expanded? I've been working on it for over 2 weeks and for 9 days it had no lead. Lol. AARON• TALK 00:22, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK queue needs filling

Crisco, if you haven't left yet for the night, there's only half an hour before the next main page update is scheduled, but there aren't any queues filled. Can you take care of this? Thanks if you can! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Urgent

I'm really bad at tables and I can't fix up the table on my article Cabbage (folk song), any help will be greatly appreciated, thanks, --TheChampionMan1234 22:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Frank's Cock

Hello! Your submission of Frank's Cock at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Yazan (talk) 17:16, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Only one of the hooks had a slight problem, the rest have ticks. Yazan (talk) 17:17, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

How do I disable this??????

Oh, those media files are all clogged up, because, I suppose, of a new update, can you please tell me how to disable it i have a picture below

And, by the way

Oh, and by the way, inspired by User:Brambleberry of RiverClan/Wikipedian-Uncyclopedian War I have created User:TheChampionMan1234/Republic of Wikipedia, feel free to edit it or to invite someone else to edit it --TheChampionMan1234 06:21, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Wel...

A Tshirt!
I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project.
I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

TheSpecialUser TSU 10:55, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm back

I'm back from my conference travel. There are several fires that need putting out but you're within sight of the head of my queue (to mix a metaphor). GaramondLethe 12:43, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Could you take another look at the lead? The phrase "is a book on literature" is bothering me. Perhaps "is a book on the methodology of literary criticism"? But you might be able to come up with something better. Overall, I think it's ready for GA. If you'd like a second opinion from a more experienced editor I'm happy to go along with that, but I think you've gotten a much more detailed review already and I'd hate to put you through that process again. GaramondLethe 11:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I originally had "literary theory" which is quite incorrect. Literary scholarship, perhaps? They combine ideas of literary history and (a very slight dash of) theory into the book. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:20, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership and quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale. For readership the scale goes from Low Readership: Low to High Readership: High, while for quality the scale goes from Low Quality: Low to High Quality: High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs   Cleanup
Readership: High Quality: Low Kemayoran Airport   Readership: High Quality: Medium Cryopreservation
Readership: Low Quality: Low Ōtani Station (Shiga)   Readership: High Quality: High Sentral Organisasi Buruh Seluruh Indonesia
Readership: High Quality: Low Guruh Sukarnoputra   Readership: High Quality: High Joachim von Ribbentrop
Readership: High Quality: Low Romusha   Merge
Readership: High Quality: Low ISO/IEC 8859-9   Readership: High Quality: Low Misfits
Readership: High Quality: Low Anugerah Musik Indonesia   Readership: High Quality: Low Formalist theory in composition studies
Readership: High Quality: Low Nidji   Readership: Medium Quality: Low List of Miss Indonesia Universe title winners
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Maguwo   Add sources
Readership: High Quality: Low Akçe   Readership: High Quality: Low Gigi (band)
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Elizabeth Cull   Readership: High Quality: Low Kirby's Dream Collection
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Suara Merdeka   Readership: High Quality: Low Chairul Saleh
Readership: High Quality: Low ISO/IEC 8859-6   Wikify
Readership: High Quality: Low 2/11th Battalion (Australia)   Readership: High Quality: Low Nicholas of Verdun
Readership: High Quality: Low Mac OS Roman   Readership: High Quality: Low Literariness
Readership: High Quality: Low ISO/IEC 8859-14   Readership: High Quality: Low History of the Jews in Andorra
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Ben Barenholtz   Expand
Readership: Medium Quality: Low Chrisye Masterpiece Trilogy Limited Edition   Readership: High Quality: Medium Timeline of Indonesian history
Readership: High Quality: Low Andersen Monogatari (TV series)   Readership: High Quality: Low Chen Shu-chu
Readership: High Quality: Low United States House of Representatives House Resolution 121   Readership: High Quality: Low ISO/IEC 8859-1

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:59, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Budak Nafsu

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 November 2012

Thanks

That was very kind of you, thanks. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 07:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Drowned God FAC

Hey, thanks for all your great comments and ultimate support at the FAC. That's the first support I've gotten in four FAC attempts now, so I'll always cherish it lol. —Torchiest talkedits 15:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Archiving problems with Salvage (2009 film)

Hi, I've just archived the urls through WebCite, but my antivirus is warning me all but the first are dangerous sites and won't let me visit them. Any idea what's happening? Have I done something wrong? Paul MacDermott (talk) 00:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Do you happen to have McAfee? Same thing is happening to me, but I don't know how to solve it. Chris857 (talk) 02:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
I do have McAfee, and on reflection it can be a bit temperamental. If I mistype the Google.co.uk address for example it flashes up a warning. I was surprised to see it flag up WebCite though as I've been using that for a while without problems. I usually edit with Chrome, but I've just checked it through a different browser and that seems to be fine. Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Given that the mcafee report on the website seems to show no actual, specific problems, I'm hoping this will clear out eventually. It's not the first time it has tagged something as dangerous that really wasn't. Chris857 (talk) 04:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
I've noticed WebCitation triggering malJavascript warnings with my Avast! antivirus from time to time, then it subsides. I agree with using a different browser, but also suggest using NoScript, Flashblock, and the hosts file (once malhosts have been flagged, redirect them with a "malhostdomain.tld 127.0.0.1" line ). --Lexein (talk) 13:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Perhaps it's the heuristic model they use? I'm not that well versed in the really technical stuff (I did use NoScript for a while, but I turned it off on Wikipedia). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:59, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crisco_1492/Archive_34&oldid=1254590788"