Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome to the Help desk! This is a help desk mainly for newcomers and users who don't yet have an account. Feel free to ask questions about the way Wikipedia works, and remember to check this page again (how about a bookmark?) to see if there have been any replies.

If your question has already been covered in one of the help pages, you could get the answer you're looking for more quickly by checking the topical index.

If your question is not specifically about the Wikipedia, you'll probably find the Reference desk a better place to ask; if you want to start a more detailed and inclusive discussion, try the Village pump.

For old questions, see Archive 1

Post a question here!

---

I'm wondering how wikipedia handles multiple, simultaneous edits, that is if I'm editing a page, and somebody makes a quick change while I'm in the middle of doing something, what will happen when I try and save my changes? - Xgkkp 04:48, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

In the new software that is yet to be rolled out here, when there's an edit conflict, you'll get two boxes, the first with the current text, and the second with your text. You should merge your changes with the first, current text.

If you've made major changes, you could replace the current text with yours (but be sure to make proper note of this in the edit summary!), and then afterwards merge any changes that were made by people before you.

HTH Dysprosia 04:57, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but what happens with the current software, does it just write straight over it without warning, or still give an 'edit conflict' but leave it completely up to you to resolve?- Xgkkp 17:46, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Edit conflicts. - Lee (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Just for clarity, I'd like to point out that Dysprosia's original answer up there is topsy-turvy: the current software will always give you a 2-box "Edit conflict" screen. The new software will attempt to merge the conflicting versions automatically, and give you an edit conflict screen only if it can't - generally if the two edits both affect the exact same part of the article. - IMSoP 21:27, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Who copied who?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Utilitarianism.html

If you go to other articles, they are pretty much identical.

Wordiq copies us. They have a notice to this effect in small text at the bottom of the page. Not terribly prominent, but at least they're crediting us. There are frequently sites that don't. Isomorphic 16:38, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the content of this site is free.(yippee!) Anyone can copy our content, as long as they credit us. theresa knott 15:44, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a site policy somewhere on whether to capitalize pronouns referring to an omnipotent creator-divinity? ("God is great, but can he/He cook?") Edit wars are fun and all, but it would be nice to have a page to point to and say, "this is how we do it here". Not sure I'm asking in the right place, but a reply would be appreciated. -GTBacchus 19:06, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Found it. Wikipedia:Manual of Style. -GTBacchus 19:27, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

question moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk.

I've found the guidelines for the image upload rather confusing.. I've found two images I'd like to use for my Mary Elizabeth Price article; one of the artist herself, and another of her work, released to me for use in wikipedia by a woman, who I believe is her neice, from their family history webpage. I'm unsure of where to go from here - as I have never uploaded or positioned images before (though that isn't what I'm currently concerned with), but I'm unsure as to the classification of the images themselves. Please help? Rhymeless 06:40, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

This page lets you upload the images and contains some guidelines. Wyllium 16:09, 2004 May 22 (UTC)

No question, I just want to let you know that this is a FANTASTIC site ! Keep up the good work. I plan to tell all my friends about Wikipedia !

Sabrina San Antonio, TX

Thanks. Why not express your gratitude by creating an account and contributing ? Wyllium 16:05, 2004 May 22 (UTC)

Thank you Sabrina for your wonderful praise. We all really appreciate it. theresa knott 15:40, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't maximize the home page or any other page????????? Can we change the policy? Thanks, ivanf@optonline.net

I'm not too sure what you mean by "maximize". If you want to get rid of the quickbar (the thing down the side of the page with all the links), then you can turn it off in your preferences (to edit them, you need to create an account and log in). --Camembert

Hello, I am very, very new to Wikipedia, which I find helpful and important. 2 Questions; first, my "Log in" doesn't accept password on many tries.

Second, I can understand that my submission "In early advertising and promotion, "coming movie attraction" glass slides... ... examples can be found in scattered collections on DVD and WWW; not otherwise published, such as: Cleveland Public Library, George Eastman House, Vintage Louise Brooks, Environmedia Illustrated: “early coming movie attractions...”, Lilly Library: “the Ralston Sampler”, Lilly Library: “Ralston, G. mss.”" Is there an appropiate place for this?

Thank you, Glennralston 12.222.143.56

gr <gralston@in.net>

First, your login problem: what is the error message you see? Sometimes people think they've created an account but infact they failed (perhaps due to a server or connection timeout). Sometimes people forget that passwords are case sensitive, or forget their CAPS LOCK key (what a stupid useless key that is) is on (or was on when they made the account). Sometimes people have cookie-blocking firewalls or browser privacy settings (but you see a message about your browser not accepting the cookies). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:22, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your second question (which I confess I'm not entirely sure I understand). I wasn't aware of the existence of such slides, and I think that an article (mostly textual) describing them would be a fantastic addition. The kind of thing one would reasonably expect to find in an encyclopedia article about them are answers things like "Who invented them?" "Are there any famous artists or designers for them?" "When did they dissapear?" "Are there any famous or notorious ones?" "Is there a market for them now (the way there is for stamps) and what is the most sought-after or expensive example?" A reasonable model for such an article would be, say, Fancy cancel. So you could chose to write an article called something like Coming attractions slide or whatever you thought was an appropriate title. And link to it from somewhere like Silent film. But be careful about uploading too many images - wikipedia isn't really a collector's website, and anyway we often have copyright problems with images - see our (rather taxing, I'll grant you) copyrights policy. All of those links you have about would make fine external links. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:36, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I am an unemployed person with an Idea to help the party, as well as give me a new way to be employed. First: Can I get the totel number of people in the PC party? Second: Whom is best to talk with an can sign a non-discloser, so my idea is safe. I know that in the post the PC party has upheld the right of intalecual property. Sorry for any spelling.

If you can not help, please forward to the right person, or let me know how to get to the best person.

Thanks for any help you may be able to give my.

Regards,

Paul Mepham

Sorry, Wikipedia isn't really the place for this. What's the PC party? I can try to help if you'd like, but no guarantees. Meelar 04:14, 23 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. How do I change a page's name without doing a copy-paste job and losing the history? --Woggly 06:28, 23 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

You use the "Move this page" link (which is on the quickbar, and probably at the bottom of the page, depending on what skin you're using). Sometimes, this won't work (if the page move would write over the history of an already-existing page, the software won't let you move it) - in that case you'll need to get an admin to delete the target page for you. Most of the time, this won't be an issue, however. See Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page for all the gory details. --Camembert

How does one terminate/delete their account? Can't find the answer anywhere. Thanks.

You can't, there's no way. I suppose you could ask an administrator to block you (which a few people do, to help them overcome temptation to edit during busy periods like exams). Other than that, you can just forget your password and walk away. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:26, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to link to an Image: page? I use Media: when I need to link to an image without displaying it, but I would really like to link to the Image: page instead. Any way to do this? —John | Talk 17:53, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Instead of Image: say :Image: in the wikilink. I dunno why this works. See the bottom of my user page, which has a bunch of these. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:58, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

It works becuase the developers thought it would be useful to have a way of linking without showing the image. The syntax is the same if you want to link to an article in another language as a link (in-line) rather than as a translation - e.g. [[:de:Fisch]] - IMSoP 21:09, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

question moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk by User:Finlay McWalter.

I'm trying to find the location & actual address of Prague university in order to plan living arrangements in the city. Can you help me...? any maps of the university & surrounding area..? Thank you for your help,

                                                        Jeff Foster
                                                     fostwand2004@yahoo.com

This one? Wyllium 23:44, 2004 May 24 (UTC)

my kitten is 51\2 weeks old. When i woke up the first mourning i got him his eyes had dried sleep in them and he couldnt open them so i pulled them open very carfully. when they opened a whole bunch of sleep came ozzing out. does this mean that he had an eye infection?

Well, I'd check with a vet to be sure. That's the safest thing to do, and I'm not sure wikipedia can help with this. That said, the best place to go for this sort of thing is Wikipedia:Reference desk. Yours, Meelar 17:46, 25 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Suddenly my watchlist shows This is a saved version of your watchlist. What could be the problem? TIA --Rrjanbiah 10:16, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Cached watchlists is just a function turned on by developers every so often to help reduce server load. It means you can only view your watchlist once an hour. If you look at it again within that hour, you'll see a cached version of the one you already saw. Angela. 22:31, May 26, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Angela... now, it seems to be working fine. I was bit worried if I did click anything accidentally to invoke such behavior. Thanks.--Rrjanbiah 04:14, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I have a number of additions to pages planned (e.g. related to mobility managment and other things related to movement and time in wireless networks) which cry out desperately for simple animation. What is the current advice for that? Preferably someting better than animated GIF.. Which format, what application to use to write them etc. I have a RedHat system so something that works there is needed. Open standards / Free Software pls.Mozzerati 19:55, 2004 May 27 (UTC)

I'm afraid animated GIF is it. The "correct" solution will be (one day) either SVG or MNG, but support for these even in the latest browsers is next to zero. And we really want to support older browsers and those with alternate access devices like cellphones, PDAs, and the users of accessibility browsers like screen readers or braille displays. Also, one day there (hopefully) will be a paper version of wikipedia - so while animations are welcome, they should always be "expendable" - i.e. the article should still read and work fine even without the animation. Some folks work around the problem with clever design - see Circlestrafing, others with multiple frames of animation shown (e.g. Four-stroke cycle). I can think of only one article that has, and really needs, animation - Roundabout intersection. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:08, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I note that Four-stroke cycle also has links to MPEGs too (I think they're made with Blender). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:23, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

hmm.. the problem I'm dealing with is that mobility management really needs movement for good presentation (since that's what it's about).. I think I'm going to try in SVG then someone can convert to GIF later if that's really needed. It would at least encourage people to get SVG capabilities :-) Mozzerati 19:30, 2004 May 28 (UTC)

Okay. Please drop me a note when you've gained some experience with whatever tool you decide upon, as I'm keen to do some SVG myself. I imagine most mature SVG tools will convert to animated GIF. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:36, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. On looking around further, SVG may not work right now. See the discussion at: m:SVG image support. You probably don't want to spend too much effort making your SVGS before confirming that they work ok on wikipedia. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:25, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hullo,

Just tried to make my first edit, but the actual text for the article didn't come up in the box. I came across reference to protected text in the FAQ/newcomer/how to pages, is that what I'm seeing?

It all looks like this: "]]

• Type 212 submarine
• Type I U-boat
• Type II U-boat"

(ok, the quotation marks didn't help- but all I'm seeing is the formatting)

-Jes

_Jes help us out a bit - What is the name of the page you were trying to edit? theresa knott 14:56, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Theresa, I was trying to edit the Submarine article that was on the main page in recent days- it was still listed when I just checked. I think the spelling correction has already been made, but I'm still curious about the basic problem I had. Now I'll see if this posts because I tried to answer you yesterday and was surprised to see my reply wasn't here today... -Jes

Where do I post a complaint? I have a tire with a bubble on the side wall, and your agent (Discount Tire) is claimimg it is road hazard. It is on a trailer that I purchased new just over a year ago and has less than 5000 miles in it. I feel that your agent is giving you a bad name in this case. Please advise. Respectfully submitted George Joy 934 East Houston Ave Gilbert, AZ 85234 480-558-1996

George, this is an encyclopedia. We don't sell tires, we don't have agents, and we get our bad name in ways other than vending bubbly tires. I suggest you find a different website on which to post your tire complaint. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:56, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

LOL -- that defintely has to go on BJAODL. →Raul654 18:05, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Unusual requests perhaps?

I've taken the liberty of copying your question to Wikipedia:Reference desk, which is the place for that sort of thing. Good luck! Meelar 22:51, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys,

1stly I have to say I love wiki, and it's a great resource. I came across one (of many) links yet to have a sity that I wanted to contribute to. I am doing an extensive project into the topic, and I wish to post a table which I have compiled myself onto the website, but I then don't want to have to site Wikipedia.org on the end of the table, when it is infact my original work. What is the best action that I/we can take on this matter?

Thanks Brad

You can re-use your own content elsewhere without citing Wikipedia. As you retain the copyright on your own submissions, you are free to use them elsewhere without mentioning they are available under the GFDL, and you can also release them elsewhere under an alternative license. Angela. 00:46, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Are euphemisms or jargon considered acceptable content in Wikipedia? I am aware of a use for the term optics in a public relations context that clearly does not match the content currently on the optics page. If these are acceptable content, how do I add this appropriately so as not to disrupt the more likely sought content that exists now?

--Gpvm 05:48, 29 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

If an article could be written about "optics" in the public relations sense, then you could add a link at the top or bottom of optics to a new article called optics (public relations). If it's just a bit of jargon, but you think it's important enough that someone might look it up, then you could put a note at the bottom of optics, like:

Optics is also a term used in public relations.

Then write a little bit about it in the article on public relations. Keep in mind, though, that Wikipedia isn't a dictionary; it's an encyclopedia. You could also consider adding the public relations meaning to the appropriate page at our sister project Wiktionary, which is a dictionary. I don't know anything about Wiktionary's policies on slang and jargon though, as I'm not active over there. Isomorphic 20:33, 29 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

See Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion. I believe they allow slang as long it meets certain standards, such as being in widespread use. Angela. 01:01, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Howdo all. I've just signed up to the site, as I have used it as an encyclopædia for some time now, and thought it was about time I contributed back to this great project.

Anyhoo, I was wondering if it would be terribly rude if I added some of my own photographs to some of the articles, for example Manchester Town Hall, or if I should really focus my contribution on textual stuff first.

-- OwlofDoom 17:31, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

There's simply no such thing as someone owning an article, so everyone is free to add whatever pictures they deem relevant and necessary to any article they want. So jump right in. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:40, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't really concerned about "ownership" though, more that a picture is hardly an intelligent contribution. :) Still, I feel better now.

-- OwlofDoom 17:44, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

We generally have far too few pictures, and of those too many that are either of dubious status or dubious quality. If all you ever do is upload photos of stuff you've taken, then you've still made an invaluable contribution. And if they're all of the quality of the Manchester Town Hall one we're in for a treat. You can tell you're a wikiholic when you wake up some Saturday, look out of the window, think "oh, it's sunny", and immediately head off to photograph every encyclopedia-worthy thing in town before the rain comes. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:01, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Finaly's right. No one owns articles. You might be interested in Wikipedia:Requested pictures. We are very grateful for anyone contributing images. Please don't feel it's a less useful contribution. It really isn't. Angela. 22:37, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, a picture is very important in an article about a building. So if all you ever did was add pictures of buildings like the one at Manchester Town Hall, those of us with interest in architecture would be thrilled. Isomorphic 17:42, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

So, (In a similar question), is adding pictures welcomed? I mean, I think quite a few of the technical articles could do with a few diagrams being added, but I wasn't sure if it was 'frowned' upon for bloating the database.... Xgkkp 11:26, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Adding pictures is greatly encouraged. If you've got good pictures or diagrams that you can release under Wikipedia's GFDL license, go right ahead and add them. File size and database bloat are not issues, at least within reason. In fact, it seems that we won't give articles featured status anymore unless they have a picture or diagramm. Isomorphic 17:42, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I've noticed that when language options are placed at the top of a page, with a blank line before the beginning of the article (in the new template), there is extra space in the published article (between the title and article body).

Language Options

 Article Body

Just thought I'd point it out, as it is a cosmetic defect of sorts (it bothered me) that just looks sloppy. Since the appreciated placement for language options is at the end of an article, it might make sense for people to fix this formatting when they are otherwise editting an article. Perhaps this is something that could also be fixed in a future version of the software.

Jeff 22:39, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

See, for example: Spermatogenesis --Jeff 22:39, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Those (which are officially called "interwikis" and "inter-language links") should go at the bottom of the wikitext (per Wikipedia:Interlanguage links). But what you describe is a (probably stylesheet) bug, so you should add it to m:MediaWiki 1.3 comments and bug reports. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:25, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hello again everyone.

I've been wandering around the site for the last couple of days, mostly contributing photographs and correcting the occasional typo. Now I'd like to make my first textual contribution to the Wikipedia.

I'd like to extend the entry on Ko Samui and add one on the Ang Thong National Marine Park. I notice that the current entry on Ko Samui is almost verbatim copied from here (although I have no idea if this constitutes a copyright violation, as the two authors might well be the same person, or have permission) and I was wondering if it would be rude to delete this text and start it again from scratch.

Thanks! OwlofDoom 09:35, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my personal opinion: yes, it is rude to outright delete a text, unless you leave some kind of note of explanation or justification on the talk page for that article. Friendlier to try and work with what is already up there, if you can, and to improve it. I would also hope that, should you choose to delete the text, the text you submit to replace it will be in some way better than what was there before: more accurate, more comprehensive, more encyclopedic, and/or clearly better written. --Woggly 11:12, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Eek! Your advice is quite right if the content isn't someone else's copyright, but if it is then we need to be super-careful - reworking isn't an option (see excessively long answer below). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 11:36, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

You're right to bring this up, and handling situations like this can be a delicate one. If something really is a violation of another site's copyright then that's not something we can safely ignore (they could, after all, sue us). So what I suggest you do in such circumstances is:

1. check that it really is the same content (sounds like you've done that)
2. check the remote party isn't crediting wikipedia (there's lots of mirrors and copies)
3. check its not mentioned on one of the pages linked to from Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (low, medium, high, undetermined) - some sites mirror wikipedia but "forget" to mention the fact (bad bad bad)
4. look through the edit history of the page, and see who contributed the suspicious content. If it's a signed-in user, check to see if they're still active (many aren't) and see if the text was built slowly up (which suggests it was authored here) or was just dumped, in finished format, by someone. Mostly anons and very new users are responsible for such dumps - more seasoned contributors know better (but equally some people write whole articles offline and upload them in a one-er, so a good article appearing wholesale isn't evidence, just indication). If you're suspicious, leave a message on the talk page.
5. if your figure it's quite likely that the text is a copyright violation ("copyvio"), list it on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and follow the procedure noted there.

Note that you shouldn't blank the violating text and start writing your new version - the potential violation is still in the edit history (which may be a legal problem in itself) and someone could accuse your new version of being a derivative work of the old one (even if it isn't). Better to make a whole new article at a temp page (as the copyvio page describes) which can be substituted for the violating page if the original is indeed a violation. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 11:34, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. It's not really the copyright violation I was concerned about. I was more concerned that it was difficult to expand the article without completely rewording what was already there. In my current draft, all the information from the original article is there, but none of the original author's words. Is this considered bad etiquette? The article was really a stub, but didn't carry a msg:stub tag. -- OwlofDoom 12:09, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing the copyvio paperwork. Your new version is (rather obviously) vastly superior. It always pays to be delicate about making large changes - I confess I sometimes do things incrementally, adding details between existing stuff, then rewording existing stuff, then eventually zapping it. I try to do this with a (utterly fake: I'm a genius) touch of humility (i.e. not making the change comment something crass like "overwrite third-rate crap with real quality work" or anything dumb like that). No-one has complained yet (sukkas). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:32, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Addendum: I've just checked and the content was originally contributed without wiki markup (except the link to the website which also displays this content) by a logged out user (213.114.144.224). The wiki markup was added three mins later by User:Evil saltine. -- OwlofDoom 12:18, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

That's a common signature of someone ignorant of our copyright policy thinking they're doing us a favour by adding stuff, even if they shouldn't add that stuff. Saltine is one of those Recent Changes junkies of whom we spoke. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:32, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

We're not junkies! We can quit whenever we want to! Meelar 11:50, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I just finished merging Bovine somatropin into Bovine somatotropin and making the redirect I realized the latter article is really entitled Bovine Somatotropin but shouldnt be. Somatotropin is not a brand name or a proper name and should not be capitalized. I think I am correct that wiki policy is to cap only the first word of an article title? If so, can someone change Bovine Somatotropin to Bovine somatotropin or tell me how to do it?Alteripse 17:09, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming pages is normally done by moving them. Click on the Move button at the top of the page and type in the name with correct capitalization. HTH  – Jrdioko (Talk) 18:26, 31 May 2004 (UTC) Thanks, I did it.[reply]

Ookay, this is quite embarassing, but having changed my skin settings to 'Nostalgia' and closing the browser window I've lost use of many of the features available in more advanced ones, or at least can't find them - this including user preferences, which I need to fix the situation. A link to the preference-setting page would be much appreciated. --Kizor 00:17, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

They're all in the drop-down box near the top of the screen. And you can always go to Special:Preferences directly. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:22, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

... *Sigh*. Thanks. --Kizor 11:21, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

User:Evertype's page redirects to a wikipedia article about himself. Is this standard procedure? It makes it extremely difficult and annoying to post anything on his talk page or look up his contributions. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:13, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)

• Well, there's no policy against it, and looking at that article, he certainly deserves an article. My suggestion would be to suggest on his talk page that he duplicate that content, rather than simply redirect. Meelar 19:34, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I recently submitted an article on dollshouses and when I added three new paragraphs, the entire block of text changed. Instead of finishing the lines after about 15 words, the lines are now about 25 words long, making the article hard to read. I have tried resubmiting the text and the same thing happened. Does anyone know why this happened and what I could do to solve it?

Which article do you mean? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:15, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

the article was called Dollhouse

Mediawiki, the software that runs wikipedia, does something special when a line begins with a space - instead of putting in a space, it goes into a special mode (used for quoting stuff, like poetry or computer software). That's the mode your example had gotten into. I've removed the leading spaces, and it now flows properly. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:46, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)