Talk archive:

• 2004
• 2005
• 2006
• 2007
• 2008
• 2009
• 2010
• 2011
• 2012
• 2013
• 2014
• 2015
• 2016
• 2017
• 2018
• 2019
• 2020
• 2021

You have voted for History of New Jersey on the USCOTM. It was selected to be this months's collaboration. You are invited to help to contribute in order to improve History of New Jersey in any way possible.

Cmadler 14:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding Image:Andy master chief.jpeg, the image cannot be public domain because it includes a copyrighted promotional image from Halo. The combined image is a derivative work and is subject to copyright. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 20:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So what do I do? Can I not have it on my page or do I have to put a different tag on it? or what? schyler 22:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you may wish to try claiming fair use, using {{fairusein}}, but I think this would be a pretty tenuous fair use claim. If you decided to do that, I would then add the tag {{fairusereview}} to get someone else's opinion on it. It may end up getting deleted. BTW, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advise. Good luck. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 22:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had read the history that had been added to the Allendale, New Jersey page, and I was too busy rolling on the floor laughing to revert the copyvio. I was shocked to see some of the curious "facts" about the community that are actually on its website, including:

• It was part of a "wilderness known only to the egyptians until the early 1700's."
• That John Fell "was taken prisoner at his home by a band of 25 one-armed Loyalists."
• That the area "was known as 'The Turdpike'."
• That in 1848, "the first train ran through the town, killing many."
• That in 1880, "Hopper Yeomans ran a traveling party shop, carrying beer and pizza by wagon to customers on his route."
• And what about the plethora of brothels, including one that "became known as Winter Brothers' Whoopie Parlor, later changing from ladies to strictly mannequins."

This is great stuff! If I didn't know better, I would have assumed that this was from a Wikipedia page that had been altered by a clever vandal. Why not let the WikiWorld share a bit of this inspired nonsense just because it was copied word-for-word from an official governmental website. Alansohn 14:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holy crap, that stuff is in the original page too! I thought it was the clever additions of an anonymous teen and didn't check for the oddities. I wonder if the allendale.org page has been hacked? :) I'll add a note about this on the talk page. The wiki-world can laugh there. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 14:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had also assumed that the clever little changes were made on the wiki side, which merited a mere chuckle (and a half-hearted one at that). But the fact that it was a cut-and-paste job taken word-for-word from the official web site is what makes it truly roll-on-the-floor funny. Alansohn 15:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How did you make the changes to the List of hospitals in New Jersey? Did you do some sort of mass edit or was it done by hand? I'd love to figure out a better way to turn [[Municipality]] into [[Municipality, New Jersey|Municipality]], especially when there are bunches of them in an article. (P.S. I loved your additions re Allendale. You think they'll ever notice?) Alansohn 17:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did it via regular expressions. This can be done with tools like sed or perl, but I used vim. For that particular transform, this regular expression worked:

s/\[\[\([^]]\+\)\]\]/[[\1, New Jersey|\1]]/g

If you use unix tools like sed, you can use it like this:

$ echo '[[Municipality]]'
[[Municipality]]

$ echo '[[Municipality]]' | sed -e 's/\[\[([^]]+)\]\]/[[\1, New Jersey|\1]]/g'
[[Municipality, New Jersey|Municipality]]

If the article source data is saved into a file, the transform can be run over the whole file like this (but beware, this will change ALL wikilinks to this format, and any existing [[Foo, New Jersey]] wikilinks will be transformed to [[Foo, New Jersey, New Jersey]]):

$ sed -e 's/\[\[([^]]+)\]\]/[[\1, New Jersey|\1]]/g' < input.txt > output.txt

I don't know if this will be useful to you, regular expressions are not a very accessible topic, and are mostly unknown outside of computer science's study of finite state machines, parsers and unix system tools. If there are large sets of changes like that I'd be happy to help out, just let me know.

BTW, I did email the webmasters of the Allendale page, but I don't know if any action will be taken. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to thank you for the part that you played in my education about Gap (clothing retailer). Without your intervention, I would never have known that the retailer exploited its workers in sweat shop conditions. But, thanks to you, I now know this about the company. Figaro 12:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you are thanking me. I've never edited that page. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 13:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not confusing you with anybody else. You suuggested that I should alter the links to The Gap to links to Gap (clothing retailer). As a direct result of following your suggestion, I came across the above information. Figaro 13:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! What do you type in pstoedit (at the command line) in order to convert from eps to svg? /Slarre 18:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. pstoedit uses plugins to convert to different target formats. Run pstoedit -help to see if there are any SVG plugins available on your install. On my Debian Linux system, I have the "plot-svg" plugin which converts to SVG output via GNU's libplot. This is available by installing the libpstoedit0 Debian package. You can then run pstoedit -f plot-svg inputfile.eps outputfile.svg .

Note that this implementation isn't perfect, the SVG output generated required some hand-tuning in the attempts I have made. If you have any problems, let me know and I would be glad to help out. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chris.. Why did you change my work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramapoughnative1 (talk • contribs)

Hello. I reverted the (anonymous) changes to Ramapough Mountain Indians because they removed several requests for citation, and made claims that were disputed by some of the sources listed in the below paragraphs. That is, the changes violated the neutral point of view and the citation of sources policies. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 02:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this context, I think, I will simply take the references to cannibalism and incest out of that article as they really are no longer relevant (at the time I wrote them, the article linked to was a few random sentences). They can be better dealt with in the appropriate article. Daniel Case 14:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your great work on the History of New Jersey article! I have placed the article up for FAC after a peer review. Please vote and include any other comments. Thanks a lot, AndyZ 21:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Riots.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. --OrphanBot 09:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Carnildo, OrphanBot notified me about Image:Riots.jpg, but I just reverted the image. Can you make the logic of finding the uploader handle this? Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 13:10, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on it. It's a bit tricky, as I'll need to tell a revert from a re-upload, while not picking a vandalized image to notify on. --Carnildo 05:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the reordering of the demographic data, and while I had some issues with it, I let it stand. I myself had gotten into a battle regarding taking out the word "located" from the heading of an article (Municipality is located in XYZ County), demanding that it stay for standardization reasons. What criteria should we use to decide on what can be changed in the standard text we've been given? In terms of overall guidance, do you have any thoughts on what can change and what can't? Alansohn 17:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that what it comes down to is that anything can be edited that you can get a consensus on. IMO changing the Rambot (t c) text without clear need is counter-productive. I value consistency in this text since it is used on so many pages. A far more effective way to do it is to get Ram-Man (t c) to change the text accross the board by updating his bot. These are just my opinions, so take it with a grain of salt. If you feel strongly about the "located" copyedits, you should revert them. Just follow the guidelines at WP:3RR if you get into an edit war. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My logic in reverting the removal of "located" was robot consistency, but I was concerned that my obstinacy not just be based on an assumption. My "opponent" seems to have given in, so a 3RR situation was avoided. I have made other changes to virtually every New Jersey municipality and CDP pages, but many of these could have been done by a bot. Perhaps revisiting the rambot boilerplate might be a productive idea.

By the way, check out both Eastwood, New Jersey and Boroughitis for some work I've done. See Bergen County, New Jersey for the latest batch of the nearly completed historical municiplaities. Alansohn 19:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've seen the USPS stamp images you've recently been adding. I am concerned about the lack of licenses however. Note that the {{USPSstamp}} template says that it is fair use in articles discussing the stamp itself and not in articles discussing the subject illustrated on the stamp. In light of this, can you explain the use of Image:Wiki newyork.jpg in New York and Image:Wiki newjersey.jpg in New Jersey? Thank you. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 23:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, if you read the bullet point under the one you were quoting, it should clear things up. Thanks Swollib 23:24, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was aware of that. Both of those listed conditions must be met. There is not an OR operator between them. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 23:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at this category: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:USPS_stamps you should see that there are a lot of stamp images on pages doing exactly what i'm doing, so i don't think it is a copyright violation . thanks Swollib 23:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for clarification at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags#USPS post-1978 stamp images. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 23:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you are a supporter of Don Bosco, take a look at this page.

• St John Bosco and LGBT edits evrik 05:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been waiting a few days to mention this to you (because your user page has said and still says you're on vacation), but since you've edited stuff recently, I figured I'd just do it now (since either you're still away and checking or you've forgotten to take the message off):

The flag on WP:NJ (Image:New Jersey state flag.svg) differs from the flag on New Jersey (Image:Flag of New Jersey.svg). I think the latter (if I remember correctly) is used more often, but I might have this backwards (it does not really matter).

Since the colors (and even the designs to a minor extent) are very different on each of the above flags, one is obviously wrong (unless I am mistaken), or both are wrong to varying extents. The WP:NJ/first one matches the background color of the flag on the NJ website] more, but it appears that the New Jersey article's (second) flag has better coloring regarding the two women's top halves, but the bottom half appears more correct on the first flag.

I'm not well versed in flag-related stuff, but I do know that many websites have it wrong. Since you appear to have dealt with them before, I figured I'd bring it to your attention, since you probably know more than me (and you appear in the edit history of one or more of them somewhere). I think that they should be "merged" into one that is more correct than each individual flag at the moment, and that all articles on WP using a NJ flag should use this new one (right now, there are at least two versions that articles use). (And I do realize that the one on the NJ site is potentially incorrect itself, but I hope it's not...)

Finally, for my own (and probably others') knowledge, if possible, could you comment on why the white skirt-like things are now blue (if you know)? A google image serach for "new jersey flag" reveals mostly white ones, and the second flag above has white. I think I saw a NJ flag on the Parkway recently, and it (if I recall correctly) was blue, too. Thanks. //MrD9 00:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to find official descriptions of the flag and its colors, but havn't been able to find much. Officially the flag background is "buff" and the seal background is "jersey blue". I've found many various descriptions of what RGB values these two colors should map to. It appears to be up to debate.

The state seal is the centerpiece to the flag. The components of the state seal are described in statute, but the rendering of the details is up to each artist. The newly uploaded flag appears to be more like the official rendering (although with wrong colors).

The white skirts appear incorrect. All of the official flags I've seen uses blue skirts.

One of the best representations of the flag I've seen online is on wikipedia: Image:250th.jpg. I'll try to use that as a model to adjust the one uploaded to commons. Also, the one uploaded to commons is off-center. That should be pretty easily fixable. I'll try to get a chance to this sometime this week.

BTW, thanks for the reminder about the vacation notice. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome (to the last part). Again, if you don't want to do whatever needs to be done (or there's nothign to be done), don't do it, but it just seemed that you were the best pesron to go (of those I've seen, anyway) regarding this issue that's been driving me insane for the past month... especially because some pages have one flag and others have the other. Thanks/hopefully it works out. //MrD9 23:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some edits, please review them. Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 14:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Flag of New Jersey.svg looks much better now. Or at least I think it does. Thanks for improving it greatly. However, should we delete the other version so it's not confused (since the new version is much better than it?) //MrD9 22:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Let me know if you notice any other problems with it. It already has a reference to the other image on commons. The license is suitable. It isn't as true to the official flag, but it is a faithful and artistic rendering of the seal. No reason to delete it IMO. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 23:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, and thank you for nominating it. Raven4x4x 10:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the template can fit all private high schools. I think "prep school" is usually used for the ones that have a relationship with an Ivy League School and hold spots for a number of students from that school. We should change the title to "Private Preparetory High Schools in New Jersey". What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs)

Thats fine. In that case Don Bosco Prep doesn't qualify. I think it is named Don Bosco Prep to distinguish it from several Don Bosco Technical schools. It indicates that all classes are at college preperatory level or higher. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 12:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just remember that a "Prep School" can be different things in different places, in Queensland Australia, it seems to be a feeder primary school for a private highschool. Alex Law 21:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for participating in Wikiproject New Jersey. In an attempt to create articles for some of the non-existing pages related to New Jersey, NJCOTW was recently created to bring members of WP:NJ together to work collaboratively on a certain selected topic, which this week is List of Governors of New Jersey. Please help by nominating/voting/commenting on articles on WP:NJCOTW, or by helping to improve articles in the scope of the topic for the NJCOTW.AndyZ 00:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a USQ student (well, was in 2005, will be in 2007). I can upload fresh images to replace these two, but I may need the copyright tag thing checked when I do. Alex Law 21:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, thanks for planning on contributing free replacements. There are several acceptable licensing options available for content creators. See WP:ICT#For image creators for details. Let me know if I can help. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 22:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Library pic replaced with one with a huamn readable name, so the current one can be killed freely, not sure how to put it up for deletion (see USQ page). Japanese Garden pic will have to wait while I dig one out of my files, as the lake has been drained this week for cleaning and repairs (autumn, probably hoping for some cyclone related rain to refill it). I should do a small article on the Japanese Garden. Alex Law 02:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you leave the {{no license}} template on the page, it will evenutally be deleted. Otherwise, you can list the image on Wikipedia:Copyright problems or Wikipedia:Images for deletion. Follow the instructions on those pages if you want to list it there. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 12:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Unchecking that box reduces the file size to ~30kb. – flamurai (t) 18:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current list, unless hand-modified, links only undiactric versions of the article (Michal Michniewski instead of Michał Michniewski) and instead of Michał Michniewski the editable text displays Micha&&322; Michniewski.

Do you think it would be possible for bot to go through the list 1) fix unicode (#%35 into proper Polish letters) 2) replace all non-diactric versions with diactrics (so if it finds a string [[Michal Michniewski|Michał Michniewski]] it will transform it into Michał Michniewski) and 3) see if a non-diactric redirect exists for existing articles and if no, create a redirect to it from the non-diactric version (so if Michał Michniewski exists, it would create a redirect from Michal Michniewski to Michał Michiewski? I have found myself creating those redirects quite often, and I don't have the time to go and hand-change the thousands entries in the list. Also, this bot could go through various articles and replace the common [[pre-unicode non-diactric old article name, now a redirect to|post-unicode current article name with diactrics]] with [[post-unicode current article name with diactrics]].--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:40, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A revised version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you kindly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much. Loom91 12:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same person who updated River Vale, New Jersey has added a Politics section to all of the Bergen County municipality articles. I agree that there needs to be asource for this information. But, even with a source, I question whether presidential election results from one year show a meaningful tilt in one direction or another. For example, registration statistics would add some more context. Alansohn 13:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw. I left a message on the user's talk page, see User talk:68.44.149.97. I agree, the politics sections as they stand are not very useful as they discuss one fact in isolation, but I think the section could be expanded to be useful. I would not object to those sections in the current form being removed. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the Bergen County wwb site for statistics on registration, but no luck online. They do have printed reports I will pick up listing registration by municipality, listing party affiliation counts. Again, not perfect, but a politics section that read: "River Vale has 3,000 registered voters (as of April 2006), accounting for 37% of the 2000 Census population of 9,449. of registered voters, 1,200 (40%) are registered as Democrats, 900 (30%) are Republicans, 150 (5%) are registered to other parties and 750 (25%) are Unaffiliated or Independent. In the 2004 presidential elections..." This would give a more meaningful indication of political leanings by municipality. Any thoughts? Alansohn 18:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that sounds good. This would be more useful and encyclopedic data. If we could get aggregate data for the county page also, that would be good. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 18:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, I keep forgetting to sign in. I got the info from this site:

http://www.nj.gov/lps/elections/2004results/2004_municipality_presidential_results.html I should've cited the info, but didn't, my apologies. I saw a similar format in the Seattle-area municipalities and that's where I got the idea from. I think that the statistics I provided, for the most part, are indicitive of the political leanings- i.e. the wealthier suburbs- Saddle River, Alpine, etc.- lean Republican, while the poorer suburbs lean Democrat, and there are some wealthy suburbs, such as Demarest and Ridgewood, that lean (slightly) Democrat, etc. Cg41386

ETA: And I like Alan's idea, I'll see if I can find anything too. Cg41386 16:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created a spreadsheet from the Bergen County data and used that to calculate percentages by party and compare to countywide numbers. See Allendale, New Jersey, River Vale, New Jersey and Teaneck, New Jersey for examples of municipalities that I've already updated. It gives a much better view of political trends, especially when combined with the 2004 election data. I have all 70 municipalities, now I just have to edit each page... Alansohn 19:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The section on voter registration looks good. Thanks for going to get the data, Alan. Thanks, CG, for giving the source for the 2004 election numbers. I've made some changes to that section on the River Vale article. If those changes look good to you guys, I'd like to use that form for the rest of the municipal articles. Comments? Further changes? Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very nice and paints a better picture than what I originally had, thanks for the updates! --Cg41386 20:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I've just noticed a problem with the 2004 election results. The numbers don't add up (literally). For example, if I sum the votes for each candidate for Allendale, I get 3538 votes, but the number of listed ballots cast is 3545. There were 7 ballots which are missing. Perhaps they didn't count absentee ballots or there was ballot spoilage (hanging chads!). You can see the same thing under the county totals, for a total of 1601 ballots not counted on this list. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 22:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had set up a spreadsheet with the numbers from the 2004 results, and I don't think any of the totals matched up. I think the votes column we're trying to reconcile to is the number of voters, not the number of votes for president. It's always possible that a person or two forgets to vote )or just doesn't vote) for the top of the ticket. It could also reflect write-ins. I will compare the numbers in the table to the report I have from Teaneck with teh details election results by precinct to see what the differences are. Alansohn 00:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'd like to ask about {{PD-NCGov}}. This template cited state law that indicates that items produced by the North Carolina government are "property of the people". Your redirection of this page to {{no license}} indicated that it was because of some "precedent", and that more information is at WP:PDOMG. Please explain what the prcedent is. There is no addtional information at PDOMG, except for California. There is statute to back up this PD claim. Why was it redirected to no license? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 16:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In general, works of the NC state government are protected by copyright. The statute [1] which you refer to only concerns public records (official announcements, court documents, mugshots, etc.), and "property of the people" in this context only means that public records can be obtained for free or for minimal cost. This is not even close to a provision that would place all works produced by the NC state government into the public domain. In fact, if you check the main NC government website [2], you'll see a prominent copyright notice ("Copyright © State of North Carolina"). If you keep following links to other state agencies from there, you'll find that all of them carry copyright notices. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 20:46, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The statue stats that "public records" include anything "made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions." This is very broad. Just because some contractor put a copyright statement on a page doesn't mean that it is valid or correct. Did you read the story of the person who wrote to NC agencies asking permission? See Template talk:PD-NCGov.

Regardless of whether you agree with me or not, this template was not taken to WP:TFD, and its removal was not up for public debate. It also cannot be reverted since the page is now locked. This is outside of the normal procedures. Please consider restoring the page and taking the issue to WP:TFD. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 23:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, the template had been taken to TfD, as noted at WP:PDOMG. Second, TfD is entirely the wrong forum to resolve issues like this one. The legal status of certain classes of works is not up to a vote on Wikipedia, it's an external contingency: either these works are in the public domain, or they are not. No amount of voting or debate can change that. Third, as I thought I had demonstrated above, the various websites of NC state government agencies display prominent copyright notices, so any blanket PD claim is out of the question. Fourth, NC is not an isolated case. Various state statutes (e.g. California's) talk about "information" belonging to the public, but copyright is concerned with the expression of information, not with information per se. And nowhere does the statute specify an exemption from copyright protection similar to the exemption for works of the federal government (17 U.S.C. §105). This leads to one inevitable conclusion: we cannot use NC government works under a public domain rationale. Even if you're not convinced that NC government works are definitely not in the public domain, there is enough doubt regarding the claim that they are for us to stop using this rationale. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 01:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All facts are derived from the link in the resources section. You must read all 11 sections of the site to garner all the facts. - CobaltBlueTony 13:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your disputed tag on the talk page. - CobaltBlueTony 13:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please review my revision, and thank you for your help! - CobaltBlueTony 14:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me! - CobaltBlueTony 16:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your revert on Ridgewood, New Jersey of "Daniel Callan- Ridgewood Biddy Basketball Champion of 2007". Maybe this person really is that good at basketball. Or maybe his true skill lies in predicting the future? You gotta live some of these edits. Alansohn 20:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi, just saw the new map you put up on BART, I'm just curious how exactly you did it? Did you just trace over the "official" map, or something else? Cool. lensovet 21:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]