User talk:Gdr/Archive 3

Archives 1 — 2004-04/2005-04 2 — 2005-04/2005-08 3 — 2005-08/2006-03 4 — 2006-03/2007-08

Categories

Can we discuss the "categories" problem you mentioned on my talk page before you make lots of changes and undo a great deal of work on my part? It's too late at night to get this sorted out right now, and I am aware of the problem you mentioned, but there are some other issues involved. P0M 06:13, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Sure, what do you want to ask? Gdr 17:16:20, 2005-08-03 (UTC)

Taxoboxes

Many thanks for the advice on authorities - I will do this in future. Warofdreams 09:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Authority-bot

Hi Gdr,

I am trying to add authorities for all animals and plants on the Dutch Wikipedia. It would be great if I can use your script for Nomialbot to do this. Is that possible? I have bot flag at nl: (nl:Gebruiker:UcuchaBot). Thanks in advance, Ucucha|... 15:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... it is not yet in a form for public use, and at the moment it can only handle animals. I am working on making it support plants, fungi and bacteria (virus nomenclature is somewhat harder work). When I've done that, I'll make a release for you. But I think it will still need some work on your part to make it work on the Dutch Wikipedia. How good are you at Python and writing wikipedia bots? Gdr 16:02:59, 2005-08-04 (UTC)

Thanks. I am only working on animals now, too, so it would already be great to have the animal bot. Do you need a long time to write the other kingdoms, you think?

I can't write it, but I can see some things in the file - if your bot makes links to "Scientific classification", I'll be able to change it into "Wetenschappelijke classificatie". I guess the main difference between nl: and en: (in this case) is that we don't use {{Taxobox section binomial}} at all, but always {{Taxobox section binomial parens}}. I guess you have somewhere in the code to change {{Taxobox section binomial simple}} into {{Taxobox section binomial}} or {{Taxobox section binomial parens}}. I think I'll be able to change that kind of things. Ucucha|... 16:15, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Taxoboxes

Thanks so much for the tip, I'll try to remember it! Pcb21| Pete 14:29, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

And thanks from me as well! I'll keep it in mind. Eugene van der Pijll 19:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Also - thanks from myself! As a matter of interest where did you find that 'Brot.' was the authority for Sheep's Fescue? Thanks again --AjAldous 15:20, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

I used IPNI [1]. But I see that it ought to be Linnaeus since Species Plantarum (1753) precedes Felix Brotero's Flora Lusitanica (1804). I will fix. Gdr 15:27:12, 2005-08-10 (UTC)

Further thanks from myself re: your tip on taxoboxes (and finding the authority for Beech Marten). Valiantis 20:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks so much!

Thank you for the work and help on the Calabar Python article! As I am only an amatuer herpetologist, I found the taxonomy of that snake particularly difficult to grasp. I did own one for a couple years (had to sell when I moved) but it was a very nice snake to own. Of course it stayed burrowed in the sub-strate for 95% of the time. In fact the one I had ended up growing to a little over a metre in length. Perhaps you'd take a quick look at the article I wrote on the Woma Python as well. If I can ever be of any assistance to you on herp related articles, please let me know. Thanks again, kind stranger! Hamster Sandwich 14:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

• Hello again kind stranger! Thanks for the redirect to Boidae. I was following a redlink from another article that led me to create that article "Tropidophiidae". Unfortunately I lost track of that original article. If I find it again I'll add the link to theDwarf boa page. I might expand that article as well. See Ya! Hamster Sandwich 00:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Once again I offer my thanks for your help in cleaning up an article I wrote! You're not hiding out somewhere in my desk are you? As you can tell, I copied the taxobox from the Calabar Python article. I ask, do you think the title should be "Queen snake" as is, or "Queen Snake"? Thanks again Hamster Sandwich 22:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

May 31 vs. 31 May

I'm sorry, I don't see the difference, so you should link to the page that it actually exists on (which is May 31, not 31 May). Was this discussed elsewhere? I'm sorry, but I reverted your edit on Battle of Jutland because I was doing some major wikilink fixing, and I guess the date tags were collateral damage. I understand that Wikipedia can automatically format dates, so which is preferred? — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 20:48, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed you reverted my second edit. Unfortunantely, you took a lot of good edits (besides the date stuff I think you're objecting to, correct me if I'm wrong) along with it. I'm going to restore the non date related edits, and then I'd like to know what's wrong with changing over the dates. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 20:53, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring my edits! I should have checked the history before I started to remove the date changes. I've read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers), and I'm going to make my case for favoring May 31 over 31 May on that talk page. Cheers. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 21:05, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Nomialbot

Your "nomialbot" seems to be responsible for some edits that are style rather than content-related. Specifically, making images 250px wide is cleary a matter of style, and is often inappropriate. Such a wide box on a browser that in many cases might be only 600-800 pixels wide (including controls and winow dressing) is a massive use of screen real estate for little or no reason. What's more some pages (e.g. morel) have images which do not scale up well, and so a resolution is chosen based on the original image's size.

Please take these factors into account before using a bot to make style changes to so many pages in the futre. Thanks -Harmil 17:39, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Gdr 17:45:54, 2005-08-12 (UTC)

Sciurognathi

About Sciurognathi, you asked "Can you comment?" Not intelligently, no. All my information comes from Rodent, so if it's wrong then so am I. (Taxonomies are difficult to nail down.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 18:25, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

I see, so you're following the MSW taxonomy. That's fine. I'll make a redirect from Sciuromorpha. Gdr 18:37:17, 2005-08-12 (UTC)

writing history on wikipedia

Hello,

I’m an historian working at the Center for History and New Media at George Mason University (http://chnm.gmu.edu/) and we are very interested in digital, peer-produced works of history, including history articles in Wikipedia. We’d like to talk to people about their experiences working on articles in Wikipedia, in connection with a larger project on the history of the free and open source software movement. Would you be willing to talk with us about your involvement, either by phone, a/v chat, IM, or email? This could be as lengthy or brief a conversation as you wish.

Thanks for your consideration.

Olivia

oryan at gmu dot edu

authority.py bot

Thank you very much for the sharing of the file!

I've tried to run it, but I got an error before even using it :-(. The things I changed were deleting the <pre> and <nowiki> tags and changing 'en' into 'nl' in "site = wikipedia.Site('nl')".

A few other things should also be changed, I think, but I think that should produce an error different from this:

Microsoft Windows XP [versie 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\toshiba>cd C:\bot\pywikipedia

C:\bot\pywikipedia>authority.py

 File "C:\bot\pywikipedia\authority.py", line 1
   Python 2.3.5 (#62, Feb  8 2005, 16:23:02) [MSC v.1200 32 bit (Intel)] on win

32

            ^

SyntaxError: invalid syntax

C:\bot\pywikipedia>

Ucucha|... 18:22, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't know much about Windows, so I may be unable to help you. But it looks like something is wrong with line 1, the Unix shebang. I suggest you try deleting it. Gdr 18:32:33, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

It starts to work :-). Thanks. I think I still have to change some things, but I'll have a look. Ucucha|... 18:42, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I am trying to run it by:

authority.py "Grote kruisbek" Borkhausen 1793

for I am trying to add the authority for the nl:Grote kruisbek (Loxia pytyopsittacus Borkhausen 1793), but how should I type it in? I am not able to find it in the source, I fear... Ucucha|... 19:34, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

First argument is the taxon, second the authority. (I think the instructions at the top of the file are out of date, I will fix.) So you should try authority.py "Loxia pytyopsittacus" "Borkhausen, 1793". Gdr 19:38:43, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

It still doesn't work :-(. I get the following:

C:\bot\pywikipedia>authority.py "Loxia pytyopsittacus" "Borkhausen, 1793"
Checked for running processes. 1 processes currently running, including the curr
ent process.
Getting page [[Loxia_pytyopsittacus]]
DBG> Loxia_pytyopsittacus is redirect to Grote kruisbek
Getting page [[Grote_kruisbek]]
Trying http://www.ipni.org/ipni/authorsearch?find_abbreviation=Borkhausen&query_
type=by_query
Trying http://www.ipni.org/ipni/authorsearch?find_surname=Borkhausen&query_type=
by_query
Getting page [[Borkhausen]]
Expansion for Borkhausen? [aecq]

Ucucha|... 19:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks OK so far. The script has tried to find an expansion for Borkhausen, but has failed. So it's asking you what to do. The [aecq] prompt is a bit cryptic, but if you press return you'll get some help. The thing to do here is to enter "e", meaning "enter Expansion", and then enter Moritz Balthasar Borkhausen at the next prompt. Gdr 19:51:47, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

Note that on the English Wikipedia the script would know the expansion for Borkhausen because it's listed on List of zoologists by author abbreviation. You might want to take a copy of that page on the Dutch wikipedia and tell authority.py where to find it (see the wiki_abbrev_sources) variable, then use the --rebuild command-line option) or else tell authority.py to use the list on the English Wikipedia. Gdr 20:00:43, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

I've just made the nl:Lijst van biologen naar afkorting. Ucucha|... 20:04, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[2]: the first is ready :-). I only have to learn him that he may not use {{Taxobox section binomial}}, but that won't be very difficult, I think. Thanks! Ucucha|... 20:04, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

See the function format_taxobox_authority on about line 510. Once you get it working and you're happy with it, send me a copy of your changed version so I can parameterize the original. Gdr 20:09:26, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

I'll do that. Ucucha|... 20:11, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't speak Dutch, but I think nl:Lijst van biologen naar afkorting may not be quite the right title. You see, zoologists and botanists have different conventions for abbreviation — compare List of zoologists by author abbreviation and List of botanists by author abbreviation. For example, Linnaeus is "Linnaeus" in zoology but "L." in botany. Gdr 20:09:26, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

It means "List of biologists by abbreviation". You're right, probably, but I am first having a look on how it works. Hopefully I can sophisticate it when I have some more experience. Ucucha|... 20:11, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I can use the list now, even for authors like Vigors. I think I don't have to change the script any more, so I'll put it in on User:Gdr/authority.py/Dutch or so. Ucucha|... 20:27, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

authors

My version is here now. It generally runs well as yet. There seems to be some kind of bug here. This only occurs when the authority is looked up from Species 2000. Ucucha|... 07:38, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for putting up your version. You introduced the bug yourself, I'm afraid! Look at the changes you made to format_taxobox_authority.

There is a problem here. It looks to me as though all articles on the Dutch Wikipedia have parentheses around the authority. By doing that, you are losing a valuable distinction. Parentheses around an authority mean that the species has been moved to a different genus. Lack of parentheses means that the species is still in the genus in which it was originally placed.

For example Pan troglodytes (Blumenbach, 1775) indicates that Blumenbach did not place the Common Chimpanzee in the genus Pan. (He named it Simia troglodytes.) But Homo sapiens Linnaeus, 1758 indicates that the genus is unchanged.

See section 51 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature [3]. There are different naming rules in botany and microbiology, but parentheses have similar meaning.

authority.py does its best to get this right. So let me encourage you to get it right on the Dutch Wikipedia. It will obviously be better to make the change sooner rather than later! Gdr 11:01:02, 2005-08-14 (UTC)

I know. I even know they have a meaning. I understand the reason now, but I think we'll have to use something like {{Taxobox section binomial parens2}} or so in any case, since {{Taxobox section binomial}} is already used. I'm home for only two days now; I'll do more when I am back home. Ucucha|... 12:15, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Genus -> Species redirects

Hi, the redirects:

• Pseudibis → White-shouldered Ibis and
• Geronticus → Northern Bald Ibis

showed up on WP:RfD, with the complaint that a genus shouldn't redir to a species when the genus has more than one species in it (as these both apparently do). (I poked around on Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life to see if I could confirm this, but couldn't, and it does seem reasonable - I'd think we want them to be red links to encourage someone to write them.) Anyway, I happened to note that your Gdrbot created them both, so I thought I'd drop you a warning in case it has done more of these. Noel (talk) 04:34, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

There are dozens, maybe hundreds, of redirects like these. Gdrbot created these redirects because the genus was (wrongly) marked as monotypic in a taxobox. There's no need to RfD these redirects, just delete them when you spot them. That's what I do. Gdr 10:24:52, 2005-08-15 (UTC)

HMS Canopus

I honestly have no idea. I took the information from French ship Franklin (1797), which refers to her as a second-rate; the initial third-rate was a typo, I think... Shimgray 15:42, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. There were a spate of other "French ship --" articles that day from the same user; you might want to glance over them and see if the same error's repeated. (I'd do it, but I'm not confident in being right...) Shimgray 11:55, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Improper genus redirects

I'll be occasionally dropping by here to signal these as I wade through bird articles to implement taxo-categorization. I figure it's the most appropriate place to point them out, since most of them will have been created by Nomialbot.

• Phoeniculus
• Cuculus (I don,t think this is nomialbot, but still inappropriate)
• Pipile mistake
• Callipepla
• Trochilus

Circeus 22:33, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

I won't delete Pipile because the Common Piping Guan article treats the genus as being monotypic, with the other species being reduced to subspecies. Is this the standard taxonomy as far as Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds is concerned? If not, please rewrite the Common Piping Guan accordingly. Gdr 16:55:40, 2005-08-16 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I only clicked one of four distinct species links from Cracidae, all linking to Common Piping Guan, thus the confusion. I have absolutely no idea what is the most recognized taxonomic status for these (all I do is taxo-categorizatioon and a few stubs for genera/families). In the meantime, I'll reduce to a single link in Cracidae. Circeus 17:10, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

• Grallina

JohnCastle 00:47, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

• Cormobates

JohnCastle 00:30, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Nummulite

Thanks for fixing up Nummulite. akaDruid 14:04, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Lesser Emperor

Now that you ask, I have to admit that I don't know which genus it belongs to. Although I bet its Anax. I got Aeshna from List of Dragonfly species recorded in Britain. ITIS doesn't have it in either genus, but both genera are incomplete on ITIS. Google gives 2 hits for "Aeshna parthenope", both from Wikipedia and 465 hits for "Anax parthenope", so I will go with Anax Dsmdgold 23:34, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Slave bracelet

Thanks - you're right! Trollderella 19:50, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

snakeroot

The other day i made Rose of Jericho, and it was very quickly editted by you, so i assume you know your stuff when it comes to plants, which is why i am asking you this;

This webpage says about White Snakeroot; it is called "Ageratina altissima (L.) King & H.E. Robins [=Eupatorium rugosum Houtt.]". Does this mean it has 2 names; Ageratina altissima and Eupatorium rugosum? Encarta and brittanica both call it the later, but we appear to call it the former on Snakeroot.

thanks Martin - The non-blue non-moose 14:50, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

hominoid taxonomy images

Could you create a 7th image, either showing all four gibbon genera, or changing "Hylobates" to "4 genera", or some such? It'd be nice to "complete" the history of the hominoid changes since right below that section the classification shows all eight genera. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I'll do that. (However: the elevation of the four subgenera of Hylobates to genera was quite recent; within the last ten years, I think. So I'm confident that the diagrams are correct as shown, since the last diagram represents the state of the art c. 1990. Probably the text should talk about this in more detail, but I don't know quite when the elevation took place. Can you give me a reference?) Gdr 12:14:37, 2005-08-25 (UTC)

I'm trying. Groves lists the four as subgenera in 1997. In 2001 he said they should be elevated but thinks a naming is incorrect. I'm looking for the publication where he says an elevation shouldn't be held up for the reasons he had previous stated, and elevates them. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:11, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Ah! Found it in the obvious spot... he elevates it in MSW3, to be published later this year. See the Wikispecies comments at Hylobatidae and Bunopithecus. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:36, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I gotta ask...

...if you're a bot, how come your capitalization differed in the two disambiguations you made in Sarracenia? Sorry, just struck me as curious :-) ~ Veledan • Talk ^{+ new} 01:48, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

NM, I found my answer on line 58x of the code!! ~ Veledan • Talk ^{+ new} 02:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Carl Alexander Clerck

If you don't agree with the changes I supposed please feel free to revert to the former version. Best regards.--Araneophilus that is here Anglo-Araneophilus 11:33, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Navyphotos

Hi,

I hope i'm not bothering you, but I'd like your advice. I'm not sure if this has already been done, but I e-mailed the maintainer of Navyphotos to inform him of the situation regarding Jimbo Wales' decree about copyrighted images. I asked him what he could do: whether he could release the images into the public domain or under a GFDL licence.

Reharding the copyright status, he said - and I quote: "Although I have given my permission to use any of the photos, I make no claim whatsoever to being the owner of any copyright of the majority of them ( some are mine and many have now been sent to me ) especially those that I had found dumped. In all conscience I cannot give a "Legal" permission to use something which is not mine in the eyes of the law, however I hope that does not stop their continued use on the wickipedia site."

He would like to get in touch with Jimbo Wales to explain the situation to him. So what can be done?

Again, hope i'm not bothering you. Keep up the great work!

SoLando 19:48, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Have you read Mr Newton's explanation of how the photos came into his possession? (See [4], especially the first paragraph.) There is clearly no way for us to determine the owners of these photographs or to get permission to use them. So we can only use them under some form of "fair use" argument. Gdr 20:27:14, 2005-09-05 (UTC)

Yes, I did read the explanation, but what about images that have recently been donated to his site? Can we still use them under fair use? I say that because it does appear to be limited looking at Wikipedia:Fair use. SoLando 15:44, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, this has now come up on Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems#Navy photos. Can we move the discussion to there. Thanks. Justinc 21:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Primates category rework

After some good discussion on the talk for WP:PRIM with User:Marskell, I've begun work on cleaning up category:Early hominids. Please come to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Primates/category rework to weigh in your opinion on what direction to take. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Couple o' bugs with the Gdrbot

The bot is creating some odd redirects. It created "many, see text" to refer to spiny lizard, and created "very many, see text" to refer to ants. Could you take a look at the bot please? I think it's gone cuckoo. --Bash 06:13, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Which articles are you referring to? Gdr 11:10, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

These are a couple: Many, see text (deleted already), Very many, see text (deleted already), See text., and 15, see text. --Bash 22:38, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Gdr 21:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Rana palustris moved to Pickerel frog

On Sept 10, you left this edit summary on Pickerel frog:

Rana palustris has been moved to Pickerel frog

Mind if I ask why? When I create pages for living organisms, I've been trying to create them under their scientific name with a redirect from the various common names of note. This gives us a uniform naming, even when the organism has no common name (including many bacteria, insects, etc.) -Harmil 00:03, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (fauna). Gdr 16:40, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Úbeda

Hello, sorry for the long message.

In March 2005, there was a WP:RM request and vote (which you took part in) to move Úbeda to Ubeda, with a 6-3 result, see Talk:Ubeda#Requested_move:_.C3.9Abeda_.E2.86.92_Ubeda (or perhaps here if renamed).

However, beginning in April 2005 and lasting several months, there was a survey conducted at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English)#Proposal and straw poll regarding place names with diacritical marks, with dozens of participants voting and discussing over an extended period of time. The purpose of the survey was to try to gather feedback for what the policy should be globally. Proponents of diacritics were in the majority, and in general, use of diacritics is widespread in actual practice on Wikipedia today (particularly since the Mediawiki upgrade to Unicode).

However, for Úbeda/Ubeda, Philip Baird Shearer is stating that the WP:RM vote takes precedence over the survey results, and a new WP:RM vote would be required to move it to Úbeda. My position is that there should be a global policy rather than case-by-case voting -- that was the whole purpose of the survey. In discussion with him, I wrote:

Just as we wouldn't have case-by-case voting on, say, capitalization issues for articles (eg, prepositions in movie and book titles should be lowercase, globally), we shouldn't have case-by-case voting on diacritic issues.

See the discussion at Talk:Ubeda#Talk_page_discussion_on_page_move (or perhaps here if renamed).

As a possible alternative to calling a new WP:RM vote which might set a precedent for case-by-case voting across thousands of articles, I am polling all the participants of the original WP:RM vote to ask:

• Regardless of how you voted in the WP:RM voting, which do you believe should take precedence: the earlier WP:RM vote on the specific article, or the subsequent survey?

Note, since Philip Baird Shearer was one of the participants in that vote, he will also be receiving this message and thus will have the opportunity to respond. -- Curps 05:55, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

For what it's worth, and for the information of all the voters in the March requested move vote, there's now a new requested move vote at Talk:Ubeda. -- Curps 01:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

1911 Taxonomy

Thank you for all the wonderful work you are doing on the 1911EB taxonomy. I was hoping that putting them together like that would generate some interest, and it looks like I was right. Some of those would have languished on the main lists for a long time. Anyway, I just wanted to offer my compliments. --DanielCD 00:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Dimorphous Flower

Just wanted to say that I like your reorganization of the short pages I put together. One slightly longer article with the redirects makes more sense. --CBDunkerson 19:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Maths: Asymptotic Series

(Anonymous homework question copied from Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science deleted.)

Have you tried asking your teacher? Gdr 14:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

flags

Hi I noticed you reverted the flags I put at Air raids on Darwin, February 19, 1942.. is this because flags are used only for wars not for battles?? or is there another reason Astrokey44 13:15, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Flags are not used in battleboxes. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Battles. Gdr 13:26, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Aleutian Islands map.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Aleutian Islands map.png. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{gfdl}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{fairuse}}.) See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. Thue | talk 20:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for all your help on American green tree frog; it is much appreciated. If you ever need hel, feel free to ask me. Warmest regards --Neutrality^talk 21:22, 23 October 2005 (UTC)