---

Archived every 50 sub-headings:
Archive 1 (July 7, 2005 to October 8, 2005)
Archive 2 (October 9, 2005 to October 22, 2005)
Archive 3 (October 23, 2005 to November 5, 2005)
Archive 4 (November 6, 2005 to November 19, 2005)
Archive 5 (November 20, 2005 to December 7, 2005)
Archive 6 (December 8, 2005 to December 18, 2005)
Archive 7 (December 19, 2005 to December 29, 2005)
Archive 8 (December 29, 2005 to January 8, 2006)
Archive 9 (January 8, 2006 to January 29, 2006)
Archive 10 (January 29, 2006 to February 11, 2006)
Archive 11 (February 11, 2006 to March 3, 2006)
Archive 12 (March 4, 2006 to April 2, 2006)
Archive 13 (April 2, 2006 to April 22, 2006)
Archive 14 (April 23, 2006 to May 11, 2006)
Archive 15 (May 12, 2006 to June 10, 2006)
Archive 16 (June 10, 2006 to July 4, 2006)
Archive 17 (July 4, 2006 to July 31, 2006)
Archive 18 (July 31, 2006 to September 14, 2006)
Archive 19 (September 15, 2006 to November 11, 2006)
Archive 20 (November 11, 2006 to December 23, 2006)
Archive 21 (December 24, 2006 to February 24, 2007)
Archive 22 (February 24, 2007 to April 12, 2007)
Archive 23 (April 12, 2007 to July 10, 2007)
Archive 24 (July 11, 2007 to November 12, 2007)
Archive 25 (November 13, 2007 to March 3, 2008)
Archive 26 (March 9, 2008 to June 21, 2008)
Archive 27 (June 28, 2008 to September 30, 2008)
Archive 28 (October 1, 2008 to June 23, 2009)
Archive 29 (June 27, 2009 to July 2, 2010)
Archive 30 (July 3, 2010 to June 9, 2011)
Archive 31 (June 10, 2011 to December 30, 2012)
Archive 32 (January 1, 2013 to January 7, 2016)
Archive 33 (January 8, 2016 to March 18, 2020)

03210 09/06/1959 M= 5 11 SNBR=  98 PATSY       XING=0      (CP)                     
03215 09/06*  0   0   0    0*2001810  75    0*2081795 120    0*2221785 150    0*
03220 09/07*2351781 120    0*2491782 120    0*2621791 120    0*2691803 120    0*
03225 09/08*2731813 100    0*2771818 100    0*2791820 100    0*2811821 120    0*
03230 09/09*2841820  90    0*2921813  90    0*3021807  80    0*3121800  80    0*
03235 09/10*3211795  60    0*3301791  45    0*3401789  45    0*3511789  45    0*
03275 09/11E3751802  45    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*
03240 HR  

     06/05/2010 M= 3  0 SNBR=0000 PHET        XING=0
     06/05*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*3003590  40  993*
     06/06*2502880  40  993*2002160  35  996*1501440  30 1000*100 720  30 1000*
     06/07* 50   0  30 1000*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*  0   0   0    0*
     TS

Anirudh Emani ( talk) 11:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I am challenging your reversion of my addition of Hurricane Katrina (2005) as an example of a Category 3 hurricane.

Does your individual opinion trump the aggregate opinions expressed in the Hurricane Katrina article? This article unequivocally describes Hurricane Katrina as follows: "The storm weakened before making its second landfall as a Category 3 storm on the morning of Monday, August 29 in southeast Louisiana."

Please reverse your reversion of my edit today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikithinker2 ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Katrina is a bad example. It was a Cat. 5, and the article says "Storms of this intensity include...", and when it made landfall, it made landfall as a Cat 3 with a cat 5 storm surge. Darren 23 ^{Edits| Mail} 20:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Very nice! Looks much prettier and more professional. Also very informational and great use of color to help the reader navigate what is kind of a long chart. TimL ( talk) 21:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, i want your help regarding the copy editing, general fixes and grammatical mistakes in the following articles related to Meteorology.

• List of extreme weather records in Pakistan
• Climate of Quetta

Waiting for your reply. Regards...

Nabil rais2008 ( talk) 15:17, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

On 30 September 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Ecuador crisis, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

-- BorgQueen ( talk) 00:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

About the template you made Template:Highest ACE Atlantic hurricane seasons navbox, I recently created a table for the ACE totals on the 1998 season page and discovered the totals were extremely close to those in 1887. So I consulted with the Talk:Accumulated cyclone energy/Atlantic by year page and added up all of the numbers of ACE for both 1887 and 1998. With all of the numbers added up, 1887 had a total of about 181.565 (it was rounded to 182 on the 1887 page) and 1998 was at 181.77; which means that the 1887 Atlantic hurricane season is incorrectly listed as 10th highest on that template, but it should actually be 1998. -- 12george1 ( talk) 16:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

{{ Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 32B}} -- Anirudh Emani ( talk) 10:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you won't mind my saying this, but the paragraph you inserted on the etymology of the word " typhoon" seems a little high-handed, incomplete and poorly referenced. You mention only an Asian etymology (itself somewhat questionable: why Mandarin, not Cantonese, or Japanese?), without mention of the well-documented Greek/Arabic/Portuguese/etc. etymologies. And your reference, a Chinese popularizing site, hardly seems authoritative. See for example the discussion in the Typhoon talk page or Tropical_cyclone#Origin_of_storm_terms. Would you mind if I updated your paragraph to include more information and references on this? -- Kai Carver ( talk) 06:06, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I seem to have wound her up a huge amount, I never intended to. She seems to have responded much more positively to you. Theresa Knott | Sort that Knee! 20:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I always respond positively to decent folk like Tito. YMMV. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 20:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Your edit has been questioned at WP:ERRORS#Errors in In the news. Art LaPella ( talk) 15:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

My name is Sophia and I am a PhD student at University of Colorado in Boulder researching the use of social media for historically significant crises like Hurricane Katrina. I am interested in what kind of values and practices are emerging from these disasters especially with the use of ubiquitous technologies like blogs and social media sites like Wikipedia. I am contacting you because I noticed you are one of the top contributors of the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article. I was wondering if you would be open to answering some questions for my dissertation research on this topic. One example of a question I have is: You provided a considerable amount of edits to the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article. What kind of edits did you make? What story was being told before you edited the article and how does that differ from what is in Wikipedia now? Feel free to email me at Sophia.Liu@colorado.edu if you have any questions. Thanks for your time, Sophia -- Sophiabliu ( talk) 05:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I've asked Feline Hymnic (hope I spelled that right) to look over the NWP article. They had some input a couple years back, and just made an edit. Hopefully, they'll be able to provide some of the input we've been lacking from others. Thegreatdr ( talk) 18:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. To clarify. I have no meteorological training at all, although I do have a science background (my previous day-job for many years was systems admin. of UNIX computers in a major science-research university in the UK). So my comments are highlighting the questions that arise as I read the article, and that perhaps need expansion for a non-met audience. (Where the answer is reasonably obvious to me, I'm editing the article, but where there is doubt in my mind, I'm leaving a comment on the talk page.) Hope that helps. Feline Hymnic ( talk) 19:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The version of the book I found online did not pass page 45. Do you have a link to the figure they're talking about? The second reviewer's comments are why other science folk on wikipedia tend not to take the GAN/FAC process seriously (all referencing issues, no content issues). If they're not going to delve into the referencing to look for issues with the text of the article, how do they know it is FAC worthy? Thegreatdr ( talk) 20:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I've pinged Short_Brigade_Harvester_Boris, who has been critical of met articles after the FAC/GAN process has ended. He could provide some good feedback. Thegreatdr ( talk) 20:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

The flow chart may be simplistic, but it might help the lay reader understand what's going on. BTW...do we discuss MOS in this article? =O If not, we should. Thegreatdr ( talk) 21:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

There is now a section on MOS. That was an interesting oversight. Thegreatdr ( talk) 21:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll be back to the NWP article on Tuesday, when I have a few days off to work on issues. I'm nearing the end of my workweek. Thegreatdr ( talk) 23:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

• I've moved relevant content from this article to atmospheric model, and have begun adding a paramaterization section to the Atmospheric model article. Since no one has brought it up (yet?) within the NWP article, I'm keeping this content out of it for the time being. A parameterization section within the NWP article could become extremely involved, as it would have to talk about ocean modeling, tropical cyclone modeling, and AQ modeling as well. Just know that it is being added to the Atmospheric model and parametrization (climate) articles, in case the issue comes up. It looks like you've taken care of the issues that have arisen over the past 2-3 days within the NWP FAC. Thegreatdr ( talk) 13:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
• History of numerical weather prediction article has been created as a subarticle, which allows us to get around the previous information duplication noted by the latest FAC commenter. A WikiBot has flagged it, since the NWP article was mirrored on another website, and it thinks I copied it off the internet. Oy. Thegreatdr ( talk) 15:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
  • That's probably fine. I don't think that info is duplicated elsewhere in the article. It did solve the problem of talking about types of models multiple times, which I think was our reviewer's concern. Won't know until they provide feedback though. Back to copyediting 1953 AHS.... Thegreatdr ( talk) 22:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
• Made changes to the history and climate sections per FAC comments. So far, their suggestions have been specific enough that the issues have been fixable. I'm back on shifts (nights), so my wikipedia time is limited for the next several days, but I'll do what I can when I can. Thegreatdr ( talk) 18:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm back editing for another four days (days off). We seem to be getting one support per week in the FAC review. I'm trying to get more info from the second to last commentor about what is still missing here. I don't think this article is the place for all the math...several of the subarticles accomplish this task. I trying to fill out more info within the calc section per their comments though, where possible. Thegreatdr ( talk) 16:30, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
• Added a new section on wildfires, which actually had a decent article already prepared on wikipedia. It originally used a rather non-wiki style, which I attempted to fix. Hopefully, this does not add much more work for us during FAC, which hasn't had a comment in many hours as it is. Thegreatdr ( talk) 01:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
  • I spoke too soon. Now the refs are reformatted. Thegreatdr ( talk) 02:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
    • I made some changes to the last section, per the most recent FAC comments. I don't think wikipedia standards allow us to write a final summary...this isn't a high school/college essay. When you proposed this as a group project back in December, is this what you envisioned? We've now spent almost 3 months on the improvement of this article. The sea surface temperature, weather buoy, and History of numerical weather prediction articles have successfully navigated GAN. Tropical cyclone forecast model is currently on GAN, and weather ship and spaghetti plot upgraded. You never know how a prospective FA is going to lead to broad changes within its supporting articles, and the met/TC projects as a whole. Thegreatdr ( talk) 17:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
      • It passed. Thegreatdr ( talk) 00:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji 02:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand your concern about fair use, but it is already on the page of the Congressman. However, why is it in the wrong column? It appears in the correct column of the table. Naraht ( talk) 20:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I accidently added my response to my own talk page, oh well. Anyway, I agree with what you said. However I did a little digging in regard to the photo. If you go to File:Benfjensen.jpg, it says it came from Benton Franklin "Ben" Jensen (1892 - 1970) - Find A Grave Memorial. However, if you click on the photo there, it goes to Benton Franklin "Ben" Jensen (1892 - 1970) - Find A Grave Photos, which says that the photo comes from "1959's "Pocket Congressional Directory of the Eighty-Sixth Congress."" and if you look at Congressional Pictorial Directory, it is clear that the Pocket Congressional Directories (which is what the Congressional Pictoral Directories used to be called) were US Government published works. Therefore, as best as I can tell, this picture is in the public domain. Is this good enough? Naraht ( talk) 21:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

The image is definitely public domain. MatthewVanitas, the user who uploaded it, mistakenly thought it was a fair use image. I have since changed the licensing information on the file page. Also, Titoxd you really need to archive your talk page, it's way too long and took a while to load. Cheers. – Zntrip 22:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

That should work. Yeah, I need to do that soon. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 22:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

To show appreciation of your many additions to the currently labeled List of members of the United States Congress killed or wounded in office‎, I present you with the Senate gavel... just don't tell the senate I gave it to you. Now get back in there and make it even better! -- Found5dollar ( talk) 15:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm still trying to figure out how editing numerical weather prediction got me over into an article which had previously been within the realm of the global warming set of articles. Anyway, could you look over the general appearance of this article, and let me know if I've made much of an improvement there over the past several days? It's a dicey proposition to edit any of the climate change-related articles, but in this case, like urban heat island a couple years back, it begged for wikification. Thegreatdr ( talk) 22:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Ello Titoxd, I've been noticing that I've been making a lot of reversions to pages that you've either recently reverted, or that I go to revert something and you've already beat me to the punch. I did a fair bit of newpage patrolling and vandalism watching last year, but really haven't done so in a long time (and was never that knowledgeable on it in the first place--though I did manage to get rollback, and how I did that is beyond me).

Any chance you can reference a decent tutorial or article, sort of a "newcomers guide to patrolling"? I know some of the basics, but occasionally I make an incorrect reversion or incorrectly tag an article for speedy deletion, and people tend to get cranky about it (understandably). I've skimmed through some of the articles like Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions and similar ones, but maybe you know of some tailored specifically to what I'm doing? (feel free to see my recent revisions, or a related complaint on my talk page). I use Huggle to keep an eye on the edit feed, and I use Twinkle for newpage patrol and for ease of adding warnings sometimes.

Any help would be appreciated. :-) Warbirdadmiral (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Any chance you can upload the anniversary jigsaw piece logo to the wiki as a separate file so we can include it in its full 135x155px glory in Wikipedia:Wikipedia logos? Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 09:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello! I uploaded here, cropped to 135x139px (because the top padding no longer is needed). (-: — David Levy 12:03, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello! You've asked to poke you when Dakar is concluded. The time has come I think. Also I hope you may be so kind as to post Chagin's record, even despite there are 50% to 50% pro and contra votes in the discussion. The ITN/R sports news are boring without winners. GreyHood ^Talk 16:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Clarify_my_argument.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 09:12, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I guess you were close to that rogue admin. Any idea why he suddenly stopped editing one day? -- 129.130.32.204 ( talk) 18:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, I have no idea. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 20:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Why the removal of the citation dealing with coriolis? Was the proof not within the citation, or was the citation not considered primary? Thegreatdr ( talk) 21:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm confused. I added a citation... Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 21:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm clearly tired. Carry on. =) Thegreatdr ( talk) 22:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. In this edit you removed my report as "stale". Can you please help me understand what a stale report is? The last edit made by the IP (which I had to revert) was at 05:00, 11 February 2011. My report was at 09:21, 11 February 2011. You removed the report at 10:49, 11 February 2011. -- Muhandes ( talk) 16:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I removed that report since the IP had not made any edits in the last five hours, so for our purposes he/she stopped vandalizing. If the IP resumes making those sorts of edits, he can be re-reported without any problems. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 19:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer, but he most probably just went to sleep. This is not a rotating IP - this is an editor with a long history, this being the third offense on the same articles. Every time he decides to vandalize I spend two hours undoing it, which I really don't like, so understand why I care when my report goes ignored. Of course, I can report it next time, but that will still cause two hours lost of my time. But if these are the rules, though they are not smart, I guess there is nothing I can do. -- Muhandes ( talk) 20:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

If this has been going on for a while, you can report it at WP:AN/I and everyone will take a look at it, and determine whether longer-term blocks are necessary. AIV's purpose is to deal with problems that are occurring as we speak, and thus reports that are several hours old probably won't get acted on there. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 20:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. -- Muhandes ( talk) 21:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks! I did not know that you could do that. And the fake hurricane season articles are just practice so I can do better in future articles and edits. The only reason I do not delete the pages is because I want to try editing those, for even more practice. Another reason is because I like to read over them, and see how good I have done. Again, I edit those pages, for practice so I can be better at editing real articles. Thanks again for the helpful information, I will get on that.--Ryder 02:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryder Busby ( talk • contribs)

• feel free to edit my sandbox, if it seems worth the trouble. I hope it is helpful. Good night. –  Peacock. Lane 12:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

  Will do when I wake up. It's an ungodly hour here as well and I should be sleeping instead. Titoxd^{( ?!? - cool stuff)} 12:25, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The MfD close template should go above the header; see my edit here. Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 23:47, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

• No worries. Also, when you close MfDs as "keep" (or a result other than "delete"), the {{ oldmfd}} tag should be placed on the talk page, which I did here for Wikipedia:WikiProject The KLF. Cunard ( talk) 00:09, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

• Please read my comment at FAC first, then see my sandbox. Tks. –  Peacock. Lane 01:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Firstly let me state that I am aware of WP:WRONGVERSION, however I stil think you have protected this in the wrong place as I don't think that as a general rule wrong version should apply to pages where an ongoing move discussion is taken place - it should be protected at the stable version. There's a simple reason for this - it screw's up the requested move discussion. I've seen them closed as already moved (not least because the tag effectively says this), people vote the wrong way because they get confused and all sorts of other silliness go on when a page is moved in the middle of the discussion and for this reason such moves are normally reverted. Protecting the page is the "non-stable" location will only make the discussion harder. Therefore I ask that you apply some common sense and move it back. That said I realise that I'm involved in the discussion (although that's not my reason for asking for it to be moved back) and that wrong version is generally accepted so I'd understand if you don't. I would start an RfC on whether wrongversion should apply in cases like this but it would probably get so little participation as to be worthless. Dpmuk ( talk) 01:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thought that may be your response. As I say i think the protection policy is wrong in this instance and I'd have hoped you'd have ignored all rules although I can fully understand your reluctance to do so. I've seen this issue a few times (as I generally help out as much as a non-admin can at WP:RM) and do think it's an issue. I will start an RfC at some point as if it's in the protection policy that it should be protected at the name that was in use when the RM started then it's a clear cut policy and admins would be able to point to it as their reasoning and still have the same level of "neutrality". Dpmuk ( talk) 11:17, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Titoxd. A few editors are asking about the protection of WP:MOS and want to know what is needed for it to be unprotected; since you are the protecting admin, I thought it would be best for you to comment. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Deal with the issue that led to this protection. Regards, Dabomb87 ( talk) 22:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Council for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters ( talk) 16:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I hereby award thee the Random Acts of Kindness barnstar for helping out with the Tropical Cyclone Forecast Model GAN when two other GAN nominations suddenly became active. Thegreatdr ( talk) 00:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		You are the only person in the TC project who can get this barnstar, since you are its founder. Even after 5.5 years, you continue to try to improve the project through efforts such as collaboration of the fortnight. It is appreciated. Thegreatdr ( talk) 14:16, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Can you please take a look at this proposed blurb expansion - Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#.5BUpdate_proposal.5D_Judgement_of_Ante_Gotovina. Thanks.-- Avala ( talk) 20:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

It seems there are no objections.-- Avala ( talk) 11:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Hiya Titoxd,

It's been a while since I've worked on the MoS at all, but I figured that I'd go and add a simple little "see also" link that should be non-controversial (which, I know, it being the MoS, I'm probably being overly optimistic, but still) only to find that the page has been full protected for more than 2 months now.

So, I go to the talk page to see what's up, only to find... nothing. Luckily, I'm experienced enough to know that I need to look at the archive. Sure enough, I see that the issue is the (ongoing?) dash war. *sigh*

Anyway, I was about to start another discussion on the MoS talk page, but I figured that I'd come to you first as just ask for un-protection. Granted, Tony, PMA, Noetica, etc... are probably watching your talk page, so my hope that a quiet un-protection will allow things to proceed smoothly is likely just wishful thinking. Still, I wanted to at least ask, and see what happened. "Nothing ventured...", and all. Regards,
—  V = IR ( Talk •  Contribs) 02:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Phoenix Wiknic is ready to go (pending a few minor tweaks) -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 23:41, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi there Titoxd! Just a line to say a huge THANK YOU for taking care of the article. It gets a bit lonely there sometimes! Greetings! -- Izmir2 (Speak you mind) —Preceding undated comment added 01:43, 9 June 2011 (UTC).

I had no idea Inciweb had a page for each individual incident.... Thanks for the heads up! Dusty777 ( talk) 21:40, 9 June 2011 (UTC)