Difference between revisions of "User:Aichon/Archive 2013"

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
(Archiving through April 2013)
Line 361: Line 361:
 
::really looking forward to what boxy has to say. think he will keep going down the line syops or get the hint?--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>23:53, 10 April 2013 </small>
 
::really looking forward to what boxy has to say. think he will keep going down the line syops or get the hint?--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>23:53, 10 April 2013 </small>
 
:::No clue at this point. He has quite awhile before the suggestion closes, so he could still go pretty far. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 00:35, 11 April 2013 (BST)
 
:::No clue at this point. He has quite awhile before the suggestion closes, so he could still go pretty far. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 00:35, 11 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== Cycling Misfiled Suggestions ==
 +
It is good that you have decided to stick around, as Kirsty's bid isn't something I'd want to be stuck with on my own for weeks. Clearly fails in significant activity as a criteria. Prior interest in maintaining the community has some efforts connected with it. Some users are against it based on these shortcomings, but we have also several serious vouches by established users. Thoughts? --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 01:54, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:That actually factored into my decision to stay, since I didn't think it would be fair to stick you with this. As for my thoughts, my take on it is that while there are a decent number of vouches from members of the community, the general sentiment seems to be fairly ambivalent with quite a bit of incredulity being expressed. Some of that might have been exacerbated by the bid being posted on April 1st, which is unfortunate, but the end result is that I can't help but get the sense that promoting Kirsty now would be like picking a piece of fruit before it was ready. If Kirsty had a history of maintaining the wiki actively, I'd still go forward with the promotion in a heartbeat, but without that history, it's hard to say if this current activity is a phase or if it's a trend that will last. As such, I think that a, "Not right now" is in order, with an indication that he's on the right track and will almost certainly have it if he keeps doing what he's doing and tries again this summer. I sincerely mean that. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 02:56, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::In contested cases like this, I think "Not yet, this is what you can do to improve the odds" is indeed the right answer. As for the housework until the next bid, this is what I would give on the way:
 +
::*Ramp up contributions in order to remedy the significant activity problem.
 +
::*Ramp up janitorial work, like categorising images or tracking down scheduled deletions like missed talk pages, unused templates etc.
 +
::*Improve procedural knowledge. I'm not an op who is obsessed with precedent, but glaring mistakes like filing Misconduct against the whole team (which historically has always failed because no one was able to vote) are a thing that should be avoided.
 +
::Got anything to add? --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 16:33, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::I actually want to chime in with few things of note.
 +
:::*We ''need'' to fill out the sysops team, we're down to 7, [[User:Aichon|one]] of which is asking for a demotion, [[User:Rosslessness|one]] of which was recently refused a demotion, and [[User:Revenant|two]] of [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Boxy which] don't really do any sysop functions. That effectively leaves us with a team of 3, 4 while Ross is still around.
 +
:::*Kirsty has shown he/she is willing to voice an alternative view to most of the team and that is a ''positive'' thing as it furthers discussion.
 +
:::*Vapor's seems to be the most weighty against, and it's unexplained. The others are laregely due not to a fault of the user's but due to them being unsure if Kirsty wasn't the job. 2 out of 4 actually with 1 being Harrison who doesn't like the user and 1 being Vapor who is unexplained.
 +
:::Generally we'd call this bid a very good one for someone looking for promotion. When the worst thing we can say is we don't know if they really want to be sysop, well the bid itself answers that when it's self filed and we have enough venues available should Kirsty not actually want the position. We now have A/RE if Kirsty proves to be inactive, and the balance of the sysop team right now is weighty with experience so any potential damage is extremely limited. Don't refuse this on the basis of it being contested though, it's really not. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 18:20, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::Officially, the number of sys-ops plays no role in the decision. Inofficially, I am aware of us running out of suitable candidates, which is why I look relatively favourable at this application - just 2 or 3 years ago, an applicant like Kirsty would likely have been instantly shot down. That being said, I still don't see Kirsty as being at the point where she is ready, nor do I see a clear-cut indication by the community in favour of the bid. (As for Harrison, he's running with Kirsty in CK and has been for a long time running with her in Cobra, so personal dislike is one of the last motives I would suspect behind the against.) --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 18:40, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::There's a more clear cut consensus here than [[:Category:Successful_Promotions_Candidacies|most of the sysops we've promoted have gotten]] and the team size needs most certainly should play a role in the decision when there's so few viable candidates. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 18:49, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::I know that ''I'm'' not refusing on the basis that it's contested. As we all know, these candidacies are not determined by votes, so as I'm looking through the people that expressed opinions, I'm looking at the reasons they provided, and what I'm seeing is that while there is some support, it's not particularly strong except on the point that Kirsty has a unique opinion to offer. Since that's only one out of the many things we expect in a candidate, and I haven't personally seen evidence of proficiency in those other areas. I feel that the decision is an obvious one, and I'm actually surprised that you disagree.
 +
::::::As for needing more sysops, as Spider said, that doesn't play into the decision, but even if it did, I disagree quite a bit. As [[User:Aichon/Other/So_you_want_to_be_a_sysop%3F#Who_gets_to_be_a_sysop.3F|I've said elsewhere]], I don't think the wiki needs many active sysops in order to function, and that's even more true today than when I wrote that a few years back (with no snark and no sarcasm, I'm actually curious why you think we need more). The idea that we should promote people first and ask questions later using A/RE or A/M is a poor rational to use, especially so when the candidate's strength is in helping with drama, which is something we've been having less and less of in recent years. And regarding the number of sysops we have, my demotion request was withdrawn prior to your posting here, and I don't plan to request one again until about the time that Kirsty will be ready for a promotion if he stays on track, meaning that everything should work out just fine by your measure. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:01, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::Just shoot him down now. Especially given his rather lackluster initial approach to his own bid, it would be interesting to see how he would deal with a rejection. If he keeps on going the way he's going now, he'll be fine in a month or two. --[[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: darkblue; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: gold; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span>  19:15, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::I actually see Karek's point about declining sysop numbers. While the wiki may not need a bunch of sysops, it does need a few to be active at any time. If there are only, say, 2-3 active sysops, it's very easy for the stars to align and all to have rl happenings at the same time, leaving the wiki not only [[A/VB/B|defenseless]] but also causing delays in cycling, cleanup, etc., which is a big flag to new users that the wiki is in decline.
 +
:::::::There are also certain governance mechanics which break down under a certain number of active sysops. I don't think I have to mention the looming decline in eligible and willing Bureaucrat candidates; but there's also the fact that if there are only a few active sysops, VB, misconduct, and other rulings can get more and more lopsided due to choices being made by fewer and fewer people. In my estimation, having around 7 sysops, with 3-4 active, is roughly a functional minimum for a wiki of this size, scope and activity level. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 19:37, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::Let me restate: I agree that the wiki needs a certain number of sysops active. Where I disagree is that we should use that as a factor in our decision (at least for now, though that may change later in the wiki's future) and that it's actually a major concern at the moment. As with Bob, I agree that 3-4 active sysops is the sweet spot for a wiki with our current size and activity, and I'd say that we have six out of the seven current sysops actively contributing when drama comes up, and about 3-4 of them actively handling janitorial tasks as they come up. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:47, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::Ok, I see that. I would say that if sysop numbers/activity do decrease further later on, though, then it should become a factor at that point. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 19:49, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::The issue you're describing goes beyond the current promotion candidate discussion. Fewer dedicated and active sysops is just a direct cause of a declining (meta)game and wiki community, there aren't any easy solutions to this. (editconf) --[[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: darkblue; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: gold; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span>  19:51, 13 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::When and where did I say i didn't like kristy? just wondering?--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>01:50, 18 April 2013 </small>
 +
::::::I think he's referring to your Against statement on her bid. He never said you didn't like her. And to answer your question, 23:42, 5 April 2013 at [[A/PM#Kirsty Cotton]]. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:47, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::{{IndentQuote|author=Karek|text=1 being Harrison who doesn't like the user}}--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>05:08, 18 April 2013 </small>
 +
::::::::{{IndentQuote|author=Sexualharrison|text=While i think you are fun to play with I just don't think you have what it takes to be a sysop on this wiki. sorry Against--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>05:10, 18 April 2013 </small>}}--{{User:Sexualharrison/sig}}<small>05:11, 18 April 2013 </small>
 +
:::::::::I just looked at Spider's comment since that's who you were replying to. Clearly your Against vote didn't express dislike. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:13, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::I was indeed referring to [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=UDWiki%3AAdministration%2FPromotions&action=historysubmit&diff=2065112&oldid=2065088 this] meant for the position not personally. I don't value the objection from a weight standpoint because it's providing an imprecise objection. I was going beyond simply 'they don't count 'cause who cares about surety' to addressing what the objections actually added to provide for assessing the candidate. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 07:06, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::::Obviously personal objections from an interaction standpoint are actually worth consideration, just not not feeling someone is up for it in general. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 07:08, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::::...you are being deliberately as confusing and vague as possible. Whole lot of fancy words for covering up for the fact you falsely paraphrased another user to suit your own arguments. I'd let it go unmentioned if it weren't one of your more annoying and consistent habits, one that has been brought up in the past before. Just stop it. --[[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: darkblue; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: gold; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span>  11:06, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
==Re-adding my suggestion==
 +
I was just wondering if i can re-add my suggestion again to the current suggestions list hopefully passing it on to peer reviewed.....--[[User:Paynetrain|<font size="4" face="Matura MT Script Capitals" color="red">Payne</font>]][[User talk:Paynetrain|<font size="4" face="Matura MT Script Capitals" color="blue">Train</font>]]<sup>'''([[NWO]]/[[FU]])'''</sup> 12:42, 15 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:If you re-add it without making any changes, everyone will respond by voting that it's a duplicate of your previous one. Even if you make changes, they'll need to be significant enough to keep people from considering it a duplicate suggestion. So, basically, I wouldn't try it if I were in your shoes, since it won't get you anywhere. That ship has sailed, and it's gone as far as it will. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:16, 15 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
==How you do this?==
 +
I'm just wondering, how do you make your signature? I can see how you type it in to make it show up, with the User:Aichon/Signature, but how do you actually make it? [[User:Jebidijed|Jebidijed]] 4:08 PM April 15th, 2013 (AEST)
 +
:Well, when I type it in, I actually just type in four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) and the wiki automatically makes that my signature (five tildes does just a timestamp with no signature). As for how I made it what it is, the wiki has [[Help:Signatures|a few]] [[Help:Templated_Signatures|help pages]] over the topic that were how I learned to do it. Take a look at them and let me know if you run into any issues. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:18, 15 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Thanks! :D By the way, do you know if [[User:Petrosjko|Petrosjko]] is still playing the game? Barely anyone sees him anymore. -- <span style="background:red; border:dashed 2px blue">[[User:Jebidijed|Jebidijed]]</span> 8:06 AM April 16th 2013 (AEST)
 +
:::The original Papa? As far as I know he isn't playing any more, but I can't say that with any certainty at all (I've never met him, personally), so you should probably check with folks in the RRF for more info, since I'm not too aware of the stuff that goes on with them.
 +
:::Also, as a quick aside, make sure you use the tildes that I described to post your signature. Doing so uses the same timezone for all of us (specifically, the timezone where the wiki is located), that way its' easier to keep track of who posted before who. If you start using Australian times, it makes it makes it possible for it to appear at a glance like you responded to someone before they posted. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:20, 16 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== Userscripts. ==
 +
Hello again!
 +
 +
Reformatted the hard drives on my current computer and unfortunately had to reinstall your UD userscripts. Oddly enough, they won't install. I click install, it seems to start the add-on install command, but instead dumps me at the userscript coding page. Currently running Firefox v20.0.1 and none of the other add-ons I have installed should conflict. Any ideas? --{{User:TheBardofOld/Sig}} 06:18, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:Hmm...not sure, honestly. Have you checked in Greasemonkey to see if they're actually getting installed? Go to Tools > Add-ons > User Scripts and see if they're listed there. If not, since it sounds like you have Greasemonkey installed, my first guess would be that you have an outdated version of Greasemonkey for some reason (it's on v1.8 right now), but that seems unlikely. I just updated my Greasemonkey and Firefox to test stuff out, and it seems to be working fine for me. Is it all of my scripts that do it, or just some? And can you double-check that you're running the latest Greasemonkey? Also, if you right-click on one of the Install links, can you select a View User Script Source option? If so, select it and see if there's a yellow bar across the top of the page that offers to install it for you, then see if you're able to use that. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 14:11, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Derp alert. I forgot to install Greasemonkey.
 +
::Doi. --{{User:TheBardofOld/Sig}} 15:13, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Lol, yeah, I thought of starting with that question, but I checked, and it didn't give me the add-on install prompt like what you're talking about, so I figured you had to have it installed. Anyway, glad you got it worked out. :) {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:23, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== PK member pages ==
 +
The one all you... PKivors use.  Care if I do some modification to make it more generic and then present it as a user page template, I'll reference you as the original?  I'd be happy to give you final say over when it's different enough from the PK version.  Also, where is it? :P  --<sub>[[User:Kirsty_cotton|<span style="color: lightgrey">K</span>]]</sub> 18:46, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:[[Template:Philosophe Knights]]. As far as stealing code and mangling it goes, that is a time-honoured tradition on this wiki. 98% of it was built that way. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">█ </span>]]</span>''' 19:04, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Yeah, {{tl|Philosophe Knights}} is the generic Knights' template [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User:Aichon/Sandbox/Templates6&oldid=1643633 I made ages ago] (VI copied it from my userspace and made a few tweaks, hence why my name isn't in the page's history), and I'd be fine with you taking it and making changes. After all, its design was inspired by one made by Sirens, if memory serves, and that design has been reused for a number of major groups in the game, as well as loads of users. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:47, 18 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== Suburb Group Listings ==
 +
Is [http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Template:Santlerville_Groups&curid=130802&diff=2068235&oldid=2054701&rcid=2140355 this edit] ok? Can a user remove a large number of groups from a suburb listing without it a) being part of a GSGM or b) being justified by, i.e. a report on group numbers in the suburb? {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 00:11, 20 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:There's nothing against locals culling inactive groups. In fact, that's the preferred behavior. How they determine that is up to them, and if it turns out that they acted in bad faith, that's what we have A/VB for. In cases where it's clear that the group is active or that someone has a conflict of interest, I'll generally look into it (as I did in this case), but none of the removed groups seemed to indicate activity in that suburb at the moment (assuming they were active at all), so I figured I'd leave it to them to re-add themselves or complain about the removal. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 06:58, 20 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Ok, cool. I guessed as much, but just wanted to check. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 07:02, 20 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== Hi ==
 +
Are you an Ay-con, an Aych-on, or an Aichon? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 23:02, 21 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:''He'' says it's like "icon", but the rest of us know it's like "acorn" because we're sensible. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 23:07, 21 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::Pretty much what he said. The "Ai" is pronounced like "eye" and the "chon" is pronounced like "con" (notably, NOT like "KAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHN!!"). Enunciation is on the first syllable. So, that makes me an Aichon, if I have to pick one of the three choices. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 00:52, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::Okay, so acorn then. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:04, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::I do answer to that as well. I even have it set up to ping me on IRC since enough people use it to refer to me. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 01:06, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::Do you answer to everything using your signature code, {{User:Aichon/Signature|Aco|rn}}? If I called you, say, {{User:Aichon/Signature|Bana|na}}? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:12, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::Visually, I key off on the "A" in it when I'm looking for it. So, Banana wouldn't grab my attention, while Acorn actually probably would have. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 01:15, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::Ah, I see, nice to know, {{User:Aichon/Signature|A bana|na}}. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:16, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::Strangely, that doesn't work for me. I suspect it's because the shape of the word changed too much when you inserted the space. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 01:18, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::Alright, apricot. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 01:22, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::Testing: {{User:Aichon/Signature|Apri|cot}}...yeah, that'd probably get my attention or at a glance would make me think it was my own, although the dangling part of the P breaks the illusion a bit. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 01:30, 22 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::::::::::{{User:Aichon/Signature|Test|icles}}, {{User:Aichon/Signature|one, |two, }} {{User:Aichon/Signature|test|icles}}. {{User:Aichon/Signature|Aren't |you}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|worried |about}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|ass|holes}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|like |me}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|using |this?}} {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 23:13, 29 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:::::::::::Not particularly. Seeing how creatively people could use it was kinda the point in adding that into it in the first place, and I was fully aware that it would be turned against me. That's the fun of it, I think. ;) {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 23:48, 29 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
{{User:Aichon/Signature|Re|ad}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|Swe|et}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|how |others}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|str|ove}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|Till |we}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|are |stouter}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|What |they}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|renoun|ced}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|Till |we}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|are less |afraid}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|How many |times they}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|bore the faithful |witness}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|Till |we}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|are |helped}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|As if a |Kingdom}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|car|ed!}}
 +
 +
{{User:Aichon/Signature|Read |then}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|of |faith}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|That shone above |the fagot}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|Clear strains of Hymn|<br/>The River could not drown}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|Brave names |of Men}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|And Celestial |Women}}<br/>{{User:Aichon/Signature|Passed |out}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|of Record|<br/>Into}} {{User:Aichon/Signature|Ren|own!}} [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Read_%E2%80%94_Sweet_%E2%80%94_how_others_%E2%80%94_strove_%E2%80%94]
 +
:{{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 00:41, 30 April 2013 (BST)
 +
 +
 +
== UDNET ==
 +
So, I went to UD Net and found... lots of advertisements, lots and lots of advertisements. Is UDNET not active anymore? [[User:CyberOpposition|-.-]] 04:23, 23 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:The [http://profiles.urbandead.net profile database] still seems to be up, as is the [http://rg.urbandead.net Rogue's Gallery]. Is there another "UDNET" I should have known about? If so, I'm unaware of it. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 04:28, 23 April 2013 (BST)
 +
:If you mean [http://forums.urbandead.net forums.urbandead.net] then yeah, its been taken over completely by spambots. Mods can't keep up. There might be an active thread or two behind closed doors, but I doubt its much. RG is in its death throws, too. The whole site is just massively borked. ~[[Image:Vsig.png|link=User:Vapor]] <sub>05:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)</sub>
 +
:: That answers my question, thanks [[User:CyberOpposition|-.-]] 16:37, 23 April 2013 (BST)
 +
::a) ''Throes''. You mean death ''throes''. [[image:nugget.gif]]<br/> b) Even the Mona Lisa's falling apart.<br/> {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 11:08, 4 May 2013 (BST)

Revision as of 20:04, 22 May 2013

Aichon:Talk Archive 2013
Aichon
ˈīˌkän :Talk Archive 2013
Personal tools
project wonderful
column-okay