User talk:NE2/Archive 15

Archives: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Nice pun, but tone wasn't right

See here. Hope that's OK. Feel free to archive the pun somewhere if you want. Carcharoth (talk) 23:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edit at List of highways numbered 19A

Your recent edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_highways_numbered_19A&diff=220028074&oldid=219947338) broke a few of the links. Rather than revert, I thought I might let you know, since you state that links on DABs should not contain piped text. However, as this page is both a list page and a DAB, perhaps this doesn't apply? DigitalC (talk) 05:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

It's a disambiguation page with a strange name. Think of it like John Smith being "list of people named John Smith"; here we have a problem with some being Route, some being Highway, etc. By the way, I didn't break the links; they were broken, since the reader will want an article about the route, not a list. (If there's almost nothing to say about the route, a redirect might be best.) --NE2 05:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

SR-30 is the Midland trail

NE2, I'm 99.9% sure you are mistaken about modern Utah State Route 30 being part of the Midland Trail. For starters, US-6 in CA and NV is signed as the midland trail, and per everything I've ever seen it used the same route as the Lincoln highway form Ely, NV to Salt Lake, this is well over 150 miles south of where SR-30 flows. How would it get from Ely, to Montello? Also IMO it is very inappropriate to knowingly use dead links for sources, which was done with the most recent additions.Dave (talk) 21:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I saw the one of the two sources claimed which is valid, and I still don't believe it. Again, how and why would a trail destined for southern California go that far north that quickly? All other sources I've seen says the trail went from Grand Junction, to Salt Lake, to Ely. There is no logical reason why the route between those cities would curve that far north. The only explanation I see is the source is in error, or there were 2 iterations of the trail, or a massive realignment to the trail. Still I do not think it is appropriate to knowingly use a dead link. The whole point of a source is so the information is verifiable. how can anybody verify something that's sourced to a dead link? Dave (talk) 21:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, thanks for the clarification. The Ogden Standard article provided clears things up. That is inconceivable that somebody would want to take this route to LA, this is at least a 300 mile detour if not more. I strongly suspect there was politics involved also, as the Arrowhead Trail would be a much better choice and would also avoid the salt marshes. I can't imagine anybody actually used this routing full length, having driven this route myself (although split among various road trips, never one consecutive trip)Dave (talk) 21:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

North Dakota mileages

I'm currently looking for mileages for I-29 in ND. Where in the North Dakota DOT site would we be able to find the logs containing the mileages for I-29? Dabby (talk) 05:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if they are online. --NE2 05:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I found a page containing mileages rounded to the nearest thousandth. However it only lists four interchanges. I left the mileage notes on Talk:Interstate 29 in North Dakota. Dabby (talk) 05:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Now that you have some figures, you can search for more, and find what you wanted. (Those links are actually dead, but you can search their site for permanent signing and find the documents in Chapter 3.) --NE2 08:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Found the source for mileages. Thanks! Dabby (talk) 02:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

I have 15 granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for your civility, understanding, and explanation. Thank you. Acalamari 20:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

East Millstone, NJ

Hi. Why did you change the category from Defunct Municipalities in New Jersey to Former towns in New Jersey? 98.221.133.96 (talk) 17:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Uh, me again. I'm not a deletionist by any means, but I find the category pages you created to be a bit misleading. You see, if a municipality renames itself from town to city, or borough to town, that's not quite the same thing as becoming defunct. Defunct municipalities no longer exist, hence the term defunct. I find the pages you created to actually be a bit ambiguous and unneeded, as defunct municipalites are listed with municipalites that still exist but have retitled themselves. I New Jersey, official municipal titles are irrelevant, but more importantly, the list doesn't specify which municipalities are defunct and which have retitled themselves. 98.221.133.96 (talk) 17:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It might be useful to actually create a list then. I'm hoping to get "The Story of New Jersey's Civil Boundaries: 1606-1968" through interlibrary loan, so if that happens I definitely will make such a list. --NE2 20:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Route 27 Alternate (Florida)

Just for the record, I'm on your side regarding whether U.S. Route 27 Alternate (Florida) should be kept. That road is 94 miles long, and if this can be redirected, so can articles on other bannered routes with more detail. ----DanTD (talk) 22:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Same here. You noticed that I restored it. Dabby (talk) 23:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to start a thread on its talk page; please reply there. --NE2 23:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Utah State Route 269

Well, I passed it without really reading the section, but if its really necessary - comment on WT:GAN, maybe some kind of conclusion can be made there.Mitch32 19:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Control Cities

To find control cities of specific highway what source to find. Because, i don't find a source list highways specific control cities. I'm trying to see if SR 19 (Rosemead Blvd.) actually have officially control cities, and what about SR 39? I know I can't make up cities, I do see some epople doing that.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 23:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

You'd have to ask Caltrans, and get a published source. --NE2 23:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

What you meant by I have to ask Caltrans to get publish source? Do I have to e-mail them or call them? And have you ever been on any of California highways in your life? Can I use my LA-Orange County maps to find out?--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 23:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

No, you can't. --NE2 23:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

OR-126

Did you originally put purple (merge) tag on I-105? And why did you merge OR 126 with i-15. I-105 in OR is an existing route.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 00:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You can find out yourself: [1] Check its talk page too. --NE2 00:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

San Diego Frwy

Should we keep it merge with I-405. The whole alignment San Diego Frwy is I-405, and i-5 is the southern half. Don't San Diego Frwy have similar history and landmarks with i-405?--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 00:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Try Talk:Interstate 405 (California). User:NE2 doesn't look like the article about I-405. --NE2 00:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Golden State Frwy, this one I don't think it can be merge, becasue it has its own landmark.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 00:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Interstate Highways in New York

I responded to your comments on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Interstate Highways in New York. Cheers, Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 13:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I-29 (ND)

Where did you get the photos for the exit list? I checked AARoads; it only goes from the South Dakota state line to the vicinity of Fargo. I tried StarOwl's Highway Heaven to finish up the rest of the exit list. Although StarOwl's Highway Heaven was not a reliable source, it was only the best source I could find. What visual photos did you use to clean up the list? Dabby (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Not photos, but driving directions: [2] --NE2 19:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: SR-196

No problem, your expansion looks good (as always). And when I saw the bluelinks for SR-900 and 901, I almost had a heart attack, never expecting those two to have articles (they don't even have shields), but then I saw they were only redirects. Well, a bluelink is a bluelink. :D CL — 07:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything else to say about them :P --NE2 07:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right, those two are one of the most obscure in the system. I don't see the point in them (besides blocking a railroad track from crossing it, why would they want to do that), they're not signed, they're not improved like a SR, and they encompass several different roads. That, and they have a ridiculously high number that is disproportionate from all the other routes (they might as well have named them State Route Mac and State Route Cheese for all I care). That, along with UDOT's poor signing practices and absolute refusal to overlay routes, makes my day. CL — 07:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, that is the only reason for them - to block a nuclear waste rail spur. Otherwise they are rather like the facility routes, which also encompass several roads. --NE2 07:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay, I didn't know the railroad was to carry nuclear waste. Speaking of facility routes, they're really tough to expand. I just tried my hand at SR-320, there's is no way that article could ever get up to even C-class. CL — 07:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

That was my error - the article was not clear about the purpose of the rail line. As for the facility routes, the best solution might be a single page that lists them all. There are definitely some commonalities in how they are set up that can also be on that page. --NE2 07:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a list sounds best. That would sure take the load off of creating articles, I'm roughly estimating there are 10-15 routes that would fall under the list. I'll most likely get to it tomorrow (well, today) and see what I can do. CL — 07:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The completion list shows 31 plus some former ones. I'd leave at least some that exist outside facilities, like SR-313, as separate articles with mentions on the list. --NE2 07:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Largest highway

What is the largest highway in the world? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 05:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I can't answer unless you provide a definition of size for highways, and even then I probably can't. Try the reference desk. --NE2 05:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Harbor and Pasadnea Frwys

I saw this over summer; the green guide displays I-110/SR-110 on Four level interchange. It will be better if we keep I-110 article just on harbor Frwy, and Pasadena Frwy only on its info.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 16:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

That sign is incorrect, and you're forgetting about the surface part in San Pedro. --NE2 17:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You never even been on Four Level Interchange; and what you mean by I'm forgetting aboout surface part in San Pedro. harbor and Pasadena Frwys I thoguht is distinctive; their histories is a little different. pasadena Frwy is built in the 1950s; Harbor Frwy is built 5 to 10 years later.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 17:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you asnwer this first?--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 19:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

No. --NE2 19:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I dont understand your meaning by I'm forgetting abiut surface part.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 19:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Read the article about SR 110. --NE2 19:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I have Harbor Frwy and Pasadena Frwy have distinct landmarks, Pasadena Frwy is alot older by 15 years, and it use to be part of US 66 when Harbor Frwy wasn't. i-110 ends at I-10. Harbor Frwy does end in Four Level Interchange.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 19:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Utah State Route 196

On 30 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Utah State Route 196, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 19:01, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Good job with the DYK! Good job with the SLCHighways template too, I like it. CL — 18:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hollywood Split

Do we have a valid source of Hollywood Split? I dug through Googel, and Yahoo I couldn't find any.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 02:25, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

County templates

Look at the last section of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. counties for the reason for including county templates in county categories. Nyttend (talk) 12:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Exit list formats

Does alternate name needs to be mention on every intersections. I've been on the 605 quite many times and Green plates outside just say I-605 north or South THru Traffic; from anothr Frwy interchange lie I-5 or 405 they just say I-605 Frwy North; South without control city. Now Green plates don't post alternate names so often; even now on Four Level Interchange from Hollywood (US 101) Frwy; they just say I-110 South to San pedro; SR-110 North to Pasadena, same as Santa Monica Frwy (I-10). On exit list does every highway need to place alternate name; like saying Century Frwy from i-405 exit list; outside I see it as i-105 West to LAX Airport; East to Norwalk. Can I go by what I see outside; or i cannot do that.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 02:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:MOSDAB

Duly noted. Should meet the Manual now. Cheers - CL — 22:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Glad to see you know how to work that, no way could I touch something like AWB. Thanks. CL — 23:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: CR 44A

You're right, my bad. Two separate highways. Working on the cleanup now. -- Kéiryn (talk) 02:29, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Roadfan

You might want to explain your actions here... --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The 110s in CA

Isn't Harbor Frwy made in 1964 while Pasadena Frwy start between 1938 and complete in 1953? This is what this site said, and 75.xxx.xxx wants both Harbor and Pasadena Frwys merge. They both suppose to be seperate page. Harbor Frwy has too much infos to merge with Pasadena Frwy. Gaffey St. I thoguht is delete part of SR 110. The RandmcNally map 2004 I have no longer have parts of SR 110.--Freewayguy ^{Msg USC} 16:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

accessdate

You're right, it's not important in the big scheme of things. I made the change as when I went through FAC last time I, and the others in line in front of me, were getting raked over the coals for consistency in the footnotes. Most of the article uses the cite templates, which uses a complete date. So I changed the others to match. IIRC an article was even failed because it was mixing the cite templates with the citation templates and/or Harvard citation templates (they are different and are for different writing styles). Dave (talk) 05:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Help...

NE2, I have recently installed Quantim GIS, but I am confused on how to make maps. Could you explain the software, after all you are an expert. --CG was here. 19:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I have nominated List of U.S. Routes in Washington for WP:FL. (See here). --CG was here. 19:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't use QGIS. --NE2 23:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Route 97 in Washington

Could you tell me if you are going to make a junctions list for U.S. Route 97 in Washington. If you are, please do it before August, and if you aren't, I'll do it. --CG was here. (T - C - S - E) 03:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I might do it; right now I'm concentrating on Utah though. --NE2 09:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright. I have started a list, and here it is:

County	Location	Mile	#	Destinations	Notes
Klickitat	Maryhill	0.00	Sam Hill Memorial Bridge over the Columbia River
		2.38		SR 14 east – Paterson	South end of SR 14 overlap
		2.80		SR 14 west – Vancouver	North end of SR 14 overlap
	Goldendale	13.16		SR 142 west – Lyle

Infobox road for toll road

Please add the missing Indiana Toll Road infobox. --75.47.194.16 (talk) 09:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Do it yourself. --NE2 09:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

No you do it yourself. I can't create templates anyway because i have to create a account for that. --75.47.194.16 (talk) 09:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

You don't need to make an account to add an infobox to an article, and why not make one? --NE2 09:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Your answer here is a joke why not just tell me the truth rather than giving me too many lies. All pages are restricted to IP address expect for talkpages. --75.47.194.16 (talk) 09:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have no idea what you're talking about, since Indiana Toll Road has an infobox. --NE2 09:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm talking about junction list. --75.47.194.16 (talk) 09:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It has one of those too... --NE2 09:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

--75.47.194.16 (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

So make an account and make it. --NE2 09:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Lund Highway

Just wanted to say -- nice job on the Lund Highway article! Arcane stuff, but very interesting. (I drove that road as a kid in the 1960s, BTW, and most of it was just a narrow, single lane of asphalt. When I returned last summer, I saw that the county had milled the asphalt off of all but the first few miles, so the route is now largely a gravel road.) Cheers. Pitamakan (talk) 13:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to change CSD G7

Notifying you directly because you took part in the preceding discussion. Please see Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Proposal to change CSD G7. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 06:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for all your recent work on disambiguating geographical names. Stepheng3 (talk) 13:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem - there are a lot of places with certain names (Mill Creek, anyone?) My current project is explained at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers#List of U.S. watersheds. --NE2 16:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I should probably join WikiProject Rivers at some point -- maybe when I get bored of Bay Area creeks. Stepheng3 (talk) 19:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

"Internet archive"

How in the world did you get access to the route log for SR-195? I tried visiting that website to no avail. CL — 20:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Try [3]. They obviously only have former routes that were just recently deleted. --NE2 01:00, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that whole archive service is quite useful. Too bad that I couldn't find any link for SR-181 though. CL — 06:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I can't either. I do have a copy I downloaded in July 2007 though. --NE2 11:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Alright, could you email it to me? I set up my email on Wikipedia so the Special:Emailuser thing should work. CL — 06:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You can't use emailuser for attachments, but here's a copy: [4]

I assume you got the old StateRouteHistory.pdf when I uploaded it a while back? --NE2 06:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the route log. And yeah, saw the message on WT:UTSH and downloaded it long ago. It's sitting right on my desktop - CL — 06:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Others on archive.org: 89 186 (these two may be useful for an article on North Temple) 237 238 239 288 --NE2 07:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Omaha transport moves

Why did you just move all of those company names to the transport names, particularly when you haven't ever had anything to do with them and a simple look at the page history would show that I have done everything to them? Good plays for WP:BOLD often make bad plays for Wikipedia:Consensus; please don't be rude. • Freechild'sup? 00:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Because the WikiProject Trains standard is to omit the "company"... --NE2 00:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hiya NE2

We're trying to get Trump Tower Chicago ready for another go-around in a couple of weeks. I'm an idiot on image issues, so I don't know, but one of the images that people found acceptable at FAC was just deleted; do you have any opinion on this? See the argument at User_talk:TonyTheTiger. (feel free to reply here, I always watchlist.) - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 13:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any problems with the current article, but I'm not very familiar with freedom of panorama and related issues about the tower itself. I'm not sure that Image:20080514 Trump Chicago Kiosk.JPG and Image:20080514 Trump Chicago Kiosk2.JPG need to be marked as unfree, since the focus of the photo is not the details of the map/ad but the kiosk itself and the fact that it contains an ad. Better safe than sorry, though, I guess. I believe that both kiosk images are appropriate given the discussion in the article.

Now about what you came here about: it seems to me that a cross section could be drawn from scratch, as long as the one in the PDF is only used as a general reference for what's on each floor. By the way, are 15 and 28 lobbies? --NE2 14:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll ask TonyTheTiger to respond. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 15:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

FAC

Thank you so much for the help with image issues at WP:FAC; most editors who engage that "line of work" burn out quickly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I responded at the FAC for Geography and ecology of the Everglades. I note you're active at a couple other FACs. Don't make me feel left out now. --Moni3 (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

A revisit needed at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ernest Joyce. Thanks, NE2, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I-110

I thought this article is about harbor Frwy only. I know part of SR 110 belongs to Harbor Frwy; but Gaffey St. I thoguht is delete part of SR 110. LA-Orange County maps is simply outdate. Pasadena Frwy is on its own page; on i-110 and SR 110 we have no place to write about Pasadena Frwy.--Freewayguy ^{Call? Fish} 18:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

No. --NE2 18:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Those two routes have sufficiently enough history to be a seperate page. harbor Frwy is commission at 1964 just like most California highways; Pasadena Frwy is alot older, commission in the 1940s. You know I post you the link photos on Four Level Interchange of Hollywood Frwy northbound. We had this conversation earlier.--Freewayguy ^{Call? Fish} 18:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I never seem to have a conversation with you. I try to figure out what you are saying and often fail. Please work on improving your English. --NE2 18:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I already reported Freewayguy to WP:AIV. --75.47.138.12 (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

He's not vandalizing, so I don't think anything will happen. --NE2 18:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

i meant this photo Hollywood Frwy northbound. Those two routes have enough historical information to kept both a seperate page. I know part of Harbor Frwy is part of SR 110, Gaffey St. is delete part of SR 110. It use to exist of Gaffey St, now its gone from Gaffey St. About my English; its tough to work on; its tough for me to fix my English skills; because my vocab level is not that high. English is not an easy language to pick up though, and its not my fault.--Freewayguy ^{Call? Fish} 18:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Gaffey Street is still part of SR 110, as is the Harbor Freeway between I-10 and US 101. --NE2 18:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure? Then why mapquest did not mark it as SR 110. Mapquest is usually accurate on mappings.--Freewayguy ^{Call? Fish} 20:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Caltrans knows what they maintain. --NE2 20:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Then why is SR 42 a delete route? i still see it passing I-605 and I-5.--Freewayguy ^{Call? Fish} 20:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Why is SR 42 deleted? Because Caltrans no longer maintains it. --NE2 20:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

What does this means when Caltrans no lomger maintains it. I do have a limit on vocab levels and its not my fault. Does this matter what mapquest identifies and what I see outside from I-605 or 5?--Freewayguy ^{Call? Fish} 20:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

wikt:maintain, verb definition 1. --NE2 20:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Washington, D.C.

Hi. I noticed on the WP:FAC page that you are a proficient image license reviewer. I am preparing to nominate Washington, D.C. for FA status in the next few weeks and would appreciate if you could review the images. If you have time to look at the article, there is an open peer review to make comments. Thank you for your help. Best, epicAdam (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Image:L'Enfant plan.jpg could use more sourcing information, but I'm sure it's public domain.
• Image:DC 2003 SAMPLE.jpg looks sketchy. If it can be sourced, it would definitely be valid fair use, but I can't see it being public domain.

Otherwise it looks good. --NE2 20:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)