User talk:George Chernilevsky/Archive/Archive 2010 3

Note

Hello. I just wanted to inform you that I granted you Autopatrolled rights. Basically, it does not change anything for you, but makes it easier for users watching Special:RecentChanges to find unhelpful edits. Cheers, Jean-Fred (talk) 00:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank You! I autopatrolled user in Russian Wiki too. --George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:15, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Desna (tributary of the Southern Bug).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support all criteria met --Pe-sa (talk) 18:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support It's the only candidate, assuming that noone of this Desna is erranously placed in Category:Desna... --Ikar.us (talk) 02:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

ex-VIC "Fort-Boyard"

Hello. Please note : The nomination of this picture in VIC was withdrawn by the nominator some days before your comments, and is therefore no more to be judged. In my humble opinion, to judge it now is not very fair. Then, two of your three comments seems for me to be non relevant, as concerning the quality (that I know bad) of the shot  : it was a VIC, not a QIC. At last, as I disagree with the judgment process of VIC for the moment, maybe have you seen that I've withdrawn all my nominations. So It would be very kind of you not to comment them until their deletion of the current page . Many thanks, and sorry for my bad English, which is much better than my Russian, and Ukrainian. However, I still congratulate you for the high quality of your own images. Best Regards from Paris --Jebulon (talk) 00:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello George Chernilevsky. J'avais compris que vous étiez très aimable, j'en ai la preuve avec votre message. Merci d'avoir répondu, et en Français ! A bientôt. Bien amicalement, --Jebulon (talk) 22:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Sets closure

Hello Georges,
I have closed the promoted set on Soviet ballistic missile submarine classes. Perhaps could you try to close the remaining promoted set on Satyrium titus, following the procedure explained here? (Note: 3.2 has already been made by Eusebius). It would be very kind of you, and I am at your service if you need. With best regards, --Myrabella (talk) 21:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour Myrabella!

I do not understand clearly this procedure, sorry. I do not wish to make a mistake.

If you ask about categorization - it is Lepidoptera.

Commons:Valued images by topic/Life forms/Animals/Arthropods/Butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera)

Respectueusement, --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Здравствуйте Георгий,

That doesn't matter, and thanks for the category! I propose something: I will close this set (not today but soon) and I will document each edit in the edit summary, so you could follow the procedure with an example (in fact, I did so for the SBMS classes set, but the Satyrium titus set might be easier, with only two images in it). I am pretty sure that you will manage to close further sets quite well, making no more mistakes than any of us! With best regards (how to say it in Russian?), --Myrabella (talk) 07:17, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

OK.

• Yours faithfully = С уважением (the most usual variant in Russian, also typical for an offical letter)
• With best regards = С наилучшими пожеланиями (more emotional in Russian).

С наилучшими пожеланиями --George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:14, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done You can see the closure step by step with comments in the edit summary in my "user contributions" list.

С наилучшими пожеланиями, --Myrabella (talk) 21:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour Myrabella! J'ai regardé vos actions. Merci. Bien amicalement --George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Please remember that User:VICbot neglects Template:VISC-thumb's promises and doesn't process closed VISCs. So the user who closes it should perform the full closing procedure. --Ikar.us (talk) 22:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to the tanks ! Thanks for the tanks !

Hello Dear Георгий.

As a lover of History, I would like to congratulate you with the photos of the T34/76 (version A, B, or C ? ). I think that this tank took a great part in the common victory againts nazism, and I remember to all those soviet guys who died in this great fight... During a professional journey to Belgorod, a few years ago, I visited the Kursk battlefield, very impressive ! We are far, here, from cherry blossoms ! When you promoted my cherry blossom image as QI, it was my birthday (24 march). So it was an appreciated gift for me ! And then, I have a gift for you too: I've translated in french (from the english version) your informations about the tank and the monument, with a link to the french wikipedia. Best regards. Bien cordialement depuis Paris,--Jebulon (talk) 15:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Bonjour Jebulon!
Merci pour la traduction en français et pour l'estimation.
J'aussi estime haut l'histoire militaire. Je voyais beaucoup de places, où il y avait une guerre. Là jusqu'ici sont restées les tranchées et le fil de fer barbelé. Je trouvais les munitions, l'armement, les champs de mines et les os des soldat en Russie.

Mon anniversaire le 2 mai (cette année il y aura 43 ans).

Bien amicalement --George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! T-34-76 Sevastopol 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Berthold Werner 16:52, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Project 775 YAMAL 2009 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good image, useful --Herbythyme 16:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! T-34-76 Sevastopol 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Qi for me -- Archaeodontosaurus 18:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Xantho poressa 2009 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI and Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 17:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orthodox church Vinnitsa S Bug 2010 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok. --Berthold Werner 13:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC) Thanks! It is my 200th QI photo --George Chernilevsky 13:12, 1 April 2010 (UTC) It WOULD be, or it COULD be... Voting period is not at the end... But don't worry, my friend. IT IS a QI (for me. I  Support)!!--Jebulon 15:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Orthodox church Vinnitsa S Bug 2010 G3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok --Berthold Werner 13:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

201

With all good wishes :)

		The Quality Image Barnstar
		For many valuable contributions to Commons and for 200 QI images Herby talk thyme 15:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

• I do  Support these congratulations, and wait for the 200 next !!--Jebulon (talk) 23:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you too! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Antonio da Trento - The Tiburtine sibyl and the Emperor Augustus.jpg

Just to let you know, the one oppose appears to be a joke. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, fixed --George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Xantho poressa.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

best in scope, all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:30, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Poster Papaver 2a.jpg

Hi George,

I wonder which of the two Poppy posters in FPC should be promoted. As is now, and if no more oppose votes fall on the alternative version, I think this is the one that should pass. What do you think? Cheers, Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Joaquim Alves!

I think, both deserved rewards. Only one photo from three coincides only.

In similar situation i have lost one award, however it was unfair IMO. We are have very similar FP several times.

With best regards --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

• Please forgive me to insist. I don't think that is correct because the second version was intended as an alternative to the first. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
• OK, wait for result. May be good idea is Delist one? --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mega-Moll 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me -- Archaeodontosaurus 19:54, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Xantho poressa 2009 G3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI for me -- Archaeodontosaurus 17:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Matches 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice illustration. Juliancolton 11:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Boletus Impolitus dried 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI and Useful --Archaeodontosaurus 12:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mega-Moll 2008 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharp and otherwise also good. --Cayambe 16:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Xantho poressa, male.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support - Best in scope, IMO. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 17:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 20:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

FP Promotion Rana sylvatica

★ This image has been promoted to Featured picture! ★ The image File:Rana sylvatica SC.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rana sylvatica SC.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

/FPCBot (talk) 07:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello George, I think there is an error on this promotion: there is a total of only 4 supporting (7-3=4) votes and 5 are needed. But maybe I missed something. --Cephas (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Cephas!

Promotion is correct. Read Rules

1. At least 5 supporting votes

2. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority)

Example: 5 support, 2 oppose - promoted; 6 support, 3 oppose - promoted too.

7 support, 3 oppose - congratulations, good result.

With best regards --George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Boletus impolitus (Iodine bolete), dried.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Question Is that meant to be one scope or two? I think I could support it for dried mushrooms, but not for Boletus impolitus, and think the scope should be broadened slightly (e.g. Boletus sp. dried mushrooms) due to the similarity of the dried form of many mushrooms if it's meant as one scope. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

 Comment Scope about Boletus impolitus usability --George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

 Comment The scope could be "Boletus impolitus" (dried). One of the interests of this mushroom is his edibility. That's why he's dried. So we can have here only one scope, I agree with George Chernilevsky. I wait a little for other arguments, but I think I'll support soon...--Jebulon (talk) 23:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I think there's wording issues with the scope that should be fixed first. It seems awkward. I have no issues with this getting promoted, just I think it needs a few tweaks. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Scope changed from Boletus impolitus (Iodine bolete), dried mushrooms to Boletus impolitus (Iodine bolete), dried

• Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

---

• Better scope now? Latina (Common name), condition --George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Good for me, Thanks, George !--Jebulon (talk) 10:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Looks good. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment I would like to support but I am not sure that I would be able to recognize these ones from, let's say, dried Boletus edulis (Cèpe de Bordeaux). However, they look quite edible and delicious but I would need a sample to be sure ;-) --Myrabella (talk) 21:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Dried Boletus edulis still white, some other dried boletus - dark brown, this fungi - dark yellow --George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you for the precision. Dried Boletus edulis are easely recognizable (white with a brown edge—I realized that I have had some in my kitchen :-), but I agree with the first Adam's comment about the similarity of the dried form of many mushrooms: it's difficult to distinguish them at the review size and without smelling them, when one isn't a specialist. If you made a second nomination for the wider scope "Dried mushrooms" after this one, I could take part in the vote. --Myrabella (talk) 03:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Ikar.us (talk) 18:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

35

Re: FPC voting

Could I use the {{opp}} template, or would that mess up the bot too? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

{{opp}} is correct IMO --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Guard ship Smetlivy.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Support The only real competitor is File:Smetlivyy2003.jpg - everything else in the category has hugely distracting backgrounds or doesn't show the whole ship. The proposed image is much higher quality than that one. Hence, this wins out as best of scope. Might be a teensy bit oversaturated, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
  • (By the way, two y's (Smetlivyy)? Really? Seems a somewhat odd transcription convention from the Cyrillic. If that's the new convention, well, sure, but I've never seen that before.) Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Russian name of this ship is Сметливый = (Keen man or Keen-witted or Sharp-witted). Exist few correct variants of romanization this Russian word: Smetlivyy, Smetlivy, Smetlivyi or Smetlivyj :) --George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:42, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Info w:Wikipedia:Romanization_of_Russian#Default romanization table decides unambigously Smetlivy. --Ikar.us (talk) 10:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Info Have scheduled category move. --Ikar.us (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

За vote

Excuse me, but what does your {{За}} vote mean? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

за = support in Russian. It is correct vote for FPCBot processing. For more info You can read Commons:Polling templates.

With best regards, --George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Xantho poressa 2009 G5.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 21:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Xantho poressa 2009 G6.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice contrast with the background. Minor burnt highlights are unobjectionable; QI to me. --Avenue 00:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
RSD-10 Pioneer.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

It was called 'SS-20' by western countries, if I'm not wrong ? ...frosty... --Jebulon (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 Comment O yes, SS-20 (thanks for the international links !).  Support Best in scope for me, because of the camouflage painting.--Jebulon (talk) 22:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 09:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

today !

Hello George Chernilevsky !

Today is a great day, if I'm not wrong !! So, I'm happy to wish you a very happy birthday !! ( So do "Commons" too : the picture of the day is yours .) Best regards from Paris.--Jebulon (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Merci bien!

Je suis très content que j'ai un bon ami à Paris! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

And let me add my best regards too then :) Felicitations --Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much :) --George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Pour

Excuse me, but what does 'Pour' mean when voting on FPC? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Pour = Support in French --George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:12, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, do you speak French or German or English as your native language? You use all three when voting on FPC. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 16:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: about images of ’SSO’

Уважаемый Георгий! Прошу Вас как автора и правообладателя изображения нарукавной эмблемы ССО «Альмагест» вставить её также и в качестве иллюстрации в статью Шелкография (Трафаретная печать). Наименование метода их изготовления в статье ССО я уточнил.

Со своей стороны, я мог бы дополнить викисклад аналогичным изображением нашивки ССО «Оптимум» (экон. ф-т ЛГУ), автором дизайна которой (1980), м.пр., я сам и являюсь :). Вообще, если порыться в моих архивах, можно было бы набрать материал и по ССО других ф-тов (в 1980-84 при Бастрыкине я был членом Большого комитета – председателем фин.-рев.комиссии по ССО) — и при наличии свободного времени посвятить им специальный раздел в Википедии.

Cherurbino (talk) 07:43, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Приятно познакомиться!

Нашивка «Альмагест» - это мой дизайн. Я был художником стройотряда в 1985 году.

С уважением, Георгий --George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:21, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Spassiba !!

Merci beaucoup Gospodine George pour cette très gentille BARNSTAR que je ne mérite pas !! Je suis très content d'avoir deux featured pictures, mais surtout très fier de tes compliments, mon ami de si loin vers l'est ! Je te salue amicalement, --Jebulon (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kotsjubinsky 76 Vinn 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 22:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kempa Vinnitsa 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Sharp and otherwise also good. --Cayambe 06:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Scope changed

Hello, I changed the scope on Commons:Valued image candidates/Mount Nebo BW 6.JPG to Mount Nebo (Jordan). So your support vote is expired. --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:03, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

FPC careless reviews

Hi George,

You may be interested in participating in this_discussion. Cheers, Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Polyporus squamosus 2010 G1.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good. --Cayambe 21:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Polyporus squamosus 2010 G2.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Also good. --Cayambe 21:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Polyporus squamosus 2010 G3.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Very good.--Mbz1 21:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)