Talk:Telescopic vision - Revision history

imported>50000JH: /* Name +3 */

2009-10-21T12:51:25Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:51, 21 October 2009
(No difference)

imported>50000JH: /* Name +3 */

2009-10-21T12:51:25Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:51, 21 October 2009
Line 88:		Line 88:
	**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)		**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
	***** The mere fact it has been stated in relation to her is proof enough that she has it. As for that telescope it further proves that the article's name is to narrow, it is called Chandra '''X-Ray''' Telescope which specifically tells it can do x-rays and is not just another ordinary telescope. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 21:01, 5 May 2008 (EDT)		***** The mere fact it has been stated in relation to her is proof enough that she has it. As for that telescope it further proves that the article's name is to narrow, it is called Chandra '''X-Ray''' Telescope which specifically tells it can do x-rays and is not just another ordinary telescope. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 21:01, 5 May 2008 (EDT)
			An Chandra X-ray can look at people bones?--[[User:50000JH/signature]]

imported>ERROR: /* 245 metres */

2009-06-18T02:03:40Z

245 metres

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:03, 18 June 2009
Line 37:		Line 37:
	* She can even bend the ray as she sees the teachers solutions sheet! --[[User:Juba\|Juba]] 09:36, 15 April 2008 (EDT)		* She can even bend the ray as she sees the teachers solutions sheet! --[[User:Juba\|Juba]] 09:36, 15 April 2008 (EDT)

	==245 ~~metres~~==		==245 meters==
	Where did this number come from? Is it in the GN? Did I miss it? --[[User:Looky\|Looky]] 18:34, 15 April 2008 (EDT)		Where did this number come from? Is it in the GN? Did I miss it? --[[User:Looky\|Looky]] 18:34, 15 April 2008 (EDT)
	* I think it was a stat on Blake's binoculars. --[[User:NellaBishop\|NellaBishop]] 18:48, 15 April 2008 (EDT)		* I think it was a stat on Blake's binoculars. --[[User:NellaBishop\|NellaBishop]] 18:48, 15 April 2008 (EDT)
Line 44:		Line 44:
	****...which is why I stopped caring about the GN's. As for the pistol, since it was the first gun she used, her description of it being a hand cannon could easily be a misnomer. You'd be surprised how many women react to firing smaller caliber weapons and thinking they're a larger caliber. As for range, effective range is the maximum range that most shooters will be able to accurately hit a target. So technically, the range can be expanded, but only by a few meters. So I'd agree that 245m is well out of the range of any handgun munition. Again, the last four or five GN's have turned me off, and I'm not really paying much mind to them anymore, just reading through them for edits here.--{{User:Baldbobbo/sig}} 12:09, 17 April 2008 (EDT)		****...which is why I stopped caring about the GN's. As for the pistol, since it was the first gun she used, her description of it being a hand cannon could easily be a misnomer. You'd be surprised how many women react to firing smaller caliber weapons and thinking they're a larger caliber. As for range, effective range is the maximum range that most shooters will be able to accurately hit a target. So technically, the range can be expanded, but only by a few meters. So I'd agree that 245m is well out of the range of any handgun munition. Again, the last four or five GN's have turned me off, and I'm not really paying much mind to them anymore, just reading through them for edits here.--{{User:Baldbobbo/sig}} 12:09, 17 April 2008 (EDT)
	*****TBH, this is the first one I've read carefully since The Ten Brides of TK, but that's mostly just because real life is being time-demanding right now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 12:31, 17 April 2008 (EDT)		*****TBH, this is the first one I've read carefully since The Ten Brides of TK, but that's mostly just because real life is being time-demanding right now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 12:31, 17 April 2008 (EDT)

			"The Ten Brides of Telekinesis?" :D--[[User:ERROR\|ERROR]] 22:03, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

	== Coincidence ? ==		== Coincidence ? ==

imported>Elemental Manipulator at 13:52, 14 April 2009

2009-04-14T13:52:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:52, 14 April 2009
Line 31:		Line 31:
	* Passive powers are quite hard to get an image of; Her eyes are glowing in this one, which is probably as close to her "using" her power as you are going to get. {{User:Seclusion/sig}} 07:21, 15 April 2008 (EDT)		* Passive powers are quite hard to get an image of; Her eyes are glowing in this one, which is probably as close to her "using" her power as you are going to get. {{User:Seclusion/sig}} 07:21, 15 April 2008 (EDT)
	** What about the image further down the page, of her pointing the gun directly at Blake from a block away? --[[User:BardinessBoy\|BardinessBoy]] 13:08, 15 April 2008 (EDT)		** What about the image further down the page, of her pointing the gun directly at Blake from a block away? --[[User:BardinessBoy\|BardinessBoy]] 13:08, 15 April 2008 (EDT)
			**We could use the one of her looking at the plane passenger from the ground. That's the most telescopic. --<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight:bold;"></span>'''[[User:Elemental Manipulator\|Elemental Manipulator]]'''</span> [ [[User:Elemental Manipulator\|U]] \| [[User_talk:Elemental Manipulator\|T]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Elemental Manipulator\|C]] ]'''</small> - <span style="color:green;">When in doubt, ask BTE </span> 09:52, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

	==Limits==		==Limits==

imported>Snow Leapord: /* Name +3 */

2008-05-06T01:01:46Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:01, 6 May 2008
Line 84:		Line 84:
	****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)		****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
	**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)		**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
			***** The mere fact it has been stated in relation to her is proof enough that she has it. As for that telescope it further proves that the article's name is to narrow, it is called Chandra '''X-Ray''' Telescope which specifically tells it can do x-rays and is not just another ordinary telescope. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 21:01, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

imported>MiamiVolts: reply

2008-04-30T15:13:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:13, 30 April 2008
Line 83:		Line 83:
	*** If it helps, I think of Donna's vision being like a really special telescope--one that can see in the dark and one that can see the details of a snowflake. That's the only way I can justify "telescopic vision" in my mind. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 19:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*** If it helps, I think of Donna's vision being like a really special telescope--one that can see in the dark and one that can see the details of a snowflake. That's the only way I can justify "telescopic vision" in my mind. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 19:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)		****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
			**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

imported>Snow Leapord: /* Name +3 */

2008-04-30T15:02:40Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:02, 30 April 2008
Line 82:		Line 82:
	**It's been called "Telescopic vision" at least five times now: three in the novels, once in the dossier, and once in the intro to the novels. Like it or not, it's the name given in near-canon sources, and the name people are most likely to search for. We're stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		**It's been called "Telescopic vision" at least five times now: three in the novels, once in the dossier, and once in the intro to the novels. Like it or not, it's the name given in near-canon sources, and the name people are most likely to search for. We're stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	*** If it helps, I think of Donna's vision being like a really special telescope--one that can see in the dark and one that can see the details of a snowflake. That's the only way I can justify "telescopic vision" in my mind. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 19:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*** If it helps, I think of Donna's vision being like a really special telescope--one that can see in the dark and one that can see the details of a snowflake. That's the only way I can justify "telescopic vision" in my mind. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 19:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
			****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* Name +3 */

2008-04-29T23:47:51Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 29 April 2008
Line 81:		Line 81:
	*What is the problem with calling this power Enhanced vision it covers all the bases. Telescopic vision doesn't cover the other aspects of the power.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 10:07, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*What is the problem with calling this power Enhanced vision it covers all the bases. Telescopic vision doesn't cover the other aspects of the power.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 10:07, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	**It's been called "Telescopic vision" at least five times now: three in the novels, once in the dossier, and once in the intro to the novels. Like it or not, it's the name given in near-canon sources, and the name people are most likely to search for. We're stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		**It's been called "Telescopic vision" at least five times now: three in the novels, once in the dossier, and once in the intro to the novels. Like it or not, it's the name given in near-canon sources, and the name people are most likely to search for. We're stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
			*** If it helps, I think of Donna's vision being like a really special telescope--one that can see in the dark and one that can see the details of a snowflake. That's the only way I can justify "telescopic vision" in my mind. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 19:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

imported>Hardvice: /* Name +3 */

2008-04-29T14:43:59Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:43, 29 April 2008
Line 76:		Line 76:
	**I agree it's a lousy name, but based on the Heroes Evolutions dossier, I think it's now clear that it's intended to be the name of the power ... even though it doesn't cover everything very well at all. Barring another name in the episode or graphic novel, we're (sadly) stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 02:42, 28 April 2008 (EDT)		**I agree it's a lousy name, but based on the Heroes Evolutions dossier, I think it's now clear that it's intended to be the name of the power ... even though it doesn't cover everything very well at all. Barring another name in the episode or graphic novel, we're (sadly) stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 02:42, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
	*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)		*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
			** True. But the only thing it says in gigantic letters under the heading "Unique ability" is "telescopic vision". The rest is a description. Much as we may dislike the name (and I don't see anybody doing cartwheels over it), that's what they're calling it, so that's what we're calling it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:43, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	**They could call it "Magical faerie optics" if they wanted. If they did so in the novels, we'd be stuck with ''that''. Our job is to document, not to create. It's been directly referred to as "telescopic vision" five times now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		**They could call it "Magical faerie optics" if they wanted. If they did so in the novels, we'd be stuck with ''that''. Our job is to document, not to create. It's been directly referred to as "telescopic vision" five times now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

imported>Hardvice: /* Name +3 */

2008-04-29T14:40:25Z

Name +3

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:40, 29 April 2008
Line 77:		Line 77:
	*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)		*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
	*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
			**They could call it "Magical faerie optics" if they wanted. If they did so in the novels, we'd be stuck with ''that''. Our job is to document, not to create. It's been directly referred to as "telescopic vision" five times now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	*What is the problem with calling this power Enhanced vision it covers all the bases. Telescopic vision doesn't cover the other aspects of the power.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 10:07, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*What is the problem with calling this power Enhanced vision it covers all the bases. Telescopic vision doesn't cover the other aspects of the power.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 10:07, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
			**It's been called "Telescopic vision" at least five times now: three in the novels, once in the dossier, and once in the intro to the novels. Like it or not, it's the name given in near-canon sources, and the name people are most likely to search for. We're stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:01, 6 May 2008
Line 84:		Line 84:
	****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)		****How do you justify the X-Ray vision part of her ability? Cause as evidenced by Career Choices' dialogue that is also a part of her ability. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 11:02, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
	**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)		**** The x-ray part of Donna's ability hasn't been demonstrated, but irl there is the [http://chandra.nasa.gov/ Chandra X-Ray Telescope] that can view X-Rays.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 11:13, 30 April 2008 (EDT)
			***** The mere fact it has been stated in relation to her is proof enough that she has it. As for that telescope it further proves that the article's name is to narrow, it is called Chandra '''X-Ray''' Telescope which specifically tells it can do x-rays and is not just another ordinary telescope. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 21:01, 5 May 2008 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:43, 29 April 2008
Line 76:		Line 76:
	**I agree it's a lousy name, but based on the Heroes Evolutions dossier, I think it's now clear that it's intended to be the name of the power ... even though it doesn't cover everything very well at all. Barring another name in the episode or graphic novel, we're (sadly) stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 02:42, 28 April 2008 (EDT)		**I agree it's a lousy name, but based on the Heroes Evolutions dossier, I think it's now clear that it's intended to be the name of the power ... even though it doesn't cover everything very well at all. Barring another name in the episode or graphic novel, we're (sadly) stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 02:42, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
	*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)		*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
			** True. But the only thing it says in gigantic letters under the heading "Unique ability" is "telescopic vision". The rest is a description. Much as we may dislike the name (and I don't see anybody doing cartwheels over it), that's what they're calling it, so that's what we're calling it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:43, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	**They could call it "Magical faerie optics" if they wanted. If they did so in the novels, we'd be stuck with ''that''. Our job is to document, not to create. It's been directly referred to as "telescopic vision" five times now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		**They could call it "Magical faerie optics" if they wanted. If they did so in the novels, we'd be stuck with ''that''. Our job is to document, not to create. It's been directly referred to as "telescopic vision" five times now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:40, 29 April 2008
Line 77:		Line 77:
	*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)		*Well on the Diagram it says Enhanced Visual Cortex, and it also says "Nocturnal Vision" and "Telescopic Vision" so I'm not sure --[[User:Dman dustin\|Dman dustin]] 03:59, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
	*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*So we are supposed to believe the name Telescopic Vision is applicable and covers Telesclopic, Nocturnal, and X-Ray Vision? The dossier is wrong, rigid adherence to stated "facts" when it flies in the face of spoken and visual evidence is irrational. --[[User:Snow Leapord\|Snow Leapord]] 07:47, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
			**They could call it "Magical faerie optics" if they wanted. If they did so in the novels, we'd be stuck with ''that''. Our job is to document, not to create. It's been directly referred to as "telescopic vision" five times now.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
	*What is the problem with calling this power Enhanced vision it covers all the bases. Telescopic vision doesn't cover the other aspects of the power.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 10:07, 29 April 2008 (EDT)		*What is the problem with calling this power Enhanced vision it covers all the bases. Telescopic vision doesn't cover the other aspects of the power.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 10:07, 29 April 2008 (EDT)
			**It's been called "Telescopic vision" at least five times now: three in the novels, once in the dossier, and once in the intro to the novels. Like it or not, it's the name given in near-canon sources, and the name people are most likely to search for. We're stuck with it.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 10:40, 29 April 2008 (EDT)