Talk:2010 Group Project 5

From Embryology

Contents

Group Assessment Criteria

The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described

This project is significantly shorter and contains fewer resources (figures, tables) than other projects prepared for prenatal diagnosis topic. Nothing about oncogenic expression?

  • Project should have at least included details about fetal Fibronectin as a protein. Such as OMIM - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/omim/135600
  • (Introduction) "Fetal fibronectin is a protein based plasma" this does not make sense?
  • (About preterm births) formatting of bullet list, why not use the standard bullets rather than "-". Would this data be better shown as a table.
  • (Procedure of the Fetal Fibronectin Test) No explanation as to what "Adeza approved method" means and this term is not listed in glossary? Suggests cut-n-paste from other source without checking the content.

The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area

  • Inclusion of detailed description, or images from, the 3 assay techniques would have improved this project.
  • There are no sections that include Australian information, data or statistics?
  • There are consistent page formatting errors throughout this project page in relation to text layout, bulleting and structure.

Figures

Figure 1 - File:FetalFN.jpg (Z3291079)

  • Meets student drawn figure requirement.
  • this is a very poor representation of fetal fibronectin and has no further explanation of what is being shown in the image legend.
  • not included any information about reuse of your image.

Figure 2 - File:FFN test2.jpg (Z3291079)

  • Meets student drawn figure requirement.
  • has no further explanation of what is being shown in the image legend.
  • not included any information about reuse of your image.

Content is correctly cited and referenced

  • "Matsuura et al. (1988) found that a single glycosylation at a defined threonine residue of the IIICS region of fibronectin defines an antigenic epitope recognized by monoclonal antibody FDC-6, which specifically recognizes fibronectin isolated from fetal and malignant cells and tissues."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2449438 http://www.jbc.org/content/263/7/3314.long

  • Also why not this reference: The oncofetal domain of fibronectin defined by monoclonal antibody FDC-6: its presence in fibronectins from fetal and tumor tissues and its absence in those from normal adult tissues and plasma. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2995969

The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations

Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities

  • (Glossary) Only a very short terms list. Not even an entry for fibronectin.
  • You cite this reference only once (The preterm prediction study: fetal fibronectin, bacterial vaginosis, and peripartum infection. NICHD Maternal Fetal Medicine Units Network. Goldenberg RL, Thom E, Moawad AH, Johnson F, Roberts J, Caritis SN. Obstet Gynecol. 1996 May;87(5 Pt 1):656-60. PMID: 8677062 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8677062) yet it contains much information that could have been incorporated into your project.
  • Searching Pubmed for "fetal fibronectin" - All (2088) Review (146) Free Full Text (511) and in 5 minutes the following recent references were identified
    • Fetal fibronectin as a short-term predictor of preterm birth in symptomatic patients: a meta-analysis. Sanchez-Ramos L, Delke I, Zamora J, Kaunitz AM. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Sep;114(3):631-40. Review. PMID: 19701045 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19701045
    • The utility of fetal fibronectin in the prediction and prevention of spontaneous preterm birth. Kiefer DG, Vintzileos AM. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Summer;1(3):106-12. PMID: 19015761 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19015761
    • Maternal diabetes affects specific extracellular matrix components during placentation. Giachini FR, Carriel V, Capelo LP, Tostes RC, Carvalho MH, Fortes ZB, Zorn TM, San Martin S. J Anat. 2008 Jan;212(1):31-41. Epub 2007 Dec 6. PMID: 18067546 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18067546
    • Uterine stretch regulates temporal and spatial expression of fibronectin protein and its alpha 5 integrin receptor in myometrium of unilaterally pregnant rats. Shynlova O, Williams SJ, Draper H, White BG, MacPhee DJ, Lye SJ. Biol Reprod. 2007 Nov;77(5):880-8. Epub 2007 Aug 22. PMID: 17715430 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17715430
    • Diagnostic accuracy of cervicovaginal interleukin-6 and interleukin-6:albumin ratio as markers of preterm delivery. Woodworth A, Moore J, G'Sell C, Verdoes A, Snyder JA, Morris L, Wares C, Grenache DG, Gronowski AM. Clin Chem. 2007 Aug;53(8):1534-40. PMID: 17644792 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17644792
    • Comparison of bedside test kits for prediction of preterm delivery: phosphorylated insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (pIGFBP-1) test and fetal fibronectin test. Ting HS, Chin PS, Yeo GS, Kwek K. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2007 Jun;36(6):399-402. PMID: 17597963 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17597963
    • Use of the fetal fibronectin test in decisions to admit to hospital for preterm labor. Foxman EF, Jarolim P. Clin Chem. 2004 Mar;50(3):663-5. No abstract available. PMID: 14981040 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14981040
    • Expression of integrins and extracellular matrix proteins at the maternal-fetal interface during tubal implantation. Qin L, Wang YL, Bai SX, Xiao ZJ, Herva R, Piao YS. Reproduction. 2003 Sep;126(3):383-91. PMID: 12968946
    • Accuracy of the rapid fetal fibronectin TLi system in predicting preterm delivery. Luzzi V, Hankins K, Gronowski AM. Clin Chem. 2003 Mar;49(3):501-2. No abstract available. PMID: 12600966 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12600966

Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology

Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki

  • Several peer reviewers suggested including additional images. The final project suggests that this was not incorporated into your reviews.
  • Feedback suggested that it was easy to read and absorb information, compared to other projects. Many times students mean a lack of "content".

Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement

  • No indication that you summarised the peer feedback you received and allocated updates within your group.

The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning

Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines


Hey, i know im not supposed to be helping rival groups (hehe) but i was just having a general look through all the pages, and i noticed your new picture (which is awesome by the way). i thought i would let you know that the cervical canal is labeled in the wrong spot :/ hope you have time to fix it. kind regards - --z3265772 04:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC) also, if you decide to fix it, at the same time you might want to change the label speculum to cotton swab (or something similar), and if you dont want to change it, you might want to delete this post so mark doesnt read it :P hehe

THanks! --Jade Seenandan 10:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Guys! I was just wondering if i could please get your permission to use your student drawn diagram, if you see our page im making a table with all our diagrams in it, and, of course, i need your permission to use it :) Thanks! Jill - group 2 --z3265772 02:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Peer review

Group 5: I found your page to be very concise and to the point and your information seems to cover all concepts without rambling on. This is a good thing because it makes reading the text straightforward and simpler to understand but at the same time i think you could still have used with some background information, perhaps in a history section, and maybe even a discussion about limitations. More pictures would also greatly improve not only the look of your page but also compliment the information and engage your reader. In terms of structure, i think that improvements could be made here to allow the information to flow better. Perhaps the 'preventions' section could be merged with "what next?' because the content is related so it would be natural progression and even put into a table to aid understanding? But overall its looking good and the research is evident. good job --z3293029 21:59, 22 September 2010 (UTC)



Group 5 - in terms of content, it is informative. Well done. In terms of the page aesthetics, images of fetal fibronectin itself would be useful at the start, and images especially in the Procedure section. The information is there however the use of images throughout the page and tabulating some of your information would make it more engaging and easier to understand. Remember to add a Historical background on the procedure even if it's short seeing as it is still a relatively 'new' procedure. The current research section could be rephrased more to fit into the flow of your page as a whole. Judging by the last sentence, it seems as though it has been put together by simply copy and pasting snippets from different journals. It would be more beneficial if the information given in the journals was analysed, interpreted and then presented while still referencing. This goes for the procedure also. Try to find information, understand it yourself and then 'explain' it to your audience. You will find that the page will be more cohesive as a result. Another point would be to expand the subheadings so that they clearly identify the subject matter being covered under that section as at the moment they are quite vague. Some points which could also be addressed: future of the procedure? The glossary could also be expanded. Good effort. --z3241780 14:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


GROUP 5: Fetal Fibronectin

Group 5 the first thing I have to say about your project page that I think will really help you guy out is that you need put more pictures. If I’m not mistaken the hand drawn picture at the very top is the only picture on the whole page. Pictures help captivate the audience and makes your intended audience want to read on to find out or relate the picture to the information present. They also help break up the page and allow the reader some processing time while reading the information of Fetal fibronectin. The Information you have presented is pretty much flawless being the perfect amount of scientific language, by this I mean that your assignment is assessable for pretty much anyone but more importantly the information was informative. The Dot points you have used many of the section also help us understand the project better. Last but not least you have missed out on history of the pre-natal diagnostic technique which Mark Hill said was part of his marking scheme, and after reading what other people have posted on your discussion page I notice that I’m not the only one to make this comment. Apart from that nice work!!!!

--z3252635 13:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


You have a nice and simple page, concise and to the point. Nice drawn image at the beginning of the page to draw attention I thought it was very well done. I found that the current research was good, showed some good effort with good references to backup your info about the case studies and statistics. Ways that could be improved is the use of images, so people could understand the topic better, and some tables may help to make the information more interesting. I guess more detail and elaborate more on the history. Also i wasn't sure if there were any risks involved and how common this test is done. References were good, with a nice glossary. nice effort! --z3224500 13:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


Simple, good organisation and what I like about it is that they referenced a lot of their text to backup their information which i thought was very scientific. The drawn picture was nice, but overall the page needed more images and pictures to understand the topic better. A table may have been a good choice to convey some information to make it more interesting, but it is still simple so not a very big deal there. So overall, more images, and I think more longer information under some headings would provide more extensive knowledge on the topic. References are very good, with an alright glossary. Hi guys!

I’m guessing that the fetal fibronectin diagram at the top of the page is your student drawn diagram. Nice job on it. You might want to more clearly indicate that it is student drawn, though, and you should probably include the copyright statement. Also, you might want to think about adding some more pictures to your page to break up the text a little bit and make the page more eye-catching and easy to look at. I have to say that I really liked the way that you’ve set out the section on the test results. It was very easy to read. If I had another suggestion, it would be to move your glossary up to before the references – I almost didn’t notice you had a glossary hidden there. If someone wasn’t really looking, they might not spot it. Other than that, nice job!--z3252833 12:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

--Group 4 Fetal Fibronectin

Although this page had not as much detail put into it compared to previous pages, I found it much easier to read and absorb information. We must take into account that they have used a variety of sources so I am speculating that this is the more important information after researching this topic. So taking this into account I believe that this page is informative on the topic using a variety of sources, but hasn’t gone too in depth. The only advice I can give is to add some pictures or diagrams, even reproduce the information in a table to make it more interesting. Thanks guys you have done a great job.

--3290040 10:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


Group 5

Group 5, the set out of your page is really good, its broken up into sections and there's lots of point form throughout which makes it really clear and easy to understand, except for current research.

What could be improved: More pictures would help break it up and make it more interesting, maybe a picture of the actual procedure would be good. Some more detail could be added to give it a more scientific aspect like for example in the procedure section, and maybe a section on the historic background, I think thats part of the marking criteria. Overall i think you've done a great job but just maybe add some more detail to give it a more scientific feel.

--z3292208 08:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


Fetal Fibronectin

Hey guys good work with this assignment. The first thing I notice was there are not as many pictures as there are in other pages. However, what was there was relevant and easily readable.I think some more detail could be given in a few sections would help convey a more technical side of this subject matter.

--z3254753 17:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 5 = I really like how all the parts are broken down into points which made it easy to follow except for the "current research" . It is very structured and the picture looks great.

What could be improved is adding more pictures and break down the current research into bullet points but other than that its great --Navneet Ahuja 12:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 5: Foetal fibronectin What I found good about this assignment was that all the information was presented in a clear and organized manner, and did appear to have a teaching element to the project. There was a great amount of research and referencing done although it did lack a bit of a “scientific feel”.

What could be improved? Some extra pictures or tables could be added and also the glossary could probably be placed above the references so that it is easier to refer to it instead of having to scroll all the way down.

--z3254433 07:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Group 5, I liked the fact that everything is referenced, it made me feel like you have really researched what you are putting on here. Your page is very informative and i learnt alot about fetal fibronectin. i liked your student drawn diagram!

improvements: definitely extra pictures. If you cant find any that you can use, start emailing the companies, this is how i got most of our permissions, as i couldnt find any with permissions. as a last resort try wiki, all of their pictures arent copyright protected. Also, probably best to go through the criteria for the page, youve missed the history altogether. Here it is for you: project outline:

1. Intro

2. historic background

3. current associated research

4. simplified description of technique

5. student drawn figure or animation

6. reference list

7. glossary

8. external links

--z3265772 03:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Reading through the information is quite easy, the headings and sub-headings makes it very clear to follow. Having questions as sub-headings makes it very user friendly to read and understand the fetal fibronectin test. However the history and development of the test is lacking. Also is the test specific for pre-mature birth detection only? please specify. The introduction also is a bit confusing where it say "Fetal fibronectin is a protein based plasma that acts as a form of glue attaching the amniotic sac to the uterine wall. Fetal fibronectin is commonly present between 22 to 35 weeks of pregnancy. It is released into the upper vagina towards the onset of labour. If the test finds fFN between this period, the woman will have a chance of going into labour" - what period are u talking about? when I read it, it seems to be prefering to 22-35 weeks of pregnancy as it state before, but it was mention that it was commonly to find fFN during that time, does that mean that it is common for women to have pre-mature births?

What could be improve would be providing a brief history of this test and fix up the introduction so it won't be confusing to the reader.

--3216889 13:53, 22 September 2010 (UTC)




Co-ordinator Comments
--This is an area for members of the group to communicate online and to place links and information relevant to the project. Do not forget to sign your additions and always add the newer material to the top of this page.

Projects: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Students Page | Help:Editing Basics



--Mark Hill 00:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC) There is no content on your project page and you are not making appropriate progress. I expect you all at this weeks lab and an explanation as to why no one is adding content to your project page.

You need to have this updated before this weeks lab when I will be reviewing all projects.

--Mark Hill 04:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC) This is no where not good enough, I will need to talk to you in this weeks lab. Your group has not searched the scientific literature, found information about fibronectin or related images. Unless everyone here gets going on this project you will not be completed in time.


Dez--Seow Liew 09:10, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi,members,i have split the work up to 3 different constituent parts and each of us will get to pick 1

and do it.In addition,i have also roughly split the work up to 3 stages, which is:

a)collecting the information from different sources,

b)grouping the information,and

c)put what we get on group page.

Note:

-you just need to put your name next to the capitalised heading,(e.g PART C-Dez)to indicate you are up to that part.

-PART C is picked by me, so,options left are PART A and B only.

-You can always add in additional info, but i think it`s better we discuss it first when we figure or find it out(the ones you cant decide if they`re your part),so that we can discussion whose part it belongs to and who should do it, to kinda maintain the flow of the content.

-i`m aware that PART B is relatively short,i was outta ideas.Well, the point of PART B i make it mainly emphasizes on info related to how this test is carried out and 3rd party`s voices on this test.

The 3 different parts that i have split up are as following:

PART A - Jade

Introduction:

-what does this technique rely on?(fibronectin)

-Stuff about fn ,fibronectin,like the time or stage it forms during pregnancy.

-what does fn do in mom`s tummy during pregnancy.

-what kind of other abnormalities can this test predict? (mainly used for the prediction of preterm birth as far as i know)


-signs and events of preterm birth in mom`s tummy if there`s a high possibility the mom`s having a

preterm birth,like,cervix dilation , fn leaks outta vagina,etc.

-the relationship of fn and prediction of preterm birth.

(like comparison of fn between pregnant woman who are not at risk of preterm birth and those who are,etc)


PART B-Mary

-how does the test work? like,steps and procedures involve.

3rd party`s voices:

-what do the public doctors , pregnant woman say about this technique?-interview thing, vids( how this

test is carried out)

-related images.


PART C-Dez

-who should take the test?

-What will the results tell about risk of delivering early?

-diagnostic accuracy.

-side effects.

-advantages of knowing the prediction.

-treatments for those who tested with positive result.


One last thing,

i think our primary source would be pubmed,of course there`re others too, but then the info isnt as

extensive and specific as pubmed,so go to it,look for the related journals and extract only details that

you need.

It`d be great if we could find more images and videos related to the info we get,by doing so,we could

make the page less lengthy and readers understand it better.

Looking forward to your comments,because i could be wrong.


--z3291079 12:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC) We should probably add something about the history of fetal f. Fit it in with part B?

heey , sorry for the late reply.Yea, it fits in with part B , sounds reasonable. Do you have any idea what it could be? and post some links on here , if you have some with you. --Seow Liew 06:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


Hey guys I found a really good article about that defines what fetal fibronectin is and how it is used to determine preterm labour. I Don't know if I can copy paste because of the copyright and I forgot how to make a link so the website is http://www.ranzcog.edu.au/publications/statements/C-obs26.pdf , It's got bits and pieces of everyones parts if You guys want to look through it and pick out what would be of help to you. Also I found a video. It's that doctor that goes onto the Dr Phil show but it's pretty good. It was one of few that I could find soo look at it and tell me what you think. Its website is http://www.5min.com/Video/Learn-about-Fetal-Fibronectin-Test-114223707. If you can find any videos just post them up because I don't think there are many around. Also I've found articles that question the tests ability to undermine the occurrence of the pre-term birth. I don't know if this is significant enough to add in as we are essentially talking about it's role in identifying whether or not the mother is going to have a pre-term birth or not instead of whether the doctor can stop it. Tell me what you think. should I add it in or not? You can find the article at http://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/Abstract/1996/05000/The_Preterm_Prediction_Study__Fetal_Fibronectin.1.aspx. --Mary Nicolas 10:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it is significant enough as it is an issue around this technique.I`d say add it in. --Seow Liew 07:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah add this in cos you can say how it is a good technique but is not the best etc., etc. This could cover the topic of the reliability of this technique which we can look through. Some additional info i guess. --Jade Seenandan 03:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Mary, you have one more part to do , which is the history of fetal fibronectin.( Like what inspired the Doc came up with this technique and is this technique a modified version of some technique, and of course it`d be great if you could find stuff like when the first time this technique was put to use, how was it and talk a little bit about the following tests,and important people involved.) --Seow Liew 06:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


Hey guys, I've found an article that is a good reference describing the test...it's a good outline of what we need to know. I've found a site about fFN that may help, nothing major though. it also has a few references of articles on there that we could research. I'm going to post the subheadings up on the main page of what i think, let me know what you think but you guys can go ahead and change it :) - Jade

http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1149.asp

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582650/?tool=pubmed --Jade Seenandan 03:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh and if we can find anything about further research about fFN, about improving it or something then we should add that in --Jade Seenandan 03:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I will do a drawing of fetal fibronectin in the womb, there's a great picture on the video that mary posted, so i will use that as a guide --Jade Seenandan 11:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

http://www.southernhealth.org.au/icms_docs/1197_Fetal_fibronectin_Quikcheck_in_threatened_peterm_labour.pdf Just some more info to help --Jade Seenandan 13:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys, kinda getting worried, we should really get a move on with this assignment lol. I'm going to draw a picture today and put it up. And hopefully finish my part of this assignment. Any feedback? --Jade Seenandan 00:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Another helpful site guys - http://www.ffntest.com/index.html --Jade Seenandan 02:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

hey guys don't worry about me I'm doing my work I just want to do it all before I put it up. The test results and procedure have been really easy to put together but the history is quite difficult as there is not demarcating date or person that used it first up... if that makes sense. I'll do it but I dont think I'm going to come up with a timeline like some of the other groups. --Mary Nicolas 04:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

@Mary:it`s alright ,Mary.Put up what you think is makes sense,we can then discuss on it and edit in the remaining days. @Jade:i realise you didn`t reference your work.So, i reckon you reference your work as soon as you can.--Seow Liew 10:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

We also need more images. It's hard to find non-copyrighted pictures for fFN. i'll draw another picture if really needed. --Jade Seenandan 12:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


Improvements

Include a table on the deformities that result from pre-term births

History; refer back to the outline - I'm finding it extremely hard to find stuff about the history ay--Jade Seenandan 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Pictures

Images for the Procedure - I added another drawing for the procedure --Jade Seenandan 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Glossary above the references - DONE --Jade Seenandan 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Make Introduction clearer - DONE --Jade Seenandan 11:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Break up Current research into dot points

--Mary Nicolas 00:25, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

"preventions" section could be merged with "what next" -DONE --Seow Liew 12:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

How common the test is done- look it up under the heading "targeted individuals--Seow Liew 12:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The risks of this test-look it up under the heading "disadvantages"--Seow Liew 12:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The "current research section" is broken down into several subheadings to make readers more easier to understand--Seow Liew 12:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


So we don't forget; the project guidelines.

1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.

2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.

3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.

4. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.

5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.

6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.

7. Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki.

8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.

9. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.

10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines. --Mary Nicolas 00:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


Hi Guys! I was just wondering if i could please get your permission to use your student drawn diagram, if you see our page im making a table with all our diagrams in it, and, of course, i need your permission to use it :) Thanks! Jill - group 2 --z3265772 02:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)