User talk:Christian Liem: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Christian Liem No edit summary |
imported>Oliver Smith (Thanks) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Thanks for the spelling help! [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 20:27, 1 January 2007 (CST) | Thanks for the spelling help! [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 20:27, 1 January 2007 (CST) | ||
:Your welcome :) It seems that "venemous" is not really wrong, and is listed in some dictionaries. However it only got 130,000 hits on Google, compared to 2,900,000 for "venomous". I reckon readers would find the latter more familiar. Good article, I actually learned a lot! --[[User:Christian Liem|Christian Liem]] 00:07, 2 January 2007 (CST) | :Your welcome :) It seems that "venemous" is not really wrong, and is listed in some dictionaries. However it only got 130,000 hits on Google, compared to 2,900,000 for "venomous". I reckon readers would find the latter more familiar. Good article, I actually learned a lot! --[[User:Christian Liem|Christian Liem]] 00:07, 2 January 2007 (CST) | ||
== Thanks == | |||
Thanks for going over and fixing my recent subpages edits. [[User:Oliver Smith|Oliver Smith]] 15:17, 10 November 2007 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 16:17, 10 November 2007
Snakebite
Thanks for the spelling help! Nancy Sculerati MD 20:27, 1 January 2007 (CST)
- Your welcome :) It seems that "venemous" is not really wrong, and is listed in some dictionaries. However it only got 130,000 hits on Google, compared to 2,900,000 for "venomous". I reckon readers would find the latter more familiar. Good article, I actually learned a lot! --Christian Liem 00:07, 2 January 2007 (CST)
Thanks
Thanks for going over and fixing my recent subpages edits. Oliver Smith 15:17, 10 November 2007 (CST)