Archives and sub-pages
- Talk before December 2005 archived
- Talk from December 2005 to February 2007
- Talk from February to December 2007
- Talk from 2008
- Talk from 2009
Hello Nick! The reason I included a list of notable Ancient Romans is because I wanted to give the reader a list of Romans who significantly changed Roman history. The Romans I have added are great Generals, lawmakers and emperors. The reader when studying these individuals will have a full grasp of the entire history of Rome. I am aware of the list of ancient Romans, but most are insignificant to the casual reader and of little value to the professional historian. Per82 (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
If you enable e-mail in your preferences , I'd be glad to send you a temporary link for access. I can't take the time to look at this myself, though Haploidavey seems not to have ruled it out. Wareh (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- A queue! - it makes me feel quite at home. Nicknack, please let me know (here would be fine) if you need more than the single access - or even, once I've read the Hind article, a second opinion on the particulars. Haploidavey (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, I've summarised Hind's argument. Still don't think it makes political sense - it would be like the US, after the first Gulf War, appointing an Iraqi dignitary as the new ruler of Kuwait. (I also think the best solution for the westward crossing is that the main invasion force sailed from the Rhine, one of the four departure points for Britain mentioned by Strabo and the easiest route for the four legions from their previous stations to the coast, not that they landed at Chichester.) --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Grant Morrison photo
Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Good to see you! and Irish language stuff
At Badb#Representations_in_legends I put in the OI of "The Morrígan's Prophecy" from CELT: Cath Maige Tuired: The Second Battle of Mag Tuired. The English translation has been shared around for years, with a variety of people tweaking it. I think it's pretty straightforward, but would appreciate someone with more Irish to check it. What had been there previously was a modern English version that, while creative and poetic, had been translated from a Modern Irish variation, and hence diverged pretty significantly from the original Irish. Stay in touch, K? Go raibh maith agat, - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Julius Caesar Edit
Hi. I recently edited the Julius Caesar article to remove a sentence that I thought was misleading, but you undid the edit. I had created a section in the Julius Caesar talk page about why I think that sentence is incorrect. Could you please just post a reply in that section to explain why you think the sentence should remain?
Hi, you expressed a concern over my edit which you reverted so I've amended slightly. The problem is that 'historical tradition' a phrase that many would see as an oxymoron. asnac (talk) 18:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
liberti and libertini
For a brief explanation, see Roman Empire#Freedmen. You seem to be unaware of how these terms were actually used in Latin authors, and that in fact they tend to not be distinguished once we get deeper in the Imperial era. Please check the sources cited there, but a dozen others could easily be cited. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- I should also note that so basic a source as the Oxford Latin Dictionary defines libertinus as "a member of the class of freedmen, a freedman (w. ref. only to social and leg. status)" and libertus as "a freedman (w. ref. to the manumitter or patron)." As is pointed out in Mouritsen and elsewhere, however, these distinctions are often hard to discern in the actual usage of Latin texts. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
I see you have been struggling to try to communicate with Rheton. You may or may not know that he/she has reported you to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Naturally, I have declined the report, as the suggestion that your edits are "vandalism" is absurd. However, you should be careful about edit warring: it would be a pity if you were blocked for your efforts. As you probably know, the standard edit warring warning template says "Do not edit war even if you believe you are right." Please do feel welcome to contact me if the disruptive editing continues, and I will take administrative action if it becomes necessary. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure what was wrong with the edits you reverted at . Obviously they weren't minor, & I think there was a slight grammar problem, but what else? Dougweller (talk) 06:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've reverted. For some reason I thought they were a removal of content rather than an addition. Sorry. --Nicknack009 (talk) 10:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Don't know how much you want to work on that article, but in regard to this edit, I also don't think we need the gallery currently at Julius Caesar#Depictions, since that is what Cultural depictions of Julius Caesar is for, and the article is already illustrated with too many busts. However, I do think we need some kind of summary section there covering legends/legacy/"depictions". Cynwolfe (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, there is discussion concerning the spelling of Boudica's name, during which a comment of yours from 2006 has been referenced. If you have any additional information about the issue, your input would be appreciated. Paul B (talk) 16:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- The content is not unchanged. Everything is now framed in religious terms, not mythological ones. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Amairgin (Amargcn, Amhairghin, Amairgin, Amairgein, Amorgin) Irish hero. This name, which means "wontlrously born" or "song-con- ception" is borne by two legendary poets: • Amairgin, son of Mil and the first great poet of Ireland, was reputed to have lived in the sixth century c.e. When the tuatha de danann, who then had control of Ireland, blew up a magical storm to keep the invading milesians from landing, Amairgin's magical words calmed the storm and allowed his peo- ple to land, with Amairgin himself becoming the first of his race to set foot on Irish soil. As he did so, he recited his most famous poem, the "Song of Amairgin," in which he describes himself shape-shifting into a salmon, a sunbeam, a flower, a spear; similar poems...
No Gluingel here, and no Druid (and later than the classical Druids).
Brief mention in Llewellyn's Complete Book of Names. And of course but that doesn't say he was a Druid or even mention Druids. The article is pretty vague about where he is mentioned. Where is he called a Druid in Irish mythology? Dougweller (talk) 11:07, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- He has the epithet Gluingel in Lebor Gabála (for example here, page 33 paragraph 387). I can't turn up any reference to him as a druid - I must have copied that over when the article Amergin was converted into a disambiguation page - although his opponents are called druids. The reference to Amergin supposedly living in the 6th century CE is just wrong - the invasion of the Milesians was supposed to have taken place in the deep pre-Christian past. Having said that, druids are not uncommon in medieval Irish literature, down to St Patrick's time. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
There was Celt in al-Andalus and Ottomans went as far as Vienna thus covered some Celtic regions.. Furthermore, Judaism was quite prominent in some parts. Pass a Method talk 08:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
- None of those regions had been Celtic since the Roman conquest, and none of them contributed to the Mabinigion. Go away. --Nicknack009 (talk) 08:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
And thanks for adding Lefty!
Sadtoseeitsmorning 14 February 2014. —Preceding undated comment added 17:23, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Nicknack. Thanks for your tweaking of the page. I have all the info but I'm not so hot on the ways of Wiki! Tony was my father so I have access to loads of his old comics such as Action, Bullet, ROTR, Victor Scoop etc... I'd like to upload an example of his comic artwork to the wiki page, maybe something from Look Out For Lefty? Would appreciate your help with this. Also I have another obituary from the Guernsey Press (which I have referenced). Cheers! Antony. Sadtoseeitsmorning 13 February 2014.
High King of Ireland
The thing is, it doesn't matter who is right here. Please read WP:3RR - you are in breach of this and need to step away for a short while or you will probably end up blocked as your reverts aren't covered by the exemptions. This isn't the way to deal with problems like this. You really don't want a block on your record. Dougweller (talk) 12:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Looks like you are getting some helpful advice. I see you misunderstood 3RR, no problem. Dougweller (talk) 21:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your detective work. As a final nail in the article's coffin, I have used Tineye to locate the photograph here - it is one John Tregerthen Short. I have nominated the page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erasmus Augustus Worthington. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
August 2014 - Annals of Ulster question
I received your note about the Annals of Ulster changes. Okay, let me explain my edit that you changed back here, so we can discuss my concern in this forum. Apologies on my part if I saw the wrong link. I've been concerned that some of the entries involving Ulster-related articles are being edited to rewrite a historical narrative to suit narrow-minded political agendas. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not doing that.
My concern was that the link I followed didn't seem to make sense. Can you please provide me the link you intended to use, or are you using, in a reply below perhaps, so I can just follow it to see? I have looked on the web and I have tried to follow your link and I cannot find anywhere that validates the name of the Annals being what you are showing. Annala Uladh was the only name I had previously known about. If you could provide that, it would be appreciated. Otherwise, I have to ask that we omit the name until we have some kind of scholastic verification that the annals were ever known by that name. I cannot find the Four Master's reference to the annals as being referenced to a progenitor chieftain, or to any single individual, but always saw them referenced as the Annala Uladh. Thank you for your consideration of this request. I look forward to seeing the link. Maybe the link Wikipedia provided was not the one you intended. Thanks again.
- Have replied on your own talk page. Basically, you're not editing the article you think you are. --Nicknack009 (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Read your reply. Thank you. Will you consider using this link to further educate the researcher that wants to validate the name history of this Cycle? Your current link leads to a search page that is not immediately user-friendly. Here is the considered link:
Re. The Hill of Tara
Hi I was just wondering why you reverted my addition to the page The Hill of Tara. I though my edit was useful and I had cited an article on the subject. I dont mean to question you judgement but I would just like to know where I went wrong. ~~dickscawed — Preceding undated comment added 00:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- It's a trivial incident involving non-notable people. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
While I acknowledge it may be obscure I wouldn't go as far as calling it trivial. The event was part was part of The Gathering which was in itself an event of international significance. The fact that the hill of Tara was chosen also makes the event relevant as it reflects how the hill has developed into a modern tourist attraction on account of it's historic roots. Whether the people involved are non-notable is a different matter. ~~dickscawed
- I called it trivial because it is. Tara is a monument of historic significance. Occasional tourism publicity stunts are insignificant and don't belong in an encyclopedia. --Nicknack009 (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Conor / Conchobar
Hello, I noticed you reverted this merge. These names are different spellings of the same thing. On the article Donald for instance, Domhnall and Donal (as well as other spellings) redirect there, for a centralised discussion on the name. What would be the purpose of having several articles on the same name when they can be brought together efficiently? Claíomh Solais (talk) 10:26, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- I disagree. They are distinct names, and there is no overlap between them, so the two articles refer to distinct sets of people. Modern people with the name Conor are not called Conchobar, and medieval people with the name Conchobar are not called Conor, so a reader looking up "Conchobar" is not looking for people called Conor, and vice versa. --Nicknack009 (talk) 10:36, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- How is there no overlap between them when Conor is just an Anglicisation of Conchobar? Otherwise, "Conor" would just be jibberish word, without it's Irish context of "lover of hounds". I suppose you could make an argument that Connor is the most commonly searched in English so that might be a better centralised location, as the article on Donald is for example, which I would be open to. Look at articles like John (given name) or Paul (name) for example which gives an overview of the name and then discusses within it derivatives in other languages. Claíomh Solais (talk) 10:47, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- There is no overlap because they are used in different periods and in different languages. The medieval Irish kings listed under Conchobar are never referred to as Conor. The modern people listed under Conor are never referred to as Conchobar. Conor is not "just" an Anglicisation of Conchobar, it's now an English name in its own right. There are lots of names like that, and there is no "one size fits all" rule for how Wikipedia is to treat them. Different forms of the same name are not interchangeable. See, for example, William and Wilhelm for an example of two forms of the same name that have separate articles. Equally, Juan and Seán are eqivalent to John, but have separate articles. In fact, there is a disambiguation page for alternate forms for the name John, with links to dozens of separate articles. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:06, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I searched the WPBIO archives for 'legendary' and read the very few relevant hits --only four relevant, in contrast to the sense in which Charles Darwin is a legendary scientist.
Last October you notified ... and concluded, "I shall start removing legendary characters from the project." Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 49#Characters from Irish myth and legend.
- P64 (talk · contribs), that was a while ago. I think I completed it with the Irish characters, but I don't think I did anything with characters from other cultures. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
RfC: Renaming the Derry article
Hi Nick, are you able to respond to my question . Please help me out here. I'm trying to engage on this in a sensible manner so sarcastic comments aren't helpful . TY. Dubs boy (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
- Not being sarcastic. You asked me what policy was being followed. I linked you to that policy. As I explained to you before, the current naming is an agreed compromise. It's something a broad consensus can live with. But you do not appear interested in that - you want to win. All that would achieve would be to reopen a very tedious argument. Now, I have made my position on this issue clear more than once, please do not keep asking. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Whilst the section you moved the information too I feel is probably better for it and so won't argue about that, may I ask why you felt that the factual accuracy of the section was disputed? Everything that needed cited was cited and is in the sources attributed. The pre-existing literature section however does have issues that need addressed yet isn't tagged, but I'll get that to bit eventually. Work in progress ad all that. Mabuska (talk) 10:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- I just seen that you opened a talk page discussion of it at the article page. Mabuska (talk) 10:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nath Í mac Fiachrach, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A. M. Sullivan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I see only one source that state that he was real. There are many other scholarly sources doubt this. Due weight must be given and better detail given over the controversy over the issue. Then again the article ignores the reality that many scholars doubt the "fact" that all of Nialls sons are so. Mabuska (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting me
Lugaid Mac Con Roi
Hi, I see you've made a load of edits on the page for Lugaid Mac Con Roi...I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm not entirely sure if you added this particular piece of information or not, but it made me curious... "He took Lugaid's head and set it on a stone, but his blood melted the stone and the head sank right through it." I've never seen that anywhere but on this Wiki page, and was wondering where you read it (if you were the one to actually add it) Thanks! Nightpassing (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- I don't remember if I added that or not, but it's in The Death of Cú Chulainn in the Book of Leinster. I have the edition/translation by Bettina Kimpton in the Maynooth Medieval Irish Texts series, published by the School of Celtic Studies, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, in 2009. It's on page 46. --Nicknack009 (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
thanks for the information re: bio tags. these were good faith edits. sorry for the extra work.--FeanorStar7 10:46, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of The Drama of the Lost Disciples for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Drama of the Lost Disciples is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Drama of the Lost Disciples (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. North America1000 15:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I thought you might like to know that somebody is trying to delete your comments - and mine too - on the Cunobeline talk page. I have tried to engage with the editor, but he has now deleted these comments three times. I have reverted twice and will do so again if necessary. As far as I can see, an editor is not allowed to remove comments from a talk page in most circumstances. WallHeath (talk) 19:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I saw this revert to virtue signalling. I think it was probably right to undo the IPs edit but I wouldn't have marked it as minor and I would have given an explanation. The IP edit appears to be good-faith and the IP has given an explanation.
The easiest way to achieve the above is to use 'undo' instead of 'revert'.
Just a heads up, I neither need nor want deletion or merge notices, especially nor for anything less than an AFD. I keep track of articles I make so there's really no need to waste time informing me about it. I want my talkpage to be about actually discussing things, not cluttered up with notices about stuff.★Trekker (talk) 09:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Don't want everyone time
- Apparently I can't request the deletion of an article I made because it has an AD on it, why???? That doesn't make any sense. It will just take more time and effort than needed now.★Trekker (talk) 11:53, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
- In the length of time it took for me to compose a reply, the article was deleted. No need for any fuss - the system works. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:57, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just want apologies about how I acted recently. I know I kinda freaked out and got really confrontative, that was very childish and immature of me. I know I have some issues sometimes with my anger but that really is no excuse. I hope I did not cause any major disruption in your regular wikipedia editing enjoyment and work. Looking back now just a few days afterwards I feel pretty embarrassed by some of my comments. I know very well that you (just like me and any other decent editor) just want to hold the site to a good standard and follow guidelines (for example about what should be included and what not), I did not follow guidelines when I became uncivil and I hope you can forgive me for that. I'm trying to get better, but at times I fail, sometimes pretty hard. I'm sorry.★Trekker (talk) 15:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- No worries. I know it's hard not to take things personally sometimes. --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Your Judge Dredd PRODS
- Cheers. Coverage of Judge Dredd-related stuff here on Wikipedia is horribly bloated with stuff that clearly falls short of the notability requirements, and so much of it is really badly written "in-universe" fancruft. I really only scratched the surface. I may take it to AfD, but I'm not optimistic. Even when you do go to AfD no admins seem prepared to apply Wikipedia policy. They're only interested in "consensus", so the fancrufters are easily able to talk it out. When I have a bit more time to devote to it, we'll see. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Tuatha Dé Danann
Please read carefully: A Brief Guide to Celtic Myths and Legends, section 5, see here: "Tuatha Dé Danann who constitued a pantheon of gods whose attributes appeared in a number of forms across the 'Celtic world'". So it's sourced. If you think it can be discussed (and it can be), just provide another source, but don't write it isn't sourced. Thanks. GraemeKad (talk) 12:36, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Cuchulain of Muirthemne
Please read Cuchulain of Muirthemne - quote :
- With the help of Sean Connolly, she undertook an experiment in translation. Connolly, an Irish speaker, translated a section of the legend into spoken Irish, which she then returned, literally, to English.
It's a translation into english from the spoken irish.
- It does not say Connolly made a translation of Táin Bó Cúailnge. Táin Bó Cúailgne is not a synonym for "the legend of Cú Chulainn". It is a specific text telling a specific story. Lady Gregory's Cuchulain of Muirthemne is a collection of a variety of stories of Cú Chulainn, paraphrased from Irish. It is not a translation of Táin Bó Cúailnge in particular. Please learn the difference. --Nicknack009 (talk) 20:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- (It does not say Connolly made a translation of Táin Bó Cúailnge - I never said that - read it again - the text says Lady Gregory translated.)
- The Tain is not a specific text though is it? What constitutes the Tain depends on what (medieval) source you use. The modern "Tain" is contains many stories of the Ulster Cycle - some versions don't even include the pillow talk...
- The Tain as it stands eg the most modern tranlsations is 90% the adventures of Cuchulain , plus 10% the actually cattle raid.
- But this is not the point - you are not the judge here - the choice is made by what published sources say - not your opinion - in practically every translation of the Tain I have ever read Lady Gregory's work is given as an early, good translations of the stories therein.
- This is from Thomas Kinsella - "I emerged with the conviction that Lady Gregory's 'Cuchulian of Muirthemne', though only a paraphrase, gave the best idea of the Ulster stories" 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:29, 13 August 2018 (UTC) - Yes her work also contains the Deidre story - it's practically an incomplete Ulster Cycle - and the Tain is a subset of that -- again I note that of all the older translations modern translators such as Kinsella found Gregory's translation of note and worthy of general praise in the introductions to their own translations. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:29, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- You don't even understand that what you're quoting DOESN'T SUPPORT YOU! Kinsella says, LITERALLY, that Cuchulain of Muirthmne is a "paraphrase", NOT a translation, of "the Ulster stories", NOT the fucking Táin! Get it into you thick skull: the Táin and the Ulster Cycle are NOT THE SAME THING! --Nicknack009 (talk) 20:46, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Please be concientious
Please be careful when reverting edits in articles - you removed a source for Standish Haynes O'Grady's translation (in a compilation by E.Hull) in a recent edit - this was referenced twice in the article, using harvard referencing. Without the source those links do not work.
I assume you accidentally removed it from "Further Reading" by mistake when you meant to remove the Lady Gregory source ?
- No, I removed it intentionally from "texts and translations" because it's neither a text nor a translation of Táin Bó Cúailnge, it's a compilation of stories about Cú Chulainn, containing a partial translation of the Táin. I explained this in my edit summary. People are playing very loose with the definition of "text" and "translation". (I think the Harvard citation style is a bad move for Wikipedia because it makes it nearly impossible to edit, thereby removing the point of its existence, but that's another point.) --Nicknack009 (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
A goat for you!
Thanks for noticing and reverting my unintentional edits. I'm translating this page bit-by-bit for the Irish wiki (https://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leabhar_na_hUidhre) and mistakenly edited the English version, too. Sorry! Marcas
Defeat of Boudica
Nicknack009, you took part in discussions about the page of "Battle of Watling Street". I thought you would like to know I've changed the title as above. Best. WillE (talk) 22:06, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Can you please tell me why you keep reverting my changes to the macha page and why you think it is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinararara (talk • contribs) 21:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Why are you acting so hostile, i was never hostile to you, i just wanted to fit in something to the page explaining that the reason there is a connection to christian mythology was due to that
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
I am sure many will be declined. Some will go to AfD, some might be rescued by editors adding good sources/arguments. But hopefully some will be pruned without a need for AfD. As you might have noticed, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements is pretty swamped these days.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:41, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment in AfD for Academy of Law and others, but I'll note that you just commented. If you want your opinion to count you should vote in addition to it, with keep or delete. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:07, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:2000AD160.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:2000AD160.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)