Talk:Adelaide Football Club

Someone is trying to alter history

Someone thought it was funny to enter the name 'Daniel Lawson' as Bronlow medalist for 2006-2009, as well as centre-half forward in the Team of the Decade (who I am pretty sure is meant to be Matty Robran). I removed the Bronlow Medal addition, but haven't fixed the team of the decade as I am not 100% sure if it is robran.

RE: Club Jumpers in finals

I thought I would add a piece about the club jumpers and their use in finals. I wrote the section used on the page, and wrote that the home jumper was generally used in all finals. This was recently changed so that the home jumper said "used in all home finals" and the away said "used in all away finals".

To my recollection, I can only ever remember us wearing an away jumper in a final once - the 2005 Prelim Final v West Coast. Any other away final we have still worn our home jumper. I had written it using the term "generally" as obviously if we were to play away to a clash team then i guess we would wear our clash jumper. But, generally speaking we do wear our normal home jumper. I have changed it back, but If anybody can prove to me that the club will now always wear their away jumper in all away finals, then i am willing for it to be changed. Cheers, Seth Cohen 10:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

Just adding to this, I have since re-written it and it was changed back again. One away final again in 2007 hardly constitutes that it will be worn at all away finals. When the away jumper was first slated in 1999, the club said that they would continue to wear the regular home jumper in all finals. They didn't in 2005 against West Coast - they wore the away jumper which at the time was predominately red - so as to avoid a potential clash with West Coast. For some strange reason this year (2007) the AFL forced us to wear our clash jumper against Hawthorn. I am still confident however that unless there is a clash, we will wear our home jumper in all finals whether they be at home or away. I still invite evidence to prove to me that this will not be the case. Until then, please leave as is. Cheers, Seth Cohen 14:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Adelaide90s.png

I found Image:Adelaide90s.png and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Adelaide90s.png

Image:Adelaide90s.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Ryan Fitzgerald

I removed him from the list of Famous Fans. I think being a former player disqualifies him. -- Karldoh 11:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Wizard Home Loans Cup Logo.gif

Image:Wizard Home Loans Cup Logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Crows Are Chokers

I think we should add a section to explain that the crows are chokers, and the fact that when they won their two grand finals it was under the old final structure.

We should also add that they have never lost a Grand Final by 119 points. In fact, they've never lost a Grand Final.

The camries have been spanked by an SA AFL record 141 points though....how humiliating.

Except the Power have that record...165 points v Hawks 2011...how extremely humiliating. Ouch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.241.12.137 (talk) 14:54, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:StKildaDesign.svg

Image:StKildaDesign.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Adelaide-2007-Away.gif

Image:Adelaide-2007-Away.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Adelaide-2007.gif

Image:Adelaide-2007.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:16, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Adelaide-2007Clash.gif

Image:Adelaide-2007Clash.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:2006 AFL Adelaide.jpg

Image:2006 AFL Adelaide.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CollingwoodDesign.jpg

Image:CollingwoodDesign.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Song

Am I correct in thinking that: a) the original club song was something that started with the line "Here we go, here we go Camry Crows" (!); b) that Greg Champion rewrote the song sometime in the mid-nineties to its present form, presumably because he hated the first version so much (certainly have to check that); and c) that the version of the song played at AFL grounds is also sung by Champion? Just trying to get a bit of history correct. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 23:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

1) Yeah, that song was the first song 2) The song was rewritten because it was no longer accurate - it had lines such as 'we're the new boys with so much to show' etc., and with Freo entering the comp, we were no longer the new boys, so someone - not sure who - was commissioned to write a new song with new music, and had nothing to do with liking/disliking the original (which I view as far better as the original). 3) No idea!

Club Jumpers

Can I just point out after a recent edit said that the clash jumper is worn more often now than the away jumper, that the comment was completely untrue. Firstly, this edit was made after the round 11 game against Richmond. To that point in the season, in five away matches, the away jumper had been worn twice, the clash twice, and the home once. The away jumper was redesigned for the purpose of limiting usage of the clash jumper. This information is already there in the article. A quick look at the fixture suggests that it is unlikely the clash jumper will be worn again this season.

The other part of the edit reffered to jumper usage in finals. I would like to direct you to a section above regarding jumper use in finals. I am still yet to have anybody show any hard evidence that all away finals will feature either the away or clash jumpers. Since the away jumper was introduced in 1999 (and subsequent clash introduction in 2006), only two of seven away finals have featured an alternate guernsey. I feel this stat shows that as a general rule, the main home hooped design will be worn in all finals, unless there is a clash.

Obviously I have reverted this edit. Sorry to be forceful on this issue, but obviously we want to have the information as accurate as possible. The statistics shown (and included in the article) effectively show the use of jumpers. Cheers, Seth Cohen (talk) 13:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Innapropriate Content on Discussion Page

There is some innapropriate and pointless comment on this discussion page, namely the sections "Future Delistings" (where the "F-Bomb" has been used and personal attack made) and "Crows are Chokers". Could someone who knows the rules for removal of this content please do so? I don't want to get in trouble for doing it the wrong way or anything. Let's keep this nice and amicable! Sem boy (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC) Sem boy (talk) 14:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

2008 Game Notes

These notes are getting quite long and I'm wondering if, at the end of the year, it would be better to summarise them into a short paragraph or two and create a new article about the 2008 season. This will ensure the main Adelaide page stays a reasonable size and the details accumulated throughout the 2008 season aren't lost. Any thoughts? --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 23:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

someone should create a new page for each year. just have asomething saying w-l-d on this page and have a seperate page to explain each game of the season 121.220.137.91 (talk) 05:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

i just thought the same this page is to long. just put in a results table with W.L.D% and POS with how far we went in the finals. and get rid of all these season summaries and create new pages ofr each one Riggy1990 (talk) 01:53, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

As foreshadowed in August 2008, I have created a 2008 Adelaide Football Club season page and summarised the 2008 game notes on this page - please feel free to comment on that page and offer suggestions. Eventually I'd like to see even these yearly summaries eliminated or put into a separate summary history page.--Perry Middlemiss (talk) 04:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

2009 Round 2 report

I don't see the point in saying that the free kick count of 30-11 was due to "poor umpiring decisons". This is opinion not fact. Also, I can't see how a side can be "punished" by the opposition "kicking to the northern end". They had to kick in that direction anyway. If the wind picked up markedly and that affected the game then it can be mentioned, otherwise the sentence makes little sense.

My aim with these reports is to give some brief overview of the games along with any interesting aspects (debutants, big bag of goals, major injuries etc) so at the end of the season it reads like an overview of the highs and lows. This is an encyclopedia so we need to be factual. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 02:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to cut down a lot of the information in the '2009' section, and turn it into a new article titled Adelaide Football Club season 2009, because the amount of information in this section, and is totally out of proportion to the rest of the article. Grandtheftwalrus (talk) 02:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Done Shadowmaster13 (talk) 06:52, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Rivalry

As The Adelaide Crows and Port Adelaide Football Club have a fierce rivalry it seems odd that the only mentions of the showdowns or the rivalry between them made in this article is within the season reviews,and as such this information could be missed by a casual reader. Shadowmaster13 (talk) 09:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Team Colours

I would like to point out that the official colours of the Crows are Navy Blue, Red and Gold. Can we please agree on the colours rather than continually changing them to whatever it that we think they are. [And here here is my source. Shadowmaster13 (talk) 12:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

1992, 1991 and prior - two small partial sentences?

There is practically no mention of their first two years in the AFL, as well as where they came from, how they developed. It's a big story, the SANFL not wanting to join AFL and the Port Adelaide influence etc. Anyone reading this would be terribly uninformed about the club. It's supposed to be an encyclopedia entry about a football club, not a summary of the seasons. 115.128.14.220 (talk) 03:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXITThe-Pope (talk) 04:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed as it gives a valid basis to mention the establishment of the Showdowns and why there is such animosity between the fans of both clubs Shadowmaster13 (talk) 05:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Club symbols sections is missing something vital

And that's a crow.

Nowhere in the article does it tell us why the club is called the Crows.

If there's any symbol that needs discussing, it's the crow. The Club symbols section is full of stuff about jumpers, but no crows.

Does anyone have some sourced information? HiLo48 (talk) 10:24, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Serious Problems

Having just read this article for the first time, it has some very serious problems. In particular, the history section:

• Cites no sources whatsoever for almost all of its content and appears to contain extensive WP:OR.
• Is written in an unencyclopaedic tone.
• Does not present a WP:NPOV.
• Uses weasel words.
• Is generally written in the style of a small-town newspaper, and one that needs to hire a more enthusiastic editor at that.

I'm tempted to just paste on article and section tags for all of the above, but wanted to start a discussion here before I charge in. Any comment? GoldenRing (talk) 13:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Comment June 5 2014: From someone who regularly visits and updates the information here, I think it is very difficult to maintain strictly encyclopaedic language on this sort of page. Simply summarising the team's results without giving clarification or reasoning behind their good or poor nature would give very inadequate information to the reader, defeating the purpose of the page.

I agree that much of what has been said ought to cite sources, however they are often so tedious to find that I just don't bother. If anyone has a lot of time (and old Advertiser newspapers) on their hands to look through this and add relevant sources, that would be appreciated. I can personally vouch that the information from the last 10 years is by and large accurate.

If you have any constructive suggestions as to how to improve the language of the article without compromising the information given, that would also be appreciated. As an aside, what are "weasel words"? 61.9.229.144 (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

A few points:

• Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Its purpose is to be an encyclopedia. If the purpose of this page is not to be encyclopedic, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia, it belongs somewhere else (like on the club's website.)
• Any editor is perfectly justified in deleting any unsourced material, which would be most of this article.
• "I can personally vouch that the information for the last 10 years is by and large accurate," is a prime example of original research.
• Weasel words are words that create the impression that something meaningful and specific has been said when in fact only something vague or ambiguous has been said. This is commonly done through unsupported attributions - "some people say", "many scholars state", "it is believed", "most feel" etc.
• The first concern is not to maintain all the information currently in the article, but to maintain a good encyclopedia. Otherwise you are not here to build an encyclopedia.
• Please indent your comments (I've fixed the comment above) and also sign them by putting ~~~~ after them.

I don't have much time to work on this at present, but might in a couple of weeks - I'll have a go at drafting something. GoldenRing (talk) 08:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment June 7 2014: Thanks for your time and explanations, GoldenRing. I do not have a Wikipedia account and update this page only as a hobby. If you think the information on the page isn't suited to the purposes of Wikipedia then fair enough. I'll defer to you as the expert on this. However, I do think this page serves a purpose that can't be found elsewhere, and as a consumer I would be disappointed to see the information deleted.

As I said in my previous comment, I think what needs to happen is someone to look over some old newspapers, reports and other sources of information in order to validate, complement and/or invalidate the information on this page. This would take a large amount of time and resources which I don't currently have, but hopefully someone reading this does. 61.9.229.144 (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2017

In former ground(s) please may you add in somewhere AAMI STADIUM. I know it is the same ground as Football Park but some people might want a more formal name or they might not recognize Football Park as AAMI STADIUM. ClassicFire (talk) 08:42, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

 Not done Wikipedia doesn't use sponsorship names in that way, Football Park is the formal name of the stadium. In addition, a link is provided for Football Park in former ground(s), and the articles first sentence refers to AAMI stadium, so users can find the information there, it doesn't belong in former ground(s). Flickerd (talk) 09:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Women's team

Now that the women's team has won the inaugural grand-final of the AFL Women's league (ie. AFLW grand final: Adelaide Crows edge Brisbane Lions by one goal after Erin Phillips masterclass, AFLW grand final: Adelaide Crows beat Brisbane Lions – as it happened), is it time for a separate breakout article? Coolabahapple (talk) 08:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Nobody seems to want to discuss this, but the issue has been raised again. My reading of previous discussion at WikiProject Australian rules football doesn't really provide a clear consensus. There did seem to be a view that the AFLW teams are likely to have their own articles at some point. Having won a premiership and received plenty of press, the Adelaide Crows women's team seems to have achieved independent notability. Is now the time? Jack N. Stock (talk) 02:26, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

2 years later (the day of the 2019 GF), surely it's a no-brainer to do it now, for all AFLW clubs. The competition is much more mature than 2 years ago, and there is plenty for an article on AFLW clubs - but especially Adelaide. Adpete (talk) 07:01, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I decided to be WP:BOLD and do it. Adpete (talk) 07:20, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I think that if it's to be done for one club, it should be done for all clubs, and that a consensus should be achieved first before doing so – for that reason, I've restored the redirect for now, but I definitely think it can be done, provided there's enough coverage of all clubs. 4TheWynne^{(talk)(contribs)} 12:31, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

OK, discuss at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australian_rules_football#Time for AFLW clubs to have their own pages? Adpete (talk) 03:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Adelaide Football Club. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100619232001/http://www.sanfl.com.au/the_sanfl/history_of_the_sanfl/ to http://www.sanfl.com.au/the_sanfl/history_of_the_sanfl/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100727232150/http://www.afc.com.au/afc%20-%20the%20start/tabid/4493/default.aspx to http://www.afc.com.au/afc%20-%20the%20start/tabid/4493/default.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100727232150/http://www.afc.com.au/afc%20-%20the%20start/tabid/4493/default.aspx to http://www.afc.com.au/afc%20-%20the%20start/tabid/4493/default.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120512223607/http://www.afc.com.au/staff%20members/tabid/4517/default.aspx to http://www.afc.com.au/staff%20members/tabid/4517/default.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://afc.com.au/TheClub/History/TeamoftheDecade/tabid/4499/Default.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/aflw/adelaide-crows-book-place-in-aflw-grand-final-after-comefrombehind-win-over-collingwood/news-story/854d1b3a053e3104e81e8286a856a348

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Rivals

Not sure if I should add something about port Adelaide been our rivals Prestothelegend (talk) 07:38, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

2018 Adelaide Crows pre-season camp

Crazy that there is only one line about this on the page. It has its own page! I'm going to add reference to it MaskedSinger (talk) 18:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)