User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 114

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Singapore Penal Code update

Hi there, I saw the message. Would anyone be able to tell me how to update the sections of the Penal Code without a copy from the AGC? Because some of the sections are clearly outdated. Thanks. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 03:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

TheGreatSG'rean, I'm at a loss. In the US, the specific wording of statutes is deemed to be pd, so there is no problem reproducing the text. I have only the tiniest sliver of a possibility—a recent US Supreme Court decision decided that Georgia’s official annotated code could not be copyrighted. This goes beyond the code itself, and covers annotations. You aren't interested in annotations, but I bring this case up because the annotations may well have copyright notices attached, so I wonder if the Supreme Court of Singapore might have ruled that the Penal Code is pd, despite the notice on the page. Another possibility is that it sometimes occurs that an organization slaps a copyright notice on the bottom of their pages, even when some of the content may actually be pd.
That option doesn't sound likely as their TOU state:

(3) The materials, including but not limited to Singapore’s legislation, text, compilations, graphics, images, software programs and all other kinds of works, located on this Website (the “ Contents ”) are protected by copyright, trademark and other forms of proprietary rights. All rights, title and interest in the Contents are owned by, licensed to or controlled by AGC.

I'm going to ping a couple copyright experts, in hopes that they might have a thought @Diannaa, Moneytrees, and MER-C: (This relates to this edit using material from this site with this test at the bottom of the page:
Copyright © 2020 Government of Singapore. All rights reserved.
Singapore Statutes Online is provided by the Legislation Division of the Singapore Attorney-General's Chambers.
Last updated on 4 May 2020) S Philbrick(Talk) 11:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
I was unable to find anything that indicated works of the Government of Singapore is in the public domain. Here is the copyright act.— Diannaa (talk) 12:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Diannaa, Thanks for finding that. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
If that's the case, is there another way to update the PD without the text? Cause there are sections that are clearly outdated, which I have fixed. If the issue is about the copies, I will trim it. I will ping this to WikiProject SG. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
TheGreatSG'rean, I understand the difficulty of discussing penal statutes without using the exact words. While it makes a lot of sense, in many articles, to insist that the editor generally write in their own words, the exact wording of statutes is important to discussing those statutes. That why I think it is so common for most countries to make the text of official documents free of copyright.
If our own article Copyright_of_official_texts is accurate, almost all countries declare that official texts are pd. I noticed that Singapore is a signatory to the Berne Convention, and I had hoped that Convention might encourage the pd status of official texts, but as the opening paragraph of Copyright_of_official_texts indicates, The Berne Convention " left to the discretion of each member country of the Berne Convention to determine the protection to be granted to such official texts in that country".
I did find a small exception for material intended for the disabled Singapore Copyright, but that's not remotely broad enough to help, and arguably hurts—why on earth would you design special legislation to carve out an exception for works intended for the disable if the source text is already pd.
I hope someone can come up with a better answer, but at present, I think we need to remove the copied text of the Statutes. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Ok. I will request copyvio. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 16:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio at Debnath

Hi, Sphilbrick. If this edit is a copyright violation (which it certainly reads like), would you please consider warning Morriscollege420? Copyright with its templates and searches is not my forte, and the user is edit warring to reinsert it. Bishonen | tålk 12:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC).

PS, I have posted a hand-knitted warning, but I don't know what-all formalities we're supposed to tell them about copyright. Bishonen | tålk 12:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC).
Bishonen, I chimed in. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Cool, thanks. Bishonen | tålk 15:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC).

DuVal County

Sorry to be slow. Expanded ref (redundantly, IMHO) to: Lynch, Dudley M. (January 1, 1976). The Duke of Duval: The Life and Times of George B. Parr. Waco: Texian Press. pp 8-10. ISBN 978-0-87244-044-9. LCCN 76-54438. Retrieved 2013-09-09. AndersW (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Anders.Warga, I'm guessing this relates to this edit
However, while references are necessary, they aren't sufficient to cure a copyright problem. The edit included text from this site, which is very likely to be subject to full copyright. While the page has no notice, all material created recently is automatically fully copyrighted, unless it is specifically licensed in a way that permits further use. I don't see such a license. If you are aware that the text is licensed, please share that information. Otherwise, you can use the site as source material, and reference it, but you should write the text in your own words (with rare exceptions for short quotes). S Philbrick(Talk) 12:07, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Anders.Warga, Sorry, I missed that you identified the source as a book, not the website I listed, as an aside, that means the County of Duval appears to have copied the material verbatim form the book. I wonder if they obtained written permission. On the third page of the book, there is a clear copyright notice. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Sphilbrick: Sorry, Google books isn't showing me content, and I don't now have access to hard copy of Lynch book. It was likely an inter-library loan, and pandemic precautions here make that unavailable. Is there reason to believe some of History section was copied verbatim from Mr Lynch's book? (BTW, link above leads me not to Lynch's copyright page, but to image of p. 408 in a bibliography that cites Lynch's book.)
Confident Duval County site was unknown to me until you mentioned it. Might that text have originated in Wikipedia article? (My edits were in 2013..That page first appears in Wayback Machine empty in September 2015, with text in question in March 2016.)
Please stay safe and healthy, whereever you are. --AndersW (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Request for copy of recent John DePol edit

Hello, I recently edited and added some information to the John DePol page on Wikipedia. I am a graduate assistant in Special Collections at the University of Delaware, and we are using the department's finding aids to edit relevant Wiki pages. I understand why you reverted my edits to the wiki page because it was a copyright violation with the finding aid. We are in the process of obtaining a Creative Commons license, which will hopefully rectify this problem in the future.

In the meantime, I was wondering if you would be willing to send me a copy of my edits to the page? I don't have a copy elsewhere, and would like to retain one for my records. I will not edit the page further until we have updated the copyright information on the finding aid. Thank you. Artsohard (talk) 17:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Artsohard, (New edits to a talk page go at the bottom). Can you turn on your email? Go to preferences, first tab, near bottom, let me know if it isn't obvious. Then I can send it to you. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, sorry about that. I believe I have now updated my preferences, but let me know if you have any issues. Thank you very much. Artsohard (talk) 18:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Artsohard, It's not pretty, but sent. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Sphilbrick thank you! Artsohard (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Pocketbikes

I recently expanded the Pocketbike page, and you reverted it to a redirect tag for Minibikes, citing copyright issues and providing a link to a definition that is both informal and inaccurate. Despite the visual attributed associated with Pocketbikes and minibikes, mechanically and purposefully they are significantly different, and the page should not be a redriect. Could you please further clarify your reason for making the page a redirect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastcalls (talk • contribs) 15:10, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Lastcalls, I didn't "make it" a redirect. It was a redirect. You changed it, and it appears to me that you did so while including copyrighted material. Perhaps I made a mistake, but let's discuss. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Lastcalls, I'll also note that I did not "cites an inaccurate definition of pocketbike" I identified what appeared to be the source of the text you added. Again, I may be wrong, but let's discuss. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:42, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

I apologize and see what happened. The page you linked to lead with an inaccurate description, and I did not realize there was text below the ad on the page. I clearly see what the copyright issue is, and will correct it. In my defense, I didn't actually write the section on the new page that contained the copyright issue, I cut and pasted some bits from the minibike page I was cleaning up due to inaccuracies and clutter, and did not verify the content. This is also why I changed the pocketbike redirect, because directing to minibikes is not accurate. I will correct the copyright issue within the previous text and repost. Thank you bringing it to my attention.

Also, please give me a an hour to edit the Minibike page, as it appears the article you cited from the Pocketbike page was heavily plagiarized on the minibike page previous to my edits (explaining the incorrect and glutted situation there), and I will need to vet what information I left on that page for copyright issues.

Lastcalls Sounds good. You mentioned you were copying from another Wikipedia article For future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.S Philbrick(Talk) 16:06, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

I will do this in the future. This is the first time I've had the experience where moving information from one page to another that turns out to be copyrighted material, but this is a learning experience and I will take this information for the future. Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lastcalls (talk • contribs) 16:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Reverted Edits Made on an Article

Hi Sphilbrick,

This is Infoman400. I just wanted to reach out to you concerning the fact that you recently undid all the work I did to help contribute to an article. Yes, I realize I might not be the best at putting researched information in my own words, but at the very least I cited my sources. I am simply trying to help get the article to B-class status. I am not a jerk who is trying to vandalize the wiki, I just want to help out a bit by improving what I can on one of the articles I found under level 2 vital articles. I am not mad, I'm just a bit sad that all the work I did in researching "human prehistory" has just been wasted just because I don't know how to paraphrase. Do you have any suggestions for how we can fix this issue while putting my contributions to the article back up?

Infoman400 (talk) 15:20, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Infoman400, You could start by telling me which article you ar talking about. Yes, I can figure it out, but it would be easier if you tell me. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:28, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Infoman400, I found it. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Infoman400, Here is the ithenticate report:
https://api.ithenticate.com/en_us/dv/0425?lang=en_us&o=58400022
This is not a close call.
No one called you a vandal, not even remotely, not even a hint. But you did copy material which is not licensed in a way that can be used. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I just checked the license for the article I used and it says "you are free to share- copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format". I'm pretty sure that as long as I cite the original article, I can take bits from the source. Either way, I apologize if I got a bit upset with you. I'm new at editing Wikipedia and so I'm not really good at it. I guess if I find a good source online that I have to put the information in my own words. Kind of like being school, copying word for word what an article says is called plagiarism. Do you have any suggestions to ensure that this doesn't happen again with any edit I make? I really want to help, I'm just not sure where to start.

Infoman400 (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

How do most other editors on the site do research on an article? Is there any pages you could point me to for people that are new at contributing to Wikipedia? Thanks, Infoman400 (talk) 21:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Infoman400, The article under discussion is Prehistory.
The source of the text is this page
The licensing at the bottom of the page says:
Some Rights Reserved (2009-2020) under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license unless otherwise noted.
I didn't see the wording you just supplied. Can you point me to it? If it is acceptable, then you merely need to provide attribution and I can help you with it, but I'd like to see something that clearly indicates the license I just quoted does not apply. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:11, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Infoman400, In terms of advice, I'll start my mentioning an approach many new editors follow which gets them into trouble. They find a good source, copy and paste the relevant section, then, realizing that they should not plagiarize, make some rewording edits to the material. However, this usually results in Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing.
A better approach is to read the source (ideally, multiple sources), put them aside and then write down the points you wish to add in your own words. Take a look at the source before adding the edit, to make sure you didn't get anything wrong, as well as making sure your memory wasn't so good that you managed to reproduce the original. Then add the edit and the source. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

June 2020 at Women in Red

Women in Red

June 2020, Volume 6, Issue 6, Numbers 150, 151, 167, 168, 169

Online events:


Join the conversation: Women in Red talkpage

Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Renaissance Workshop Company

At the end, everything about the Renaissance Workshop Company has been removed in favour of the Early Music Shop in Saltaire. As usual.

Fortunately, the truth will keep being the truth independently what is stated in the wikipedia.

Kind regards 81.34.79.85 (talk) 20:56, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't know what action you were hoping for so I'm not going to do anything, unless I have a bit of a clue. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
I don't know either, but they've been spamming apparently random talk pages for the last few minutes with this message. Perhaps something to do with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renaissance Workshop Company. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Suffusion of Yellow, Thanks, but my list of things I want to do is making my eyes water. I have no interest in playing detective to guess at what this editor wants. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:13, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, Suffusion of Yellow, I'm sorry, I fear this is partially my fault: I advised that IP in response to their initial version of this message on my talk page (many hours before the spam) that they might want to contact the closing admin if they wanted to retrieve the WikiText of the article they were working on that got deleted. They seem to have interpreted that advice as... well, this. Anyway, apologies for having brought this to your door, and I hope this clears up some of the confusion. YorkshireLad  ✿  (talk) 22:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
YorkshireLad, If someone wants some text that was removed, I'm happy to help. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, Thanks! I will refer them to you if they come back to me. As it happens the relevant IP address is currently blocked, but that expires tomorrow so they may show up again. YorkshireLad  ✿  (talk) 20:21, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Revision to the article Screenwriters Association

Hi, I had made quite a lot of updates to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screenwriters_Association today but you seem to have unilaterally reversed all the edits. I dont understand why when I have mentioned the sources with external links and I'm an executive member of the Screenwriters Association and my edits are all legit. You have reverted the page to its 2016 old version. Can you advise me as to why this has been done and what can I do to reinsttate the edits I have doneSumeetS (talk) 13:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC).

SumeetS, Given your position, you should read Wp:COI, which will probably explain why you should not be directly editing the article at all. I reverted your edits because they were copyright violations. Identifying the source does not constitute an exception to copyright policy. Please ask if you want a more complete explanation. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

SumeetS (talk) 13:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)SumeetS

SumeetS, Did you notice that I provided an explanation on your talk page? See User_talk:SumeetS. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:47, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Dr. Krishnam Raju Penmetsa

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Dr. Krishnam Raju Penmetsa, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Fuddle (talk) 16:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Your attention to cleaning up copyvios such as this is hugely appreciated. I'm not sure if you're aware, but there is a thread at AN/I discussing the various concerns, including copyright violations, with many accounts associated with the 1lib1ref.org project. No reply necessary, just an FYI (and a thank you). -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:53, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Ponyo, I was not aware of that thread, but starting to wonder if I should start one. I'll check it out, but give me a sec, I'm working on another one :) S Philbrick(Talk) 00:55, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Warning: it's not pretty and involves hundreds and hundreds of edits. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 00:57, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

added CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
removed Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

removed SQL

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

March of the Living 2020 Program Update

Hello,

I updated the March of the Living page to reflect the cancellation of the 2020 program due to Covid-19. I footnoted all of the sources, nothing was copyrighted or copied from another wiki page, so I am wondering what is the issue so I can fix the problem.

I believe your issue is with the below so can you please advise:

“This year, for the first time in 32 years, we are not able to march in Auschwitz-Birkenau, but that will not stop us. We will continue to educate the next generation with the values we have been teaching for three decades.”Dr. Shmuel Rosenman, March of the Living Chairman, “[1]

“We were bitterly disappointed to have to postpone this year’s March of the Living. However, we remain utterly determined to ensure that the unparalleled tragedy of the Holocaust remains at the forefront of the world’s conscience. Given the distressing recent rise in global antisemitism and today’s need for greater compassion and tolerance, the lessons of the Holocaust are more relevant than ever,” March of the Living president, Phyllis Greenberg Heideman.[2]

Israel’s President Reuven Rivlin, the first to lay a virtual plaque, wrote this in his message: “75 years after the Holocaust the terrible tragedy of our people as antisemitism raises its ugly head once again across the world the nations of the world must stand together. Together in the struggle against racism. Together in the struggle against antisemitism and extremism. Together for the protection of democratic values and human dignity. This is the mission of our time. This is our challenge..”[3]

Thanks,

Eli

References

  1. ^ "March of the Living launches Virtual Holocaust Remembrance Initiative".
  2. ^ "March of the Living launches Virtual Holocaust Remembrance Initiative".
  3. ^ "March of the Living launches Virtual Holocaust Remembrance Initiative".
@Uiaeli: Here is a link to the iThenticate report:


iThenticate
it shows substantial overlap with copyrighted sources.S Philbrick(Talk) 19:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


Hello, I am responding to the lines below. 1)@Uiaeli: Here is a link to the iThenticate report: When I clicked on this link it asked me to pay a fee of $100.00 to register with iThenticate to see the report. Is this what you are expecting me to do?

iThenticate it shows substantial overlap with copyrighted sources.S Philbrick(Talk) 19:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC) 2) This comment appears to be cryptic. Since I cannot open the link above, can you be more specific about the "substantial overlap with copyrighted source” you claim is taking place? The only copyrighted sources are short quotes from on line newspaper articles which is commonly done all over Wikipedia and virtually everywhere else and are allowed by the publications themselves. This is the article: https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/march-of-the-living-launches-virtual-holocaust-remembrance-initiative-624615

Thank You, Eli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uiaeli (talk • contribs) 20:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Uiaeli, No sorry, I thought it would be available to you. I thought I had shared links before with no issues. You write:
Israel’s President Reuven Rivlin, the first to lay a virtual plaque, wrote this in his message:
The copyrighted article says:
President Reuven Rivlin was the first to place a virtual plaque, writing:
That's a close paraphrase, and doesn't involve the material in quotes.
The three quotes were 42 words, 65 word and 62 words.
It is my opinion that three quotes totaling 169 words doesn't qualify as "brief".
However. I have reverted the revdel, I'm asking you to rewrite the section noted above, and let other editors weigh in on the acceptable length of the quotes, if you choose to re-add them. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you S Philbrick for explaining the above. I will rephrase the text about President Rivlin so it's less identical. We'll wait and see how other editors feel about the length of the quotes. Thanks Again, Eli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uiaeli (talk • contribs) 20:14, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Uiaeli, Thanks. I understand the difficulty of rephrasing. I often say it isn't hard, but I didn't see a simple solution or I would have suggested it myself, but I thank-you for committing to make the effort. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:25, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for responding so quickly. All the best, Eli — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uiaeli (talk • contribs) 15:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Iowa PBS

“ You obviously have a lot of experience so it seems unlikely that you would violate copyright policy but your edit included material closely matching a copyrighted site so I'm reverting until we figure out what happened and if there's a good explanation I will be happy to undo my reversion. S Philbrick(Talk) 01:32, 7 June 2020 (UTC)”

Some content was from an earlier vandalizing editor (Virginia based), without citations, which I was trying to clean-up, instead of completely reverting (may be easier). Do as you wish with it. Beatgr (Talk) 01:42 7 June 2020 (UTC)”

@Beatgr: That makes sense; sorry I missed what was happening. I restored the edit.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

copyvio

In 2017, you cleaned up an article for copyvio. But it looks like you didn't do a complete job since a whole second paragraph copied from the blogspot citation was still left there, maybe because the blogspot URL is broken. You can visit the correct page by replacing the blogspot.in with blogspot.com. Also, the article should be moved to Sheikh Chilli (Sufi saint) since only the second copyviod paragraph is about the character, the rest is about the real deal. Regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 15:43, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

TryKid, It sounds like you know exactly what to do, can you take care of it? S Philbrick(Talk) 16:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
okay I've removed the copyright material and placed Revdel copyvio on the page. I'll later move too. Thanks 😊. Regards, TryKid [dubious – discuss] 16:32, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
TryKid, Someone beat me to it doing the Revdel. Thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

About a edit revision

In my talk page you added a discussion aboit this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wurt_Pit_and_Devil%27s_Punchbowl&type=revision&diff=961257865&oldid=961217548 I am really very sorry but I didn't understand what's wrong. I you explain me in brief this will help me in future Md Maruf Parvez (talk) 16:13, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Md Maruf Parvez, My edit summary reads:
Copyright issue re https://www.showcaves.com/english/gb/karst/WurtPit.html
It looked to me like you're at it was substantially the same as the material at that link. that material appears to be fully copyrighted and not licensed in a way that can be used in Wikipedia. Do you think I'm missing something? S Philbrick(Talk) 21:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

How iy cam be licensed to be used it wikipedia? Can you please explain. Md Maruf Parvez (talk) 15:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Md Maruf Parvez, This page WP:DCP should explain everything. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sphilbrick/Archive_114&oldid=968892937"