User talk:ZephyrAnycon

A prior version of this userpage was nominated for deletion on 15 April 2007.
The result of the discussion was No consensus, Default Keep.

To Paul

To Paul: do you think I'm any good then?
Your control of metre in 'Of a Bee-swarm' is highly impressive, but you must change 'uninspiring supermarket'!
For some reason my favourite poems of yours are the shortest – they're uncanny.

Paul: yes I think you are good. You require, as we all do, a greater and more subtle control over formal aspects of poetic art. Thankyou for liking my poems - it is always easier to write a short poem - but the poem I like on this page is this (amended):

yellow peaches grown

fat on summer warmth;

Funky. You are kind. I have just written an essay on the Theory of Riddles. Shall see you at the Ricks lecture tomorrow (well actually today), I presume? ZephyrAnycon 05:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answered your question

You'd asked something about the usage of 'unity', over at Wilcox-McCandlish law; answered in its Talk section. --SMcCandlish

images tags

Hi, I changed the {pd} tag to {fairuse} on Image:Menand.jpg which you just uploaded. If you aren't 100% sure something is in the public domain (the rules are fairly specific), it is best to tag something as "fairuse", even though it is a somewhat problematic classification. Also, it improves accountability to include the web page where you found the image. IANAL. -- Viajero

Funny Guy?

Thanks.

-G

Pleʒ

-B

Image:EBayLogoTM.gif

Hi. I have listed Image:EBayLogoTM.gif on User:Smoddy/Fair use assessment, where I am checking fair use claims. I don't believe this image is verifiably fair use, and if you don't respond in a week, I shall list the image on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you don't think the image should be deleted, please go to that page and state your views, and your justification for fair use. Cheers, [[Smoddy]] 13:31, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Derrenbrown.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Derrenbrown.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. The JPS 00:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair's degree

In John Rentoul's biography of Blair, it states that he had a good second class degree. However, I don't think Oxford University divided its second class degrees into class 1 and 2 until long after Blair left. Do you have a source for the claim that he actually got a 2:1 as opposed to a result which would have got him a 2:1 if the second class had been divided? David | Talk 18:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes

Greetings! You have edited the Katie Holmes page in the past. I've completely reworked the article and have posted it on WP:PR in the hopes of advancing it to WP:FAC. I would be grateful for your comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 18:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Margtims.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Margtims.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then 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 you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 04:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Wood (critic)

Image:Woodbw.jpg

The photographer of the image you uploaded contacted us, telling us the image was taken for the New York Times. This image is not fair use, and certainly not "public domain", as you had marked it. -- Zanimum 16:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cjs.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cjs.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Chowbok ☠ 20:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Alden.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alden.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} 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 you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. 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 00:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 00:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More replaceable fair-use images

Image:Dylmor.jpg

—Chowbok ☠ 03:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Göthe’s Oak in Buchenwald

If you have a source for the bit about Göthe’s Eiche in the perimeter of Buchenwald, please cite it (see WP:ATT). Further, could you relate some significance of the tree’s being there? As the statement stares, it doesn’t seem relevant to the article, and its presence would kind of conflict with the Nazis’ rationale for not wanting the name the place association with Göthe or the Ettersberg. Thanks, Jim_Lockhart 06:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:F&f.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:F&f.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Timmins lg.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Timmins lg.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Uafanthorpe.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Uafanthorpe.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 23:45, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hill

Don't worry too much about the occasional 'misunderstanding' ... they happen quite a bit ... I think editing as an anonymous IP rather than a logged in account immediately puts many editors on guard. I'd like to expand the Hill article quite a bit, but I'd like to do it with enough footnotes and listed references so that it is clear that there are reliable sources to back up the content. I'll try to find time to do a bit on this over the next few days. Thanks for your contributions ... they help push the article in the direction it needs to go. Stumps 13:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like your suggestion of a chronological account of the career - the details and fair-use quotes could possibly go in articles dedicated to each of the books. I started one on Without Title just over a year ago. I don't think any of the other books have their own articles yet. I take your points about the 'no original research' policy issue, but I've found that - for me anyway - there's plenty of good work that can be done within the accepted Wikipedia policies, and any attempts to wade into an argument about the details of a policy ends up consuming a lot of time and energy. Stumps 04:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK ,let's start with putting what we can into the main article ... if one book's section gets too long we can put it into its own article and summarize that article in the Hill article ... that is a fairly standard approach. There are many pages devoted to individual poetry collections, although a lot of them are pretty disappointing. I see nothing against it ... individual compositions (sonatas, concertos, symphonies) generally get their own article, and I think a poetry collection is a reasonable analogy for that. Having said that, of course there needs to be enough interestimg, referenced, and encyclopedic material to make the article worthwhile ... that's why I started with the contemporary critical reception of Without Title ... it is at least easily referenced, and is probably of lasting interest. But, yes, let's start by putting what we can in the main article. Perhaps we can start with a discussion on the talk page about possible section headings? Stumps 03:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Whishaw.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Whishaw.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Margtims.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Margtims.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AgByrCov.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AgByrCov.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Merchant1.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Merchant1.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 21:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bellow.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Bellow.JPG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: John Harris (critic)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as John Harris (critic), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/review/3129131.stm, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:John Harris (critic) and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:John Harris (critic) with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:John Harris (critic).

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:John Harris (critic)/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:John Harris (critic) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Oxonian2006 (talk) 14:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Hfoster.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Hfoster.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 19:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Cpkindleberger.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Cpkindleberger.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello ZephyrAnycon! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Hal Foster (art critic) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 15:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Ericecam.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Ericecam.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, ZephyrAnycon. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, ZephyrAnycon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, ZephyrAnycon. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

52005 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 52005. Since you had some involvement with the 52005 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:43, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]