User talk:Michael Bednarek/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

Hi there. I've looked at the talk page for this article and also the latest talk archive page and found, unsurprisingly, that most editors would prefer this article includes an infobox. I came across this as I was looking for basic biographical information about the article subject, and was very surprised to see that this article did not have an infobox, despite the majority of articles including one, and an even larger majority of biographical articles including an infobox. Could you please self revert to ensure that this article has an infobox? Thanks. Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I've looked through Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and its archives #14 & #15, and I can't find consensus in favour of an infobox. Two RfCs in those archives closed against an infobox. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

The current talk page shows that CactiStaccingCrane and Mottengott support including an infobox, with no expressed opposition. In the Archive 15, it is clear that Cj7557, KyuuA4, Here2rewrite, Politicsfan4, BigRed606, Rauisuchian, AvRand, Jojhutton, Sahaib3005, Furius, Morvahna, AHI-3000, DividedFrame, Antiok 1pie support an infobox being included as well. There is no explicit opposition there, though some editors saying that the issue was already settled, such as yourself.

I assume that you oppose including an infobox, completely separate from your assessment of talk page consensus, for what could certainly be supportable reasons that you may have held for years. However, you surely must agree that in 2023, Wikipedia editors today very broadly support including an infobox, and that this would also be the case for a biography article such as this one. In the spirit of wasting as little time as possible, can we set this dispute from the past aside and let the inevitable happen? You have the right not to let it go, but we would then be engaging in a process, such as a Request For Comment, which would end how we both know how it would. Thank you. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

If you think now is the time for the inevitable to happen, I suggest you make that argument at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes to get the wording of MOS:INFOBOXUSE changed. And no, I don't have any idea about the result of a future RfC at WAM. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

This is not about Wikipedia policy on infoboxes broadly applying to articles. This is about editors supporting an infobox on the Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart article in particular. Are you at least willing to not revert an infobox and seeing what happens? Onetwothreeip (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Not until a RfC recommends it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

David Lloyd George

Please don't change to sfn or harvnb. If you want to change referencing style you must get consensus first, on the article talk page. DuncanHill (talk) 10:55, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

The article on David Lloyd George was inconsistent in its citation style before my edit; it had 3 {{sfn}} and 82 {{harvnb}} citations, so that ship seems to have sailed a while ago. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Out of over 200. DuncanHill (talk) 22:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

IOW, inconsistent. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Isle of Wight? Anyway, whatever you might mean by IOW, there isn't a consensus to switch to a single style. So I'll be changing them back - you did make some helpful changes, so I won't be doing a blanket reversion. DuncanHill (talk) 23:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

(IOW, def #2) WP:CITEVAR deals with "an article's established citation style"; Lloyd George's article doesn't have that. Reverting e.g. the Crosby and Gilbert citations (unnecessarily repeated publication data) would not improve the article. In fact, a rigorous examination of the article's citations would discover works not cited in the article but listed under "Biography", like Bennett (1999), which should be under "Further reading". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Romani ite domum

The article Romani ite domum has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Handily fails WP:PLOT & WP:N (nominated at the request of User:Michael Bednarek)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I made no such request and reverted your PROD. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Romani ite domum for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Romani ite domum 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/Romani ite domum until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

— Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:57, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

grafton high school BT edit

why did u revert the notable alumni in grafton high school Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

He's not notable. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

MSO and Imelda Clancy.

Dear Michael,

The issue of Imelda Clancy as leader of the MSO is quite confusing! Bertha Jorgensen was certainly the first female leader of the Orchestra, and you will note that I have added ABC publicity as a source for this. The ABC is certainly a more reliable source than Punch magazine. Nevertheless, I looked at the article in Punch, and it does state that Imelda Clancy led the MSO in a version of Le Marsiellese. I suspect that she may have been an acting leader. However, as I said, the ABC is most certainly a better source for information than the little Punch magazine. Further, there are other sources than the ABC that show that Jorgensen was the first female leader (https://www.google.com/search?q=bertha+jorgensen&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBAU883AU883&oq=Be&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j46i131i199i433i465i512l3j69i60l3.8622j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) Albert Isaacs (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

You misread the article after my edit. It did not name Clancy as the leader of the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra but as the 1st violin. Imelda Clancy is mentioned in several concert reviews of the time and here; she deserves some mention in this article. Your removal of the Punch citation additionally dropped an interesting light on the history of the orchestra's name, at least as reported in the press. I suggest you restore the fundamentals of the previous version. I also encourage you to dig up an online source for the Wireless Weekly article from 29 July 1927. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Noel Coward template

Thanks for your support [at Template talk:Noël Coward musicals] on the template issue Britfilm (talk) 04:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate the photos you sent me. They are quite literally perfect, in terms of framing and composition. However, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ57 seems to have a known issue with autofocus that I've seen with other cameras from that era (Venus IX 2014) that leads to blurry images if you aren't aware of it, hence your problem. I will try to clean them up in post and see if I can salvage them, but please be assured, the problem isn't with your photography skills, the images themselves are perfectly composed. If you plan on continuing to use the camera, read up on how to use the autofocus feature as it will save you some trouble in the future. This article explains the known problem. Thanks again. Viriditas (talk) 11:58, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you asked me to notify you when I uploaded the photo. I have chosen to upload P1030769.jpg. It is the only photo of the painting that is in focus, more or less. And it perfectly demonstrates the large size at an angle, just as I requested, so I must thank you yet again. I will reply with the new file name in just a moment. Viriditas (talk) 10:57, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Image located here. Added to the article here. If you can think of a better caption, please modify it. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 11:51, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Italics in art song titles

Hi Michael. Re this revert: the MoS (which is often wrong anyway for my money) does not give any foreign-language examples of minor works. But surely Lieder with German titles are to be italicised for the same reason that it's right to italicise "Lieder". Is there guidance on this? What is your opinion? SaryaniPaschtorr (talk) 13:06, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia's MoS is a product of consensus and carries some weight. Deviations from it are likely to be corrected. The place to raise concerns about it are the relevant talk pages.

MOS:NAMESANDTITLES and MOS:NOITALIC cover the case of foreign language minor works and recommend quotation marks only, no italics. The words 'lied' and 'lieder' in lower case are loanwords, and are not italicised; see MOS:FOREIGNITALIC and MOS:FOREIGN. Whether it's a genuine foreign term when spelled in upper case, 'Lied', 'Lieder', seems debatable; generally, I wouldn't italicise them. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:14, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi there

How does the accepted key of an anthem was dubious. It has been establish in government sources. I tried to add them based on key signatures. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 00:50, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Reversing order of tables

If the list is just bullets I have a small program that reverse the order of each line.

For tables I use a text editor (one designed for programmers) that has a 'macro' function that I can use to reverse blocks; but then I need to manually take care of rowspans. Unfortunately I don't have an easier method right now. RJFJR (talk) 03:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Austria10

STOP IT STOP EDITING MY STUFF AND STOP DESTROING MY WORK ON ARTICLES Austria10 (talk) 16:13, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

AND GET YOUR REVERSING ORDER OF TABLES THING OUT OF HERE Austria10 (talk) 16:16, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

I recommend you read Help:Talk pages and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, especially WP:SHOUT. If you have concerns about my edits to specific articles, I suggest you raise those on the talk pages of those articles so other interested readers can participate. General displeasure uttered on my talk page cannot start a meaningful discussion. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:44, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

just stop it stop it right NOW AND LEAVE ME ALONE Austria10 (talk) 16:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

o by the way the YouTube video I noticed near the end of the 2nd movement I heard the main theme of the 3rd movement that's why I linked it Austria10 (talk) 14:52, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

and sorry for the fight Austria10 (talk) 14:55, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Mon cœur s'ouvre à ta voix

Thank you for fixing Mon cœur s'ouvre à ta voix the right way after my halfway measure. I'll keep {{Music repeat}} and <poem lang=...> in mind for future use. —Anomalocaris (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		Your answer to my Petscan question was great! Thanks for the app! Thinker78 (talk) 03:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Re: Lise with a Parasol

The honest truth is I want what is best for Wikipedia, and at the end of the day, that means sublimating my own self-interested, long-term grudge matches, ego, and all the rest of my foibles in pursuit of that goal. If you truly think converting the citations to templates as your preferred style is an overall improvement (Ordnung muss sein?), then I would encourage you to do it, and I won't stop you. Viriditas (talk) 21:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

==

Hello Michael

I have requested dispute resolution relating to the Cooman page.

There's no need to participate if you don't want to, as the main dispute is between me and Poketama. I only added you because you seem to agree that the article isn't written from a neutral POV.

Happy to discuss. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 01:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I dip my lid

Hi @Michael Bednarek - grateful for the tidy up you did for Alliance for Responsible Citizenship. In much better shape now. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 03:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Nationality of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nationality of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart 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/Nationality of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

SamuelRiv (talk) 15:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ==

Hello Michael

It looks like no one on the dispute resolution board wanted to get involved, so I listed it with the neutral point of view forum. Once again, there's no need for you to get involved if you don't wish to.

Thanks Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Threading issue at Template talk:Sfn

Hi, Michael. I was confused by the indentation level of your latest comment at Template talk:Sfn (diff). You appear to be replying to me and taking me to task, but I doubt that was your intent, as my comment was in pretty complete agreement with you. The "mind-numbing and discouraging" comment you quoted was by the OP, and if you meant to reply to them, as I'm almost certain you did, then you want only one colon before your message. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:11, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Or actually, since there's a section break between OP and your comment, maybe not. I think in that case it has to go flush left, but WP:THREAD doesn't address that issue I don't think. Mathglot (talk) 02:15, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see you just adjusted it; thats probably fine, as the same OP started the subsection as the section it's embedded in. Thanks for the quick action. Mathglot (talk) 02:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

"Notte e giorno faticar"

Dear Michael, thank you for checking both of my two last editions of Don Giovanni. It seems that we share quite a lot of common interest. However I would like to point out that the first number of the opera cannot be described as an "aria", but as an introduction, through which not only this opera begins, but also The Magic Flute, Una cosa rara and Il matrimonio segreto. You are welcome to check Mozart's own autograph manuscript if you want, and see for yourself the word "Introduzione". https://vmirror.imslp.org/files/imglnks/usimg/e/ef/IMSLP293279-PMLP36804-Mozart_-_Don_Giovanni,_Act_I.pdf Barr Epstein (talk) 10:07, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, "Notte e giorno faticar" is marked as Introduzione in the score, but IMO the phrase «cites the introduction "Notte …'» is a bit ambiguous – does Beethoven cite the introduction to this number? – so I reworded it to make it clearer. After all, it is practically an aria – an orchestral prelude, two verses of rhyming text, using several melodic phrases, almost 2 minutes long. Readers will be familiar with recitative, aria, duet, etc, but Introduzione will baffle those who have not read the score. But if you want to restore your wording, go ahead – I (almost) never revert twice; but it might be helpful for readers to use Introduzione in Italian. Cheers, Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:18, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Israeli peace song

Thank you for the lilypond for Hevenu shalom aleichem. I commented out "D minor" because your sample is "E minor". Modern German hymnals assume that D is the highest note a congregation can manage ;) - Where does E minor come from? -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I found many score sheets of this song in E minor, which I preferred over D minor because it doesn't start on the A below the system. Let me know if you want it to be changed – it only takes \transpose e d { … } to do that. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:32, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I like E minor, and just wondered, thank you for explaining ;) - I saw the EG version reproduced in the booklet for a wedding, and was one of the few actually singing. For Gotteslob, I noticed transpositions downward when going from the 1975 version to 2013, but this song is not in it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

November songs

my story today

Thank you for what you put into the peace song, making it survive, - my story today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

... and for your constant fight against ref template errors, and missing links! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Shalom chaverim

Today: in memoriam Jerome Kohl who said (In Freundschaft): "and I hope that they have met again in the beyond and are making joyous music together". Can you perhaps help to music for Draft:Shalom chaverim? I struggle with the Auftakt, and didn't even try a round yet. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I, too, miss Jerome often. // I made some changes to "Shalom chaverim" a few days ago, fixing the anacrusis (Auftakt) and adding lyrics. I'm not sure what else I can do. To have a round/canon played is very cumbersome using LilyPond, or any other notation program. All the parts need to be written out, and that score would overwhelm the Wikipedia article. As a first step, I can add numbers for the four cues (Einsätze). As a second step, I could notate the four parts and upload the resulting MIDI file to Commons and attach that to the score in the article. The question with that approach is: how many rounds does one use? Until the fourth voice has completed? Anyway, that's a lot of work, and the article is still a draft, and so many Kutsch/Riemens citations need fixing. Cheers, Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Michael, and sorry that I didn't see your changes, - perhaps I failed to take the draft (not by me) on my watchlist, or I overlooked it on my watchlist (that I try to shorten ...). Anyway, it's great as it is, thank you! - I began Langsamer Satz today, being the one on my to-do-list connecting to Jerome a bit. Too tired for more now, though. I heard it at the Casals Forum that I recommend highly in case you happen to come to the area. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Ernani is linked from the Main page, lovely work by Viva-Verdi, - now marked as needing more (inline) citations. Do you happen to know which refs support the uncited paragraphs? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:10, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Gerda! I couldn't let the challenge of a round remain unanswered, so I put a simple version in Draft:Shalom chaverim. Just remove the version you don't like. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:34, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo UniSC.svc.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo UniSC.svc.svg. 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) 18:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

FYI

About a classical music spammer you've been reverting, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hydrocolloid. Thanks for keeping an eye on that and setting me straight ... I didn't check the relevant diffs properly (checking diffs can be weird with screen readers). The one time I *don't* check a user's contributions ... and this happens! Graham87 (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

It's a confirmed version of the voice

Hello, dear Michael Bednarek, if you see my edits are confirmed in relative's Italian version of the same voice, due the fact I'm a relative of the person's voice. Pls go to see, thanks buddy ;) Nick31629 (talk) 08:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Your edit at the Italian version of Elena Mauti Nunziata is irrelevant. Wikipedia relies on reliable published sources, and they all give 1946 as her year of birth. Please restore the previous version of that article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Please then, if you know better than me (my mother's great aunt) how is that the year is 1946 instead 1944 how herself told me, some days ago? If you can give me a solution, then I'll change, else I'll do nothing. If you can't give me a peaceful solution, and you want change, we can talk with an administrator, instead of doing edit war. I'm coming in peace, anyway--Nick31629 (talk) 11:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't know any better; I just look at published reliable sources. Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. I have now restored the previous version. Please don't change it again without citing sources. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:37, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Nick31629 (talk) 13:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:Das-lila-Lied.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Das-lila-Lied.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for thanking me! (this is my first time being thanked!)

Hym3242 (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. I don't quite remember for which of your edits I thanked you, but I assume it was for some disimprovements by an anonymous editor at Candide and Leonard Bernstein. I don't "thank" often, but I was on the verge of reverting those edits myself, and I was glad you did. Cheers, Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Indeed they were! In addition to reverting them (politely), we should also help them know the rules and conventions, since most non-vandalizing anonymous editors do seem to want to do something useful but failed to do so. What message do you think should I leave on their talk page? Hym3242 (talk) 14:20, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

When I was sufficiently upset by edits, I picked templates from Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace, but I mellowed (or tired) enough, not to that often anymore. But if I read your intentions correctly, you probably have to hand-craft what is appropriate in the circumstances. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Hym3242 (talk) 14:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you ...

story · music · places

... for a constructive comment about the value of a list of compositions! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

I uploaded vacation pics (from back home), at least the first day, - and remember Aribert Reimann. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I listen to Bach's St John Passion today, - 300 years after it was first performed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Category:Klingon-language operas has been nominated for merging

Category:Klingon-language operas has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 13:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)