Loading AI tools
Archive 1 (April 2006 - September 2006 incl)
Hi Cowboy, sorry to dump my message here again, you need to tell me the most appropriate place to put it. I wrote the article on Godskitchen, it`s basically a blow by blow account of what they have beeen up to as I have been a regular attendee at their nights for about 8 years. However, the article is still only being treated as a stub, is there any way to make it into a proper entry? Cheers again for the advice - SteveSircull
Zzyzx11 | Talk 17:22, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, ill head off down into the places you said, erm ill dig up some history on the site, i know it has declined in recent years (the blue lagoon) thanks again (Neostinker 18:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC))
Thanks for letting me know about the changes but thats all fine, as long as it looks more organised, at the moment i dont think i am going to the bowl but if i do ill send you some of the pictures, maybe a flower show or something. Let me know if you need any others pics of MK, im a local!!!
The changing of the founding date is almost certainly false. I have reverted the edit. Qwghlm 14:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I see you made a new category "Field hockey venues". I've been intending to something similar in another topic. Can you tell me where the process of creating a new category is documented, please? --Concrete Cowboy 11:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- All you need to do is enter a non-existent category in an article (copy the format of an existing category). Then click on the red link that will appear at the bottom of the page to start the new category. Otherwise there is no difference between creating a category and creating a new article. Choalbaton 13:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
They're not that hard. :) Follow the instructions in WP:AFD#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion - all you have to do is copy the template tags into the relevant articles. Really simple version follows:
- Add {{subst:afd1}} at the top of Franchise F.C., and save
- Follow the red link created (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Franchise F.C.)
- In that empty page, paste in {{subst:afd2 | pg=Franchise F.C. | text=whatever }} ~~~~ (with your reasons instead of whatever) and save
- Add {{subst:afd3 | pg=Franchise F.C.}} to the bottom of today's deletion log (probably Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_February_1 but use the CLICK HERE link on the AfD guide to be sure)
And you're done! Quite painless, really. Qwghlm 23:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Its just that its quite 'p.o.v.' to call that a franchise move, since its not generally considered as one. Grimsby Town F.C. have been playing in Cleethorpes for years but it's not considered a franchise; Partick Thistle left Partick for Maryhill, but again this is not considered franchising. Indeed, I was tempted to remove Arsenal from the list too but left it as I'm less aware of the situation. However, during the Selhurst Park era the club was never referred to as being franchised out, and it would be wrong of WIkipeida to suggest that moving within a larger conurbation necessairily makes it so. Robdurbar 23:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Interesting... I think that there is a place but the text needs to be re-worded to show that you're clearly talking about the relocation of clubs. I think perhaps two sepearte sections might be relevant here - one discussing the Wimbledon move to Milton Keyenes - and one discussing the various relocations, including Selhurst Park. Robdurbar 08:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment. I'm afraid that because "sports franchising" is a UK term, a British person is going to have to work on the article. I'll do what I can, though. -- Mwalcoff 23:57, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Pursuant to the discussion, the former "Sports franchising" article has been moved to Relocation of professional sports teams. For now, I've turned Sports franchising into a redirect to franchising, as most of the links to it had little to do with relocation. -- Mwalcoff 03:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- No offense or anything, but I think you're stuck on the word "franchise." As far as I know, the fact that American sports teams are "franchises" has nothing to do with the lack of promotion and relegation or anything else. If they were some other type of corporation, I don't think it necessarily would have an effect on the organization of the league. I bet that if Major League Soccer were to adopt promotion and relegation, the teams would still be called "franchises," simply because that's what we call pro sports teams in the U.S. -- Mwalcoff 00:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- To be honest, I don't know exactly how that works. You'd have to ask someone with a better background in sports business.
- Since I'm not British, I don't know exactly what British sports fans mean when they call MK Dons a "franchise." If they use that term to mean the relocation of teams, that's already handled by the disambiguation page. We could also say, "Sports franchising is a term used in Great Britain to refer to the American model of organizing professional sports leagues." -- Mwalcoff 17:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'll do that. Sorry I couldn't be more help. -- Mwalcoff 23:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
My use of the word "franchised" in the Dons article was because it was the first thing that came into my head. But it does look like a word fraught with dangers so maybe I should have written "funded" instead. Whatever you want to call it, it doesn't seem to have got Griggs very far - R&D are out of the Football League. Northampton Town should have snapped him up while the offer was there. By the way, that redirect of "Franchise FC" to the Dons article is absurdly POV - if we're going to do that we might as well redirect "Redshite Bastards" to Liverpool. Still, mildly amusing. Lfh 20:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, i notice you've worked on this article. It's up for featured article status. Please join in in helping if you can. Ta Logan1138 18:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
AJR gave me a link to the SRA's stats , Thats where the data's from. Thanks Djm1279 16:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Think you've got something there, will need to do some research.Djm1279 19:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I put a clean-up tag on Peace Pagoda because the images were messed up. Now they are cleaned up, so I removed it. -SBrools (talk)
Hi Cowboy,
regarding me citing my sources relating to the changes I made to the Stantonbury Campus article, I'm afraid that I currently cannot.
The announcements regarding what I mentioned were only made official this week (being a student at the school myself), so I doubt there are any online publications as things stand. But I'll keep an eye out on their website, and make any references I can as soon as possible.
Cheers
Hello friend,
Sorry, got carried away by the discovery of two Carstairs railway sites, station and junction, both stubs and a splended request to discuss merging the almost empty junction site with the almost equally empty station site. Wiki is littered with virtually empty stubs that people seem keen to create but reluctant to add more than half a dozen words to. It was simply that your 'colour change' brought it to my notice.
Cheers, NoelWalley 09:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello again,
You know Carstairs is the only station in Scotland at which I have changed trains and that was in LMS days en route between Edinburgh and Crewe where I lived for over 20 years. So I do know the WCML and also the Watford DC lines which used to be four rail DC and then became three rail after the Bakerloo pulled out (I don't know how they work the complicated electrical switching between LT and third rail only sections but they do). Of course you know that the Watford DC lines diverge from the main line quite significantly. Firstly between Watford Jnct and Bushey DC and then between North Wembley and Willesden Junction where it dives under the mainline from west to east and then emerges to run round a loop through Stonebridge Park and Harlesden before running parallel again at Kensal Green. On the WCML only Bushey, Harrow & W and Wembley C remain open. I remember the time when Bushey was closed but its open again now and so is Wembley C and if Virgin needed to stop there I am sure they would because its operational and used daily by Southern's AC/DC dual voltage sets which cover the 9 miles from Watford to Wembley in 10 minutes compared with 23 minutes on the DC line.
Now we are really talking about the WCML not Network Rail's Route 18 but either way Wembley Central is on Route 18 not any other and it is certainly on the WCML. So we are perhaps actually talking about back room wishful thinking or perhaps simple mistake drawing a map at Network Rail rather than reality!
But you are not consistant, what about Watford J to St Albans Abbey (electrified single line single section) part of Route 18 and what about Kidsgrove to Crewe also quite recently electrified, part of Route 18, which hardly ever sees an electric train?
Cheers, Noel.
Hi, I have just read your note to me again. What has Chiltern got to do with it. These Southern trains don't go anywhere near Adrian Shooter's Chiltern lines, they leave the WCML at Willesden Junction and take the West London Line to Olympia and Clapham Jnct. NoelWalley 22:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I don't see your problem. The Southern electrics from Watford J to Clapham J and Brighton share exactly the same tracks as Silverlink and Virgin between Watford J (main line) and Willesden Junction (no main line platforms) and they all pass through Wembley Central main line station. Some of the Southern trains also stop there and the main line platform facilities were upgraded in recent years. At Willesden Junction the Southern trains leave Route 18 WCML and join Route 2 Brighton etc. Chiltern is Route 16 and has no physical connection with Route 18. There is absolutely no justification for removing Wembley Central from the list of operational passenger stations on the WCML. The entirely separate Watford DC Lines are not physically connected to Route 2. Please do not allow the absence of a dot on the Route 18 map to hide the fact that an operational main line station is physically there on WCML tracts and is being called at by trains that are under the operational control of WCML signals. Willesden Junction, where they leave the WCML to join Route 2 is entirely under WCML train control. This is important if only to show the great complexity of passenger traffic operating on and under the control of the WCML. NoelWalley 18:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, At Wembley Central there are six platforms, two on the Watford DC Lines and four on the WCML. As recently as 2004 some Silverlink trains on the WCML stopped regularly at the WCML platforms and may well do so in the future. At the present time only some of the Southern Trains stop at the WCML platforms. The Southern trains do not at any time use the Watford DC Lines. Willesden junction ceased to have main line platforms about 1945 so WCML trains (incuding the Southern trains) could not stop there if they wanted to. In terms of platforms, Harrow & W and Bushey are in the same situation with usable and used platforms on the WCML as well as the Watford DC Lines. I do not understand your talk of a loop, Wembley Central is on the main line not a loop or branch. NoelWalley 20:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Many thanks, best wishes, NoelWalley 20:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
You asked: Has there been a recent release of new stats? I'm surprised by how big the jump in traffic at Bletchley is. --Concrete Cowboy 20:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
- No, it's just that the way the stats should be entered into the {{UK stations}} and similar templates is to add together both the entry and the exit figures. What the table says is "Anuual entry/exit", but for some reason known only to the template's creator, the field is called "exits". It is confusing, but changing the template source so that the field is called something more illustrative (e.g. "usage") would mean having to change this in all the station articles! --RFBailey 21:03, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Greetings and thanks for your note. We agree on what needs to be done. I am not sure that I want to do it myself at the present time. The Network Rail document to which you first drew folks attention appears to have been drawn up in 2004. There is a new document published in April 2006 which is somewhat different it is at: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/companyinformation/BusinessPlans/BusinessPlan2006.htm The Route 18 map has been redrawn but is at first glance basically the same except that an additional station is now shown on the WCML (AC line) at Queens Park in addition to the station on the Watford DC Line and yet it is years since it had an advertised service! hey ho! I need to spend some time reading the Business Plan first.
Regards, NoelWalley 21:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Carstairs
Greetings, I find it difficult to follow the logic of your latest change. If Carstairs Junction needs a place in that table, then so does Colwich Jnct and Weaver Jnct and probably others. But why when the junctions and the ramifications of Network Rail Route Numbers now have a very comprehensive table of their own. But in any case I do feel it is quite wrong to exclude Carstairs when the station is used nightly as perhaps the last remaining place on the WCML where two sections are joined and in the down direction divided. It also picks up passengers both sleeping and overnight coach. In this it preserves a great tradition of the WCML against formidable odds. Three sections of the highland sleeper split and come together at Edinburgh but since the station is closed, passengers may not join or leave, I understand. Regards, NoelWalley 19:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Glad to see I'm not the only one watching over the MK article for accuracy. I noticed you had removed the City Status template from the article, you beat me to it ;o) . I have however brought up this factual error on the talk page for the template as Milton Keynes is linked on the template along with 3 other towns that dont have city status. Cheers for you help. JonEastham 22:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello Concrete Cowboy. I understand entirely that you care about the MK article. Its good to see people take 'responsibility' for articles within their specific exertise. I have to admit to getting quite narky if anyone badly edits a few that i 'look after' too... Please feel free to use them (or not) as you wish. I quite liked them (especially the fountian one). But its up to you. If they are not going to be used, please tell me an i will flag them for deletion (no point in bunging up the server). :) Bjrobinson 20:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for cleaning up my edit and not removing it. Reading through the article, I had realized that there was no longer any reference to MK Dons being the official continuation of Wimbledon F.C., which is important even if most people don't like it (and plus the "see text" in the infobox doesn't really make sense without it). The page will probably have to be watched closely, but I think it far better to deal with an edit war than to leave out crucial info. - Pal 14:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I see you commented in the edit summary for Roade that you could do with a map ref. Done! My method, which is probably horribly roundabout, is to look the place up on streetmap.co.uk then click on the almost-invisible "click here to convert/measure coordinates" link near the bottom of the Streetmap page. This gives you a Landranger grid reference (SP758524, for instance) as well as lat/long. You can also use the OS "Get-a-Map" feature at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/getamap/ Then I've used the {{GBmap}} template to add the map. I've used Northampton as the location; look here for a list of the maps available Use the name of the map from that list without the trailing "dot.png". You might like to use MK as the marked location instead but as the dot on the map is only a fairly rough indication it's not too crucial, I'd say! Cheers. Tonywalton | Talk 17:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
- No, I've never heard of Roade, though I must have driven past it on the M1 a few times ;-) Just a matter of stuffing the name into streetmap.co.uk, really, and discounting the ones it came up with that weren't in Northants. Tonywalton | Talk 10:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I've changed "is" back to "are", as that is the most usual way of referring to clubs and other groups in British English (although it's a fine distinction, and there are cases when "is" is more appropriate — see English plural#Discretionary plurals for more info). — sjorford++ 08:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- I see what you mean about "is a football club", although I still think it looks okay with "are", and I definitely think "they joined the league" and "they are members" sound better, and as its best to be consistent, I always prefer to use "are" throughout. I'm not that concerned about it, it's just your brief edit comment seemed a bit sweeping, I wasn't sure if you were American or something :) — sjorford++ 12:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I was cleaning out the incorrectly named files at Commons and saw you tagged the first with {{badname|Image:ConcreteCows.png}}. I wonder why, because the image is 8 times larger in the PNG-version. JPG is a better format for photographs, PNG is better for graphics like maps or icons. Do you have a specific reason to want the .jpg deleted, because it would be more logical to me to delete the png? NielsFTalk to me.. 14:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
The Redway School in Milton Keynes is The Redway School as opposed to Redway School is located in Southern Humboldt County California. Redway School is a K-7 school serving 325 students in a 773 square mile area.
The Redway School was named as such on 31 March 1993, because it is bounded on two sides by redways.
I don't recall adding any info to the WikiCommons, and was unable to login as Chris. Chris 03:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
re your comment...
Your latest edit is reasonably fair and neutral, but one item opens another can of worms. You say that the club was "forced" to move out (nobody put a gun to their heads. You'll need to rephrase that slightly). The relevant bit of the detailed section says at the end of the 1990–91 season Wimbledon decided that its cramped Plough Lane ground was beyond redevelopment. Without getting into opinions like "everybody knows that it was worth more as a site for a supermarket" and "Merton Council put impossible conditions in their way", can you find out what really caused the first relocation? --Concrete Cowboy 16:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
In response, I disagree totally. This is not a controversial issue or one that needs rephrasing and no personall opinions were expressed. The club was forced to leave Plough Lane because of the implementation of the findins of the Taylor Report of 1989, which recommended that all terraced stadia in the top-flight be converted to all-seater or closed, imposing a deadline for doing so. Wimbledon F.C. had neither the money nor, more importantly, the space to do so and therefore were required by the footballing authorities to find an alternative ground, moving in 1992 to Selhurst Park. All fact. Matt derry 13:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out my error on that page. Brickhill is one of many MK-related edits I have done recently - others include V6 Grafton Street, The Hub:MK and many more... User:Tom walker 14:25 GMT 25 July 2006
I wouldn't want to see that extlink there. Don't know if we have policy forbidding that sort of thing. Morwen - Talk 07:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey Concrete Cowboy, just wanted to let you know i have created a few stub like articles about some schools in milton keynes, i hope this will be ok until i can find out some more information about the schools. Let me know what you think (Neostinker 23:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC))
Ok, sorry about that, ill make sure im more careful with the others. Lord Grey has the most information on it , i think the other school articles are basic and to the point for now. Thanks for the pointer!! (Neostinker 08:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC))
Hi, the page history is important since Wikipedia needs to keep it to remain GFDL compliant. The way you did it could make it appear that you had written all of the text in the article, which wasn't the case. Furthermore, you probably could've just moved the article, a move can be done if the target page is a simple redirect to the current article (with no other history). The interwiki link seems fine as it is, since it (mostly) talks about the same thing. - Bobet 12:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. This isn't a parish - the parishes of Broughton and Milton Keynes have currently got a joint parish council but this is different. election-maps.co.uk shows them as separate parishes, etc. Morwen - Talk 15:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I recently changed the River Lovat article (since renamed by User:Roleplayer to River Ouzel) to describe what I believe is the actual use of the names Lovat and Ouzel (that Lovat is now only used near Newport Pagnell).
I notice that some time ago you added "(known locally as the River Lovat)" to the Leighton Buzzard article. Do you actually know someone in Leighton Buzzard who calls it that? I was going on information such as Ordnance Survey maps, books on the natural history of Bedfordshire, Google, and a Tourist Information leaflet on Leighton-Linslade, all of which just say "River Ouzel".
P.S. Thanks for your kind words at Talk:Central Milton Keynes Shopping Centre about the article I created. JonH 12:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
please, anything but having brackets like that - even ceremonial Buckingamshire would be preferable. Morwen - Talk 14:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
See: Talk:Tyringham Lozleader 19:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- Volume I, which deals with "Southern" England (Beds, Berks, Bucks, Cambs, Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Essex, Glos, Hants, Herts, Hunts, Kent, London, Middx, Norfolk, Oxon, Som, Suffolk, Surrey, Sussex, Wilts). Vol II (Northern England) deals with everywhere else. Lozleader 10:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
- Continued from our convo on User_talk:Matt_derry
- First of all, cheers for the tips on where to reply and how to link to stuff!
- In reply to you comment... Sorry! Cheers for clarification - no offence taken on my part. It just didn't come across that way from the text (which was why I acnkowledged that I could have misinterpreted the tone). Anyway, we're all friends now! :-)
- Re the Wikipedia:Assume good faith policy, yeah point taken (altho it's tricky when watching a football club's wiki-pages as the amount of vandalism you get - most of it politically motivated / from rival clubs !!!)
- ps dare I say that I thought I read a comment from you somewhere to the effect that you didn't expect edits from yourself to be welcome on the AFC Wimbledon page? (Just asking, like)!
- --Matt derry 13:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, that is perhaps a slightly informal term, but one that is used very frequently. It refers to the household refuse trains which traverse the GCR and Varsity lines to Calvert waste terminal as well as countless others around the country. Binliner is a generic term derrived from Frieghtliner. If you want you can change it to household refuse or something. User:Tom walker 17:16 GMT 8 September 2006
I did note why on the talk page of the article itself - is he responsible for the famous stereotype? Then he belongs in the intro - David Gerard 21:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- See article talk page again. It's not clear how you can claim the stereotype is irrelevant and Noel Edmonds' role in it is trivial when it's the single piece of text on your userpage - David Gerard 22:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Touché. I've deleted the 25 year old comment by this C-list celebrity. --Concrete Cowboy 23:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Template:Infobox symbol/variant has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi John Maynard Friedman,
As per your discussion on the US dollar talk page, I've removed the unofficial users of the New Zealand dollar since there was no veritable sources cited to those countries that were listed to unofficially use the NZ dollar. I'm hoping that's an example on what you mean is a difference between an offical and unofficial user of a currency. Thank you for discussing your issues with me and please put on a mask so you don't spread COVID-19 to other people. If will be interesting to see who's defined as an offical user and unofficial user of the US dollar. Thanks ;) Put a mask on mate! (talk) 13:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Put a mask on mate!: Yes, this is a perennial misunderstanding where editors rely on their personal experience. The worst case is when the hotel invites you to pay your bill in your own currency, giving you a much worse rate than the Forex rate on your credit card.
- Tijuana is an interesting edge case because I suspect that USDs circulate freely between residents, as freely as pesos. But you couldn't reasonably say that Mexico is an unofficial user, just because one border city does so. Would you say that Oz is an official user of the Yuan because some high-end establishments will take them at bank rate plus 10%? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- @John Maynard Friedman: Well mate, firstly Australia is definitely NOT an offical user of the Renminbi as per your definition that it must be "sanctioned by the monetary authority" to be offical in which the People's Bank of China does NOT sanction Australia as a user of its currency and that it's not listed as an offical user in it's Wikipedia article, so we can both agree on that. I could argue that Australia "unofficially" uses the yuan (Renminbi) if that is the case however I don't believe that Australia is a user of the yuan by any means. Would you say that the International Monetary Fund is an unofficial user of that currency just because it's listed there on the article page? How about you have a look at the "unofficial" users of the Renminbi and see if you can verify the source of that information? If not, perhaps you could delete the "unofficial" users from the article's page to prove your point that you need a reliable source to add such information. Remember, masks protect others from you from the virus, so please do wear one. Happy editing ;) Put a mask on mate! (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Put a mask on mate!: So we agree that, although some Ozzie shops will accept payment in redbacks, it certainly does not mean that Oz "uses" CNY. (The IMF is a special case, it is not a country, but see special drawing rights - it uses the CNY on exactly the same basis as it uses the USD, JPY, AUD, EUR, GBP etc etc.) I haven't looked at the "unofficial" users of the Renminbi yet, but I'm not expecting to see any credible citations. Sigh.
- BTW, putting a political or religious message in your sig is going to get you in trouble. I always wear a mask so I won't be the one to make a formal complaint but sooner or later you will encounter someone who will – and even complain about your user-name, let alone your message of the day. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- @John Maynard Friedman: Well mate, firstly Australia is definitely NOT an offical user of the Renminbi as per your definition that it must be "sanctioned by the monetary authority" to be offical in which the People's Bank of China does NOT sanction Australia as a user of its currency and that it's not listed as an offical user in it's Wikipedia article, so we can both agree on that. I could argue that Australia "unofficially" uses the yuan (Renminbi) if that is the case however I don't believe that Australia is a user of the yuan by any means. Would you say that the International Monetary Fund is an unofficial user of that currency just because it's listed there on the article page? How about you have a look at the "unofficial" users of the Renminbi and see if you can verify the source of that information? If not, perhaps you could delete the "unofficial" users from the article's page to prove your point that you need a reliable source to add such information. Remember, masks protect others from you from the virus, so please do wear one. Happy editing ;) Put a mask on mate! (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
