Jump to content

Talk:8 minutes 46 seconds/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

8 feet 46 inches

Just wondering why this page chose 8' 46" and not 8:56? Kire1975 (talk) 07:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Huh? It has nothing to do with "8 feet and 46 inches". It is a reference to "8 minutes and 46 seconds". It's a measure of time, not length or distance. Specifically, the amount of time that the police officer held his knee on Floyd's neck. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:36, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
That's my question. Why does this page use the prime symbol for minutes and the double prime symbol for seconds? Just found the page and it's extremely rare? Who chose it and what was their reasoning? Kire1975 (talk) 16:45, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
It's pretty common usage, see the prime symbol page. IdreamofJeanie (talk)
The source on the prime symbol page says it's "not particularly common". Kire1975 (talk) 05:07, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Side comment—while the URL encoding is correct for the UTF-8 prime and double-prime, the typeface specified in CSS for the article title is actually displaying what would be right single and double quotation marks, not primes. Bad typeface! Primes do not slant, and Wikipedia should choose a better quality typeface where this important detail is correct. 2601:3CA:204:F860:93B:D07B:C6B5:E16B (talk) 07:00, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Because 8:46 used to be an article about a 9/11 documentary. But that has since been turned into a redirect to a list of 9/11 documentaries, based on the documentary not being notable under WP:NFILM. I just re-pointed 8:46 to this article, which is definitely the more common usage of 8:46 than some non-notable documentary. Personally, I think the article should be moved to 8:46, if it's not merged somewhere else. I'd wait to see what happens with the merger discussions, and if it survives as a stand-alone, I'd support moving it from 8'46" to 8:46, because that is the more common notation style in the US. I'd also support 8min46sec or 8 minutes and 46 seconds (to differentiate from either 8 feet, 46 inches, or 8 hours, 46 minutes), but ultimately we should call it using whatever notation style is most often used by RSes. Levivich [dubious – discuss] 18:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Why not just simply 8m46s ? There isn't really a need to use three-letter abbreviations for minute/second, in combination merely one letter suffices in people knowing what it means, that's the notation YouTube uses for timestamps for example, if you use a ?t= command to begin playing from within the video. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.14.240 (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
8' 46" is not an acceptable format per MOS:UNITSYMBOLS. As 8:46 is ambiguous with 8 h 46 min, the title should probably just be spelled out as 8 minutes 46 seconds, with the short forms as redirects.—Bagumba (talk) 01:38, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 10 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Original closure: The result of the move request was: moved to Eight minutes 46 seconds. (closed by non-admin page mover). Mdaniels5757 (talk) 18:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Additional comments: This closure was challenged on my talk page. I provided an expanded rationale there. Given that discussion, I wish to clarify that additional discussion may be helpful. In particular, a new move discussion focused on the following issues could be productive, and definitely should not be considered disruptive:

  1. Should the first integer in the title (currently "8"/"Eight") be spelled out or represented by its digit?
  2. Should the word "and" be between "minutes" and "46"?
  3. Given the actual duration, should the first integer in the title be "7"/"Seven" or "8"/"Eight"?

Best, --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)


8′46″ → 8m46s – More obvious meaning, easier to type 70.27.14.240 (talk) 17:27, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Oppose. I don't think it has more obvious meaning. While there is a URL with those characters (www.8m46s.com), even that website has to title its page as "8 minutes 46 seconds" and provide text to explain what it is about. Many news articles describe the time as 8 minutes and 46 seconds. 8m46s doesn't seem much better than 8′46″, which is also confusing.VikingB (talk) 21:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Move instead to 8 minutes and 46 seconds Per MOS:UNITNAMES, In prose, unit names should be given in full if used only a few times ..., which seems appropriate for a page title. If unit symbols are to be used, the MOS recommends using min and s, e.g. "8 min 46 s". Do not use ′ (′), ″ (″), apostrophe (') or quote (") for minutes or seconds. Finally, "8:46" is ambiguous: Use this format only where it is clear from context whether it means hours and minutes (H:MM) or minutes and seconds (M:SS).—Bagumba (talk) 02:03, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Move instead to "8 minutes and 46 seconds" per MOS:UNITNAMES and also per WP:COMMONNAME, e.g. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. "8 minutes, 46 seconds" [6] [7] or "8 minutes 46 seconds" [8] would also work for me. "8:46" is in use [9] but it is ambiguous and disfavored by MOS:UNITNAMES. I haven't done any kind of comprehensive analysis, but my impression is that "8 minutes and 46 seconds" is the form most commonly used by sources. I don't think either 8'46" or 8min46sec are commonly used by sources.Levivich [dubious – discuss] 05:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
    As the title is not an official title nor a trademark, where WP:MOSTM would apply, the styling that other sources use should be insignificant factor. We should just follow WP's MOS for styling the time duration.—Bagumba (talk) 09:59, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
    Support for a move to 8 minutes and 46 seconds VikingB (talk) 14:26, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support move to "8 minutes and 46 seconds" per above. I think the creator of this page was trying to use the same format as the musical composition "4′33″", but that's different as it's the actual name of an artistic work. Paintspot Infez (talk) 15:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support move to "8 minutes and 46 seconds", which is the most common format being used in print media. Rhythmnation2004 (talk) 17:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I support a move to 8 minutes and 46 seconds per Bagumba & Levivich. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose 8m46s and 8 minutes and 46 seconds, move instead to "8 min 46 s" per MOS. "8 minutes and 46 seconds" I think is too long. Brad (talk) 04:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
    MOS:UNITNAMES says to spell out the units upon first use (at least): In prose, unit names should be given in full if used only a few times, but symbols may be used when a unit (especially one with a long name) is used repeatedly, after spelling out the first use—Bagumba (talk) 05:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support moved to 8 minutes and 46 seconds per reason above. The current name is misleading and could be also referred to 8 feets 46 inches. This article also not yet as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, so disambiguate page is needed. 36.77.95.210 (talk) 22:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - I have undone the previous improper close of this discussion and the page move. The closer (Psiĥedelisto) declared this a SNOW close, which does not apply when there are two opposes, and this was not allowed to run the prescribed seven days. -- Fuzheado | Talk 15:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
    @Fuzheado: The first "opppse" actually later supported the new suggested target at 14:26, 11 June. The second "oppose" really supports a move, just to a different target than nominated. FWIW, there's nothing specifically in WP:SNOW that says the !votes need to be unanimous. Still, it is unanimous here that the current title is not appropriate.—Bagumba (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
    @Fuzheado: (edit conflict) I respect your decision, but question if actual opposition exists. VikingB's opposition was against 8m46s, which consensus is clearly against. They specifically write, Many news articles describe the time as 8 minutes and 46 seconds, which in my view is support of the new title. DividedFrame also does not support the current name, they instead wanted 8 min 46 s, which is clearly counter to the MOS as multiple people noted. However, you are an admin, so if even with these points raised, you still think my close was improper, I respect your authority. I think you could have reopened this without moving the page back, though, because nobody supports the current name, and it's confusing thousands of readers in the here and now. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 16:17, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
    Further replies to this thread should go in § Conduct of User:Fuzheado, which has more context, below. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 00:37, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support move but Levivich must have taken up drinking again.[FBDB] If our intent is to name the article as a straightforward quantity (not as a stylized slogan) which I think is right (if this article continues to exist at all, which I think it shouldn't -- but that's a different question) then correct forms are Eight minutes forty-six seconds or Eight minutes 46 seconds or 8 minutes 46 seconds; there's no and under any circumstances. Of those three, the last is problematic at the start of a sentence; I personally think Eight minutes 46 seconds has a nice balanced look to it. (To reiterate: this is under the assumption we think of it as a quantity instead of a slogan.)
    While I'm pontificating: 8′46″ is completely wrong in any number of ways (see the Time section in the table at MOS:DATE#Specific_units) and 8m46s could be acceptable, in some contexts, if the m were min and it had spaces (8 min 46 s) but it really would be used only in technical, scientific, and sporting contexts. The OP's implication that we should care about what's easier to type has zero weight. EEng 16:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I support the move to 8 minutes and 46 seconds. Sorry for the confusion. VikingB (talk) 16:57, 13 June 2020 (UTC) I SUPPORT the move to 8 minutes 46 seconds. VikingB (talk) 17:25, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
    I clearly suck at discussion. I now agree that "and" is unnecessary. Would there be a comma in there? I am not sure what the Wiki style is, but AP style suggests a comma. I strongly oppose any title with an abbreviation or symbol (e.g., 8′46″, 8:46, 8min46sec, and etc.)
    Here is my rank order preference of things I support:
    • 1. Eight minutes, 46 seconds
      2. Eight minutes, forty-six seconds
      3. 8 minutes, 46 seconds
      4. 8 minutes 46 seconds
      I might be convinced of something else for the sake of consensus if it gets rid of the 8′46″ title for good.
    VikingB (talk) 17:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Move instead to "8 minutes and 46 seconds" per above, its much more clear--Ab207 (talk) 18:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Sanity break

I think there's clear consensus that the following are NOT what we want:

  • Any form of 8′46″ (whether with some spaces or not, or with straight apostrophes/quotes instead of prime marks and so on)
  • Any form using short symbols to abbreviate minutes and seconds, like 8m46s or 8min 46s

If anyone thinks we do want one of the above, speak now. In the meantime I'll press on. That leaves some form of Eight/8 minutes forty-six/46 seconds, maybe with an and in there and maybe with a comma in there. For a moment (just temporarily) let's say we go with Eight instead of 8 and forty-six instead of 46. So there's:

A1 Eight minutes, forty-six seconds
A2 Eight minutes and forty-six seconds
A3 Eight minutes, and forty-six seconds
A4 Eight minutes forty-six seconds

Someone above mentioned AP style, and it's true, it does want something like (1). But it's strange, because AP also wants 3 feet 6 inches, with no comma. In any event, our MOS says no comma in either case, so I'm going to suggest we cut out (1) and (3). That leaves (2) vs. (4). You could certainly use (1) in speech, or for emphasis, but again it's not what our MOS calls for in normal prose (nor, I think, would any style manual call for it). So I propose we go with (4).

That then takes us back to digits versus words:

B1 Eight minutes forty-six seconds
B2 Eight minutes 46 seconds
B3 8 minutes 46 seconds
B4 8 minutes forty-six seconds
B4 is just weird, and both it and B3 are awkward because they can't be used at the start of a sentence. That leaves B1 or B2. Is there anyone who disagrees so far? EEng 20:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Later correction: B3 and B4 violate MOS' provision that numbers zero to nine are spelled out in words (with exceptions not applicable here), so they're out. (Remember I said they look weird?) EEng 21:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC) Even later correction: I'm beginning to realize that the labyrinth of this corner of MOS is more treacherous than I had thought. I can no longer say definitively say that B3 is out so I've unstruck it. EEng 21:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Support the move to eight minutes 46 seconds (slightly preferred) or eight minutes forty-six seconds if that reaches consensus VikingB (talk) 20:51, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
    So that's B2 (1st) or B1. EEng 23:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
  • B2 (1st choice) but I can live with B1. EEng 23:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Can we just move it to B2 (Eight minutes 46 seconds) already and get everyone a round of drinks? VikingB (talk) 02:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Given that it’s essentially being used as a commemoration or slogan, why couldn’t B3 or B4 be used inside quotation marks at the beginning of a sentence? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:36, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
    I guess, but why not just avoid the issue entirely? Are numbers-as-digits somehow more associated with the slogan than are numbers-as-words? EEng 15:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
    I’m not sure if that’s the case. I just think we should discuss all of the options before moving this article. Personally, I’d be fine w/B2 as the title & B3 as a redirect. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:48, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
    I should have been clear: I don't think anyone minds if all the leftover options are created as redirects. So the only actual issue is what will be the annointed title of the article. So far (in this subthread) everyone seems OK with B2. Let's hear from others. EEng 19:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I'm still a bit wet from the hose, but I likewise support B2. Not really for any love of B2, just for extreme dislike of the curly quote title, and moderate dislike of straight quote title. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 20:15, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
    Here's a towel -- dry yourself off. EEng 22:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia MOS is not AP WP:MOS is the in-house MOS we follow. Not AP. Per MOS:NUMNOTES: figures or words may be used with unit names (2 minutes or two minutes) As our MOS has no preference, I believe readers will more commonly enter figures, not words.—Bagumba (talk) 01:06, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
    AP was invoked (and dismissed) only on the question of whether a comma should be included, so its irrelevant. And you're leaving out part of the passage you quote, which (until a minute ago) said in full
figures or words may be used with unit names (2 minutes or two minutes), within the guidelines above
Unfortunately, here it gets complicated. One of the "guidelines above" is that Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words, and the "2 minutes or two minutes" example violates that. Without even looking I can almost guarantee that I wrote that example, perhaps when I was tired or drunk or both; I've now changed the 2 and two in the example to 12 and twelve. Sooooooo...
This means B3 and B4 are out for sure; there's only B1 and B2. Let the !voting resume! So far B2 has the decided edge, if people want to jump on the bandwagon. EEng 21:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
And you're leaving out part of the passage you quote ...: It didn't seem relevant until you changed the MOS. I had assumed it was an accepted exception. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 04:52, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
The part you left out -- within the guidelines above -- was always there and always relevant. All I did was fix the example to be thoroughly consistent (instead of just arguably consistent) with the "guidelines above". EEng 21:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Eight minutes 46 seconds: There's no explicit guidance in MOS regarding handling of mixed units. It seems strange to mix spelling out with figures. I'd suggest following the spirit of MOS:NUMNOTES ("Comparable values should be all spelled out or all in figures") or MOS:RATIO ("Mixed numbers are usually given in figures ... 8+1⁄2 ... not nine and 1⁄2") and just use figures for both the minutes and seconds.—Bagumba (talk) 06:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Due to this discussion, I definitely think that 8 minutes 46 seconds would be the best title unless it’s decided that it’d definitely violate WP:MOS. Most readers would probably search for that as the title, so it’d be the most natural title. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
  • The more I think about the intersection of figures-as-words-verus-as-digits and units, the more my head hurts. At this point I'm happy to have at least warned everyone off A1, A2 and A3, and obviously B4 is out, and I'm sure the rest of you can work out B1 vs B2 vs B3. I just don't have the energy. EEng 21:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Conduct of User:Fuzheado

Now that Fuzheado replied on talk page and clarified they do not favor the current article title, and days have passed, I consider this issue resolved. Let's focus on content

All editors should be aware that Fuzheado, the admin who moved the page back to the curly quotes, also chose the curly quote title. Despite not !voting, and not mentioning it in their reopen comment, they chose the title and authored the first version of this page which had it in the lead. I've questioned their conduct at User talk:Fuzheado § 8′46″. This is about all I'm willing to do. In a perfect world, if they continue to ignore vital questions about their involvement and why they won't defend the title, this should probably go to WP:AN/I for review in my view. However, I probably won't have time to take it there if it ends up being needed. I've got a lot on my plate, and these obviously not allowed curly quotes have already eaten up a lot of my time. I still can't believe an admin, much less the reopening admin who moved the page back to a title which has no consensus, did this. But, such is life...full of surprises, not always happy ones. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 23:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Sigh. It was a revert of your improper snow close before the 7 days prescribed for requested move discussions. It was not selecting a title - it was resetting the state to before you improperly moved the page. Please get back to the discussion at hand and respect the process. -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:58, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
@Fuzheado: A WP:SNOW close, properly executed, will never happen at seven days. Closes at seven days will always be regular closes. But let me just copy what you wrote at User talk:Fuzheado § 8′46″ so all are aware:

I currently have no strong opinions about the naming, including the original name or the curly quotes or the alternatives that are being discussed.

So, this means, no one is currently in favor of the current title. I gave you reasons above why VikingB's opposition was not to the new title, and why DividedFrame is not opposing the new title. Can you address these? I continue to believe my WP:SNOW was correct. Now, I'm happy to chalk it up to the WP:CYCLE. Clearly Talk:8′46″ § Sanity break is interesting, and is leading to a current that wasn't there originally. I still think that the move back to the original name, which now we know, you don't even support, was improper. You say there's no urgency (on your talk)—but clearly this topic is attracting interest worldwide. We're legitimizing an incorrect title. This can lead to WP:CITOGENESIS. Do we want to be the reason curly quotes are one of the accepted names in WP:RSs? It can happen. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 00:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Addendum: You are also incorrect that I chose a title with the curly quotes. It was this edit by another user. -- Fuzheado | Talk 00:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
@Fuzheado: Bad eyesight, one reason I don't like curly quotes in sans serif typefaces as used on Wikipedia—they look the same to me as straight. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 00:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Do I have to turn the hose on you two??? EEng 01:01, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Psiĥedelisto, I think you owe Fuzheado an apology for your bad faith assumptions here and on his talk page. You are clearly the one in the wrong here.--Jorm (talk) 01:19, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
    @Jorm: My critiques based on MOS:CURLY were baseless. I apologize, Fuzheado did not add curly quotes to the title. I really cannot tell the difference between 8′46″ and 8'46" in (especially) Courier New but also Arial/Helvetica. This was an unknown unknown to me until they pointed it out. I have written User:Psiĥedelisto/BashUnicodeDAB as a work-around to assure this doesn't happen again. I am sure better solutions exist, but that's the one I'll use for now as I'm used to Bash (Unix shell), etc. If you think I've more to apologize for, feel free to let me know. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 03:18, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Psiĥedelisto, I find it odd that you cite Wikipedia:There is no deadline... Don't rush to create articles, Don't rush to delete articles, but do rush to move them? As for your "citeogenesis" worries, hey what about the week that passed before anyone noticed... hasn't the "damage" already been done? Besides, Wikipedia has always had the fact coorect, 8 mins. 46 secs. is still eight minutes & 46 seconds no matter what style you use. Citeogenesis doesn't just apply to facts, it applies to style as well? Really, now. Stop sweating small stuff. As for Fuzheado's behavior, you have totally overlooked his worst sin. As an experienced administrator he should know enough to ensure that articles and talk pages move together. He didn't move the talk page until 19 minutes later after he moved the article. The talk page was out of sync with the article for 19 minutes which confused my bot so it misplaced a move notification! wbm1058 (talk) 02:49, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
    @Wbm1058: I am glad Fuzheado came to the talk page and clarified some important things. It seemed to me like they were avoiding doing so, and I didn't get why. I cited WP:NODEADLINE on another talk page as a rhetorical device; I am of course aware of the general principle, but also of WP:DEADLINENOW. Figuring out which one applies is the art of discernment, and that's what I was trying to ask.
    So, then, on discernment, could I have over-exaggerated the importance? Perhaps. But this article, CHAZ, et cetera, are WP:CITOGENESIS waiting to happen. In fact, it already happened to CHAZ in a minor way.[10] Perhaps more major incidents were narrowly avoided. But yes, stop sweating the small stuff. I agree, I need to do that, not only on Wikipedia. (I have diagnosed OCD.) I don't like knowing that Wikipedia is the source for many facts and style conventions that enter into the real world. We only catch a fraction of the times this happens. Most of the time, one would hope, the editors were even right with what unsourced stuff they added, so no real "damage" is done.
    By the way, as regards your bot, I'm sure Fuzheado has read your comment, and likely will always remember to move them together in future. So, perhaps, one worthwhile thing came out of this? Two? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 03:18, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

For all those opposing 8'46">8m45s because it's not in your opinion the desired ultimate final destination: it doesn't have to be, you simply have to agree that it's better than this feet/inches thing, and then we can talk about whether to fully spell out the words minutes/seconds or spell out the numbers afterward.

8:46 (film) is exactly why 8:46 is a really bad idea, and I don't like that it redirects here now. That definitely can be ambiguous as to whether it's HR:MN or MN:SC. That film should've been called 8:46:40 or 8:46am or 8h46m or something like that. 70.27.14.240 (talk) 06:09, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

For all those opposing 8'46">8m45s because ... AFAICS, nobody is arguing to keep "8'46"". Those disagreeing with "8m45s" have offered alternatives.—Bagumba (talk) 10:36, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 18 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: withdrawn by nominator. Paintspot Infez (talk) 02:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


Eight minutes 46 seconds → 8 minutes 46 seconds – Part 2 of the previous Requested move discussion. It was agreed that we should write out "minutes" and "seconds" (and not "m"/"s" or "min"/"sec" or prime marks), but there was debate on whether to use all numerals or to spell out "Eight". However, there was a consensus among a large portion of users above that it should be "8 minutes 46 seconds" or a similar version with all-numerals. "8 minutes 46 seconds" is cleaner, shorter, and less awkward. Some relevant reasons:

(1.) It looks incredibly clunky/awkward for the page title to be half-written-out & half-numbers. It's a mess to use the written-out spelling of one number and use numerals for the other. WP:NATURAL, WP:CONCISENESS...
(2.) No one's searching for this page by typing "Eight minutes 46 seconds". The first thing most people would type is the number "8...".
(3.) While numbers 1–9 should typically be written out, the MOS isn't clear on what to do with a combination of units. Also, the MOS guidelines are just that — guidelines, not final unwavering rules.

-Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:8_minutes_46_seconds/Archive_1&oldid=1121849352"