This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sandra Lee (chef) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish Women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish WomenWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish WomenTemplate:WikiProject Jewish WomenJewish Women
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Seventh-day Adventist ChurchWikipedia:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchTemplate:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchSeventh-day Adventist Church
Expand "Glacier View Controversy" section, to include more background, history, theological issues, and details of the Glacier View meeting itself
Add to "Adventist Responses to Criticisms" section, ideally with material from Adventist scholars etc.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
MaryGaulke (talk·contribs) has been paid by Sandra Lee. Disclosures made below and on userpage.
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
Extended content
Hi! Sandra Lee has hired me to request some updates to this article. The scope of the requests is pretty extensive, so I'm breaking them into two batches. If you'd like to review all the proposed edits now, you can see them here. I also created a mockup of all the edits implemented, with deletions struck through and additions highlighted. You can see that here.
Update "Kimmy" to "Kimber"[1][2] and "Johnny" to "John Paul".[3]
Add to end of first paragraph:
Due to her mother's illness and the absence of her and her siblings' fathers, Lee effectively raised her four younger siblings.[3][4][5] In her youth, Lee learned how to feed her younger siblings frugally with a combination of food stamps and welfare payments, an experience that informed her future approach to cooking.[4][6]
QVC also selected Lee to launch its craft and home decorating categories on its networks in the U.K. and Germany. In 1994, she released her first DIY home improvement video series, which sold more than a million copies.[8]
In second paragraph, after "Semi-Homemade Cooking with Sandra Lee premiered on the Food Network in 2003.", add:
The show ran for 15 seasons[9] and was in the top three new weekend shows on the network for its first five years.[10]
In second paragraph, update
Lee's second Food Network series, Sandra's Money Saving Meals, began airing on May 10, 2009.[11]
to
Lee's second Food Network series, Sandra's Money Saving Meals, began airing on May 10, 2009,[11] in response to the Great Recession. At the time, she was the only host on the Food Network with two cooking series running concurrently. Kurt Soller, writing for Newsweek, described her as "among TV's most successful female chefs".[4] As of 2019[update], her shows have aired in 63 countries.[9]
After the above in the second paragraph, update
Each episode contains an arts and crafts element, in which Lee decorates the table setting in accordance with the theme of the meal that she just prepared. She refers to these as "tablescapes".
to
Each episode contains entertaining and arts and crafts elements, in which Lee decorates the table setting and kitchen in accordance with the theme of the meal that she just prepared.[3] She refers to these as "tablescapes", a term she coined.[12]
In late 2009, Lee hosted Sandra Lee Celebrates, a series of four one-hour specials that aired on HGTV.[16][17]
Add to end of section:
People magazine has included her in its list of "Most Beautiful" people multiple times.[18][19][20][21]
In early 2020, Lee began creating her "Top Shelf" video series for Today.com, showcasing new ways to make meals from products commonly found in pantries.[22][23][24] An April 2020 New York Times article authored by Jessica Bennett called Lee "the queen of making something out of nothing".[6] In late 2020, Lee hosted a series of holiday segments, "It’s a Wonderful Lifetime", on Lifetime.[13]
At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, both Jessica Bennett in the New York Times[6] and Jaya Saxena in Eater noted that the context of pandemic scarcity made the "semi-homemade" concept feel newly relevant. Of Lee, Saxena wrote, "her show, Semi-Homemade Cooking, might be the perfect way to cook through quarantine."[25]
This may make more sense as a top-level section rather than as a subsection of "Career".
Delete "partly" in the final sentence: "Lee has said this recipe is the only one of hers whose criticism she has taken to heart, and that the recipe was partly due to the Food Network dictating the show's content at the time.[5]" Per the source, "Lee says that at the time of the Kwanzaa cake, her show's content was 'dictated' by the network."
In first paragraph, after "Home-shopping network QVC hired her as on-air talent.", add ref [1], using the "Vogue02222011" ref name already in use in the article.
Update
Also in 2012, she started a new monthly lifestyle magazine in partnership with TV Guide.
to
Also in 2012, she started a monthly lifestyle magazine, Sandra Lee, in partnership with TV Guide.[2]
The Gourmet source in the first paragraph is a dead URL. Here's an archived alternative.
Hi again! As noted above, I've been hired by Sandra Lee to request updates to this article. I split the requests into two batches since they were pretty extensive. Now that the first half has been implemented, sharing the remaining requests. I also created a mockup of all the edits from both batches implemented in the article, with deletions struck through and additions highlighted. You can see that here.
I'm wondering if {{Infobox person}} would be a better fit for this article than {{Infobox officeholder}}. (Tough to find a perfectly similar precedent here, but cf. Rosario Dawson, Melvyn Douglas, or Rachel Campos-Duffy, all of which use {{Infobox person}}.) The conversion doesn't require removing any information; it just requires tweaking the "term" parameters to fit {{Infobox person}}, and allows for the addition of the "television" and "awards" parameters similar to {{Infobox chef}}. A mockup of how this could look is at right. I also added "documentary producer" to the "Occupation" field per the "Documentaries" section below, and changed "author" to "writer" since Lee has also written for television.
Add new section (using the "Stein"[3] and "DeSantis"[4] ref names already in the article):
Lee co-founded the Los Angeles chapter of UNICEF in 2000.[5][6] She donated the proceeds from her second cookbook to God's Love We Deliver and Project Angel Food, two organizations that deliver food to homebound individuals.[4] In 2015, she led a UNICEF team on a mission to Haiti in her role as a special nutrition emissary for the organization.[5] The U.S. division of the UN's World Food Program, the world's largest humanitarian organization,[7] appointed Lee to its board of directors in May 2020.[6]
Lee was a spokesperson for Share Our Strength's No Kid Hungry campaign for more than ten years[5] and created No Kid Hungry's annual fundraiser, the Great American Bake Sale.[8][9] Her first Great American Bake Sale, in 2011, raised more than $50,000.[10] She has also worked with the Elton John AIDS Foundation[6][3] and serves on its board.[11]
In 2015, shortly before being diagnosed with cancer, Lee started her own production company.[12][13] She created Rx: Early Detection – A Cancer Journey With Sandra Lee, a documentary about her experiences with cancer, with HBO and Sheila Nevins, among others.[14][15] The film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2018,[16] at the 2018 Tribeca Film Festival,[17][18] and on HBO in October 2018.[15][19] Lee received the Made in New York Award at the Gotham Independent Film Awards in November 2018 for her work on the documentary.[20][21]
In first paragraph, add before "On October 12, 2015, she was rushed to a hospital because of fluid buildup..."
In August 2015, she contracted an infection in her right breast that resulted in her going on bed rest and intravenous drugs for three months.[28]
Add to end of section (using the "Luscombe"[21] ref name already in use in the article):
In 2016, Lee "flexed some political muscle"[21] to push for the passage of the $91 million "No Excuses" law in the state of New York,[28] which provided for expanded breast cancer screening and removed insurance co-pays for mammograms.[21] She subsequently advocated for other states to pass their own versions of the "No Excuses" law.[29] She was a keynote speaker at the Susan G. Komen Advocacy Summit for breast cancer advocacy in Washington, D.C., in May 2019.[30] She also became an ambassador for Stand Up to Cancer[31] and produced the documentary Rx: Early Detection – A Cancer Journey With Sandra Lee.[15]
Consider renaming to "Cancer and advocacy" to reflect the above.
|-
|2013
|[[Gracie Award]]
|Outstanding Host – Lifestyle Program
|''Sandra's Restaurant Remakes''
|{{won}}
| style="text-align:center;" |<ref>{{cite web |title=2013 Gracies Winners |url=https://allwomeninmedia.org/gracies/2013-gracies-winners/ |website=Alliance for Women in Media |access-date=10 April 2021 |date=3 October 2016}}</ref>
The citation source about Lee being cancer-free didn't match the mock up. The final sentence of this section currently reads: Lee announced that she is cancer free in late 2015.
I gave all the recent updates a quick review, and remove content that seemed problematic and in need of a much closer inspection. --Hipal (talk) 17:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The awards request needs a close review. Clearly notable awards generally deserve mention, but some are unclear. --Hipal (talk) 17:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
After spending hours verifying and completing part 2 of the edit request, every new section was deleted before I completed the Bibliography and Awards edits. I pinged Hipal to provide more specific feedback on which parts of the request are concerning.
Thank you for your work verifying it all, but there's no rush either.
I gave edit summaries for each section, but overall we have exactly what we should expect from a request by a paid editor for a celebrity with a considerable public relations machine behind her: It reads like part of her publicity campaign rather than encyclopedic content.
I'll assume everything is verified. An easy next step would be to identify all the poor and promotional sources. --Hipal (talk) 18:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: I can honestly say I've done this to the best of my ability. I've been editing Wikipedia for many years and really strive to set realistic expectations with my clients instead of wasting Wikipedia editors' time with frivolous requests. We may disagree on what has encyclopedic value and which sources are reliable enough, but I've been scrupulous about cross-referencing with WP:RSP and every other objective guideline that's available. I know you have to double check my work – that's what the edit request process is for! – and it sounds like Heartmusic678 has also checked the sources I provided. Is there anything else I can do? Mary Gaulke (talk) 00:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: Of course, I completely understand. I just wanted to assure you that I have checked the sources as you directed, and check if there's anything else I can do. Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My concern is that someone is putting out press releases and promotional material for Lee, then a paid editor comes here and makes edit-requests based upon them. --Hipal (talk) 16:28, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: In part 1 above, citation 14 is included as part of quoted text from the current article and is not part of my edit request. Citation 35 in part 2 is included supplementally to citation 36, an independent source that supports the same information. Are those the two to which you are referring? Mary Gaulke (talk) 12:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Those two are identified as press releases, correct? Can you please tell me why you wrote none of the requests above are cited to press releases? --Hipal (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: I honestly just forgot those were there. As I mentioned, one is not part of my requests, it was just included as part of quoted text from the current article, and the other is included on a supplemental basis. I felt comfortable asserting that I was not relying on press releases for any of my requests because I do not do that as a matter of course. Mary Gaulke (talk) 12:27, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Similar problems such as heavy use of poor and promotional references such as warmed-over press releases, announcements, etc. which describes far too many (if not the majority) of the references used for this request. --Hipal (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
Extended content
Hello hello. Revising the requests in part 2/2 above to reflect Hipal's feedback and intervening article edits. As a reminder, I also created a mockup of all the edits from both batches implemented in the article, with deletions struck through and additions highlighted. You can see that here.
Add new section (using the "Stein"[1] and "DeSantis"[2] ref names already in the article):
Lee co-founded the Los Angeles chapter of UNICEF in 2000.[3][4] She donated the proceeds from her second cookbook to God's Love We Deliver and Project Angel Food, two organizations that deliver food to homebound individuals.[2] In 2015, she led a UNICEF team on a mission to Haiti in her role as a special nutrition emissary for the organization.[3] The U.S. division of the UN's World Food Program, the world's largest humanitarian organization,[5] appointed Lee to its board of directors in May 2020.[4]
Lee was a spokesperson for Share Our Strength's No Kid Hungry campaign for more than ten years[3] and created No Kid Hungry's annual fundraiser, the Great American Bake Sale.[6][7] Her first Great American Bake Sale, in 2011, raised more than $50,000.[8] She has also worked with the Elton John AIDS Foundation[4][1] and serves on its board.[9]
In 2015, shortly before being diagnosed with cancer, Lee started her own production company.[10][11] She created Rx: Early Detection – A Cancer Journey With Sandra Lee, a documentary about her experiences with cancer, which aired on HBO.[12] The film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2018,[13] at the 2018 Tribeca Film Festival,[14][15] and on HBO in October 2018.[12][16] Lee received the Made in New York Award at the Gotham Independent Film Awards in November 2018 for her work on the documentary.[17][18]
In first paragraph, add before "Lee announced that she is cancer free in late 2015.":
In August 2015, she contracted an infection in her right breast that resulted in her going on bed rest and intravenous drugs for three months.[23]
Add to end of section (using the "Luscombe"[18] ref name already in use in the article):
In 2016, Lee "flexed some political muscle"[18] to push for the passage of the $91 million "No Excuses" law in the state of New York,[23] which provided for expanded breast cancer screening and removed insurance co-pays for mammograms.[18] She subsequently advocated for other states to pass their own versions of the "No Excuses" law.[24] She was a keynote speaker at the Susan G. Komen Advocacy Summit for breast cancer advocacy in Washington, D.C., in May 2019.[25] She also became an ambassador for Stand Up to Cancer[26] and produced the documentary Rx: Early Detection – A Cancer Journey With Sandra Lee.[12]
Consider renaming to "Cancer and advocacy" to reflect the above.
@MaryGaulke and Hipal: I don't see an issue with updating the info box and award section. However, the request for the new section additions have the same sources and wording as the previously rejected edit request, so I will defer to Hipal on how to proceed. (I do recommend removing "flexed some political muscle" from the edit request in the Cancer section.) Hipal, I would like to know if it is okay to update the info box and awards sections per this new edit request. I would also like to know your opinion on the wording of the proposed Cancer (and advocacy) section compared with the Litigation and advocacy section of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's page. Heartmusic678 (talk) 15:20, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not keep current on the general consensus for infoboxes, but adding all the shows seems UNDUE. The Emmy seems reasonable.
Thanks, Heartmusic678, for looking this over. If there are only minor changes between this request and the previous, then it should be rejected and MaryGaulke pointed to WP:COITALK. --Hipal (talk) 17:52, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal and Heartmusic678: In the Awards section, I did remove the citation to BroadwayWorld per Hipal's direction, and the accompanying information. I reviewed the other sources and information and genuinely do not see anything problematic. "Flexed some political muscle" is a quote from the cited source but happy to reword if helpful. Hipal's feedback was to remove any reference to press releases and ensure the remaining references are independent editorial content; I did so. If this request is rejected, I would love to receive additional feedback so I know what else I need to change. I'm not trying to wikilawyer here; I'm genuinely looking for guidance. Thank you again. Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You removed one reference when I said the problems are with too many if not the majority of them? This is an encyclopedia article, not a forum to use for public relations. --Hipal (talk) 00:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: You asked me to omit "poor and promotional references such as warmed-over press releases, announcements, etc." I've done so. Most of the remaining references are in-depth profiles and news coverage from major media outlets. I'm not sure what is objectionable about them. Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: Of course. I’m just asking for additional information I can use to improve these requests and my future work. Would it be helpful if I itemized why I think each source meets the WP:RS standard, so you can tell me where you see issues? Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: First up, I want to confirm that before beginning on the below, I took a few hours to reread carefully each of the policies to which you linked. Here's my rundown of each source:
1. Out – Independent, long-standing publication that appears to have editorial oversight and fact checking. The author has no apparent affiliation with Lee. The content is presented without obvious bias, including some criticism of Lee (e.g. quoting Anthony Bourdain's criticisms). The text confirms the cited information – "Lee became involved with Elton John's AIDS Foundation."
2. People – Identified in WP:RSP as a reliable source for information that is not contentious. Appears to be neutral, including repeating criticism of Lee. Confirms the cited information – the Ellis Island Medal of Honor, and "She donated all of the proceeds from her second cookbook to home-bound food delivery organizations Project Angel Food and God’s Love We Deliver."
3. Today.com – Major, independent publication and author. Confirms the cited information: "Lee has worked with several charitable organizations for years, including serving as a spokesperson for No Kid Hungry for more than a decade. In 2000, she founded a Los Angeles-based chapter of UNICEF. Five years ago, she was given UNICEF’s Special Appointment of Nutrition Emissary, raising awareness about the nutritional needs of children affected by hunger."
4. Good Housekeeping – Independent publication that publicizes its standards for editorial oversight and fact checking. Author has no apparent affiliation with Lee. Article text confirms all the cited information – don't want to quote in full here since it's enough text that it might be considered copyvio.
6. Delish – Independent, Hearst-owned publication that asserts its accuracy and independence.
7. SheKnows – Independent editorial content; author appears to have no affiliation with Lee.
8. Times Colonist – Independent, long-standing publication, syndicating content from the Associated Press, identified in WP:RSP as a reliable source. Confirms the cited information: "The last one, held in 2011, raised more than $50,000".
9. The Elton John AIDS Foundation – A primary source, but hoping this information (that Sandra is on the board) is straightforward enough that this suffices, but understand if this line has to be cut.
18. Time – Identified in WP:RSP as a reliable source. Formal correction at bottom of article speaks to fact-checking standards.
19. Town & Country – Longstanding, independent Hearst Media publication. Of course the interview at the end of the article is primary, but the cited fact – "premiering March 1 on Starz" – is included in the introduction penned by the article author.
20. People – Identified in WP:RSP as a reliable source for information that is not contentious. Confirms the cited information – "Ruth will air Monday (9 p.m. ET) on Starz".
21. Cleveland Jewish News – Longstanding publication and independent author. CJN's "About Us" page states, "The Company is completely independent."
22. Vital Thrills – Independent publication and author. Appears to have an editorial team, although this is probably one of the more marginal sources. Confirms the cited information: "Starz kicks off Women’s History Month with the premiere of the Ruth: Justice Ginsburg in Her Own Words".
23. Good Housekeeping – Independent publication that publicizes its standards for editorial oversight and fact checking.
Thanks for the breakdown. Much appreciated. Apologies, but I doubt I'll find the time to through this quickly. --Hipal (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note that my concern was and continues to be there is heavy use of poor and promotional references such as warmed-over press releases, announcements, etc., as such the relevant policies are IS, BLP, NOT, and POV. The focus on reliability of sources is distracting. --Hipal (talk) 15:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hipal: Thank you for the reply. I'm surprised the Out magazine piece is considered a puff piece, since it includes substantial criticism of Lee. Is the problem that the cited information is not centrally positioned in the article? If so, is a citation like #13 better because the cited information is the focus of the article? Also – is every citation that does not contain explicit criticism considered non-neutral? It seems to me that a lot of entertainment reporting is straightforwardly sharing news about new releases, etc. For instance, Oprah Winfrey includes several Hollywood Reporter citations (e.g.) to support information about Winfrey's career moves. We seem to agree that this kind of citation does verify the cited information as accurate, so is the issue that this kind of citation is insufficient to demonstrate that the information is neutral?
Criticism is fine. In-depth analysis from a larger context (historical, social, etc) is the ideal. Just because information is verified does not mean it is encyclopedic or deserves mention.
@Hipal: Sorry for delayed reply – I wanted to take the time to really dig into your points. Since we've covered RS and seem to agree these sources meet that standard, I revisited WP:IS, WP:BLP, and WP:NOT:
IS states, "Interest in a topic becomes vested when the source (the author, the publisher, etc.) develops any financial or legal relationship to the topic. ... Independence does not imply even-handedness. An independent source may hold a strongly positive or negative view of a topic or an idea." It goes on to specify that when writing about a person, "News media, popular or scholarly book" are independent sources. As far as I can tell, only sources 9 and 29 above don't meet this standard, and are used with the caveats specified above. A lot of the subsequent contents of this policy discuss the type of sources needed to establish the notability of the article subject, but of course that isn't relevant here; we're just discussing the notability of the additional information about Lee, not of Lee herself.
BLP focuses on NPOV, verifiability, and WP:NOR. Again, I think we have agreed that verifiability is not the issue here, and I think you also agree that none of the above citations constitute original research. (Please correct me if I'm wrong!) That leaves NPOV. I believe the tone of my proposed additions is dispassionate; I have done my best simply to recount the information presented in the sources. I know the "flexed some political muscle" quotation from Time (which I am happy to cut) raised some skepticism, but other than that, I'm not aware of any issues with the tone.
The Balance subsection of that policy states, The idea expressed in Eventualism—that every Wikipedia article is a work in progress, and that it is therefore okay for an article to be temporarily unbalanced because it will eventually be brought into shape—does not apply to biographies. Given their potential impact on biography subjects' lives, biographies must be fair to their subjects at all times. To me, it seems unfair that a significant chunk of Lee's career – her documentary filmmaking and philanthropic efforts, both of which have received extensive media coverage – are completely omitted from this article. As far as I can tell, the rest of BLP is not relevant to this specific discussion (although it is of course relevant to the article as a whole).
In NOT, I assume the relevant section is WP:NOTADVOCACY, which specifies that content should be written in a neutral tone and cited to independent, reliable sources – both topics addressed above.
I understand that in-depth analysis is the ideal, but I've never understood that to mean that it was required for every source or every piece of information contained in an article, nor am I seeing that specification in any of the policies above.
Again, I really hope this doesn't read as wikilawyering; I'm genuinely trying to diagnose the problem. If you're tired of being involved in this edit request, I totally understand and am happy to open it up for other editors to weigh in instead. Thanks much. Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:01, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I've not had time to go over this. As long as some of the references look inappropriate, I don't see the need to waste time with anything else. --Hipal (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. It sounds like you may not be interested in working on this anymore. Is it OK if I collapse the above discussion and leave this open for another editor to review? Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
