Jump to content

User talk:Graham Beards

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:GrahamColm)

Lancefield grouping

[edit]

Re: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Lancefield_grouping&oldid=1210678286 : System for classifying bacteria

  1. Are Streptococcus bacteria or not?
  2. Wikipedia:Short_description#SDJARGON: avoid jargon, and use simple, readily comprehensible terms that do not require pre-existing detailed knowledge of the subject

--Christopher Ursich (talk) 02:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, streptococci are bacteria but "System for classifying bacteria" sounds like Lancefield Grouping is used for all bacterial genera. But it's not. How about "System for classifying streptococci bacteria"?Graham Beards (talk) 07:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted on the ANI noticeboard about Fabrickator.

[edit]

Thanks for all your awesome actions, not least the undoing of Fabrickator's atrocious reversion of my edit. I've posted here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Please ban Fabrickator from interacting with me. Polar Apposite (talk) 21:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move Nudivirus to Nudiviridae

[edit]

About 2 weeks ago, I proposed to move the page Nudivirus to Nudiviridae (see Talk:Nudivirus), but there has been only one reaction so far. Could you help as a virologist? Bernhard Zelazny (talk) 12:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have commented there. Graham Beards (talk) 12:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot. Bernhard Zelazny (talk) 12:22, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

[edit]

Hello Graham Beards,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Optimal Growth for Campylobacter jejuni

[edit]

This pertains to the Diagnosis section of the Campylobacter jejuni article. Upon collection, it was noted that stool samples are typically grown at 42 degrees Celsius with 5% - 10% oxygen. It is important to note that the oxygen levels for stool cultures have a more comprehensive range than the actual environment in which Campylobacter jejuni grows. This is because it is a diagnostic tool to confirm Campylobacter jejuni and other microbes. Regarding the growth conditions for Campylobacter jejuni, it is a thermophile and microaerophile. I sincerely appreciate the edits and attention you have given to the page. Your input has been constructive. Nathaniel Yankey (talk) 14:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will copy and paste this comment on the article's Talk Page. It doesn't really belong here. Graham Beards (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bordetella pertussis zoonoses

[edit]

Hello, I hope you're doing well and thank you for your feedback on our paper. I noticed you disregard the zoonotic portion on our page, therefore, I would like to further elaborate. More research and scientific studies are coming out suggesting the ancestor of B. pertussis is B. bronchiseptica. With further research and cases coming out of Bordetellae infections, I intended to emphasis the importance of having veterinary and human fields interact and encourage research of B. pertussis zoonotic potential. There were also statistics and research in the zoonotic potential category that wasn't pertaining to B. bronchiseptica. Averihardwick02 (talk) 17:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this really belongs on the article's Talk Page, and not here. Having said that, I deleted the paragraph because it is out of place in an encyclopedia article on Bordetella pertussis. The research is speculative and unconfirmed and as far as I can tell, comes from just one research paper. The article is also at risk conflating the disease, whooping cough, with the bacterium. The inclusion of this speculation does not help in this regard. In any case, full marks for questioning me on this. Graham Beards (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

[edit]
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
Thanks, seventeen years ago! Graham Beards (talk) 06:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]

If you have time

[edit]

I've been prepping the myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome article for a FAC run. I've had a great pre-FAC review already from from Ajpolino, but would like 1 or 2 more, as I'm quite new to all this medical editing. If you have time, I would greatly appreciate some feedback, given your expertise as a virologist :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Femke, I'll take a look over the weekend. Best regards, Graham Beards (talk) 19:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Platelet

[edit]

Hi, I noticed you reverted my change on the platelet page. While I agree that platelet satellitism is not only relatively but extremely rare, I believe it's still a valuable option for visualizing the structure and function of platelets – they're centered and accumulated in one place. I'm open to hearing your rationale for keeping the current image, but from what I see, it has lower resolution and a wider distribution, which might make it difficult for uninformed people to determine the actual position of the platelets. –Tobias (talk) 14:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it does. It's made quite clear in the legend. And the one you added is full of staining artefacts that almost look like malarial parasites to the undedicated uneducated eye.Graham Beards (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The new image also had a clear legend. However, how many undedicated people do you know who would willingly scan a micrograph for malarial parasites? It seems like a bit of a stretch. –Tobias (talk) 14:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about the staining artefacts? The slide you added shows an effect only seen in an old EDTA blood sample. It does not occur in vivo at all and it is a bad Lead image. Graham Beards (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I personally don't consider them that disturbing, but I understand if you do. It would be the best to just have a good quality 3D-rendering like in neutrophil, eosinophil and basophil, but it seems like Commons is still lacking such an image. –Tobias (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution of the Menstrual cycle

[edit]

Hi, you reverted my edit on the menstrual cycle page stating that my revision was "not in the source". Can you elaborate what exactly I changed wasn't in the source? Ferid9 (talk) 10:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this is the source I quoted Ferid9 (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not in the cited source, "According to one theory, It evolved in some placental mammals because it confers advantages in that it allows females to detect the genetic abnormalities in the embryo and reject it, thus allowing the mother to limit her investment in bad embryos." Graham Beards (talk) 10:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
İt literally is, i copy pasted 2 sentences and fused them with minor tweaks Ferid9 (talk) 10:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Section
WHY DID SPONTANEOUS DECIDUALIZATION EVOLVE?
-Maternal-fetal conflict drives the evolution of uterine tissues Ferid9 (talk) 10:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have looked. Are you are aware of our policies on copyright and close-paraphrasing? Graham Beards (talk) 10:59, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, is my revision a copyvio? İf so, how should İ change it? Ferid9 (talk) 11:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. You need to rewrite it entirely in your own words and propose the change on the article's Talk Page, as is our custom with Featured Articles. Graham Beards (talk) 11:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
İ will work on it later, thanks for informing me Ferid9 (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. Graham Beards (talk) 11:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Isabelle Belato
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Izno

CheckUser changes

removed Barkeep49

Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
  • A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: bold editing...

[edit]

It's a sad thing that WP can call for bold editing from its diminishing pool of very experienced editors, then instinctively quibble (without careful consideration of the value added) when constructive bold edits are made.

The fact of the matter is that the Virgo article that you came onto is poor, pedagogically, in terms of presentation (using jargon, putting the more specific before the general, answering critical reader questions late or not at all, or admixing them in so much detail as to lose the reader. Moreover, structurally, the article is a mess, esp. insofar as one does not really have a sense of what Virgo is, unless willing to read through all the organisational description (about host coutries and such), down to the very long and complex multi-subsection specialist section that describes the instrument and its function.

Bottom line, the article needs both a revision of its lead, and a structure that includes a description of the instrument design and function, brief and much earlier. This I gave you—a good starting point for further editing, as overwriting and long quotes can be shortened—and you decided to throw a large baby out with a little bathwater. No time for back and forths like this, life is too short. But note, none of our students will read the article. They will read, instead, the long quote at the organizational site, and other descriptions we can find them. Virgo article is yours. Signed, some educators, and former registered editors here (who are revisiting their earlier reasons for leaving). 98.193.42.97 (talk) 15:30, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I invited you to discuss your proposed changes on the article's Talk Page. We have a guideline called Bold-Revert-Discuss which is helpful in this instance. I didn't throw the baby out, your edits are preserved in the article's history, where they can be retrieved, in part or whole. Your edits did not show evidence of your being "very experienced", and it was clear to me that you would need help. If you have "no time for back and forths like this", perhaps Wikipedia is not for you. We produce and refine our articles by collaborative writing. Graham Beards (talk) 15:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mistake differences in editorial approach for inexperience. [At the time of my retirement (after many years here), I alone had >10K registered edits, tens of created pages, and unique edits on approaching 2K pages.] We are all physical scientists, retired from academia, now driving related startup work, and editing in volunteer time in disadvantaged STEM trainee contexts.
The edits moved the article in a needed direction. We will not waste time on an article where an awareness of the problem is not shared, and respect for time spent is not evident. (It is not humbly collaborative to fully remove an hour of our-end collaborative effort on an impulse, especially as a microbiologist acting at a physical science article.) Our edit summaries were thoroughly explanatory so as to preclude the need for further discussion in a new Talk section; we believe the vectors we suggest for new content directions for the article are clear (and of value).
Moreover, the article as it originally stood was not useful to our charges, and will remain so, and without us, unless you put time into reclaiming the baby—a developmental reference, and biological, implying something not yet mature, but having great potential—that did indeed go out (of useful sight) with your rapid, cursory response. Put something constructive and derivative back, or leave it in bad shape. If the former, we will be back in the game; if the latter, it's all yours. Your call. 98.193.42.97 (talk) 16:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, you have chosen not to engage on the Talk Page. But of greater concern is that you are a group of anonymous people rather that single voice, which goes against our ethos. If you wish to disengage, feel free. We are not responsive to demands. Graham Beards (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I have been pinged on my talk page by the IP user in my quality of having written most of the Virgo interferometer article. I do welcome the initiative in contacting me, however I would mostly agree with Graham here. I am happy that this article is of interest to people, and welcome any criticism on the article; it is by no means perfect, and can surely be improved. However, I am not convinced that the edits made by @98.193.42.97, while they are rightfully motivated, are a good solution to the article's problems. As Graham pointed out, being bold is not a immunity token; the revert is not an issue as far as I am concerned.
A section called "Abstract on instrument design and function" would be very uncharacteristic of a Wikipedia article; if you feel that the nature of Virgo is unclear, this should go in the lead. I feel that the first paragraph conveys most of the relevant aspects of Virgo, with more details being provided in the first section of the Instrument section. The vocabulary in those sections do not seem much more complicated than what is proposed. Overall, the proposed changes feel like a tutorial to Virgo, which this article does not aim to be. I would like to stress that my aim in writing this article was to provide a thorough, yet accessible, reference on the Virgo interferometer, which is what I believe Wikipedia should be for. I made a point to address every part of the experiment, using the technical vocabulary if necessary but trying to provide as many hyperlinks and reference as possible. Again, my work is far from perfect, but I do not think that the proposed modifications are furthering that objective.
I am also a bit worried by the attitude of the IP user. The Wikipedia article is *not* meant to be an introductory article to Virgo; I feel like it could play that role if you wish for your students to get a bird-eye view of the Virgo experiment, but it is not meant for a pedagogical support; by its nature, it is supposed to be used by anyone and not specifically by students. If you wish to have an introduction for a specific public, it is to be found elsewhere, or written by yourself. I strongly encourage you to contact the Outreach group of Virgo for such things (I can provide a contact for this or act as a liaison if you wish). Finally, I would like to point out some non-cooperative behavior: as it was pointed out, the revert should have been discussed on the Talk page, rather than coming here to make some accusations. The intended goal for the page also seems very personal, rather than being dedicated to upholding Wikipedia standards. Finally, the ping you made to me mentions "work reverted by a microbiologist": this feels like a personal attack on Graham, who is a very experienced contributor as far as I am aware of, and would be well-versed on this kind of edits which do not cover the most technical parts of the article.
To conclude, most of this message seems negative, but I do not wish for this to end up as nothing. I am happy with making the article more accessible to the general public and avoid jargon if possible. However, either I have gone terribly wrong on the article, either your expectations are misguided. I would be a bit worried about advanced physics students being unable to read through the article; while it does have technical bits, I do not think that reading it should be a challenge for any physics-savvy person. I had friends with some higher education (not specifically on this domain or physics in general) review this, and none of them reported any major understanding issues; this is not a perfect test, but I am surprised to hear that you feel that the article is "a mess" or that it is "poor" on a pedagogical level. In any case, I welcome any further input on either part, as long as it is made in a collaborative manner. Thuiop (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Smith issue

[edit]

ShroCat is the one you should report. He started all this nonsense. Rusted Auto parts was just trying to understand and solve the problem like me. Spectritus (talk) 20:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for your advice. Best regards. Graham Beards (talk) 21:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Legionella pneumophila, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Facultative.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Recently you blocked Horoyukisawada for vandalism on some pages replacing the topic name with words such as "negro," and "black people". Another user KanataTanaka was also blocked about 10 minutes before, for a similar reason. A number of these vandalising accounts with similar edit styles and usernames would lead me to suspect a sock puppet vandaliser. Two newer accounts have been making these edits on mpox articles, Jesusmejesus and Josephdejosef. A.B.123 (talk) 11:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't really been editing in a while, so I've forgotten where to report these sock puppet vandalisers, sorry. A.B.123 (talk) 11:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The venue is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, but as the accounts have been blocked now, there might be nothing to be gained, Graham Beards (talk) 12:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thank you for the reply, I'm a bit late, I figured someone would notice the accounts and block them but thanks for the info. Have a nice one. A.B.123 (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

[edit]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

[edit]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Graham_Beards&oldid=1257051902"