Jump to content

User talk:Keith D/Archive 79

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 75Archive 77Archive 78Archive 79Archive 80Archive 81Archive 85

Thanks, and is there a script for this?

[1] ? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:46, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Hello, there is not a script for this, as far as I know. I have AutoWikiBrowser set-up with some replacements to do the changes for these common errors. Keith D (talk) 09:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Keith

Here - below - is a new page for you to do a double check please if that's OK. Thanks as always T.

Also

James Caan edits

Can you please revert your changes thanks.

On 2 Jun 2021, at 19:21, Will Burton <[[2]]> wrote:



Hi Alia


DOB changed and now live.


Thank you, and to yourselves


Will

On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 at 18:14, Alia Caan <[[3]]> wrote:

Hi Will,


Apologies but James has confirmed he wants the date of birth to read 10/11/1961


I am sending through a different pic too that he would like to use.


Have a good evening

Alia


Sent from my iPhone

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Burtonwj (talkcontribs) 17:26, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

We only take information from published sources, and the information given is not supported by any references, so I have reverted. Please do not change without supplying supporting published sources. Keith D (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

16:31, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Mohamed Please I want you revert my Degodia- page to its original Degodia (Clan) page I make a mistake I wanted to rename the page but moved to Degodia- page people will see in search results Degodia (clan) but when they open they will see Degodia- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamed IT (talkcontribs) 12:01, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

I have fixed up the page for you. Keith D (talk) 12:14, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - July 2021

Delivered July 2021 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

12:28, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Keith D! You edited Ben Bernanke. You said MOS:DATEFORMAT does request for that. I think, MOS:DATEFORMAT only applies to Read-Text, not to Source-Text inside of templates. Don't the templates convert it correctly? The yyyy-mm-dd format is used in foreign Wikipedias as well as in en Wiki, and the foreign templates are able to convert yyyy-mm-dd to the date-formats used in their languages respectively. yyyy-mm-dd makes it easier for translators who want to develop versions in their native language from the en Wiki article. Best regards, --Himbeerbläuling (talk) 16:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MOS:DATEFORMAT applies to all dates in an article.
  • Publication dates in an article's citations should all use the same format, which may be:
    • the format used in the article body text,
    • an abbreviated format from the "Acceptable date formats" table, provided the day and month elements are in the same order as in dates in the article body, or
    • the format expected in the citation style being used (but all-numeric date formats other than yyyy-mm-dd must still be avoided).
  • Access and archive dates in an article's citations should all use the same format, which may be:
    • the format used for publication dates in the article (see above);
    • the format expected in the citation style adopted in the article; or
    • yyyy-mm-dd
The templates now convert to a single format for reader consistency but that does not absolve editors from keeping to the MOS requirements. The article in question had a mix of date formats, including some invalid formats, so I brought it in line with the MOS as indicated by the {{Use mdy dates}} template on the article. Keith D (talk) 17:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, i have learned this is one more difference between different language Wikipedias. --Himbeerbläuling (talk) 19:15, 1 July 2021 (UTC)


Bro my page Degodia (Clan) doestn't show up in Google search sometimes it shows and other times it doesn't show what is wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamed IT (talkcontribs) 11:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, it appears as the first result when I try. I would ask at Village pump (technical) if you continue to have problems as that is for any technical queries. Keith D (talk) 11:24, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Can you help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamed IT (talkcontribs) 17:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration


Hello Keith D! Please have a short look over a learner's edit (~1hour ago): is it correct? (some date format adjustments, and a new category) Katherine A. High — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himbeerbläuling (talkcontribs) 06:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Edits look OK, though month first dates may be more appropriate for an American person. Keith D (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. --Himbeerbläuling (talk) 10:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Keith D.

I don't know if this is the proper way to contact you, but I figured this was a way to contact you easily:

I worked on the Juhana Vartiainen English article, and elaborated quite a bit with extra sources, list of his published books and so on. As I was publishing it, it told me there was a "conflict"/you had fixed the two date source errors while I was editing. How would I get this version in the article, with the new extra bits added without "losing written progress"?

MarcoHamilton12 (talk) 22:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC) MarcoHamilton12 MarcoHamilton12 (talk) 22:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, there is a problem with edit conflicts in general and can only be fixed by reapplying changes. It depends on the amount of changes that you have made, if it is small then you can just edit the article as it stands, if they were major changes then just save your edit and the date changes can be reapplied to your version. Keith D (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

AWB and Short Description

I noticed that two recent edits using AWB moved the Short Description down below other headers, contrary to MOS:ORDER. This was presumably due to an incorrect AWB 6.1.x genfix, which was corrected in the most recent version. If you haven't already, could you upgrade to version 6.2.0.0, possibly? David Brooks (talk) 16:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

If a newer version is available then the updater should apply it when restarted. Keith D (talk) 17:01, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
There's a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Updater_FAILED that I didn't follow completely, but it's possible that the updater didn't get updated itself. I believe 6.2.x was the first official (non-checkpoint) version with the fix; if you are already using it, there's a different problem though. David Brooks (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
I am using the last version the updater delivered 6.1.0.1. Looks like a complicated thing to do. Keith D (talk) 18:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Version 6.1.0.1 was released in September 2019 and there have been a couple of updates with numerous bugfixes since. The problem is, at least when I tried it just now, the updater fails when you run it from the Help menu, so it can't even update the updater. If you know which folder you are running the binary from, you can quickly get the new one.
  1. Make a backup copy of that folder just in case.
  2. Go to https://sourceforge.net/projects/autowikibrowser/files/autowikibrowser/ and click the big green button.
  3. You will end up with a zipfile on your system and, depending on your browser, some kind of invitation to open it. Open it.
  4. You should see a pseudo-folder containing 5 files and a Plugin folder. Using drag-and-drop, copy those 6 items to your own binary folder and, if prompted, select Replace.
  5. Right-click the two exe files in turn, select Properties, and if there is a Security warning, click Unblock and OK.
You should be able to run AWB now and, if you use Help/Check for updates it shouldn't fail.
Thanks for the information, easier than I expected. I have now got version 6.2.0.0 running. Keith D (talk) 09:53, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
👍 David Brooks (talk) 14:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

17:31, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Jack Hobbs (footballer) GA Reassessment

Jack Hobbs (footballer), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 12:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Hiya, I just edited her page and I understand you recently removed an edit that was slightly biased. I've tried to keep it neutral as possible but been a bit difficult and because it is such a contentious issue I don't want to be editing pages without support. The last thing I want is a biased article on a politicians page and the last thing I want is someone removing her recent amendment to avoid any criticism of her. We have to remain neutral. So any help to ensure that its included but not biased would be much appreciated.

Thanks --Blackwater-Bradfield1900 (talk) 09:05, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I have had a look and it looks to be a little long for a single point, but cannot see any obvious way to trim it without loosing anything or making it biased. Keith D (talk) 09:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Hiya, yeah that is an issue. That was the problem I had. I’m really glad it looks ok, thanks for the shout! Just wanted to make sure with it being such a contentious issue, I’ll have a look though and see if there’s anyway to short it at all.--Blackwater-Bradfield1900 (talk) 08:31, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Keith D! Could you add these articles properly? Due to it's semi-protected, (Fischer (apellido)) goes with (Fischer (Familienname)), thank you so much!. RossiLeone (talk) 02:49, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Questions on Imaginal Retraining

Hello Keith D, I have created the wikipedia website on "Imaginal retraining". I would like to assure you that I did not copy-paste any material and that I tried to write in a neutral manner including criticism. I have just added that results on long-term efficacy are missing. Further, the site is not about business; there is no financial conflict of interest. I would be grateful if you could change the status from draft to main article Wiki psych21 (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wiki psych21: Hello, you need to click on the button "Submit the draft for Review!" at the end of the box at the top of the article to start the process for moving to main space. Keith D (talk) 12:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your time and effort. I have revised the page (added a second limitation and deleted two categories). As suggested by another editor, I made links to other wikipedia pages so that the site is no "orphan" anymore. Thanks Wiki psych21 (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, last question: is there anything I can do at the moment except waiting? Any advice would be appreciated, thanks for your time, yours --Wiki psych21 (talk) 16:40, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, it is a case of waiting till those looking after articles get to it. If you look in the box there are a couple of sections that may be relevant. "How to improve a draft" gives you suggestions for improving the article while you are waiting. "Improving your odds of a speedy review" suggests adding WikiProject tags to draw attention of the reviewers who have an interest in the subject area. Keith D (talk) 16:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, much appreciated--Wiki psych21 (talk) 17:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Spaces that are not actually there

Hi, why are edits like this suddenly necessary? Who decided to put a nonexistent space after the comma that we now need to suppress by using non-intuitive syntax? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

It is a problem caused by the cite templates inserting a space after the comma in the |issue= field. I raised it here and was pointed to Help:Citation Style 1 § Accept-this-as-written markup. Keith D (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Please check this Yorkshire-related page. Thanks from T. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.112.84 (talk) 05:47, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Please check new refs and all other sources. Thanks, u r so quick. T. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.112.84 (talk) 11:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

15:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)


Please check latest source was placed as a book when it should have been as a newspaper. Thanks again - you are great - (also can you look at — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.112.84 (talk) 23:50, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

21:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Help to link an article WRONGLY added on Wikidata

Hello Keith D! Could you add these articles properly? (Schäfer) goes with (Schäfer (Familienname) and (Schäfer (apellido)), due to somebody added The Turkish article where is NOT supposed to be, thank you so much!. RossiLeone (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

I think that I have fixed this. Keith D (talk) 09:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please check new refs - this is a Yorkshire-based page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.3.204.158 (talkcontribs) 03:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please check new sources - thanks as always T. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.3.204.158 (talkcontribs) 03:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 09:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please check new sources/citations — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.3.204.158 (talkcontribs) 07:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 09:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Please check ref number 2 and all citations (this is a North of England page!) Thanks from T. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.3.204.158 (talkcontribs) 07:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Keith D (talk) 09:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thanks a lot for your kind contribution. I'm Jo and very nice to meet you. I'm pretty new in wikipedia. May I ask you a help about my draft Alessandro Bergamini? Any kind of suggestion will be very appreciate! It's important for me understand if it's enough of if it needs improvement.

Many thanks

--Giorgia1103 (talk) 11:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)Giorgia1103

Hello, good to have some new editors. I can give a few formatting type problems with it at a quick glance.
  1. The reference tags, <ref></ref>, should come after punctuation not before.
  2. Book names should be in italics.
  3. ISBN numbers you could use the {{ISBN}} template to get a link from the number to the search page for the book, similar to the way it is done in the References section.
  4. Reference 4 - is giving a warning about unknown language
  5. May be you could change the "General references" section into prose, rather than a bulleted list, and give more details as this will help to establish their notability.
Regards Keith D (talk) 11:51, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Second Wave Feminism: 1915-1947 on "Feminism in India"

Hi, I added some edits to this section of the page that I spoke about on the talk page. I am very new to Wikipedia editing so am still getting to grips with the basics but I can assure you that I only want to make positive contributions to the pages. I do not understand why my sources are being rejected as not good when they are reputable academic journals from the past 50 years (Refashioning Mother India: Feminism and Nationalism in Late-Colonial India[1] was published in Autumn 2000 and [2] in 1985. It appears that other academical articles have been accepted as reputable sources on this page so I am curious to know what is unacceptable about the sources I have used. Is it the way I have written the information and could this be changed? I am very willing to learn as this is for an important Univerity project and I would love to make changes that are eligible to stay published on the page but all of my edits currently end up reverted. Please if there is any way you can advise me do let me know.

Many thanks

Heroicmernaids98 (talk) 12:22, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, you would have to ask User:Fowler&fowler who actually reverted your changes with an edit summary of "Restored revision 1035836881 by Natpalit (talk): Sorry, but do not seem to be WP:DUE. It is best to examine WP:TERTIARY sources for what carries due weight". My change was just to correct an error in the date format of a cite. Keith D (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear @Heroicmernaids98: P. W. Wilson in his review of Mother India (by Katherine Mayo), NY Times, June 5, 1927, wrote, "The facts that she states are not likely to be disputed. The only question is whether she has stated the facts in their true proportion. Having seen life in India, has she seen it whole?" Although Wikipedia was not around at that time, Wison had given in those three sentences a pretty good idea of what constitutes due weight in a high level topic. As I had explained to you before, you have picked low-level journal articles and have added their conclusions to these high-level articles. It is best that widely-read undergraduate books (see WP:TERTIARY) make those conclusions (in their summary of secondary sources). If these points of view do not appear in these books, then these facts have not been stated "in their true proportion." This is essentially the problem with your edits. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 16:27, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Refashioning Mother India: Feminism and Nationalism in Late-Colonial India by Mrinalini Sinha
  2. ^ Gender and Imperialism in British India by Joanna Liddle and Rama Joshi

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - August 2021

Delivered August 2021 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:33, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

20:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

About Maharashtra floods

The Maharashtra government declared 11,500cr package for flood victims Reference - https://english.gnptimes.in/11500-crore-package-for-flood-victims/ I hope you will update it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niranjan2209 (talkcontribs) 11:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I presume that this applies to 2021 Maharashtra floods article. Keith D (talk) 08:38, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
I am unsure of the exact details to insert here, so I have dropped the link on to the article's talk page for others with some background on the subject to deal with. Keith D (talk) 08:43, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Edits to Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust

Hi Keith,

I notice that you keep reverting the updates to the Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust page that I have made recently. I have permission of the organisation to update this with the content that I provided before. The content that is currently shown on the page is out of date and holds information that is incorrect. I have provided reasons for this within my edit reasons and would like to update it. There is no copyright infringement on the content I am updating. I would like to ask that we update this to the correct and accurate information with it being reverted back please?

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by HTFT (talkcontribs) 07:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)


The content is an exact copy of the information on the trust's website and appears to be copyrighted and as such we cannot take the information. If it is released under an appropriate license then follow the instructions I left on your talk page. There is also no third party references to support the changes that you are trying to make. Keith D (talk) 08:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Nsj Mali article

Hello Keith,

I hope you are well in these uncertain times that we live in. I am not too sure on how to use wikipedia but respect its impact on the world and longstanding positive approach on information sharing to no end. I saw that you edited the article that I drafted and put out as a proposal and was wondering how I would go about getting the page approved or improving it. Thank you for your time and I hope you enjoy your afternoon. Many Thanks, James :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesLydoss (talkcontribs) 10:54, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello James, I am fine, just waiting for the oven to ping me when lunch is ready.
To submit the page for approval put {{AfC submission}} at the top of the article, and it will place it in to the queue of articles to be looked at.
I would suggest that you try to find sources to back up some details in the article as only the lead paragraph has sources. Probably this is the one that his high on the reviewer's agenda and that would get the article rejected if not supported by reliable sources.
On the formatting side a few pointers -
  1. Bold the title of the article at the start.
  2. The date need to have the ordinal removed and the month expanded.
  3. Puctuation goes before the <ref></ref> tags.
  4. The second ref is giving an error, suggest you just remove the |first1= parameter as it duplicates |website=.
  5. I would probably drop the "Age" or use a template, such as {{Birth date and age}}, to generate it as it will go out of date and need an annual update.
  6. Could add the section header for the references by placing ==References== where the reference's section should be and generate the references with {{Reflist}}. Currently the references are automatically generated and not placed by the user.
  7. May be you could suggest some categories for the article to go in to when published. Put them at the bottom and add a colon at the start like [[:Category:Living person]] or just forget the colon and wrap them in the {{Draft categories}} template.
Hope these are useful. Keith D (talk) 13:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Missing Pipes in a Reference

Hi Keith, I saw that you fixed two references of mine today in the page "Historic country estates in Lake County, Ohio". I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong or how to fix it myself. I'll probably be adding similar references soon and would like not to leave mistakes behind like that again. Jbarrow51 (talk) 00:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, you can find the problem by looking at the hidden categories that the article gets added to. You can see the hidden categories by setting the flag in preferences, on the Appearances tab under Advanced options check "Show hidden categories". Many of them are irrelevant tracking categories, but the one for the pipe problem is Category:CS1 errors: missing pipe. If you find the article has that category then you can look through the references and there will be a red message on the one with the error. The message "Missing pipe in: |issue= (help)" gives you the name of the field where it thinks the problem is, in this case the |issue= field. Hope this helps. Keith D (talk) 00:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

16:18, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Railway line moves

You recently ran a script on about 100 station articles after one (or more, I haven't checked everything) train lines were moved. Where was the consensus for this move? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:33, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I closed Talk:South_West_Main_Line#Requested move 20 July 2021 as move and was slowly making the changes to linked articles/templates to reflect change in name to the 5 articles, as there was a large number of these. Keith D (talk) 11:08, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Ah okay. I don't have any views either way, but it now means Ashford International railway station#Location and services, which lists several lines the station connect to, now has a mix of caps and lower case depending on whether an RM has been filed for it. I think possibly we might need an RfC to do the whole lot. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
This move was a follow-on from Great Western Main Line which had a unanimous close as move to get all the lines using Main Line in to the same case. I would guess that if we go for all of the ones that were de-caped in the last few years that there would not be agreement and we would still end up with a mixture. Though a significant number of people were just piping the lower case version to show upper case. Keith D (talk) 11:41, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Changing the links in templates was fine; changing the links in articles could be seen as running foul of WP:NOTBROKEN. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Hi, regarding the article "Onam" that you have edited recently , Onam is a Hindu festival celebrated in Kerala, India(citations given). But recently it's being changed back and forth, although proper citations are given, non existent terms like "Indian mythology" have been added. Onam is celebrated religiously by majority of Hindus and culturally by many non Hindus(this aspect has been added multiple times in the article). However, the keyword "Hindu" has been edited out from multiple sentences of the article which made the article very misleading. Could you please look into it? Thank you! Jai Bhavani(Hail the Goddess) (talk) 03:58, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I cannot help with the content as I have no knowledge of the subject. I have semi-protected the article for a month so prevent the IP edits that appear to have all been reverted. Hopefully this will give a breathing space to get the article back into shape. Though it has been protected a number of times before over edit-warring so may not be enough, and may need to go to administrator only editing, but I am reluctant to do that without having a knowledge of the subject. Keith D (talk) 09:28, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for responding. I'm very concerned about the edits being made by a user called "trengabellam",he/she/they have completely changed the page according to his/her/their narrative and perspective, thereby editing out the contributions of other editors and contributors without discussing about the changes in the talk pages, have also edited out many citations. Changes span from 50 to 100 edits. The user "trengabellam" have made similar disruptive changes in other Wikipedia articles as well according to his/her/their narrative without discussing it with the editors and contributors. Please take note. Thanks! Jai Bhavani(Hail the Goddess) (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

19:25, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Hoping you might be able to adjust two new refs. Thanks again T.

Please look at new refs.

Sorry, new refs today that I have totally got wrong - numbers 4 and 5 - please leave in quotes but fix if you can and thanks T.

Archive 75Archive 77Archive 78Archive 79Archive 80Archive 81Archive 85