User talk:Ytzesza

Nomination of Diamonds (Lil Peep and iLoveMakonnen album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Diamonds (Lil Peep and iLoveMakonnen album), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diamonds (Lil Peep and iLoveMakonnen album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Dispatch (band), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Isabelle ^🏳‍🌈 20:38, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Hello, I'm Ingenuity. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Lil Tjay, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 20:11, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm PhantomTech. I noticed that in this edit to Mojave (album), you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. PHANTOMTECH (talk) 20:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Mick Mars.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Mick Mars.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vladlen Manilov ✉ / 04:02, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dinosaur (Disney's Animal Kingdom). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 09:06, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Hello, I'm Dr.Pinsky. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Tipper Gore—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 11:43, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Standard notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Dr.Pinsky (talk) 11:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Aimee Osbourne.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Aimee Osbourne.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Aimee Osbourne.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Aimee Osbourne.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/ozzy-daughter-admits-tune-siblings-article-1.2352658. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whpq (talk) 15:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Ytzesza! While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 15:39, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources?

Hi. I reverted your edit on Pantera. If you read the article and looked at the most recent events + the Members section, you'd see that they are technically active since 2022.

Regardless, I'm posting on your talk page about something else. You've made 169 edits since late April, yet, 48 of them have been reverted. That's nearly half of your edits. Most importantly, out of those 169 edits, you have not cited a single source. For something minor like correcting grammar or adding something that's obvious, a source probably isn't needed, but for other substantial additions, it is needed. See here. Just trying to give you a heads up before you get blocked. Xanarki (talk) 00:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey so the reason I don’t use sources for all of it is cuz I don’t know how to cite it on here. And most of my edits were things I knew were correct. Some were fixing stuff too like I fixed shout at the devil on the page cuz if u pressed the song it would redirect to ur current page so I removed the [[ of the side. Ytzesza (talk) 00:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you can learn about referencing at Help:Referencing for beginners. Wikipedia has a policy on verifiability, all information in articles should be supported by reliable sources. PhantomTech[talk] 01:00, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing is not an option. If you want to edit Wikipedia, please learn how to include proper citations when adding or changing content. See Help:Referencing for beginners as noted above.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Patient Number 9, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. HorrorLover555 (talk) 02:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Patient Number 9. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. PhantomTech[talk] 02:57, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at Patient Number 9, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stop calling other editors names. Remain civil and use the talk page. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 04:09, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn’t harassing someone Ytzesza (talk) 05:14, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you did. Here and here. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 08:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Live Evil (Black Sabbath album). - FlightTime (open channel) 05:24, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was on accident it’s a discography for the band only tho so I was tryna move it and it fucked it up and I didn’t know how to fix it. Ytzesza (talk) 05:29, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also do u know if I’m allowed to have multiple accounts on Wikipedia? I won’t do anything bad just want an alt account for like school or public Wi-Fi cuz ion wanna be tracked Ytzesza (talk) 05:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Wild Side (Mötley Crüe song), you may be blocked from editing. Sources must show the song meets WP:NSONG MB 03:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not disrupting Wikipedia. I will source whatever is needed to be sourced in that article just don’t make it a redirect

Ytzesza (talk) 20:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Kurt Cobain. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. PhilKnight (talk) 11:04, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editwarring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Patient Number 9. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New message from FlightTime

Hello, Ytzesza. You have new messages at FlightTime's talk page.
Message added 03:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

- FlightTime (open channel) 03:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Motley cruewildside.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Motley cruewildside.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:30, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shout at the Devil (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hollywood. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content related to living persons

Hello, I'm Marchjuly. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Kurt Cobain, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:09, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) Hi Ytzesza. Even though Cobain is dead, WP:BLP still applies to content about other persons who are still living that you want to add to the article. Your recent addition of content about Courtney Love was considered to be so problematic per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons that not only was it reverted, it was also subsequently WP:SUPPRESSed by a Wikipedia oversighter so that it's no longer viewable in the page's history. You need to be very careful when adding content like this to any Wikipedia page (not just articles). Even if you believe it too be true and can find a reliable source to support such content, you still need to be very careful per WP:BLPREMOVE and WP:BLPCRIME, and most likely the best thing to do would be to be very WP:CAUTIOUS and seek consensus to add the content first on the article's talk page. If you simply meant well this time and just made a mistake then that's OK, but be very careful not to make the same mistake too many times because doing so is likely going to lead an administrator stepping in and possibly blocking your account. If you want to add content about living person to an article and you're not sure whether it's OK to do so, please seek assistance on the article's talk page or at a noticeboard like WP:HD or WP:BLPN. Be also very careful to word your requests for help in a manner that also doesn't violation any relevant Wikipedia policies or guidelines. Don't just repost verbatim claims you've read somewhere else, but try to rephrase things in such a way that avoids violating WP:BLP but also allows others to understand what you're trying to ask. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:29, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Die Young (Black Sabbath song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Glenn Hughes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:TheMob.Rules.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:TheMob.Rules.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:30, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Black Sabbath. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to City Girls, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Schläger4 (talk) 19:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article isn’t notable at alk Ytzesza (talk) 19:50, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ytzesza: would you please explain why the City Girls aren't notable enough for an article? —VersaceSpace 🌃 20:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Explain how it is are notable Ytzesza (talk) 22:12, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's trolling, but also an easy question to answer. They have two charting albums and at least five charted songs in the US (as seen here). This makes them notable per WP:NMUSICIAN's second criteria. Only one criteria has to be met, but the others are met too: The duo has been discussed in reliable sources, so they meet criteria one as well. They have Gold and Platinum records, so they meet criteria three too. They've released multiple records through an important record label (Capitol Records), so criteria 5 is met. They've been nominated for BET and Billboard Music Awards, criteria eight is met. They're important figures in southern hip hop, criteria 7 is met. They've had several singles sent to radio, criteria 11 is met. They've been on a notable tour with Jack Harlow, criteria 4 is met. Now, would you please explain how they are not notable? Thank you. —VersaceSpace 🌃 00:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TheMob.Rules.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TheMob.Rules.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 22:55, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How long is the block?? Ytzesza (talk) 22:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One week. Given your track record, I feel obliged to warn you that this is probably the last block you will receive with an expiration date. I suggest you tread very carefully when the block expires. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn’t trying to be disruptive I honestly thought it was ok to make it a redirect I am really sorry. How do I use the unblock template Ytzesza (talk) 23:08, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have a wall of warnings on your page indicating bad editing habits and or a very poor grasp of our policies and guidelines. I think you would do well to spend the next week reviewing our guidelines for editing with an emphasis on WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:RS and WP:GNG. But if you want to appeal the block, you can copy and paste the template in the notice above, below this comment. Be sure to include a clear statement that you understand why you have been blocked, how you are going to correct the problematic editing and what you intend to work on. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:22, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ytzesza (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Was not trying to be disruptive. I just didn’t think city girls were not notable and I am sorry for that. They are just not that known I guess. I won’t do that again if you unblock me and I’ll source everything I do. I meant no harm making the article a redirect.

Decline reason:

It's hard to believe you actually thought that, given apparently platinum-certified singles and no fewer than 50 references on that page. Frankly, I'm not buying it. I mean, I hadn't heard of them either, but there's zero chance I'd have claimed they were non-notable, given that article. Frankly, if you weren't trying to be disruptive, we need to immediately block you indefinitely because you lack sufficient competence to continue editing Wikipedia. If you were trying to be disruptive, please take this week to decide if you're willing to knock it off and contribute constructively going forward. Yamla (talk) 10:22, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

also why do u think the next block will be perminate? I’ve had one other block before this Ytzesza (talk) 23:31, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting that the City Girls aren't known (followed by a redirect to Lil Uzi Vert) is either trolling, misogyny, or both. Continue going down this path and you can expect an indefinite block. —VersaceSpace 🌃 00:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I legit didn’t know Ytzesza (talk) 00:17, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also responded to wrong message Ytzesza (talk) 00:28, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HorrorLover555 (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ytzesza. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 13:32, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]