User talk:Steel1943/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Happy New Year, Steel1943!

Happy New Year!

Steel1943,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 00:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 00:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Cricket articles

Thanks. Despite being around for ages and ages I didn't realise that I could go down the speedy route for the redirects I'd identified. I'll take any others I find down that route.

As you're currently doing all the DENY stuff, can I ask you to take a look at List of English cricket people to 1787? This was moved to its current title in September, without discussion from List of English cricketers to 1771 and now overlaps with List of English cricketers (1772–1786). By the same sock. Because it's quite complex I was saving that for later, but if you're in a position to move it back over the redirect then I'll tidy up everything behind that. No worries if that's not possible just now. Blue Square Thing (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

• @Blue Square Thing: Done, I believe. Steel1943 (talk) 02:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

• • Thank you. I'll get on tidying it up today. There will probably be a few other moves that might need attention, but we'll get to those at some point. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleting your comment

Sorry if the deletion seemed rude at Talk:Smartphone zombie, that wasn't the intention, appreciated you making the correction that I'd missed. I just wanted to spare every visiting RM editor from having to read through an extra paragraph of me overexplaining something that wasn't relevant any more. Belbury (talk) 17:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Belbury: I know it wasn't your intention to be rude, but yeah, WP:TPO is pretty strict. There's another solution for this that will probably work for both of us ... one moment ... Steel1943 (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Belbury: See edit. Steel1943 (talk) 18:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Looks like Wikipedia:Mutual withdrawal might be a simpler option? I hereby give you permission to erase my comment! But if you prefer to have the record kept, that's fair enough. Belbury (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Belbury: I've been editing regularly for over a decade, and I had no idea that essay existed. I consent to that, and I'll take care of it. Steel1943 (talk) 18:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

A new one to me as well, turns out it was only written last year. Thanks for tolerating my persistence! Belbury (talk) 18:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

thanks for starting the rm for me, i'm fairly new to wiki-ing

anything else i should know about this procedurally DarmaniLink (talk) 18:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@DarmaniLink: I'd consider editing your comment a bit so that it reads like a move proposal rather than you stating you are going to move the page. Other than that, everything else has now been done. Steel1943 (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

alright, thanks DarmaniLink (talk) 18:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

IPs can close discussions

Steel, how you found what upcomings that are no longer upcoming? Also, it's the first time I closed a discussion and moved it to the talk page. That discussion is actually a wrong forum, which is a page move request. 176.88.82.7 (talk) 16:06, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Steel, they are added to "Upcoming no longer upcoming" section by me

No, do not revert. They are all my deletion suggestions, and I'm your helper. 176.88.82.7 (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

READ MY COMMENT ON YOUR PAGE. MY CAPS IS INTENTIONAL AS YOU ARE PISSING ME OFF. Steel1943 (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

"Garuda (upcoming film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Garuda (upcoming film) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 3 § Garuda (upcoming film) until a consensus is reached. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 18:51, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

RM template

Does the RM template actually break if the numbers are non-sequential? I was initially cleaning that up but appeared to be functioning fine - if it was only appearing to, I'll make sure to fix that in the future. BilledMammal (talk) 07:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

• @BilledMammal: To answer your question: Yes. See this edit, which was performed by a bot on the RM discussion list page after I fixed the nomination template. Steel1943 (talk) 15:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
  • Thank you BilledMammal (talk) 22:39, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

"Cheese & onion" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Cheese & onion has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 20 § Cheese and Onion until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Contested move

A contested move on which you commented at WP:RM/TR has been transferred to Talk:Pinocchio (Soundtrack from the Netflix Film)#Requested move 27 March 2023. - Station1 (talk) 23:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

"Template:G14" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:G14 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 8 § Template:G14 until a consensus is reached. 192.76.8.84 (talk) 14:30, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Deleting link templates

Hi there! I'm nominating a few or many templates you have created that produce many internal links. You can find it's entry here. I invite you to discuss the nomination there. SWinxy (talk) 05:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Gru (disambiguation)

Can't we/I just link Despicable Me in the page? ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

• No since Gru exists: There can be only one blue like per line. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attacks from C. A. Russell. Thank you. Randi Moth ^Talk_Contribs 11:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your work!

Just wanted to pop by and give some encouragement and thanks. You are very obviously a skilled and dedicated Wikipedia contributor and not a robot. I appreciate you! Dylnuge ^{(Talk • Edits)} 16:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

May 2023

Is Kirk Thornton technically an actor? Because he is just a voice actor. ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 20:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

• I'm not sure what you are taking about since you did not link any articles, but most likely, WP:PRECISE is relevant. Steel1943 (talk) 15:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The Game

please check my last edit on that page if I gave correct info ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 07:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Accidentally deleted your RfD section

Hello, I deleted your Leave Entitlement section from today's RfD in this edit. I tried to fix it here after an hour. I think it's fine, but since I didn't notice deleting it in the first place maybe you could double-check.

No idea what happened, but I'm guessing some bug wrt to those subsection edit links. I'll be less trusting of them in the future. ― Synpath 22:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

BLAR and redirect stuff

See @Sergecross73 rationale then [1]. It is fine to bold redirect or merge articles that arent notable. Also, whats with that "and please stop WP:BLARing articles as you have already been warned multiple times to stop doing this", I mean I have been warned only once by you and Haleth about Blaring GA articles, but this one isn't GA at all. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 04:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, if we're talking about something like this, and you just object a specific instance of it because of a particular article's stance, then that's fine. But you can't ask an editor to stop making WP:BOLD edits, no. There are times where specific editors are deemed disruptive if their judgement calls are consistently against standards and overturned/rejected, but I can generally anecdotally say that GreenishPickle is acting in good faith and has a relatively good track record at AFD and in merge discussions. Sergecross73 msg me 12:55, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Greenish Pickle!: Incorrect, I warned you about BLARs in general with a one-sentence mention of GA ([2]). And here's another instance of another editor reverting your BLARs in the past week: [3]. (There's I think at least 2 more I've seen in the last month, which is unfortunate since I asked you to lay off the BLARs a month ago, but the amount of effort I care to put into this at the present time is limited to requesting that you to review your article-space edits during the last month.) Bottom line is, I disagreed with the BLAR, so WP:BRD applies, and your next venue is WP:AFD. You've been warned by multiple editors on either your talk page, or reverting your BLARs, on how you doing these BLARs are bad. I've been considering starting a community discussion to ban you from BLARs, but now that I'm getting ganged up on by another editor on this (Sergecross73), it's a stick I'm probably dropping since I stay out of time-consuming drama on Wikipedia these days (if I see there a clear chance that I would need to participate in the discussion more than posting just one comment). As much as I enjoy editing Wikipedia, real life trumps this crap any day. Steel1943 (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I am not trying to "gang up on you", I'm just explaining it you, largely because another experienced editor recently seemed to suggest there's something wrong with BLARing too, which is a fine personal philosophy, but not a viewpoint you can push upon others because WP:BOLD clearly supports it. (But as you say, BOLD supports doing it once. BRD says it shouldn't happen multiple times in the same article.)

I do partially understand your frustrations- I believe the community is getting burned out on all these character merge discussions. But as long as the majority are closing as merge/redirect/delete, I doubt any community sanction would be successful. Sergecross73 msg me 15:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: Agreed, my apologies for the way I worded that. What I meant was that now that I see another side of this argument, I'm probably not going to pursue my preferred course of action because the resolution I believe needs to occur is not clearly uncontroversial. Steel1943 (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. Makes sense. Sergecross73 msg me 16:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

"It's a stick I'm probably dropping since I stay out of time-consuming drama." What a little bit dramatic but ok. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 16:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Please don't unnecessarily provoke. Sergecross73 msg me 16:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

MOS:LAYOUT

Hi! In regard to Aberdeen Angus, do please actually read the MOS page you're citing. The relevant section is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Links to sister projects, which reads (in part) "If the article has no "External links" section, then place sister links at the top of the last section in the article. More precisely, box-type templates ( ... ) have to be put at the beginning of the last section of the article (which is not necessarily the "External links" section) so that boxes will appear next to, rather than below, the list items. Do not make a section whose sole content is box-type templates". Sister-project links are not not considered to be WP:EL. Would you you be kind enough to revert your mistaken revert? Not that it really matters, except for the accessibility problem of the refs in excessively narrow columns. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:55, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Compromise edit incoming as I don't agree with the notion that sister project links are not external links ... since they are. In addition, the "...-inline" templates are not "box-type" templates ... notice that I used a different template than the "box-type template". ({{Commonscat}} vs {{Commonscat-inline}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:57, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: [4]. Steel1943 (talk) 19:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

...And wow, I don't agree with the wording of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Links to sister projects, given it makes more sense (to me) to do it the way I did. Possible discussion coming soon, provided such a discussion is not a perennial discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Wowwie, reading that section, it has a bit of contradicting instruction creep ... hope to fix that. Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: FWIW, I just reviewed WP:EL, and I cannot find anything specific there stating links to sister projects are not external links: The only Wikimedia-related mention on that page states that "non-English Wikipedia" links are not considered external links. Am I missing something? Steel1943 (talk) 21:13, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, I think it can be inferred from the statement that an External links section should not be created solely for them. I just can't see the point of creating such a section (which functions effectively as a spam magnet) when there's no need – Occam's Razor seems to apply. You might note that the box-type link had been in the article without any problem for just over fourteen years when you changed it the day before yesterday. Yes, I agree that the guidance is not clear, and possibly also not needed, but I don't think that's the most urgent problem facing the project at the moment. Thanks for the other change you made. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 07:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

Hey Steel1943, hope you're doing well. I wanted to reach out to see if you'd have any interest in rejoining the New Page Patrol team. I see that you have 2,000+ patrols and that your permission was procedurally removed after a year of inactivity. You're one of the most active editors at WP:RFD, and I could definitely use some help with the redirect backlog that's been piling up. I think your expertise in redirects would be a great asset but I completely understand if you're not interested in taking on anything more at this point in time. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:30, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh: I appreciate you reaching out to me regarding some of the work that you do here on Wikipedia, in addition to asking me if I would be interested in joining your efforts. As you noticed, I lost a lot of my privileges due to having over a year of inactivity back in 2021; At this point, I have requested all of the privileges that I have any plans on utilizing at any point in the future. (I also had the file mover privilege, but have not asked to restore that privilege because I just have not been active there since I returned back to editing; I had previously monitored the file upload log.) Long story short, after all that has happened over the past few years on and off Wikipedia, I don't have the amount of time to dedicate to Wikipedia as I used to, and I kind of just do what I want here and there in spurts, and then take sporadic breaks. I'll keep this in mind though if I ever feel like getting more involved. Steel1943 (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for editing the OP Article!!

		The Anime Barnstar
		Enjoy this special ANIME Barnstar! Babysharkboss2 was here!! 17:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions

Hello Steel1943,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages.

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

--- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 17:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Ballad for Americans (album)

Could you please move "Ballad for Americans (album)" back to "Ballad for Americans (Bing Crosby album)"? You thought that was "unnecessary disambiguation". But it was Paul Robeson who originally released the cantata as an album (a two-record set) and I think his version is more famous. (There's no article about that original album yet.) And redirect "Ballad for Americans (album)" to simply "Ballad for Americans". --Moscow Connection (talk) 03:06, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

@Moscow Connection: I made that move 7 years ago, so no. You will need to use the WP:RM process. Also, see WP:ALBUMDAB. Steel1943 (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

It's just that I thought you were an admin. (I see now, I'll just have to create an article about the Paul Robeson album.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 07:50, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:RFD work

	Washing dirty redirects
	Thanks for wringing out every WP:RDAB violation from the filthy, forgotten corners of the 2005-era Wikipedia. (Roundish ✡t) 00:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

"Berry picking" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Berry picking has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28 § Berry picking until a consensus is reached. Indefatigable (talk) 20:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Monotypic taxa

Just to note that as per the two pages linked from Wikipedia:MONOTYPICTAXA, articles about a species which is the only one in its genus, as is the case with × Tripleurocota sulfurea, are at the genus (unless this needs to be disambiguated). Peter coxhead (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

@Peter coxhead: Could you please provide to me linked names of the article(s) I moved which contradicted these guidelines? (Unfortunately, I've done more edits lately than I usually do in such a period of time, so I recall what you are referring, but not specifically.) Either way, IMO, it's a bit odd that an article is titled with its parent subject rather than itself per WP:CONCISE, so ... any chance you may know the discussion(s) which resulted in a guideline that possibly goes against WP:CONCISE? (I mean, I'm no stranger to titling and disambiguation guidelines that go against WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE, considering WP:ALBUMDAB and WP:SONGDAB, so I know it happens ... I'm just curious how it happened.) Steel1943 (talk) 00:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Peter coxhead: Never mind about the list of articles as I see you have reverted my move(s). However, just curious: Do you know of any location where there might have been discussion that led to the consensus I referenced above? Steel1943 (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a very long-standing convention across the tree of life wikiprojects, and seems to have been in place before the naming conventions guidance was split between fauna and flora, so I'm not sure where it was originally discussed; I would assume there's material in the archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life. I've never known any other convention since I started editing seriously around 2010.

You wrote "it's a bit odd that an article is titled with its parent subject rather than itself", but this isn't the case. If a genus has only one species, then if there is an article on the genus and an article on the species there's really nothing different to say in each one. Having one article with a redirect avoids duplication of content and consequent redundancy. For a monospecific genus, the genus name and the species name refer to exactly the same set of organisms, so there's no problem with WP:PRECISE. As for WP:CONCISE, the genus name is more concise than the species name, so once it's decided to have only one article, it seems to me that the genus name is the more obvious choice. But it is to some degree arbitrary which name is chosen, and other language wikis have made different choices.

Peter coxhead (talk) 07:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Peter coxhead: Regarding "If a genus has only one species, then if there is an article on the genus and an article on the species there's really nothing different to say in each one.: What I mean by that is ... at some point during some edits I have recently been performing, I found an article titled the genus but the article in its entirety described the species, which I found odd. I mean, in that case, I would believe the genus subject would have WP:REDLINK potential since it is/was not identified anywhere other than a brief mention on an article with the genus as a title, but the article is only about its only species. Meh, this policy of ours can potential cause article connection issues on Wikidata since it could lead to Wikidata claiming an article about the genus on one Wikipedia discusses the same subject of another article on another Wikipedia, but that article is about the species. (I know the English Wikipedia tends to give local policy over fixing Wikidata issues, and I could have sworn that was written somewhere in the project space, so it is what it is.) Long story short, I've been editing regularly since about 2012, and ... this is the first time I can recall running into needing to know this article titling policy at any point during my time here ... which is a bit of a surprise for me since a good portion of the edits I do on here tend to be regarding titling articles per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE in terms of disambiguation (besides my regular WP:RFD participation ... and whatever other redundant fixes I find that several articles tend to need.) Anyways, that's all I got for now, so ... as they say: Cheers! Steel1943 (talk) 20:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

There's some discussion of the Wikidata issue at User:Peter coxhead/Wikidata issues#Monotypic taxa. As noted there, it's worse than genus/species issues for more complex monotypic taxa, because, for example, the general policy on the Spanish wikipedia is one article at the highest level, on the Italian wikipedia one article at the lowest level, and on the French wikipedia one article at each level except the genus. I regard the problem as being with Wikidata: it is supposed to model the external world as it is. The policy of only allowing 1:1 links manifestly fails to represent reality. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

...I've been dealing with that Wikidata redirect linking issue for over 10 years, around the time Wikidata first went live. Now, yeah, Wikidata allows linking redirects, but only if the title is not a redirect when it is linked in Wikidata. I don't have the resources to figure out where on Wikidata this may be stated, but linking redirects directly through Wikidata links to the redirect's target instead. Annoying, but ... after discovering the initial failure to allow linking redirects over a decade ago, the fact that a workaround in Wikidata still needs to occur to link a redirect is frustrating. But, eh ... it is what it is. Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Actually, you can link directly to a title that is a redirect. When you add the link, a little icon comes up next to the title you're adding (when you hover, the text "Click to assign a badge" appears – "badge" is very odd here to me). Clicking on the icon you can choose "intentional sitelink to redirect". I'm not sure how long this has been allowed – I found it by accident. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Joyous Season

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Cremastra (talk) 22:09, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Cremastra (talk) 22:09, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	Replying to all your RfDs (that all had the same problem) made me lose a million brain cells. Anyway, how do you even log that many redirects in a day? The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 22:45, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

@The Corvette ZR1: I used to do bundled nominations, and people complained. I then split them up, and then people complain. Since there is really no third option, guess people will just complain. 😂 Steel1943 (talk) 23:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

It turns out, complaining is as addictive as beer. Also, you should tell them that complaining is literally killing them. Sadly, I'm pretty sure these don't meet RS, so... umm... uhh... idk, my brain is dead lol. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1^{(The Garage)} 23:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas, Steel1943! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 15:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

	Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!
	WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024. Happy editing, InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:12, 25 December

InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)