Talk:Francis Parker Yockey

Untitled
Remer was anything but a "conservative thinker". Being in command of the Berlin garrison when the attempt on Hitler`s life took place on July 20th 1944, Remer was responsible for the mass killings of conservative German officers. It was Remer and his soldiers who court-martialled and shot Stauffenberg and his companions. Remer might have been a gallant and dashing soldier, but apart from that, he was a Nazi scoundrel who took pride in quelling Stauffenberg`s coup d`etat for the rest of his life.

Relations With Willis Carto
I read in Laird Wilcox's 1996 book American Extremists that Willis Carto was opposed to many of the more liberal views espoused by Yokey (apparently, Carto attempted to ignore this and promote choice pro-Nazi and anti-semitic tidbits in The Spotlight). Permission to add this info? 69.248.43.27 02:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

On calling Yockey a "philosopher"
Philosophy is defined on Wikipedia as "Philosophy is the study of general problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, truth, beauty, justice, validity, mind, and language." Therefore, it is entirely accurate to say that he was a philosopher. I did modify the term to "political philosopher" since that is the area with which he dealt the most, however. --Jbmorgan4 (talk) 18:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think he's mostly concerned with politics and political doctrines, instead of "philosophy" in conventional sense (i.e. ontology, epistemology, ethics). Even Ayn Rand, whose status as philosopher became an edit war on Wikipedia, pondered and wrote on those fundamental philosophical issues, while Yockey has concerned himself exclusively in politics. George W. Bush has formulated his political doctrine (Bush Doctrine), but he is not a philosopher, not even a political philosopher. Wandering Courier (talk) 18:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

That's not true. There is political content to Yockey's writing, but he also engaged with various metaphysical topics as well such as the nature of history. To compare Yockey's Imperium to the Bush Doctrine is absurd. Oswald Spengler, upon whose work Yockey modeled his own writing, is called a philosopher on Wikipedia. If Spengler is a philosopher, then Yockey should qualify as well (or else there needs to be a serious debate about what constitutes philosophy on Wikipedia, and many other entries will need revision as well).--Jbmorgan4 (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * His work after all is named Imperium: The Philosophy of History and Politics. Derpian (talk) 03:47, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:FPYIMPERIUM.JPG
Image:FPYIMPERIUM.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

"Imperium" is not dedicated to Hitler?
Hitler is not mentioned anywhere in the book (although Mussolini is acknowledged) - so I am inclined to question whether the work really was dedicated to Hitler, as stated in this "Wikipedia" article's main page. In addition, it may be indicative that the word 'hero' in Yockey's dedication - is not capitalized. DLMcN (talk) 21:23, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

No challenge has been received to my above claim - nor even a reply - so presumably I can now go ahead and delete the piece concerned? DLMcN (talk) 10:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello there Redhanker ... You really need a specific citation in order to claim that Yockey 'revered Hitler'. I have read most [or all?] of Yockey's [important] writings, and have never seen any evidence to support what you say. By way of contrast, Yockey does praise Mussolini, but Hitler is never mentioned at all in "Imperium", nor in any of Yockey's "Four Essays", etc. Regards, --DLMcN (talk) 05:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


 * This section of code was taken directly from another article in Wikipedia which has been there quite a long time. I don't think there are any credible sources to support the claim he did not revere hitler, rather most sources indicate he was a seminal neo-Nazi if not an actual Nazi agent according to some reports. That he continues to influence people still active in politics such as David Duke and Willis Carto makes Yockey and his views, particularly towards National Socialism, of considerable importance today. Redhanker (talk) 13:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for replying > [I do not deny your very last sentence^]. What "other article" in Wikipedia are you referring to? ... I would be interested to see what sources it uses. Wikipedia procedures require that we quote 'reliable citations' in order to make a point - rather than the other way around - (i.e., we are not justified in assuming something purely on the grounds that nobody has asserted the contrary). However - surely the fact that Yockey never ever mentions Hitler - anywhere in his writings - is evidence that (like Spengler) Yockey had reservations about him?


 * So I am going to remove those claims from the main article: (Indeed, as you will see above, I did something similar in November 2010). I hope this does not lead to an edit-war with you ... rather, let us see what other editors say. Regards --DLMcN (talk) 16:20, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I am currently reading Imperium (for educational purposes) and i would have to agree with DLMcN as of now, but I am not finished and will hopefully be able to 100% confirm it (in maybe a month or two).RedLionSit (talk) 06:43, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Yockey and Spengler
I am inclined to put back the piece: "Although he [= Yockey] was a devotee of Oswald Spengler (who was critical of the Nazis)," - which was removed by Treybien on 25th June. That^ statement is correct, and it is important. Spengler criticised the anti-Semitic policies of the Nazis - despite the fact that in the mid-1930s they were still 'mild' compared with the appalling horrors which would unfold in the 1940s --DLMcN (talk) 16:43, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Francis Parker Yockey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041009224151/http://www.nsm88.com/articles/renaissance%20press%20catalogue.html to http://www.nsm88.com/articles/renaissance%20press%20catalogue.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:58, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Francis Parker Yockey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012171404/http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/carto.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=2&item=carto to http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/carto.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=2&item=carto
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040905224553/http://www.autonomedia.org/dreameroftheday2.html to http://www.autonomedia.org/dreameroftheday2.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041108115135/http://www.autonomedia.org/dreameroftheday3.html to http://www.autonomedia.org/dreameroftheday3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Picture?
There are plenty of pictures of Yockey available--could we upload one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.254.237.80 (talk) 04:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Francis Parker Yockey.jpg

Pertaining to recent edit conflicts
Yockey was an antisemite, a Nazi sympathizer, a fascist, and a white nationalist. The sky is blue. Any disagreement? Mewnst (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Putting all of those designations in the lede in that form fail to properly show complexity of his views since his relation to all those worldviews require more detailed elaborations. For example, he did support National Socialism, but he also disagreed with it on some topics, namely about race, as illustrated by his book Imperium. Also, a "pan-European nationalist" and "Spenglerian" would be good characterizations of his views as well. ArsenalAtletico2017 (talk) 20:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you arguing that Yockey wasn't those things, or are you arguing that he was those things but that you prefer to use different terms? Mewnst (talk) 21:47, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Yockey was all of those things but he was more than that, for instance he was also a spy of sorts, the point is that making this the emphasis for people who want know about his political contacts for example and the implications that had in the broader cold war. StrongALPHA (talk) 18:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * In a sense he was also a philosopher and a "Spenglerite", etc (all the things that ArsenalAtletico2017) mentioned above, because those things were a major influence on the writting he put out. I mean we could all start putting White Supremacist into the first sentence about Hegel or Kant because of their obviously racist attitudes. StrongALPHA (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

ArsenalAtletico2017, your edits removed some references to Yockey's and Imperium's Nazism from the top. Do you want to discuss the rationale and sources? Llll5032 (talk) 22:47, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Redirect from The Enemy of Europe
I have redirected to this article from The Enemy of Europe after that article was deemed to be not notable by a rough talk page consensus (with one editor dissenting). If anyone would like to argue for recreating that article, feel free to do so here. Generalrelative (talk) 03:49, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Lee citations
Hi. It looks like you added some sfn citations to Lee 2013. Are these references to The Beast Awakens? And if so, do the page numbers come from the 1997, 2000, or some later version? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:39, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. I just switched the refs to 2000. Llll5032 (talk) 15:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. One Lee 2013 left Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That ref should have been Goodrick-Clarke, fixed. Llll5032 (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Similar question but for Goodrick-Clarke 2003. Looks like the paperback came out that year, but our only full ref is to the 2002 version. Do you remember which you used? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 2003, thanks. Llll5032 (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Influence
I´m going to delete the claim that Schmitt had a copy of Imperium, unless someone else here has evidence of the specific. I want to get to the bottom of who placed this article under need of better verification. StrongALPHA (talk) 15:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

I would like to add a section on Alexander Scharf
I understand that it comes from the Coogan, but let me look at it again I think the book itself includes alternate sources for the claims it makes. StrongALPHA (talk) 17:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Philosophy and Occult
I understand some of it like mentioning H.G. Wells may sound a bit generic, but there is a point to this, that this was a subject that highly interested Yockey. In the case of Wells, I only mention it because it was found in his suitcase alongside the occult material that the FBI took at the time of his suicide. StrongALPHA (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Yockey a Young Earth Creationist?
in his work Imperium he states there have been 5 Millenium of history. Implying belief in a 5,000 or so year old Earth. 2600:1702:CC7:1A20:7DB7:6AFE:EBD0:A75F (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * If a reliable source notices this and mentions it, we can use it. If not, we cannot. We do not scan the person's writings for stupid ideas, we let secondary sources do that. See WP:OR. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * if I find the exact Citation, will you include it? 2600:1702:CC7:1A20:7DB7:6AFE:EBD0:A75F (talk) 02:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Update: It is on Page 21 of Imperium. A simple reading of a pdf of the novel will confirm this, striaght from Yockey himself. 2600:1702:CC7:1A20:7DB7:6AFE:EBD0:A75F (talk) 02:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Not a reliable source. See also WP:PRIMARY. We do not scan the output of crackpots to collect all the weird ideas they have. Instead, we let reliable secondary sources do that. --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:26, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * He's not, in some of his other writing he distinguishes physical time from organic time, with there being approximately 5000 years of organic time (Organic time starting when the first High Culture came to be). 2601:1C0:5083:A280:C434:929D:A906:199 (talk) 00:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Neo-Nazi European empire?
To say that Yockey called for a right wing pan European empire would be correct but to say it would be neo-nazi is abnormal given how he believed that race was more so cultured based not geneticly and saying it was dedicated to hitler is strange given although he said it was dedicated to the hero of world war 2. the ideologies of Hitler and Yockey were different i.e according to Yockey a Jewish person could become a westener if he renounced his Jewish beliefs and assimilated to westerner culture Waterdrinker11 (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * look, i don´t personally care too much either wy, I am neutral on this topic, but its not completely wrong to describe as being "Neonazi" bearing in mind that the nazi movement included many people who disagreed with the racial views of Hitler, just look at the differences between him Rosenberg and Himmler. StrongALPHA (talk) 00:09, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Rosenberg made the Nazi racial hierarchy. The only real difference being Rosenberg and Himmler was religion. Himmler and Rosenberg thought that Germany was the heart of the west while Yockey believed that all western cultures were the heart of the Western superculture. Waterdrinker11 (talk) 16:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Per the cited RS, Imperium "called for a transnational, neo-Nazi European Empire" and it is "dedicated to 'the hero of the Second World War' (Adolf Hitler)". Llll5032 (talk) 17:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Early Life Section Issue
As is, it says in the early life section that Yockey's biographer Kevin Coogan "wrote that Yockey's associate James Madole once claimed Yockey was one-quarter Jewish, but there is no evidence for this". The latter part is true, there is no evidence for this. Less than 5 minutes after editing it, it was reverted saying that I "missed the point" as "james madole was someone close to yockey" As to this, it is important to understand the context in which it is stated in Coogan's biography. He states that Madole wrote in passing that Yockey was "quarter-Jewish" in an article, however it is vital to mention the fact that the article (which, by the way, I cannot find a source of besides reference to it in the book) was an attempt to defend a friend of his, Dan Burros (who was also heavily inspired by Yockey) who was a vicious anti-semite after Burros commited suicide after being exposed for being Jewish himself. Given the context that this was something Madole only mentioned in passing to try to defend a friend of his who now had his only legacy among anti-semites, this does not hold weight at all, and it holds even lesser weight when you consider Madole did not even know Yockey by his real name, but rather a fake identity (it is possible Yockey could have lied about being quarter-Jewish, but I doubt this) so Madole was not exactly an expert when it came to details of Yockey's life. But that's not all. Coogan tries to claim that he cannot "confirm nor deny" that Yockey's grandfather was Jewish as his grandfather was actually.. not his grandfather? Coogan then tries to back this up by stating that Yockey's putative grandfather, the German-born Valentin Yocky/Jacky could not have been Yockey's grandfather because the old man's gravestone says he died in 1883, while Yockey's dad wasn't born until 1886. However, censuses, draft registrations, and consular records mostly state that Yockey's father Louis was born in May 1883. I think that pretty much dispels Coogan's point, especially considering one of the few things Coogan consistantly got wrong in his biography were details of Yockey's family, but as to not gloss over any detail I will bring up the other part Coogan tried to use as an argument for this. He states: "Alice told the FBI that 'her nephew is very pro-German, and she is of the opinion that this pro-German attitude was brought about by the influence Yockey's grandfather, who was a German, had on Yockey.' Since Francis clearly knew his grandfather, he could not have been Valentine Yockey". This vague statement teaches us very little about Yockey, and it does not show that Yockey's grandfather was some mystery man instead of what it says on all Government documents, it could simply mean that Yockey was pro-German due to the fact that his grandfather was German, or that his grandfather inspired him. Additionally, if his grandfather were Jewish, don't you think his aunt would think to mention this to the FBI who was investigating his political activities which they knew included open anti-semitic stances?

Given everything I have written, I do not believe this should be written in the article any more than Yockey being a unicorn, as there is there is "no evidence for this" either. If you do plan on reverting me again, I do hope you explain as to why before doing so. 67.254.242.193 (talk) 02:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I feel bad for that unicorn bit, it is worth clarifying that it was only in jest and not an attack to you or anything. Sometimes my tone in text seems a bit angry with the punctuation, lol 67.254.242.193 (talk) 02:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Listen, I understand some of your reasons from wanting this removed, but the greater point here is that Madole referring to yockey as being a quarter jewish is not nothing actually, of course there is no evidence in the straightforward sense, but madole who made this remark on one occaision to defend Dan Burros when his heritage was revealed leads me to not dismiss this. On separate note, do you have proper WP account or do you just make edits directly from your IP address, I´m not inclined to yield to someone who is a mere IP address, who has only made 10 edits with his account. StrongALPHA (talk) 23:44, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello. I apologize for my late response and for responding on a different IP, I'm traveling right now. IIRC I have a WP account, I could make one but I don't really see the need to make one. If it could help you change your mind, then sure. Wouldn't Madole only bringing it up for the sake of saving face for his friend who was lying about his heritage not help his claim? I could understand how you could take it the other way, but it mostly seems like it hurts your claim rather than helping it. Additionally, like I said, Madole knew Yockey under a different identity so it's not the best claim even if he wasn't lying on purpose. And nothing I said was from self-research in any good definition of that word.
 * Seeing as another person has agreed with me (I think?) on the talk section that it shouldn't be there and the fact that even you admit there's no proof or importance of it, I'll go ahead and remove it again now. As I said previously, if you have a reason to keep it, please detail it. 12.203.166.218 (talk) 21:12, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure, I agree, but I think this is getting lost in the weeds. We need to use sources to show why this matters without trying to interpret or second-guess the motives of unreliable primary sources. All of this about 'saving face' and so on is WP:OR. If this is significant enough to mention, we would use a reliable source to explain why it is significant, even if it's seemingly obvious. To put it another way, one guy said that another guy said one time... is nothing at all. Grayfell (talk) 23:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I would like to add that a lot of what you say sounds like more than what is written in the book, but in fact original research, which is not allowed. StrongALPHA (talk) 23:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * "a mere IP address"... Wow, that's not a good approach. If you have a reason to think the IP is acting in bad faith, spit it out, otherwise don't cast aspersions.
 * If this is significant, use a reliable independent source to provide context. If no source can be found which provides context, it should be removed. As it is, it reads too much like trivia. Grayfell (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Yockey and Hitler
Llll5032, What evidence does Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke have - to justify his [questionable] claim that Yockey was dedicating to Hitler, his book "Imperium"? ... Regards, DLMcN (talk) 08:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [User:DLMcN|DLMcN]] (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you cite any sources which suggest that Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke - who seems to have impeccable credentials in subject-matter expertise - was making a 'questionable' claim? Because if you can't, we are unlikely to take your word for it. As you are no doubt aware, Wikipedia bases its content on published sources, and doesn't reject such sources solely on the basis that we don't agree with them. And no, we don't insist that such sources provide 'evidence' for anything they say. That is clearly an endless rabbit-hole, leading nowhere constructive. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Andy - The fact that Yockey's "Imperium" never actually mentions Hitler by name, must indicate that Yockey had reservations about him. [On the other hand Yockey does acknowledge Mussolini, and even praises him].
 * Andy - The fact that Yockey's "Imperium" never actually mentions Hitler by name, must indicate that Yockey had reservations about him. [On the other hand Yockey does acknowledge Mussolini, and even praises him].


 * I would therefore be interested to see what Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke wrote, exactly. If he is quoting other sources, then surely it would be relevant to mention them here. --DLMcN (talk) 09:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Black Sun is viewable on the Internet Archive. The comment regarding the dedication is on page 76. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you Andy - that was really helpful.
 * For the record, Goodrick-Clarke just writes a single, very brief sentence to support that point:
 * "Imperium is dedicated to 'the hero of the Second World War' (Adolf Hitler)."


 * --DLMcN (talk) 10:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Which is all we need, barring WP:RS that disputes the statement. AndyTheGrump (talk) 10:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * If Nicholas G-C was still alive, I would be tempted to write to and question him, and perhaps even draw his attention to this discussion... [Admittedly, any correspondence arising from that would probably not be relevant in Wikipedia !] --DLMcN (talk) 11:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * If Ouija boards worked, we could ask Yockey too. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Also relevant, a quote from Anthony Mostrom, writing in the Los Angeles Review of Books: :
 * Yockey wrote Imperium under the pseudonym Ulick Varange, which to him symbolized the meeting of Ireland-with-Russia. The writer was savvy enough not to mention the names Hitler or National Socialism in the book at all, instead relying on code terms like “Prussian Socialism” and “the European Revolution of 1933” to get his neofascist message across. Imperium’s basic message at the time was to assure hardcore fascists across the globe that their Nazi dreams were not in vain, that fascism truly did represent the realization of the Spirit of the Age, and that “the day” would come again, if fascists would avoid petty-statism in pursuit of the Imperium.
 * Mostrum may not have quite the credentials that Goodrick-Clarke did, but he seems to have written about Yockey on several occasions. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Eureka ! ... I have found the necessary evidence which demonstrates that [Yes!] Yockey did indeed dedicate "Imperium" to Hitler.


 * I have to mention, though, that it involved a process which is "forbidden" in Wikipedia - i.e., engaging in Original Research. However, it is important information, so I will present it here:


 * On six occasions, Yockey writes about someone whom he calls "the Hero" - in contexts which can only refer to Hitler:


 * 1. For the benefit of readers of 2050, I may say that the Hero and the Philosopher of the period 1900-1950 were both invisible to their contemporaries in the historical dimensions in which you see them.
 * 2. Neither Wallenstein, Cromwell, Napoleon, nor the Hero that we have seen, attained absolute success.
 * 3. Alexander the Great, Frederick the Great, Cromwell, Napoleon, the Hero of this age, all impressed most people at the beginning of their careers, as being unworldly, out of touch with Reality.
 * 4. The creative man in politics ... thinks along one line, and one line only. This gives to his enemies the opportunity of convincing many that he is mentally ill, and they have never failed to do so, from Alexander to the Hero we have seen.
 * 5. The Western demand for sharp accents in History will repose gigantic forces in the hands of individual men. The Hero whom we have seen was a symbol of the Future.
 * 6. The West ... must reconquer the world-supremacy which the jealous little opponents of the Hero flung to the winds.
 * It might [?] be worth including, in the main article, a very brief mention of that^ supporting evidence, despite the fact that it resulted from "Original Research".
 * --DLMcN (talk) 19:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a publisher of original research. Even when it proves the obvious. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, fair enough ... To me it was not obvious, until about three hours ago... Cheers! --DLMcN (talk) 19:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, fair enough ... To me it was not obvious, until about three hours ago... Cheers! --DLMcN (talk) 19:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)