Talk:Stoor worm

POV censorship of Scottish National Dictionary's etymology
Under Stoor worm, the Orkney dialect stoor is cognate with Old Norse stórr and means "big". Lexical references back this clearly: However, this etymology was knee-jerk purged by Sagaciousphil and Eric Corbett in WP:IDONTLIKEIT fashion (" and "", promoting their own pet etymologies, one soley website-sourced, another reliant on their judgment call (as to which denotation should apply to this wyrm (dragon)). My experience with the ongoing Talk:Kelpie has been that the duo will basically stonewall for ever, so I am going to flip the table. Bring me to my attention that this non-neutrality problem has been rectified properly. In the meanwhile, I am leaving a standing "No" vote for any upgrade of this to GA or FA status.--Kiyoweap (talk) 12:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Edmondston (1866) An Etymological Glossary of the Shetland & Orkney Dialect pp. 119, 163.
 * Scottish National Dictionary (online search engine) under Sture


 * As you please, but surely even you ought to realise that GAN isn't a vote. And in fact neither is FAC in reality. But of course you wouldn't know that, as you've never been near either of those processes with you poorly written crap. Eric   Corbett  14:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)


 * ad hominem much? Piboy51 (talk) 13:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Variant eytomologies may exist and though sources from books seem more reliable than websites, the material in the Scottish National Dictionary may still be incorrect. More research may be needed. Slightnostalgia (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ha, the threat of spoiling the GA does work after all. Well, after denigrating my edits as "not improvement", you sneakily reinstate my stórr etymology under your own signature (in your edit ). Not only is this an abysmally WP:OWN behavior, it is such a minimal concession, maybe just to give the semblance that all I raise here is the stórr issue, and now it's been resolved.
 * If this was working like a real WP:BRD, I would have been alerted when you made the small concession, and would have reparteed then. But here is where toss the ball back into your court now: the Etymology section is still a chaotic mess: mix of only-website citable theory, the sturre bit you got on a tip from a wiki-user, and some bizarre incapability of straight-out mentioning Scottish National Dictionary where your cited definition occurs, and instead having to call it a post-1700 extension to DOST at the DSL site.--Kiyoweap (talk) 09:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Resemblance to Greek myth
This is of course OR on my part, but to me (no great classicist) there seems an obvious resemblance between this myth and that of Perseus and Andromeda, from which it might therefore have been derived. I'd be surprised if nothing scholarly has been published examining this. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * It also has certain similarities to stories such as St George's slaying of the dragon. Perhaps all myths have their origins deep in our shared human psyche, rather than being invented once and then simply repeated. Eric   Corbett  13:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yes, I believe there was some comparison done by Hartland - hopefully, we'll be able to re-start further developing this article a little bit more over the next few days.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  13:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Traill Dennison's long version
Various, regarding Traill Dennison's long version. Added two external links. --Kiyoweap (talk) 09:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC) Added #5 and #6, Added info icon--Kiyoweap (talk) 20:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC) }}
 * 1) I think Marwick says the long version appeared in Orcadian Sketch Book and reprinted in Douglas's edition of the Scottish Fairy and Folk-Tales (ca. 1893). I may not be quite accurate on this, since I am catching Marwick only in snippets. Douglas says his is from MS., and Hartland says the manuscript text and has never been printed, so that is a contradiction. Verification needed?
 * 2) Orcadian Sketch Book is a rare book, not in many libraries, nor online as far as I can tell. So Douglas's SFFT reprints becomes the most accessible resource for this.
 * 3) Only some editions of Douglas have the Stoor Worm, there used to be a copy on Google I think but no longer, and that's why I used the Hathi Trust link. But the full view may only be available to US residents.
 * 4) It is in consideration of this restricted availability that I bothered to type out the beginning of the long version text, "The goodman of Leegarth was a well-to-do udaler.." A search using this string will lead, I believe, to only one other electronic copy @electricscotland.com.--Kiyoweap (talk) 11:27, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Outside of the US, the Hathi Trust link only allows text search. Result gives page number with a piece of text (like Amazon's look inside feature).
 * 6) For non-US folks, thre was also a Google Books snippet view link.

Links to 1893? edition

 * I previously used the url for the HathiTrust description page but I am replacing this with the "Full View" link. I thought I made it abundantly clear above that the text was available for access to US residents, and didn't think anyone would have trouble navigating from one link to the other.--Kiyoweap (talk) 09:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Page specific links:
 * "Assipattle and the Mester Stoorworm" p.58 to p.72
 * "Notes .. by Mr. W. Traill Dennison" p.299 to 301 --Kiyoweap (talk) 10:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Somehow I missed HathiTrust has copy of Douglas's 1893[?] edition (first edition), which may be preferred:
 * HathiTrust description page
 * Full View page (to use as citation url= value)
 * "Assipattle and the Mester Stoorworm" p.58 to 72
 * "Notes .. by Mr. W. Traill Dennison" p.299 to 301

Dennison's long ver as base
Arguably, it would be best to use Traill Dennison's long version of the folktale as the base text, against the short version and Marwick's. But Dennison's long is restricted to viewing by US residents at the HathiTrust link right now, so that presents a logistical issue. I would argue against quoting "folklorist Westwood", making it sound like she collected a version of her own when she's just second-hand paraphrasing. For example, Marwick has "The Stoor Worm's head was like a mountain and his eyes like round lochs." I don't see any merit to purposely breaking this up and replacing the first bit with Westwood's "like a great mountain," except as a deliberate ploy to avoid "extensive quoting" copyright issues. The other quirkily sourced quote comes from this audio transcript version, which I don't think takes much astuteness on the part of an armchair proofreader to notice, but I'll just go ahead fix these using the corresponding pages in Douglas's ed. --Kiyoweap (talk) 10:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Scope issue
Here's the question: "Is the article about the stoor worm, or Assipattle the hero, or the folktale?" The answer is, though it pretends to be about the monster only, the already is about the "dragon-slaying" type folktale to a large extent. The /*Origins*/ section is actually mostly a list of folk-tale motif parallels. Given that it is about the folktale, I had inserted missing detail such as the horse Teetgong and the sword Snickersnapper. I tweaked the lede to include folktale, and added the section /*Other names and characters*/ under, though reverted by Eric, no surprise there. Now, the article is already set up as one also about the hero Assipattle by Sagacious, as anyone can verify, it redirects to Stoor worm. They have included one detail about Assipattle (meaning of his name in Orcadian), but awkwardly as an efn explanatory note ("[b]") on the heels of comments on the stoor worm. Where should additional details from the folktale belong? Probabaly not Askeladden, and probably not a new Assiepattle and the Stoor worm article, because that would be WP:REDUNDANTFORKing. So the place for people to add other aspects of the tale would be this article. And as such, it should be allowed to develop the whole story synopsis, instead of some arbitrary hightlights, before being upgraded to GA status. --Kiyoweap (talk) 07:32, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Midgard serpent
On Talk:Stoor worm/GA1 #9 raised by Montanabw, I am all for not using Jörmungandr even though that is the article title used in Wikipedia, and sticking to "Midgard Serpent," since the cited source, Ernest Marwick says "Miðgarðsormr or the World Serpent whose coils encircled the earth" and "In Orkney the World Serpent became the Stoor Worm." In the Etymology section, the Jörmungandr kenning etymology, is intriguing but backed solely by personal website, hence WP:Unreliable or WP:UNDUE and should be deleted. The wording of the part about "It is probably an Orkney variant of the Norse Jörmungandr, " needs careful treatment, I would reword as "Orkney's rendition of.." or "Orkney version of " to better reflect what Marwick says. The serpents share physical characteristics and venomous breath, but the stories in the Eddas aren't very similar. Next, I am not enamored of the Fuseli painting being used here. This is almost a stock photo everyone recognizes of Thor fighting the Midgard serpent, seen in various popular mythology books like Cotterell's, and in fact, it is the exact same image as splashed at the top of the Jörmungandr page. So, at the very least, the caption should read something like "The stoor worm may have been inspired by the Midgard Serpent, as shown in this painting by Fuseli". I think you can dispense with alluding to Thor or Hymir story here, because, there's not much of a folklore motif parallel; none of the commentators submit that opinion that I can find. Thor is not swallowed by the serpent at Ragnarök, though Odin is devoured by the Fenriswolf. And characterizing this as "Orcadian mythology" and "folk belief" is judgmental, prejudicial, etc., suggesting the islanders could be so credulous, so a choice of neutral terms like "folklore" would be more desirable. --Kiyoweap (talk) 11:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Editing process
Pinging all reviewers: Due to the dispute between,  and , I have asked Kiyoweap, at his/her talk page, that instead of editing the article right now, that he/she use a limited number of appropriate inline tags (i.e. , , etc. to highlight areas where Kiyoweap has a legitimate dispute. However, I also asked him/her not to "tag bomb" the article.  Where Kiyoweap tags, please don't remove the tag; I will take a look at it and make the call if it's an actual problem.  Montanabw (talk)  20:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I reject this so-called solution proposed by this GA reviewer. Its all but a block against me for duration of her GA review, save for a "limited number" of inline tagging. Somehow with such hampered means, I am expected to fully articulate my side of the argument in the edit dispute. I hardly see this as fair or wise.
 * I have already made a number of BOLD edits to make my point, with detailed edit summaries. It should be enough for any capable editor to understand the dispute, though it might require some subject familiarity.
 * To assist you, in User:Kiyoweap/Stoor worm I wrote up the more polished endproduct of the etymology paragraph as I would have it.
 * In addition, I will post below a more fuller explanation beyond edit summaries. If you still can't bring your self to the point of understanding the dispute and make cogently argued refutation beyond blanket rejection, I will have to conclude you fail as a dedicated enough GA reviewer comptent to make neutrality and sourcing issues on this article.--Kiyoweap (talk) 22:54, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Etymology, simply
I have come up with the following concise etymology, posted on the User:Kiyoweap/Stoor worm page. It reads as follows: Stoorworm is literally "great sea serpent",[1] and Mester Stoorworm "the greatest of the great sea-serpents".[2] The adjective stoor or sture in Scots signifies "large"[2] (cognate with Old Norse stórr),[3][a] and mester means "superior" in strength and other attributes.[2] A worm is an archaic term for serpent (or dragon[4][5]), and more generally "any animal of serpent shape".[2]

I argue, to put in extreme terms, that much of anything beyond the above is either misleading but irrelavant, or website-based fringe theory, and digression. (I am not married to my own word-smithing above, and some others may be able to fit more info in concise language).

I was on my way to accomplishing the above through a series of BOLD edits I performed on 30 October, though reverted at each increment. Here I explain the reason for their edits, and challenge the disputing editors to defend their POVs, in the forms of questions below:

User:Kiyoweap, why are you doing this? Challenge to Eric and Sagacious to defend this and that? Eh, why don't you walk away and do something else for a while, this is not productive. Hafspajen (talk) 01:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit on (+33)
 * 2) /*Etymology*/ section lowered. But not lowering is fine with me.
 * 3) When I placed the meaning of mester stoorworm as "greatest great serpent" in the lede. Can Sagacious explain exactly which part of this is and WP:OR, when Traill Dennison's notes says the meaning is "the greatest of the great sea-serpents"?
 * 4) Edit on (+52)
 * 5) Scottish National Dictionary (SND) is the dictionary where you find the definition for sture, stoor, and stoorworm. Can Sagacious explain how it is not irregular and misleading to use circumlocution, instead of outright calling it SND, to call it a sequel portion to DOST within the online DSL dictionary that lets you query both dicinaries ?
 * 6) DOST's definition of sture in the sense of "violent conflicts" is something Sagacious picked up on a 'tip from another wikiuser . But if DOST gives no backing this applies in the context of stoorworm, is it not original research to say it applies?
 * 7) Similary, isn't a dictionary entry "mester" providing "Yorkshire, dialect" definition a bit shakey sourcing for a specifically Orkney dialect word?
 * 8) Traill Dennison's notes says that Mester Stoorworm signifies "the greatest of the great sea-serpents", and provides other etymologies, generally consistent with SND. So wouldn't WP:DUE considerations dictate Dennison's etymologies not be trumped by your WP:OR and other non-Orkney writers like Westwood?
 * 9) Edit on (-1,125)
 * 10) Eric and Sagacious used as etymology it may have been deemed Mester Stoor Worm because it was the "master and father of all stoorworms" citing Westwood. This is not etymology, and mester does not mean father. If anything it is a paraphrase from the tale that reads "the first, and the father of all the [s]toorworms". If a fairy tale states "the man was called Mr. Bigbelly because he once ate a tonne of cheese," it does not follow that bigbelly means eating a ton of cheese. So, this "father" tidbit seems best to belong with the "progeny" bit elsewhere in the article, hence I transposed the information there. But to make clear this was a move from the /*Etymology*/ section, I probably should have deleted Westwood there. Sorry.
 * 11) Edit on (-1,125)
 * 12) Implemented previously explained, replacing SND (for DSL web) as source, and deleting DOST as not in context. Sorry, should not have been doubly repeated.
 * 13) Delete of Westwood occurs here. I am sorry got deleted in this edit, but not quite so sorry, because I had actually evacuated that efn to a different section in the earlier edit  (+36), and would have been fine if Sagacious had not undone it.
 * 14) Edit on
 * 15) Placed , as it is only sourced by the Orkn[eyjar website] --Kiyoweap (talk) 23:20, 2 November 2014 (UTC). Formatting modified to indicate relative priority.--Kiyoweap (talk) 05:12, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * This section is pure WP:BRD. If you are going to weigh in at all, write something of substance, since I wrote on a topic relating to word origins, and I take it that you are Scandinavian. --Kiyoweap (talk) 05:12, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


 * To be perfectly frank,, this is becoming very tedious. You are trying to force edits that are against consensus, which is why they are being reverted. When you inserted "greatest great serpent" it was done without any reference to back it up; many of your other comments above are incomprehensible to me. I disagree that orkneyjar.com is unreliable or a fringe theory but if , who is a very experienced editor and GA reviewer, wishes me to back up my reasoning for this, I am more than willing to do so.  SagaciousPhil   -  Chat  12:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Sagaciousphil's claim "without any reference" is old: it happened "1. Edit", and was only true for about 1.6 hours, till I referenced it in "Edit 2.4".
 * This is not much "incomprehensible" factor about the following: The definition "a monster serpent, a sea-dragon" now in the article is sourced to entry for sture in Scottish National Dictionary (1700–), so you need to just say so plainly. It is only misleading to rope in mention of the other DOST (1400-1700 period) dictionary, which it fails to give instance of "stoor" used in the "stoor worm" context.
 * Since the Orkneyjar.com is a private website (SPS). What is the webmaster's credentials? Is he linguist/folklorist offering dissenting etymology that trumps that of the published references, Dennison and DSL. This should be slam dunk? Doubt it. Calling it FRINGE may sound bit harsh, but Orkneyjar.com is basically the lone source. This second websource [2], from this McCoy (self-published author?) doesnt mention stoor worm on the webpage that I see, so I dont know what it is meant to accomplish.
 * Just a stab in the dark, I am not contesting the fact that Storðar-gandr is a kenning for the Midgard serpent in Old Norse texts, you can look that up in Cleasby-Vigfusson to confirm that, if that's what you're trying to do. I am just saying you can't assume that it is applicable here. --Kiyoweap (talk) 15:17, 6 November 2014 (UTC)


 * There is a difference between etymology and a description of the tale. I looked at the McCoy source, he does cite his references, which is this.  For WP:GA status, that is sufficient to pass SPS.  Montanabw (talk)  02:13, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if you discount Dennison's "great sea-serpent" as "description of the tale", there is still Scottish National Dictionary's definition of sture, stoor as "Big", and below it specifically "stoorworm", so it's still stoor=big according to linguist/SND versus website [1] claiming stoor=Storðar. But this open issue I can table it at Dispute resolution noticeboard for other opinion, rather than keep asking the reviewer to take on the task of defending a position Eric & Sagacious should be defending.
 * On the other footnote [2] (McCoy & Simek), I was just confused. Because it was added next to [1] I was tricked into thinking it was meant as addl corroboration for Storðar-gandr etymology. But now I realize it is merely to corrob Jörmungandr="Midgard serpent", which no one was contesting. In my view since [1] is not RS/non-neutral and should be purged, mention of Jörmungandr can then disappear altogether in a puff of smoke just as reviewer had suggested, and thus obviating need for this [2] source.-Kiyoweap (talk) 20:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I can see the WP:BRD. I notice also that it is recommended: Care and diplomacy should be exercised. Some editors will see any reversion as a challenge, so be considerate and patient. I can't see this happening.

I am only a Talk page stalker: I am not involved in your editing dispute, but I do address on two issues here:-Assume good faith (a) (b) you should take note of Etiquette as for a discussion that is really not that constructive any more -... and such ... maybe also Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point Sincerely, Hafspajen (talk) 18:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Stoorworm etymology dispute feedback
"Storðar-gandr" etymology is sourced only to a private website http://www.orkneyjar.com/folklore/stoor.htm and should be removed. We already have the well-sourced (and obvious) stórr="large" etymology.--Kiyoweap (talk) 13:47, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Addendum: The premise is wrong anyway. Storðar-gandr is kenning for forest-dwelling snakes, not the World Seprent of the sea (See below)--Kiyoweap (talk) 10:58, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In my experience of Orkneyjar it is a pretty good source and certainly better than some books on the general topic of Orkney. I can see no reason to ignore it on these grounds alone, although I agree it would be better to have another reference. According to this source (pdf) the idea may be Towrie's, but it's inclusion here give's it further respectability. Ben   Mac  Dui  17:05, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
 * --Kiyoweap (talk) 04:51, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you,, that's interesting. the reference used has been found acceptable by a number of experienced, respected editors; I can only repeat the comment I made on 6 November - "Consensus has been achieved and to continue to argue until you get what you want is disruptive, something I believe  has already pointed out". As to your suggestion when forum shopping in attempts to garner support here, here and here, the article has already appeared as a DYK in August.  SagaciousPhil  - Chat 05:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

{{small|This topical thread moved to User talk:Sagaciousphil/Archive 17--Kiyoweap (talk) 16:06, 28 November 2014 (UTC) {{collapse bottom}}
 * Not to denigrate Sigurd Towrie's impressive Orkneyjar site, but what seems established now is that the Storðar-gandr etymology is Mr. Towrie's own theory, as {{u|Ben MacDui}} seemingly has to concede after his own investigations.
 * I applaud Ben for discovering one doctorate thesis from Spain footnoting the Storðar etymology, as I was stumped to find anything of the kind, but this is scrounging. The thesis does not specialize in Orkney folklore, and you cannot seriously argue this tips the scale appreciably from being a web-theory to a theory on equal footing with the established etymology in the dictionary.--Kiyoweap (talk) 10:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

{{collapse top|Topic of stour (verb, dust up), storey (grub), moved to User Talk:Ben MacDui#Stour soukin}}
 * Thank-you for your kind compliment (although I note that 'scrounge' is derived from scrunge meaning "to search stealthily, rummage, pilfer" and I can assure you no theft or stealth was involved). I am certainly not arguing that stoor cannot mean 'large', but it can also mean other things. Its a word my granny used for dust or oose (fluff) and (and this is rather anecdotal) I have been told that stoorsucker is Norwegian for 'vacuum cleaner'. Stoor also means a stiff breeze or a copious stream of blood. Interestingly the same source suggests a "storey-worm" is a slug. In fact stour (as in Papa Stour) is probably more common modern usage for 'large'. The question is thus not, what does stoor mean, as it means many things but rather "what is the derivation of stoorworm"?

{{collapse bottom}} Enlarging on my comments above, I don't think Towrie's word alone is ideal, but if this same notion were mentioned in passing in a book by a professor of folklore studies who'd never been to Orkney we'd latch onto it as a "reliable source". Why then so hard on someone with a lifetime of local knowledge? (For the record I have no recollection of ever meeting him). For me the issue is not whether to include the idea, as how to nuance its inclusion. The text already reads "may be derived". I'm not sure that addtional caveats are really needed. Ben  Mac  Dui  11:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC) {{od}}{{u|Ben MacDui}}, "{{tq|What is the derivation of stoorworm"?}} is precisely the question. {{collapse top|Topic of stour (verb, dust up)}}Your slew of words, 1) stour to "dust up" and cognates in Norwegian (cf. User talk:Ben MacDui, 2) Orkney stoor "breeze", 3) storey "slug" (cf. SND) have no authority stating they apply to "stoor worm", and are irrelevant. Whereas the relevancy of "large wyrm" is unequivocably clear from Dennison's notes, and DNS's entry sture. Off-topic, the preference of "stour" spelling I do not object to, but is confusing since footnoted source is SND's headword "sture". {{collapse bottom}} In the current edit, the Storðar etymology appears not front and fore, not as passing mention, and I doubt the qualifier "may be" is sufficient to deflect criticism of WP:UNDUE weight. I am normally more indulgent than others about keeping such minority opinion in an explanatory note, if there is reasonable expectation of discovering an authority after better search or future publication. But here we have a kenning premise which is a clear refutable mistake. If Ben is unwilling to enquire on this, I will await others used to consulting Icelandic dictionaries before broaching it myself.--Kiyoweap (talk) 13:40, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As I recall, you asked for feedback. You have had some. Can you explain, in a sentence, what it is you are seeking to amend about the article? Ben   Mac  Dui  08:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * {{u|Ben MacDui}}, I did create a version representing my edits before reverts in: User:Kiyoweap/Stoor worm, which gives view of what I am "seeking" regarding the etymology section. It is pretty cut and dry. Perhaps you should give us an edit that you consider properly "nuanced" that satisfies WP:NEUTRALITY.
 * However, you have made it sound as if we should pretend to the viable possibility that a book by a "professor of folklore studies" has, or will emerge to support this etymology. I think you are trying to push the envelope against guideline here, and such a discussion should be tabled at Wikipedia talk:Fringe theories.--Kiyoweap (talk) 14:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I will take a look at this in due course. However, returning to comments above by {{u|Hafspajen}} I am beginning to find your methods of communicating well below optimum. You are as entitled as anyone to draw on expertise as you see fit but I am starting to get the impression that if you don't get the answer you want that you are simply intending to search further and further afield in the hope of getting one that you do like. Nor do I find your belittling interpretations of what I have said to be especially helpful. Ben   Mac  Dui  10:00, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Storðar-gandr in Icelandic dictionary
In the Cleasby-Vigfusson Icelandic Dictionary, if you look up gandr, it states and under storð, we find
 * Storðar-gandr, the 'gand' of the earth
 * STORÐ, f. a young wood, plantation, ... 2. the earth (grown with brush-wood) 、

p.40

As such, Storðar-gandr isn't a kenning for the Midgard serpent at all. It stands for an ordinary serpent inhabiting forested areas. --Kiyoweap (talk) 10:58, 25 June 2015 (UTC) correction in darkred 21:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

To reiterate, the website etymology is spurious WP:FRINGE theory. It contradicts a mistake, contradicted by the standard Icelandic dictionary. It is an alternative etymology that is novel and totally different from that given in the Dictionary of the Scots Language.

McCoy's Jormungand excerpt from Norse Mythology for Smart People I earlier removed from the etymology section, since the excerpt does not mention stoor worm or its etymology at all. I afterwards caught sight of Montanabw mentioning it as referencing Rudolf Simek's well-known book; as this seems to be in reference to belief of a worm as cause of "earthquake", I efn this material where the article delves into discussion of "earthquake".--Kiyoweap (talk) 04:38, 10 July 2016 (UTC)