User talk:Abdull

Determinants
Hi I added absolute values to the formula ad-bc so that the sign is correct. Thanks!:) Rpchase 23:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

shannon sampling
Hi Omegatron, thanks for your quick reply on my question on the Nyquist-Shannon_sampling_theorem. It helped a lot! There only is one thing i haven't understood clearly: let's imagine a soundcard that samples audio input at 44 KHz (you see, the same with your explanation). What the soundcard does, is it takes a record of the voltage every .000025 seconds.

If you drew all those recorded values on a time-voltage diagram (time being the variable), you'd get a diagram full of dots. To reconstruct the original signal, you could draw lines between each dot and its next neighbor.

That would be quite a close approximation, but you couldn't find out what happened between those .000025-second-snapshots. Maybe there was a high voltage burst (being a Dirac distribution for example) somewhere between the intervall 1.000025 s and 1.000030 s.

Maybe you understand the problem I see - but maybe I just made a mistake at some point in my thought.

Thank you for your help, --Abdull 18:56, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Very correct. However, the dots with spaces between them actually DO have all the information in the original signal.  As long as they are at most .000025 seconds apart.  That's the whole essence of the theorem.  You just have to get it back out in the correct way.  I can't think of a simple explanation, but I will try.  If you were to connect them as you described, with a straight line between ( i think this is called a first-order hold ), you would not reproduce the original signal.  What you actually do in a real system is even cruder!  You just make a horizontal line out from each dot like stairsteps (this is a zero-order hold, i think ).  The thing is, you are creating extra frequencies above 22 kHz when you do that, perfect multiples of the original frequencies.  If you then filtered out those higher frequencies, you would smooth out the horizontal lines into exactly the original signal.  As long as the original signal doesn't go above 22 kHz, you can reproduce it exactly with sampling at 44 kHz.  It's hard to explain.  (When you've figured it out, help me make the article easy for beginners to understand.)  Here's some diagrams http://cnx.rice.edu/content/m10402/latest/ - Omegatron 19:23, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Perhaps if I and a few others try to explain it a few more times, one of the explanations will "stick". Then hopefully you can figure out why the article is confusing and fix it.
 * --DavidCary 23:24, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Note: Further discussion has continued at Talk:Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem and/or Talk:Programmable array logic.

Root Beer
There is one distinctive smell that helps me identify root beer as root beer. the root beer article lists a lot of herbs, but i can't believe that all those herbs are responsible for the special taste of root beer - can someone say which ingredients make up most of the root beer taste?

Thanks, --Abdull 16:22, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Only my opinion but it has to be the anise that lies at the base of the taste with other flavourings adding various tones to it.Dainamo 28 June 2005 23:20 (UTC)

Re: Impact of Muppet Show
I think the answer is the same as for the Rocky and Bullwinkle Show. The show(s) appealed not only to all youth, but to adults also. Very few shows do so... until the youth reach a more mature age. On the Muppet Show, obviously the muppets are an attraction for youth, and looking at the list of guest stars, a pattern of diverse celebrities appealing to a wide adult audience are found. Plus the interaction between the muppets and the guest stars took on a more adult (yet light hearted) angle, unlike the interactions on Sesame Street (which was specifically intended to entertain youth ).
 * &hellip; G u y M &hellip; (soapbox) June 29, 2005 23:06 (UTC)

Common Clothes Moth
Hi, I saw your comment in Talk:List of moths about there being no article for Tineola biselliella (Common Clothes Moth is the common English name). I'm doing a load of moth articles at the moment and I will do one for this species if you'd like. Alternatively why not try writing an article yourself? If you decide to give it a bash, I would recommend calling it Common Clothes Moth and putting the scientific name as a redirect. Taxobox format can be seen in any of the existing moth articles. If you have any questions, drop them on my talk page, thanks Richard Barlow 2 July 2005 09:22 (UTC)

Diamond vs Graphite
I saw your question on the Talk page for metastability in molecules listed on Recent Changes, and quite fortuitously I happened to be able to provide (what I hope is) a clear, simple, comprehensible answer. Have a look. DS 12:46, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Amis
Hallo, ich habe gerade eben deine Frage gelesen, die du vorgestern auf die talk page des America's Army artikels geschrieben hast. Klar, dass für einen Deutschen so ein Spiel merkwürdig wirkt, aber in den USA würde ich es als geradezu natürlich bezeichnen.

Dort werden die Hochschulen von (unehrlichen) Rekrutern heimgesucht und durch Bushs no child left behind Regelung ist das sogar noch extremer geworden. Und Schulen können und dürfen dagegen auch nichts machen. Die haben in den USA eben keine Wehrpflicht mehr, aber Rekruten brauchen die trotzdem für ihre Kriege. Ich habe mal in einem Artikel gelesen, dass viele Filme von der US Armee durch konstenlose Waffen oder ähnliches profitieren, wenn denen das Drehbuch "gefällt", was die Army wahrscheinlich im Gegenzug auch "aufbessern" darf. In einer Reportage (Fokus TV oder so etwas) wurden Rekruter der Marine oder Navy (alle Zweige des US Militärs machen so etwas) gezeigt, wie sie herumliefen und junge Leute auf der Straße von den angebilchen Vorteilen ihrer Organisation volllabertern. In diesem Kontext muss man auch Americas Army sehen.

Ähnlich wie ni Deutschland wird America's Army wie jedes andere Spiel nach Gewalt oder Sex im Spiel von den Prüfstellen gewertet wird. Selbst im Fernsehen werden Filme auch nicht nach der Botschaft, sondern nach ähnlichen Kriterien bewertet, selbst wenn es Betrug ist wie zB (wenn dir der Sender etwas sagt) Neun Lives Ratespiele. Was natürlich America's Army von Fernseh- oder Internetwerbung für die US Armee (gibt es natürlich auch) unterscheidet ist das subtile: es sieht fast so aus wie jedes andere Spiel. Aber hat das Spiel keinen Effekt? Nun, die Typen, die am Projekt beteiligt waren, waren Professoren und Experten, die sich schon damit auskennen. Man wirft ja nich mehrere Millionen US Dollar für nichts aus dem Fenster, oder? =)NightBeAsT 21:42, 24 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Den Schritt würde ich wirklich begrüßen, doch weiß ich nicht, ob du damit durchkommst, so ohne Referenzen. Ich habe den Artikel ziemlich geprägt und nicht dass ich im Unrecht war, aber nie hatte ich sehr viel Unterstützung bei meinen edits. Der Artikel hat schon unter mehreren edit schlachten gelitten, wie auch die talk page dokumentiert (knapp die Hälfte der Talk page stammt von mir). Wenn du Informationen für deine Edits brauchst, kann ich dir wirklich helfen, aber pass auf, denn zB Ele9699, der erst kürzlich America's Army maps und classes unter einem anderen Nickname erstellt hat, bereitet bestimmt jetzt schon die Version Bauchschmerzen. Frag mich einfach, wenn du über irgendetwas, was das Spiel, den Artikel oder dessen Talk page angeht, mehr wissen willst.NightBeAsT 19:40, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Könntest du dir mal die aktuelle Version des Artikels anschauen und entscheiden, ob man diese vielleicht nicht ... revertieren sollte? Ich wäre dir sehr verbunden.NightBeAsT 13:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Hallo Nightbeast, ich finde es ziemlich schwierig, als Artikeloutsider den Überblick über die Änderungen zu halten. Ich habe die Veränderungen vom 10. September mir angeschaut, und muss sagen, dass fast alles anscheinend umformuliert wurde, was ich unnötig finde und daher pauschal dem Revert zustimme. Ich hoffe, ich konnte dir bei der Meinungsbildung helfen :) --Abdull 15:00, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Zirkulare Polarisation
siehe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_polarization

Warum es sie gibt, findest du graphisch im englischen Polarisations-artikel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization

Request for edit summary
When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this: The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature. When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Oleg! No, this produces too much overhead to my work here on Wikipedia. Even if a nice, friendly edit summary has been written, you can never be sure if vandalism has happened or not as long as you haven't checked the diff. Bye, --Abdull 17:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Pulitzer
Can you explain? Why don't you use Edit Summary? What is the language problem in the Joseph Pulitzer entry? Thanks. --K72ndst 11:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrong coordinate system image
Hi Jacobolus, i think the image no the left is wrong. the y-axis is in front of the green z-coordinate line. It should be the other way around. As you have created the image, maybe you still have the original file and could easily create a new version? Thanks, --Abdull 08:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Um… the y axis looks behind the green line to me… --jacobolus (t) 02:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Elasmosaurus
Just to say thank you very much Abdull - I'm the one who made a mess of the Elasmosaur article. Despite attempting to revert it back to a prior version several times it never worked for me, so thanks very much for sorting out my mistake. User: SMegatron

Electric fluff balls
Hi. I'm not sure what they are called (I know them by their name in Spanish, clavel del aire), I believe they are some variety of carnation, but in short they are some sort of "sticking plant".

Here are some photos, hope it helps.

Best wishes,

Pilaf 07:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry to but in, i saw your question on Pilaf talk page the cientific name is Tillandsia if you want to see the varieties here in the photo its Tillandsia argentina here is more information hope that helps (Cizagna)--200.67.154.105 18:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Cizagna, thank you for your comment! I will look through the pages you mentioned. Bye, --Abdull 09:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's a lot of species in the genus of Tillandsia - by the way, Wikipedia has an article about Tillandsia too. --Abdull 11:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Languages
Hi There! Can you translate my name in what language you know please, and then post it Here. I would be very grateful if you do (if you know another language apart from English and the ones on my userpage please feel free to post it on) P.S. all th translations are in alpahbetical order so when you add one please put it in alpahbetical order according to the language. Thanks!!! Abdullah Geelah 17:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the coordinates!
Your help is greatly appreciated. -- Zanimum 20:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Zanimu, thanks for the commendation. There was a "double minus" in the coordinate ("minus west"). Maybe it wasn't even a mistake by your own - the coor template has changed recently, redirecting to another page, so maybe someone messed up the syntax while doing it. Bye, --Abdull 21:58, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Do Like AMW
WELL DO YOU? HUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

American Dad
There is a specific website for adding quotes (wikiquote) also things are undergoing a big cleanup, so if an episode already is in a somewhat correct format maybe the cleaning wont effect it as much. Grande13 15:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Atomic blast flares
They're called Sounding Rockets. Better a late answer then never!--Planetary 01:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Planetary, thank you for your reply. I'd say the smoke in the background are smoke trails, such as explained here... compare it to the rope trick effect. Bye, --Abdull 07:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Castlevania Adventure
I saw your post on the discussion of Castlevania: The Adventure, and I went and updated it and Castlevania II: Belmont's Revenge as well as some of the other games in the series that needed some work (at least in my opinion). --Brahman 23:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Polya conjecture
Per my talk page:

linas 03:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

That Kuhn
Thanks for your expert disambiguification in Force field (physics) a while back. I was going to do it, but I didn't actually know who the person was! MagnesianPhoenix (talk) 11:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC) [signed retroactively]
 * Well, I was not 100 % sure myself, but actually that Kuhn seemed to be the only correct Kuhn :). --Abdull (talk) 21:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Semiconductor device modeling
Thanks for fixing up the references. I've supplied the missing figure, and changed the text to match. LouScheffer (talk) 05:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair-use images in userspace
I noticed that you were using a couple of fair-use images in your userspace. These are prohibited by site guideline (WP:UP), and as a result I removed them. I'm not trying to be unfriendly, and I don't want you to take it personally. There are so many policies and guidelines, it's easy to accidentally miss a few. Just be careful in the future. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 23:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good you noticed. User page is also a good policy to follow. As is
 * [i]n general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission. Some users are fine with their user pages being edited, and may even have a note to that effect. Other users may object and ask you not to edit their user pages, and it is probably sensible to respect their requests. The best option is to draw their attention to the matter on their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. In some cases a more experienced editor may make a non-trivial edit to your userpage, in which case that editor should leave a note on your talk page explaining why this was done. This should not be done for trivial reasons.
 * --Abdull (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply; I hadn't seen that latter one before. What's the source page? -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 15:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's in the User page passage. --Abdull (talk) 15:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, there it is. I must've looked right past it. I apologize if I upset you by removing them myself; I know that images and userpages are both kind of sore points with some people, so I tried to split the difference by leaving a personal message instead of a template warning. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 15:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem :) It sometimes is hard to even make a single edit considering the fact that Wikipedia's policies can change on a minute basis. --Abdull (talk) 21:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Video games in Germany
Hi. I saw your talk page contributions on the article for the USK, and thought you might be the person to ask for advice. I live in South Africa and recently bought two PS2 games from Amazon.de. How can I find out whether they've been tampered with or not in order to be released in Germany ? --Rickus Muller (talk) 14:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good question - I've just taken a quick look via Google to find a list of modified games, but I couldn't find anything like that. Most of the time, games will be modified because of the German youth protection law. Another reason is localization, for example most Wii games you can obtain in Germany are localized to German (voice, text, sometimes even graphics).
 * A way to find out if a particular game was modified is by looking at its German Wikipedia article: http://de.wikipedia.org . "German" modifications are usually commented on in a game's respective article. For example, the Carmageddon and Command & Conquer articles state edits such as replacing humans by robots and gore by oil puddles. Try your best in translating them or use a translator such as Google built-in one :). Actually, you can tell me which PS2 games you bought and I'll try to find out any change made to them. Bye, --Abdull (talk) 15:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply :) The games I bought were Ratchet & Clank 2 and Champions:Return To Arms. Thanks again--Rickus Muller (talk) 15:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the ref on Remaindered book
I've just learnt how to carry the ref name from one entry to another and didn't have the chance to go back and correct previous ones. Travellingcari (talk) 01:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem :). I just happened to play around with ref tags the same day I fixed the remaindered book article. I was an expert for everything ref that day. Hopefully, I will memorize how ref's are done this time :). --Abdull (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * if you work out how to memorize it, please do share as I'm entirely too dependent on Wikicite :) Travellingcari (talk) 22:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany Invitation
--Zeitgespenst (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Negation normal form
You have an answer here. -- Obradovi&#263; Goran ( t al k  16:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Reporter device (Family Guy)
Hey, it's three years after you asked the question, but I've more or less found the name of the reporter device in that Family Guy episode. :) --82.171.70.54 (talk) 22:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Removing merge on range and image
There is no talk page section with a reason why Range (mathematics) and Image (mathematics) should be merged so I will be removing the tags. You need to give reasons for things like that. Personally I don't think it is a good idea as they can be different. Dmcq (talk) 09:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello dmcq, I do not fully agree. Please have a look at your talk page. Cheers, --Abdull (talk) 14:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Have answered on my talk page. Dmcq (talk) 14:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

libre.fm
Yes, Libre.fm is powered by the GNU FM software, and is a GNU project. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattl (talk • contribs) 01:47, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Removing merge proposal on FBP and Data Flow
I don't see any response to my points, made in March, so I would like to remove the tag. Alternatively, perhaps you could come up with a sketch of your proposed combined article. TIA. Jpaulm (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Saw your comments. I took a look at Dataflow Programming, and it's very broad, covering a wide range of related systems. FBP, on the other hand, is a unique technology, and is now starting to spin off all sorts of offshoots, most of which share FBP's characteristics (bounded buffers, information packets with defined lifetimes, named ports, and separate definition of connections), although a few call themselves FBP, but appear to have different ancestry. If you want to say that FBP is a type of data flow approach, I'm OK with that. However, the only justification for merging them is if you believe that FBP is the only viable dataflow approach - which would be very flattering, but probably not proven. :-) Thanks. Jpaulm (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Abdull, I will remove the suggestion for the reasons I give above. However, it is probably a good idea to update the article itself a bit, as there have been significant new developments over the last 15 years. Thanks for the feedback. Jpaulm (talk) 17:40, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Monitors (assertion or predicate)
Thanks for your comment. I changed some occurrences of assertion to condition. My rationale is on the talk page. Theodore.norvell (talk) 23:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

OpenAL claification needed
On December 10, 2010 you added two Clarify tags to the OpenAL section (here). I am familiar with Ambisonics, but it is not clear to me what clarification you feel is needed. Wikipedia contains a long and detailed article on Ambisonics which is linked to from that section. I don't see what else is needed, or possible in just a few words. Please respond here. HairyWombat 20:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, in the meantime since my edit, these parts have been clarified via wikification. I just took out the clarify maintenance tags. --Abdull (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The difference between Flow Based Programming and Data Flow Programming
Hi Abdull,

I'm hoping to improve the quality of the Flow Based Programming article and I was hoping you might offer some advice.

On the talk page you suggest that the article should explain why it is different to Dataflow Programming.

One problem I have is finding an official definition of what Dataflow Programming is. The boundary does not seem clear.

I can describe the differences between what Wikipedia describes as Dataflow Programming, but this seems to be self referencing, which I understand is not a good practice.

Can you offer me any guidance?

Thanks.

Ged Byrne (talk) 22:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Ged!
 * As much as I can remember, I felt the merge discussions regarding the articles flow based programming and dataflow programming had been opposed by one user who was the inventor of either of these terms.
 * The best both articles can benefit from is giving citations to some well-respected literature. And both articles need precise definitions (mathematically; and introducing terms). Lastly, both articles should clearly state the differences to each other's lemma, so that it's obvios to a reader why they should be treated separately. If it turns out that both things are the same, than that's the sign for merge.
 * Cheers, --Abdull (talk) 11:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Whois anonymous speech
Hi! I noticed that you added a "clarify" tag to the term "anonymous speech" in the article Whois about two years ago. I know it might be hard to remember, but why does the term "anonymous speech" need clarification? Orthogonal1 (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I added the "clarify" tag because the term "anonymous speech" is not known to me. Also searching for it does not turn up a definition on first sight. Usually I guess from context what's meant by a term that I don't know - but the context of use in the Whois article is of legal nature (especially US law nature), so I would say clarification for the term "anonymous speech" is adequate, maybe even a dedicated article or section. Cheers, --Abdull (talk) 09:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised that Wikipedia doesn't have an article about anonymous speech. It seems to have been used in a legal context (McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission). In any case, I've changed the phrase "anonymous speech" to "anonymity", which hopefully should make it more clear. Orthogonal1 (talk) 21:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking care of the Whois article. I'm really pleased with your change from anonymous speech to anonymity and clearing the clarify tag. And thanks for pointing out the McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission article. That was an interesting read for me :-). --Abdull (talk) 21:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Real World Interface listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Real World Interface. Since you had some involvement with the Real World Interface redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TB (talk) 16:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

"Parfum" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Parfum. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 29 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 15:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

"≙" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E2%89%99&redirect=no ≙] 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  until a consensus is reached. D.Lazard (talk) 10:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)