User talk:Rhododendrites/2016e

Why do you like Metapedia so much?
It's a fascist, neo-Nazi site, yet you keep including it where it doesn't belong, alongside legitimate general reference encyclopedias. What's your deal? Do you hate minorities? Sole Flounder (talk) 13:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If you want to have a conversation about content, do it on the talk page. Stop with the personal attacks, edit warring, and trolling, and do not post to my talk page again. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 13:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

New article improvement drives
Check out the following new article improvement drives/contests. North America1000 12:11, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The 10,000 Challenge – aims to reach 10,000 article improvements for UK- and Ireland-related articles
 * WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge – aims to reach 10,000 article improvements for Africa-related articles

H+Pedia
Hi there, as a member of Wikiproject transhumanism, I thought you might want to check out the latest on H+Pedia which now has a revamped home page as an introduction point. :) https://hpluspedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Deku-shrub (talk) 21:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: August 2016
About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 17:55, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

September 14: WikiWednesday Salon / Wikimedia NYC Annual Meeting
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Deletion of notable alumni at SUNY New Paltz page?
Hi. Sorry, I reverted your deletion, because I'm unfamiliar with the rule you quoted? DavidHobby (talk) 03:35, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there. Sorry, I reinstated the edit before seeing you left a message, or I would've replied first. The most relevant guideline is WP:ALUMNI, which itself draws on WP:LISTPEOPLE. "All alumni information must be referenced. [including] a citation to a) verify that they did indeed attend the school, and b) [verify the short description following their name on the list]". If they have an article, the citations can be in the article rather than in the list. "Per Bio, alumni to be included must meet Wikipedia notability criteria." So interpreting all this wikijargon, the most lax interpretation of the guidelines is that someone could be included if they don't have an article as long as sufficient sources are included showing notability (which requires significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject, so usually multiple citations to articles/books/high-quality web articles which cover the person in some depth) and a source showing they attended the school. In practice, the overwhelming majority of lists of people simply go by the "need to have an article" rule. It's nothing personal with regard to those people I removed, I assure you. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 03:43, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:46, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Page mover granted
Hello, Rhododendrites. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3ARhododendrites granted] the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when  is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:
 * Requested moves
 * Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, post here, or just let me know. Thank you, and happy editing! &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  04:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Thanks! &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 04:38, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Why aren't you an admin?
Prompted by your recent note on my talk page, I came to the realization that you're not an admin. I'm curious why not? You've been around a while, certainly seem to have a clue, haven't done anything that I can recall which would make me think you're an idiot, etc. So, if you're interested, I'd be happy to nominate you. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:49, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer. As much as I feel reasonably qualified, and think I'd make good use of the tools, I've no real desire for power and I'm not keen on setting aside a week to spend running back and forth through the RfA gauntlet to get consent to help out in new ways. It's a problematic perspective, I know, given the problems people have faced trying to reform RfA and the need for more admins. There are other non-minor factors, too, but that's the big one. I've been wondering about the likelihood of success for an experimental RfA in which I have several respected co-nominators and then decline to answer any questions other than the basic starting set. Some people would, no doubt, be annoyed, but if successful I imagine that model might be appealing to people with a similar perspective. I don't know -- not something I'm thinking about for the immediate future regardless. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 17:09, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * While I think not answering some of the questions is a valid strategy I'd be wary of not answering any questions, at all. That said, Wikipedia wants mop pushers to work backlogs. If that's something you're willing to do the optional RfA candidate poll could at least give you a third opinion and highlight some of your issues. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 17:26, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I certainly can understand your distaste of the RfA process, and can't blame you. I thought my own RfA (10+ years ago at this point) was kind of absurd, and it looks like it's been downhill since then. The last person I nominated, although they did get approved, the process was so acrimonious, I felt embarrassed I had put my candidate through that. Maybe, instead of being a rogue admin, I should run for bureaucrat, and go rogue in that position, appointing admins as I see fit :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 19:08, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Alice Gray
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Dates
Feel free to revert if you wish, I have no massive inclination either way. I also prefer DMY generally but US articles (other than military) have MDY. GiantSnowman 09:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Well that's sort of my question. I wouldn't interpret someone from the US as having "strong national ties" to the US (to the extent there are "strong national ties" there must be "weak national ties" and "average national ties"), which is why I say politicians as one example, but an entomologist not so much. Again, not a big deal, but I don't have much experience in these sorts of matters so don't know what's typical. It sounds like you're saying "strong national ties" could be "a national tie". &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 13:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Comix
As the editor says, a group of comic lovers are using box.com, a cloud provider, to store their comics. Clearly a copyvio link by an editor with copyvio problems in the past. Doug Weller talk 15:11, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Is this in response to my AGF-related comments? Indeed I did not notice copyvio problems in the past. Regardless, I don't disagree in any way, which is why I had removed all of the links. :) &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 15:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes it was. Have you removed all thelinks? I'm struggling with my iPad while waiting for a new router/modem from my ISP. Doug Weller  talk 15:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, all but Star Trek (comics) where it's used as a source rather than in the external links section. I know that doesn't actually exempt it, but I was sort of hoping someone would replace it with a citation of the comic (mentioned at ELN) -- and if not, I'll do it later. Also didn't remove it from fair use file pages. What do you think of that? Where the actual author is given, but the url for where the image was found is a copyright violation? Seems to me like it falls in with the fair use claim, but maybe I'm wrong. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 15:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I don't think we can use it for fair use files either. Maybe give me an example and I'll nominate it for deletion, or you could. That should settle the matter. Doug Weller  talk 16:06, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm worried about the implications for that. As long as we're crediting the author and acknowledging it's a non-free fair use scenario, the URL where the file came from (in the source field) seems like it could be from anywhere. If not, I think there would be a lot of files that would need to be deleted, and I'm not keen to be the one to start that. An out-of-print book cover, for example, likely won't have any official site to get it from, so we might have to grab an image we find from a blog we find via random Google Image search, or from some commercial site like abebooks or amazon. Doesn't mean we credit them as the author, but as the source of the file. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 17:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * For the sake of example, though, File:Smokeystover113041.jpg. Looks like they were all uploaded by the same user, (inactive over the last couple years though). In looking at where non-free files I've uploaded came from, File:Cover of Richard Brautigan's June 30th, June 30th.jpg is from abebooks and File:Cambodian Rocks album cover.jpg is from emusic. Is the difference between those and the comix archive that we are deeming the comix archive not to have any fair use claim, but a bookseller would? What if abebooks/amazon had images of the interior of a comic book in its preview. Perhaps the interior (vs. the cover) is the big point. I'm jumping around because of my own uncertainties rather than because I'm trying to circumscribe a point, btw. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites  <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 17:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Pinging to see if they can help. Diannaa's away for a few days though.  Doug Weller  talk 18:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey guys and gals. Take a look at the footnote to to the external links policy (which I added some time back but which was discussed and kept in). That is, we may not link to copyvios in citations either. This does not mean we must remove the citation. Links to online versions are a convenience but not necessary. The fact that we were able to access the source to verify the information by looking at a copyvio notwithstanding, if we can't find an online, non-infringing url to point to, this can be converted to a citation to the paper source and left in (and then we can use cite book and add things like its oclc number by looking it up on Worldcat and so forth). Yes, it certainly becomes complicated when we consider that maybe the big movers and shakers like Abebooks, Amazon etc. may be casually violating copyright themselves. I would note that both of these, however, provided limited file sizes, at least when they show a cover next to a listing, though at Amazon they sometimes allow you to "look inside" and then they show a much higher resolution version of the cover. These large sellers may very well also have a licensing agreement with the publishers/owners that covers use of their copyrighted material for marketing purposes. We can discount for the cloud page as vanishingly unlikely. I know it may seem a bit of a fine point but providing a non-linking URL that can be copied and then pasted into your browser, versus providing a hyperlink that can be just clicked on to link, are not quite the same things – the access to the copyvio source is made less direct. It might be a good idea when a file description page disclose the source and we think it might be a copyvio, but we're not sure enough to want to remove the link entirely, to make the link non-working by taking it out of brackets and using nowiki tags. By the way, I would think File:Smokeystover113041.jpg needs to be reduced in size in order to not violate fair use.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We'd like to invite you to participate in a user study closely related to SuggestBot. User:Another Article is seeking to understand more about the workflow and time commitment of contributors to the English Wikipedia. As part of this study you will occasionally be prompted to answer questions about your editing activity, and these questions should never take more than a minute or two to complete. The intended length of the study is two weeks, but your actual time commitment is totally up to you. If you would like to see more details you can read the project proposal at Research:Measuring editor time commitment and workflow (on meta), but if you are feeling bold and would like just like to sign up right now you can add the line  to your. Contact User:Another Article if you have any questions about this study!

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:08, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Game pronouns
Just saw Losing Chess drift past on my watchlist (which I'd forgotten about, and which is still written using "he") - did anything happen with your suggested pump RFC for pronouns in game articles, in the end? --McGeddon (talk) 10:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Short answer is no, nothing happened that I know of, but I haven't been watching anywhere but that article, either. Sorry. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 14:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Follow up to an edit of yours

 * .


 * (Also, do you think the "wikibreak" notice at the top of this page may be overdue for reconsideration?) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Ack! Thanks for fixing. The Wikibreak is good intentions. I cleared my watchlist but obviously haven't stuck to it. I kept it there for motivation and to make it so when I do go on a break in the near future ("for real"), I won't feel obliged to come back to add a message like that. Maybe the more appropriate thing would be "Status: It's complicated". :) &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 14:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, I understand, and sympathise. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 September 2016
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Violence against men category
It is clear I have overstayed my welcome on this subject, though I hope some progress has been made on resolving what seems to me to be a status quo that is at the very least a logical contradiction in the category description. Could I pass the baton off to you? I ask this explicitly, because I don't want to see the entire enterprise simple lie fallow and the can kicked down the road (like we've seen with other logical inconsistencies in Wikipedia). I trust your judgment on the situation and basically have supported all of your substantive proposals on the subject, and I think having someone other than myself who has "fans" following me from page to page would be a way to improve the situation. If you're up for it, that is.

If you want to wash your hands of this subject, that's understandable too. I would just like to know so that I could find another person to help guide the discussion towards consensus.

jps (talk) 11:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * To me it seems prudent to let the editwar drama fade from the talk pages for a little while, and then start a new thread. I'd get a shiny new baton, though, thank you very much, rather than the used, battle-worn one you're looking to unload. :) So if you're looking for someone to push forward in the immediate future, that's probably not me. I'd also have to think on what the ideal way forward would be. It will certainly take scrapping the current category description and rebuilding it, but I'm rethinking what I had floated on the talk page.
 * Let me ask you this: if we had no categories (so not trying to improve what's there, but rather starting over), how would you set them up to account for the fact that there's a commonsense "violence against men" that's separate from ~"violence against men because [in part or in whole] they're men", and at the same time does not create a false equivalence between e.g. domestic violence against men vs. domestic violence against women? I know you might be burned out on talking about it, but I don't feel like I've seen a succinct proposal from anyone. Again, I'm not looking for how to reframe the current category, but how to get rid of it and put in place something better. For what it's worth, I don't think you've overstayed your welcome on the subject -- it's just the edit warring. That doesn't speak to the issue of fans, though. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 22:08, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the category was started as an exercise in false equivalence. The internet is a haven for MRAs to come "help" us write this encyclopedia and, lo and behold, they come to promote their beliefs it is "unfair" that there was coverage in Wikipedia about the documented phenomenon of violence against women. The question I haven't figure out the answer to is: "Is there a well-researched "category" of violence against men?" What does the "subject" of the category even mean independent of MRA rantings? You can read our rather tortured article on the subject to see what I see as the problem. If we're going to have such a category, I think it irresponsible to base it on the original research where things such as serial rapist and castration are somehow deemed categorical examples of "violence against men" (indeed, trying to find actual sources which claim as much is essentially impossible). I believe the person who invented the category worked to bend over backwards to contain rejoinders of the sort we see so as to ensure the following outcomes: ,. So what's the best option? Probably deletion. But reading teh CfDs made me understand that an extremely limited scope for the category was what "the community" wanted. Just so. jps (talk) 22:49, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

California parks
Hi, not sure if you live in the bay area or were just touring. In either case, the coyote brush reminded me of a great place to check out if you get a chance: the Stebbins Cold Canyon preserve is situated between Lake Berryesa and some BLM land - it has a great loop hike that takes you along a ridge, down through the chaparral, then into a canyon that indeed stays cool-ish, even in the summer. SemanticMantis (talk) 17:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't live nearby, but I'm there a couple times a year. Usually for work, so I don't usually get more than a few miles from the hotel, but one of these times I want to take a few extra days to see things outside the city (Yosemite is the big obvious one, but I'll keep this in mind as an addition or closer alternative :) ). Thanks for your help on the RD. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 20:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We'd like to invite you to participate in a user study closely related to SuggestBot. User:Another Article is seeking to understand more about the workflow and time commitment of contributors to the English Wikipedia. As part of this study you will occasionally be prompted to answer questions about your editing activity, and these questions should never take more than a minute or two to complete. The intended length of the study is two weeks, but your actual time commitment is totally up to you. If you would like to see more details you can read the project proposal at Research:Measuring editor time commitment and workflow (on meta), but if you are feeling bold and would like just like to sign up right now you can add the line  to your. Contact User:Another Article if you have any questions about this study!

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:46, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: September 2016
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 15:01, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Sun October 16: CommonsLab / Open House NY Photo Contest + Hackathon
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Editing News #3—2016
Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter • Subscribe or unsubscribe on the English Wikipedia

Did you know?

Did you know that you can easily re-arrange columns and rows in the visual editor?



Select a cell in the column or row that you want to move. Click the arrow at the start of that row or column to open the dropdown menu (shown). Choose either "Move before" or "Move after" to move the column, or "Move above" or "Move below" to move the row.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has mainly worked on a new wikitext editor. They have also released some small features and the new map editing tool. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. You can find links to the list of work finished each week at mw:VisualEditor/Weekly triage meetings. Their current priorities are fixing bugs, releasing the 2017 wikitext editor as a beta feature, and improving language support.

Recent changes

 * You can now set text as small or big.
 * Invisible templates have been shown as a puzzle icon. Now, the name of the invisible template is displayed next to the puzzle icon.  A similar feature will display the first part of hidden HTML comments.
 * Categories are displayed at the bottom of each page. If you click on the categories, the dialog for editing categories will open.
 * At many wikis, you can now add maps to pages. Go to the Insert menu and choose the "Maps" item. The Discovery department are adding more features to this area, like geoshapes. You can read more on MediaWiki.org.
 * The "Save" button now says "Save page" when you create a page, and "Save changes" when you change an existing page. In the future, the "" button will say "".  This will affect both the visual and wikitext editing systems.  More information is available on Meta.
 * Image galleries now use a visual mode for editing. You can see thumbnails of the images, add new files, remove unwanted images, rearrange the images by dragging and dropping, and add captions for each image.  Use the "Options" tab to set the gallery's display mode, image sizes, and add a title for the gallery.

Future changes
The visual editor will be offered to all editors at the remaining 10 "Phase 6" Wikipedias during the next month. The developers want to know whether typing in your language feels natural in the visual editor. Please post your comments and the language(s) that you tested at the feedback thread on mediawiki.org. This will affect several languages, including Thai, Burmese and Aramaic.

The team is working on a modern wikitext editor. The 2017 wikitext editor will look like the visual editor and be able to use the citoid service and other modern tools. This new editing system may become available as a Beta Feature on desktop devices in October 2016. You can read about this project in a general status update on the Wikimedia mailing list.

Let's work together
Do you teach new editors how to use the visual editor? Did you help set up the Citoid automatic reference feature for your wiki? Have you written or imported TemplateData for your most important citation templates? Would you be willing to help new editors and small communities with the visual editor? Please sign up for the new VisualEditor Community Taskforce. If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:19, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Saturday October 22: WikiArte Latin American Edit-a-thon @ MoMA
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:56, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
Hello, I'm Wysprgr2005. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Margaret Sanger— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Wysprgr2005 (talk) 13:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Wrong user talk page :P &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 13:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Huggle hates me, I'm sorry. Wysprgr2005 (talk) 13:23, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries at all. Keep fighting the good fight. :) &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 13:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)