User talk:Nick Moyes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to top
Skip to bottom



Hey Nick! Thanks for reaching out on my talk page. Just the push I needed to get back into this. I really appreciate your commitment to women on Wikipedia; the Art + Feminism events are really what got me started editing. I did start with a bang last year while at an Artist Residency where I hosted an edit-a-thon at the Art Center and taught a dozen people how Wikipedia works. Together we edited 20 articles on women artists of color and I wrote and published a new article (that never got flagged for deletion!). Although I fell off the editing wagon, Iam back and have found new motivation for editing this year. I have set fairly reasonable goals but I am trying to self-motivate to edit every week. I plan to write a few articles this year about women and gender-non-binary artists and would love some help editing those when the time comes. I am starting from my own bookshelf and seeing what I can contribute to, as well as looking at the Women in Red project. Lastly, I am dreaming of hosting local micro-events at specialized libraries like the Craft Council Library or the History Museum archives. Let me know if you would be interested in adopting me and helping me accomplish these goals this year! Thanks, Terasaface (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for answering my question, Nick Moyes, but to answer your question, I would like scientists in astronomy, like Tycho Brahe or Nicolaus I hope that helps narrow it down THEGREECEPEACE 23:19, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Greecemaniac2005. You get points deducted for not explaining yourself better when you posted at the Teahouse!!! But seriously, like I said in my original reply, this encyclopaedia is never going to create its own list of best scientists, but I now think I have an answer to help you find all the articles about a related topic, like 'astronomers'. You simply need to look at the 'Categories' shown at the bottom of every page. Tycho Brahe has nearly 30 categories, and click one that interests you. That will display a list of all the articles currently tagged with that Category name, and at the bottom of the page you'll see the parent category that that child category falls in to. If you visit Special:CategoryTree you are able to select simple category titles and see the sub-categories and pages within them (like this). Does this make sense and give you what you want?
By the way, what have you done to your signature? I think you have you changed it at Special:Preferences, and have given yourself a name that's not the same as your username. If you would uncheck the box labelled Treat the above as wiki markup. Keeping it as it is gives no link back to your talk page and so I had no idea who really had left a talk page message, and this goes against our guidelines that require a hyperlink back to you. (See WP:SIGLINK for details). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:58, 10 October 2018 (UTC)



I am a relatively new user that is looking to be adopted as part of the adopt a user program. My interests include Judaism, Computer Science, and history (particularly American and Jewish).

Thank you for taking the time to consider this. Alternate Side Parking (talk) 00:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Alternate Side Parking and thanks very much for taking the initiative of contacting me, and well done for getting all 15 of your The Wikipedia Adventure badges. I'm not confident that your interests and mine tally up sufficiently closely for me to be able to help and guide you in a formal adoption process. In particular, I know nothing of religion, about which you seem to edit a lot. I would also have preferred that you had 'come clean' right from the start and explained your previous J.A.R.N.Y. account and 6-month block (and subsequent unblock) and what appears now to be a genuine attempt to make up for past poor behaviour. So well done for the latter. If you are going for a WP:CLEANSTART, you might like me to add {{retired}} to it on your behalf. If, rather than just a clean start, you've simply just lost the password, as you've stated elsewhere, using your A.S.P. account you ought to edit the old J.A.R.N.Y. and clearly declare the linkage between accounts, and why you've retired it. Obviously, you must never use multiple accounts, so that one must not be used again. Ever. (I think I'm giving you the right advice here, but I am going to ping @Vsmith: who unblocked you in April so as to be certain.)
That all said, and despite thinking formal adoption isn't quite right between us, I'd still be happy to offer any help and guidance you need - either here, on your talk page, or over at the Teahouse where I tend to lurk quite a bit. My approach to adoption (and I'm new to this myself) is to support a new(ish) editor in an ad hoc way, rather than in a structured step-by-step manner as some adopters have done in the past. So even if we don't go down that route, perhaps I could invite you to list a few of the areas you have been struggling with and would like assistance over, and at the very least I'll try and help and perhaps get a sense of what support you need. Looking at your contributions since you began editing under this new account name last month, I could make the following suggestions for you:
  • You could lose a few of your userboxes to help other editors get a better sense of you, as a few do seem rather irrelevant - but fun though!! (I am guessing that one of them is actually revealing your true age - if so, you might wish not to reveal your birth date in such a sobering way.)
  • With this edit you seem to have copy/pasted an entire paragraph as a 'quote' within the reference. This isn't necessary. Indeed, it's a breach of copyright so do please remove that. The citation and link lead users to the article where they can check the source for themselves. I know absolutely nothing about religious topics, nor have little interest in them, but the source seemed adequate to support the statement (even if I didn't understand many of the terms used within it). I see you've also done it here too] which, again, is unnecessary if it's to an online article. I would like you to understand that using quotes in this way is not only unnecessary, but also against our policy explained at WP:COPYVIO.
  • Whilst it's great to send welcome messages to other new users, there's no need to send them to editors who, thus far, have never edited. You seem to have done that a quite few times, and as so many accounts get created that never ever edit, this is a waste of your efforts.
You do seem to have done a lot of things right since editing under this new account name, so keep it up. Like I said, give me a shout on my talk page, or wherever, if you need any input or guidance, and I'll support you as best as I'm able. But bear in mind this. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:09, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
Nick, many thanks for pointing my mistake and helping me out.
Denim11 (talk) 16:23, 15 November 2018 (UTC)


Can you please adopt me and help me around Wikipedia so one day I can be like you :), Also I'm British too Breakroute (talk) 21:23, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

@Breakroute: Thanks very much for posting your request for adoption. I would prefer to see a longer commitment from editors to contributing across Wikipedia before considering adoption. I feel the Teahouse is the best way for experienced editors to help you on specific issues you come across. My approach is outlined here at Adopt a User. That said, if you need input on a matter relevant to my declared experiences, I'll do my best to help you. Best wishes for Christmas and the New Year, and good luck at the star of your Wikipedia journey. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For your diplomatic, helpful, and understanding posts on Teahouse - especially tonight's! Schazjmd (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals update #025, 30 Dec 2018[edit]

We can now crop the tops of pics to make banners[edit]

Before, we could only cut off the bottom of pics.

User:FR30799386 has pulled it off, and made the upgrade to {{Portal image banner}}...

So, this:

Niagara falls, from the Canadian side
Niagara falls, from the Canadian side

Becomes this:

Niagara falls, from the Canadian side
Niagara falls, from the Canadian side

Here's the code for the above banner:

{{Portal image banner|File:American Falls from Canadian side in winter.jpg | [[Niagara falls]], from the Canadian side |maxheight=175px |overflow=Hidden|croptop=10}}

To see it employed in a portal, check out Portal:Niagara Falls.

About that end of the year goal...[edit]

We were racing against time to create 5,000 portals by the end of the year (just for the heck of it).

We made it. We've passed the 5,000 portals mark, with time to spare!

And the 5,000th portal is Portal:Major League Baseball, by Happypillsjr.


What's next?[edit]

The 10,000th portal mark. But...

...there is plenty else to do in addition to building new portals:

  1. The new portals need to be linked to from the encyclopedia.
  2. On those portals about subjects that are not typically capitalized, the search parameters need to be refined/expanded, to maximize the chances of Did you know and In the news items being found and displayed.
  3. A Recognized content section needs to be added to each portal that has a corresponding WikiProject.
  4. Addition of a category on those portals that lack a subject category.
  5. Implement the portal category system, adding the appropriate categories to each portal.
  6. Upgrade, and complete (as per the tasks enumerated above), the old-style portals that are not regularly maintained, which have not been converted yet (about 1,100 of them).
  7. Find and fix the remaining bugs in the underlying lua modules.
  8. Build portal tools (scripts) to assist in the creation, development, and maintenance of portals.
  9. Build a script to help build navbox footer templates, via the harvesting of categories, amongst other methods.
  10. Update the portal building instructions.
  11. Update the portal guideline.
  12. Refine the programming of the portals to reduce their load time.
  13. Design and develop the next generation of portals and portal components.

And whatever else you can dream up. Face-wink.svg

But most of all, have a...

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   12:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you![edit]

Cheeseburger.png Thanks for all you do here in Wikipedia! (Especially giving me guidance when I am (and still am) a Wikipediholic! Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:08, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the burger, Thegooduser. You have the makings of a really great, committed editor, though I still remain concerned lest your amazing interest here Wikipediholism here ends up impacting on your real-world school work. How is school going, may I ask? Do you (including your family) think you have got the balance right, or have teachers expressed any concern over how well you study and work in class? If you show the initiative and commitment at school/college that you do here, you'll be doing fine. No need to answer if I'm asking personal questions. But I just want to know I/we care, though none of us here are as important as real world friends and family. Do have a really great New Year. I've got my daughter home from her first year at University right now (and she seems to have managed a sensible balance between studies and a good social life with like-minded friends there); whilst the one a couple of years younger is now seriously revising for mock-exams starting at the beginning of January. I'm not sure whereabouts you are in your college life, but I really wish you well. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:36, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
I have now sort of found a way to balance my schoolwork with Wikipedia, Yet I can never get off Wikipedia of my mind though. [ I am in Grade 10 by the way :) ] It's so hard to not be a Wikipediholic once you become one. I find my self to be a level 1-2 (Mostly level 2 Wikipediholic). I really should be doing my schoolwork instead of spending it here on Wikipedia, but ever since I started editing Wikipedia, it's been really hard to stop. --Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:41, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
I am at 6,011 edits or something the last time I checked my edit count. I am trying to clock at or past 10,000 edits by the end of my Winter Break for some reason. Do I have Edit contitius? --Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:43, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
@Thegooduser: Yes it does! (At least by 'Edit contitius' I presume you mean 'Edit countitus' - or perhaps you're employing a soldier from the Roman legions to assist you, LOL. I think your Grade 10 is our 'Year 11' here, so you and my youngest are at roughly the same stage. She spends here online time listen to YouTube music videos - so, if - and only if - you do get the balance right, I think you're using your online time far more usefully! But don't tell her that. However, it will all be for nothing if you flunk your studies because you've been overly-distracted by Wikipedia editing. I'm rather the same as you (albeit retired now, so I have far more right than you to waste all my time here!), but I love the elegance of how this site works and have often wondered if anyone has written a script which assesses and reports back on how much time an editor spends on Wikipedia. It would need to look at time between consecutive edits and make assumptions on how small a gap between them constitutes one period of 'continuous editing' and then add them together and report back on how much time we spend. I suspect in your and my case that that figure could be quite alarmingly high. In the case of my own Wikipediaholism I sometimes wake in the middle of the night with a thought, grab the phone and my glasses under the bedsheets, wait for the ensuing condensation to clear as my glasses warm up and, ensuring my wife doesn't get woken by the dim glow of the phone on its lowest brightness setting, make the odd edit or check the Teahouse messages. How worryingly sad is that? I do hope you don't do that too! (When I was your age it was a Crystal radio that I had wired with an earpiece under my pillow) BTW: Did you ever work out the answer to your Huggle question? My one foray into Huggle left me feeling I'd leave it for another day to get to grips with, but it was a very good point ]] that I had wired with an earpiece under my pillow) you asked. I didn't see you asking ti at Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback, so maybe you found the answer? If so, what was it? Maybe rather than aim at edit counts you might like to think about focussing on some of the Wikipedia things that might give you useful life experiences - possibly even in the eyes of a future employer. When I was your age I became the secretary of my local ham radio society; so I wonder what potential there is there for you in your own local community to work with others to, say, run a local WP:EDITATHON or get work experience at local museum, library or local archives office? Approaching any one of these, whilst scary for a youngster, could all lead to content being added to Wikipedia, providing you happen to encounter a receptive person there. This might sound frightening to a youngster like you, but I suspect you could find that encouraging real-world Wikipedia events to be run by one of them - or even simply being the catalyst to bring other like-minded people together in a local social situation could be great CV material that has career benefits for you. Certainly far more useful than meeting random edit count targets! I do think you have the potential to become an admin here (and even that probably has real-world CV-type benefits for a young person). So have you worked through the many essays around the topic at WP:RFA and assessed yourself against them? I am absolutely not suggesting you should put yourself forward at this stage in your life, but identifying your strengths and weaknesses against what is required for adminship could be quite a useful exercise in its own right that could help you grow and evolve as an editor and as a person. It's something I've been mulling over for a while now, yet still feel I've a lot more to learn first. So I'm not for one moment suggesting you rush to an WP:ORFA, but the act of self-assessment might help you identify strengths and weaknesses that need addressing. But above all, do stay grounded in the real world! You are welcome to email me if you ever get to the point of Wikipedia overtaking you. I will happily give you a really very stern, but private, talking to, and tell you, once again, that it is the real world and your own real life and future career that matters the most. Cheers, my friend. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
I have decided to not use HG to do CSD, instead I will now use TW. (It's easier and much faster :) ) Somedays, I'll think of nothing but Wikipedia. ALL DAY. I am an extreme wikipediholic, When I meet someone new the first thing I ask them is, "Do you edit Wikipedia?" and the answer was always "No, I don't". --Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 23:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
That's way too nerdy for most people. Why not just drop it in later, and very gently, and then learn to drop it if there's no response. There are other more important things in life! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
All I ever talk to people usually at school is Transit or Wikipedia.--Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 22:13, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
LOL. Happy New Year! Nick Moyes (talk) 00:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Rocher de la Tournette[edit]

Best wishes to you for 2019, Nick and a long life to all who care! Now please have a look at this: GentleDjinn (talk) 09:20, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@GentleDjinn: Happy New Year to you too. I'm pleased you made the article, though I think the other editor was fair in draftifying it through lack of any sources to verify it to their satisfaction at this point in time. This isnt a rejection of the topic per se - just a reasonable action for an unreferenced page by an editor with no knowledge of the subect. I might have done the same myself and - if I'm frank - I don't think you needed to have responded quite as sharply as you did. It was no attack on you or your knowledge. I did a quick check thismorning, both online and in my 1990s Alpine Club Mont Blanc guidebook, and can easily provide sources to make it ok to move back. You can leave that with me to do, if you wish, though I don't work quite as quickly as you do! I'll also check my French maps as I suspect the article ought to have the main title of Tournette or La Tournette, and a redirect from Rochers de la Tournette. I'm with the family at the moment, and editing on a tiny mobile, so checking stuff isn't easy right now. I don't want to patronise you by suggesting you work in your sandbox first, but do feel free to send me any links you'd like input on. I do do New Page Reviewing anyway, so am happy to offer any observations. You might have spotted that I rushed to post my unfinished draft on the Géant Glacier. It still needs an infobox and a few bits adding, but I'm still cross with myself that all my work on my Gouter Hut draft was for nothing bcause you took the welcome inititative to actually post something yourself. Couldnt have that happen a second time in as many days! Very best wishes for the New Year, and I'm excited to see what other articles you're going to produce. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:15, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
PS I've also long thought the 'top of MB' page was rather pointless under that name. Maybe in due course a merge might be justified. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:18, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your kind reaction and reencouragement. First, I was annoyed because it was not unreferenced (if two planes have hit the rock, and there are books and movies mentioned about those crash disasters and even reports about dead bodies of the victims now emerging from the ice, I would not call that unreferenced). Second, sources are certainly needed when the existence of something is doubted or disputed, but demanding them when that is not the case seems rather senseless pedantry to me, with destructive consequences: that leads to a rather absurd abyss, finally ending with questioning the reality of existence itself, and the use and validity and legitimation of rules... (probably good for a theoretical philosophical lemma in Wikipedia but not for the whole). But you suggest a merge of Top of the Mont Blanc with Rocher de la Tournette? GentleDjinn (talk) 08:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
@GentleDjinn: You're very welcome, though I cannot agree with what you've just said. This version was the one before it was draftified for not being verifiable. In my view that's unreferenced. I'm sure you realise that wikilinks to other articles don't suffice for verifiability (except in Lists), nor would it be fair on users to expect them to have to wade through from one Wikipedia article to another in order to eventually find a WP:RS which proves something actually exists. That absolutely must be visible on the page itself, so I am a little surprised to hear you say that. It's a simple task to copy a reference from one article to another, or to link to an online map to show that a feature exists. Anyway, that said, regarding merging the Top of the Mont Blanc page with Rocher de la Tournette article, yes, I would consider it at some point in the future, but it would also need definite independent references to show that that rock is assumed/alleged/proven/stated to have come from there before it would be acceptable. It certainly wouldn't be OK to merge it based on one's personal guess (or WP:OR) that that was where the rock sample came from (even though I cannot imagine it coming from anywhere else. As there has never been any rocks accessible on the summit of MB in a historical timescale, it's really not 'the top', is it? As far as I can remember, the page just seemed to be a literal translation of a museum or exhibit label. Anyway, let's leave discussion on that that for another time shall we? BTW do you have a source that states what you added here? I don't disagree with your conclusion, but it is stated rather too strongly in my opinion (maybe the word 'likely to have been collected from' would have been more appropriate?) but even the archived refs to the Teyler Museum don't seem to function any more, so it's hard to check back. Best wishes. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

So, what is the source for the Teyler(s) Museum being a museum in Haarlem, and for Haarlem being the capital of North Holland? Or to restart in alphabetical order: what is the source then for Abu Dhabi being the capital of the United Arab Emirates? (and so on with all capital cities of the world form A to Z mentioned in the Wikipedia...) 14:00, 6 January 2019 (UTC)~

@GentleDjinn: I'm not sure why that reply comes across as a bit belligerent towards me, but I'm surprised you're challenging my simple observation that you did need to have cited statements on unusual topics like the plane crashes in an otherwise unreferenced new article. I thought we were on the same page, as it were, regarding Alps articles. You might like to read: Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue. Anyway, I did add the required references for you, so that's sorted, isn't it? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Yes, thanks indeed for the references! The pages on the crashes of the Air India Flight 101 and Air India Flight 245 exist since 2007 and 2009. It was sufficient to include links to those pages, imho. Both Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue and Wikipedia:You do need to cite that the sky is blue offer food for thought as well. But thanks again. By the way, I see in many sources the plural Rochers de la Tournette, e.d. [1]GentleDjinn (talk) 07:46, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

ok, thanks. Which references use the plural? Ignore non-mountain or geographically local literature and I rarely see the plural form; the remainder seem likely to be akin to an unfamiliar source wrongly referring to the 'Rocks' of Gibraltar. I would not wish to see it/they used throughout as that would only serve to confuse the reader. I would like to see fuller references, though, rather than bare urls. I think quality content deserves quality-formatted references, don't you? Cheers,Nick Moyes (talk) 10:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

GentleDjinn (talk) 12:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Nick, can you please help with the notes on the page about the Goûter Refuge? As you might have noticed already, I am quite clumsy with notes. Thanks. Cite error: The named reference Griffin1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).GentleDjinn (talk) 14:30, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

  1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
  2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
  3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

Technical news

  • Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:
  1. At least 8 characters in length
  2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
  3. Different from their username
User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on
  • Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
  • {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.



  • Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
  • Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Fulfilled request concerning Rocher de la Tournette[edit]

@Nick Moyes: I am notifying you that I have completed your move request concerning Rocher de la Tournette. MarkZusab (talk) 01:55, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


Sorry for deleting your change at Teahouse, I think I've restored everything. RhinosF1 (talk) 09:45, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

No worries. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Recently created accounts[edit]

Hi Nick, is there any page on Wikipedia which shows the list of recently created accounts?Betour13 (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Betour13 Sorry for the delay in replying to you. Yes, you can see a list of all new user accounts at Special:Log/newusers. You can use this to both check for inappropriate account names, and to identify new editors and send them a welcoming message. This can really help make new editors feel welcome here (I shall be sending you one in a few minutes, myself!). Just bear in mind that most accounts are never actually used, so only welcome active editors whose 'contribs' link is blue, not red. Likewise, no need to report to accounts to WP:UAA unless they, too, have actually edited. There are some guidance links there on username policy and how UAA works. (I'm guessing this is why you asked your question). You seem to have dived into a lot of helpful administrative work since you joined us in late December. How are you finding it? And have you tried The Wikipedia Adventure yet? There are 15 badges to be gained as you tour the universe and gain useful Wikipedia skills. Feel free to ask any further questions you may have, though you will, of course, get a faster response by posting at the Teahouse where lots of volunteers are on standby to answer calls for assistance. Best wishes from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:04, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You are right Nick, I wanted the list of newcomers to check whether there username is with policy or not. I will only report them to WP:UAA if they have edited and if there username is against policy. I am finding it very nice on Wikipedia but haven't tried The Wikipedia Adventure yet. I mainly improve sports related articles and do Anti-Vandalism works here.Betour13 (talk) 10:27, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-03[edit]