Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:50, 6 February 2019

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23

15 January 2025
From the editors: Looking back, looking forward Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2024 In the media: Will you be targeted? Technology report: New Calculator template brings interactivity at last Essay: Meet the Canadian who holds the longest editing streak on Misplaced Pages Opinion: Reflections one score hence News and notes: It's a new dawn, it's a new day, it's a new life for me... and I'm feeling free Serendipity: What we've left behind, and where we want to go next Op-ed: Elon Musk and the right on Misplaced Pages In focus: Twenty years of The Signpost: What did it take? Arbitration report: Analyzing commonalities of some contentious topics Humour: How to make friends on Misplaced Pages
Single page Front page About Subscribe Suggestions Archives

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Formula One

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Formula One. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Louis Farrakhan

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Louis Farrakhan. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ron Stallworth

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ron Stallworth. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Death of Elaine Herzberg

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Death of Elaine Herzberg. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Interpretations of "deny"

You may have a point about that user asking for something he knows can't exist, or being argumentative. But if you want to "WP:DENY", surely a lengthy discussion of his past edits replete with Misplaced Pages jargon plunked down into the middle of the Refdesk isn't really what I had in mind. Honestly, it's jarring because I'd prefer to just think about science there. Traditionally, "denying a troll" meant giving someone the silent treatment, and in any case, behavioral discussion just doesn't belong on that particular page. And residually, well, I'm not sure how much I care about an editor's history; so long as they're not blatantly starting a problem on a particular page I don't really want to call them out there. Wnt (talk) 03:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Again, I'd advise you look at some of the diffs raised there if you don't think that discussion was headed for a WP:disruptive place; virtually every one of their edits for the last few years has been them dropping into one space after another to rail on a topic that seems to be intertwined with their beliefs regarding how science cannot disprove their immaterial soul; i.e. a WP:NOTHERE, WP:SPA effort to turn various talk spaces into a forum on materialism as part of an effort to right a great wrong, one debate at a time--and as you can see, they don't take well to anything that looks like an ontological view that would, as they see it, attempt to deny the existence of their non-material self. If you don't think that pattern is relevant to the debate they were trying to re-engineer on the desks (not for the first time--that's also in the contribution history), I don't know that there's a point to discussing the matter, as it's unlikely we are going to have a meeting of the minds on that.

As to why I outlined their previous behaviour and community cautions they had received while also mentioning WP:DENY, I felt it was the responsible thing to do for my fellow RefDesk contributors, lest they AGF that the SPA's request and unfamiliarity with the topic was genuine and waste their time (just as I initially did) attempting to provide an informative response, before realizing the SPA is just there to troll up a fight with anyone who has a naturalist view on those topics. Beyond that, while I wasn't telling them anything they hadn't been told before about our policies and the limited purposes for which talk spaces are reserved, I nevertheless feel that I was beholden to elucidate what was wrong in their approach if I was going to criticize it, even briefly. You and I may doubt that was going anywhere, but I still feel it important in those cases.

Lastly, I didn't want to make a thing of this point, but since we are talking about this anyway, I'd appreciate if you consider a different phrasing from "nastiness" in similar circumstances in the future. I may have been blunt with them and firm in drawing attention to the WP:NOTAFORUM line they were crossing, but I was perfectly civil from word one. I may not have been in a particularly hand-holding mood once I realized what their angle on this topic was, but I was careful to be clear that I was not belittling their spiritual/philosophical beliefs, merely telling them that this project is not the place for them to engage in an open-ended debate on the topic. The internet is replete with places where they can find masses of people willing to validate their views on dualism and a immaterial essence to consciousness--or to challenge them about it, whichever they are ultimately seeking--at great length, but that's not what the Misplaced Pages RefDesks or talk pages are for and they need to internalize that lesson or they are going to end up blocked or topic banned. You know me well enough at this point to know the high priority I place on WP:CIV, I think, but if I was curt in this instance, I can live with it--it's not the first time all of this has been pointed out to them.

All that said, Happy New Year--I hope it's off to a good start for you and yours. Snow 04:45, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry if "nastiness" comes across as too strong a term; still, my feeling was that this was something of an attack, and from what you write above, perhaps a preemptive attack. I'm not sure what harm you intended to spare me and other editors from - either the question would be dull and hard to answer and we would stay away, or the discussion would get interesting enough to pull us in, in which case I have nothing to complain about. You posted some decent links and references before you got (to my mind) side tracked on Misplaced Pages bureaucracy. I mean, it's one thing to say that "per WP:NOTAFORUM Misplaced Pages rules I don't want to get into an open-ended debate, so let's stick to the question" (indeed, 'merely telling them' as you say above), but it's something else again to start raising an editor's contribution history there. I mean, to me that seems just as off-topic as any religious debate. Wnt (talk) 15:25, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Once again, the diffs are the explanation for why this user needed to be addressed about this unacceptable pattern. Look, I know you are super laissez-faire about WP:NOTAFORUM, but that rule did not get spun out of the ether (nor did the RefDesk guidelines) because the rest of us are just oh so WP:BURO; there are many, many, many reasons why engaging in soapboxing and extended advocacy not related to the work of the project in talk spaces is discouraged. Just one of those many reasons is that people tend to be emotionally/personally invested int he things they want to talk about that badly. Look at the diffs and the user moanign about how Misplaced Pages is a hotbed of arrogant materialists who just won't accept that they can't prove there is something of an essence beyond the body and then look at their initial responses on the desk and then tell me the same thing wasn't unfolding on the desks once again.

And even if that weren't the case, the objective they were trying to serve there--ranting against the belief they perceive as contrary to their own and fishing for an opponent to serve as their foil/philosophical opposite in that process--still would not have been appropriate. "Having an interesting conversation" is not the purpose of WP:RD; the RefDesk is a work space that is meant to serve the purpose of improving the encyclopedia / provide relevant information, just like every other talk space at this domain. Just because that benefit tends to be a little indirect and some editors lose sight of the fact altogether does not obviate the rest of us from adhering to that principle. We get a lot of slack to permit us to serve that end in an indirect fashion that literally no other operational area of the project gets, but that is likely to change (and has been threatened to change by stirrings in the braoder community in recent memory) if we cannot adhere to at least a semblance of adherence to WP:What Misplaced Pages is not and efforts to make sure the desk does not operate like a Reddit clone. That's not it's function, it will never be its function.

So, I'm done with the matter. If the contrib history is any indication, that user (or at least that account--note that they've socked in the past) will go into torpor now for a couple of months, make exactly zero edits improving any article, and then pop up on another talk page about the nature of existence beyond the physical world and complain about how someone there is assuming a materialist world view that can't be proven. You feed the troll, or others like him, if you like, though I'm telling you that you won't be doing anyone any favours, least that user. Snow 16:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh yeah, no disruption inherit in this guy's approach to this topic at all, right? I'd consider remembering this next time you are inclined to pursue an argument along the lines of "violations of WP:WWIN provision X is essentially harmless". Again, we have these policies for a reason. Snow 17:58, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

His comment there doesn't bother me any more than some of your later procedural commentary, though it doesn't advance the topic either. Wnt (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

If personal insults with a side of misogyny referencing anatomical terms don't qualify as WP:disruptive in your view, we have very different understandings of the meaning of that term, what manner of commentary is appropriate for a discussion page on this project, and the relevant policies representing community consensus on both topics--and above all the type of behaviour said policies are explicitly directed at preventing. That being the case, I'm afraid we've exhausted any hope at arriving at a shared perspective as to what should be done in the case of such trolls. Thanks for stopping by, though. Snow 22:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Matthias Corvinus

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Matthias Corvinus. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of longest-reigning monarchs

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of longest-reigning monarchs. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tamika Mallory

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tamika Mallory. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ersan ?lyasova

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ersan ?lyasova. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Suki Waterhouse

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Suki Waterhouse. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Article titles. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rihanna

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Rihanna. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Michel Temer

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Michel Temer. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, someone was bound to take me up on this someday

Okay Snow, lets rap!...or whois me for a dance-off.

♫ ♬ 🎶 🎵 ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ 🎤

So I hear you may want this in iambic pentameter…

and I would have obliged if that is your parameter.

Here’s to the prospect of a healthy restart…

let’s hope this warms the cockles of your heart.

While my deductive thinking builds concrete from the abstract…

your NIMBY cries of imprecision simply do distract.

The rules you flaunt around yourself say a lot about you…

but the ones you ignore also do too!

Before you bite off my head like a judge with a writ…

you might want to reflect on what it would mean to be a hypocrite.

Seems the rules are really guidelines that can be justifiably broken…

and that’s the specific case to which I here have spoken.

I’m not here to cure the Wikiworld of all of its ills…

or tear down policy without a better solution to the void that it fills.

Neutral is not saying you’re “hating this,” or what you provoked about The View…

just look at the byzantine discussions about fault, this entire page is off queue.

We’ve always assessed quality by comparing ours to other pages…

without any worry to who the analogy enrages!

Let’s be real, it was you who first made this look clowned…

nobody said anything about a bombing, but with your box, that’s the talk of town.

Letting it go to disagree would have been the best respect…

but you made everyone gawk because of the Streisand effect.

You’re smart enough to know that not all relativity is theoretical…

saying relativity is conjoined to viewpoint is not heretical!

Carlin would specify that a heart attack is not defined within fatality

and ultimate causation? Don’t be histrionic; that’s simply not reality.

As the time to summon charges is constrained by statutory imperative...

it's the final juncture when criminal responsibility can be added to our narrative.

Whether title is pinned to Uber or whether to Elaine…

has been debated relatively long enough to make a man insane!

Horizons are expanded by listening to other viewpoints and voices…

forbid how we describe reality has other choices.

That learning in turn allows one to find a reliable new source…

the Overton window shifts and neutrality plots a new course!

I have an acknowledgment I will share here in closing…

that my discourse serves no one if it is too imposing.

But if you have been inspired rather than tired…

you all should stand up that I shouldn’t be fired!

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫........................🎤

40.140.35.124 (talk) 2:25 pm, January 25 (UTC−8)

Yo, IP, you gotta believe,

I don't mean to be dissin'

But you see, on TPs,

it's all about the efficien--

See, on this project,

we gotta always be workin'

Hustlin' that policy,

for the proper WP:Here purposes

Your asides and diatribes,

yeah, they're plenty keen,

But man, understand,

this just ain't that scene

where we can be relating and debating

just any old thing

We gotta keep matters focused

on an editorial scheme

Yeah, it may sound quite boring

But this just ain't no forum

Open up the gates, and there's no escape,

from that POV warrin'

And you're likely to put discussion

into a lurch

If you lean too much

on that whack original research

Yo homes, I dig your passion

and I don't mean to be bashin'

Hope you'll stick on hand--

lend a hand, with the editorial action

But man, your still quite green,

and I gotta say a few things,

'bout the limitations on the sopaboxin'

and straight abstract philosophical themes

Yeah, don't get it distorted

here open debate is exhorted,

But you gotta keep it rooted

in those reliable sources

Too much tack

on your own personal track

will only keep us coming back

aaand back--

to intractable spates,

and subjective debates

That POV pushin'

making every user irate

No doubt, in general, expression's gotta be free

But I hope these verses have helped you to see,

That not just everything's fair game,

here on the pages of the WHI-KEE PEEE!

Yo man, just one last little thing,

if you wanna be seen:

Gotta sign your posts--

just four tildas and you're king

Snow 08:11, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ricardo Vélez Rodríguez

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Ricardo Vélez Rodríguez. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Request: help with Italian-to-English translation

Hello. I'm trying to expand an article on an Italian volleyball player Viktoria Orsi Toth. I was wondering if you could help me translate a two short paragraphs (3 sentences) from an Italian source (I found you on Misplaced Pages:Translators available#Italian-to-English). No worries if you're not interested, but if you are, I'll quote the text here or via email (whichever you prefer). Thanks. Bennv3771 (talk) 20:44, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Bennv3771 I'm happy to help. :) Just drop the content here at your convenience; a couple of paragraphs should only take a moment, so if you catch me quickly enough I can get it back to you immediately--and if not, I'll be on tomorrow as well. Snow 22:40, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Here's the first paragraph:

"Che peraltro la luce l’ha vista a Budapest e già questa è una bella storia, perché mamma Agnese e papà Laszlo erano tutti e due nazionali ungheresi, di basket e atletica (decathlon) e l’ultima cosa che volevano per la figlia era che giocasse a volley: <<In Ungheria non è che ci sia una gran tradizione>>, spiega. Solo che dopo aver chiuso le rispettive carriere hanno messo su casa a Santeramo. <<Dove tutte le ragazze giocavano a pallavolo, e così hanno vinto le amiche, nel senso che mi hanno trascinata con loro>>." (paid subscription needed unfortunately)

I had to type it out manually as the source doesn't allow me to select the text. So if anything doesn't make sense, it's probably because of a typo on my part. Bennv3771 (talk) 22:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

And the second paragraph:

"Dice Viki: <<Lei è precisina in tutto, in campo e fuori. E poi gioca da molto più di me e quindi fa da guida>>, ovvero il contrario di quel che le capitava con Greta Cicolari con cui ha giocato gli ultimi 2 Mondiali. Ribatte Marta: <<E lei sdrammatizza, mi fa volare bassa. Sul fatto della leadership invece ho dovuto lavorare molto su me stessa, ma mi piace. E’ giusto prendersi delle responsabilità>>. Quelle che Viki si accolla sul piano pratico. Perché con il livello tecnico individuale di Marta (è una delle prime al mondo) è evidente che nessuna coppia si sogna nemmeno di battere su di lei (ricevendo andrebbe poi anche ad attaccare)."

That's all. Your help is much appreciated. Bennv3771 (talk) 22:59, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Bennv3771. sorry for the delay: I ended up heading out the door very quickly after the last message yesterday and I'm just now getting back online. I've translated both paragraphs, but they come with a caveat: I'm not really the greatest of experts with sports lingo in even my native language and even less so Italian--so I did my best with what turned out to be a fair bit of idiomatic construction in these extracts: I think these are servieable, but with regard to the last sentences of both paragraphs in particular, if they turn out to contain information you want to implment or even quote in the article, you could always consider a second pair of eyes from someone more inured in Italian sports culture! Also I wouldn't mind if you could provide me with the sentence immediately preceding the first sentence of the first paragraph, because it used very atypical syntax in one clause, and some context would be helpful in knowing if I made the right call as to the grammatical actor.

First paragraph:

However, the light has been seen in Budapest and this makes for a great story, because mother Agnes and father Laszki were both nationally ranked Hunagarians, in basketball and athletic (decathalon) respectively, and the last thing they wanted for their daughter was that she play volleyball: "In Hungary, there's not exactly a great tradtion" she explains. Only after closing out their own careers did they relocate to Santeramo, "Where all the girls play volleyball, so in a sense, they won the supporters, in the sense that they dragged me along with them.

Second paragraph:

Says Viki: "You need precision in everything, on the field and off. And as she's played a lot more than me, she can therefore act as a guide.", the opposite of the relation she had with Greta Cicolari with whom she played in the previous two World Cups. Marta replies "And she plays so low, she keeps me rooted. On the subject of leadership, on the other hand, I found I had to work a lot on myself, but discovered that I like it. It's only proper to take on that responsibility." Viki takes all of this onboard at a practical level. Because with an individual of Marta's technical skill (indeed, as she is one of the premier players in the world), it is clear that no other set of partners even dares dream of easily beating her (and would face a counterattack if they did).

Once again, thanks so much! As you said, these translations look serviceable to me. I don't intend to quote anything from these, just want to get a better idea of what the source was saying. "Flying low" definitely isn't a volleyball term. For some context on the first sentence, Viktoria Orsi Toth was born in Budapest and I think that's what the first part of the first sentence is referring to. These are the sentences right before the first paragraph (this is also the start of the article): "Le gemelle d'Italia han cominciato bene. A Rotterdam il loro primo Mondiale insieme e partito con un 2-1 alle argentine Gallay-Klug. Marta Menegatti e Viktoria Orsi Toth sono nate a 48 ore di distanza l'una dall'altra: il 16 agosto 1990 la prima, il 14 Viki.". Again for context, Menegatti was born on 16 August 1990 and Orsi Toth on 14 August 1990 so that's what the second part is referring to. Bennv3771 (talk) 01:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Great--well for those purposes, I think that wording is plenty reliable then (fyi, the extra sentences merely note that the pair were off to a good start in their first World Cup together and mentions the fact of their close in time births, referring to them in the opening sentence as "the twins"). Note that I did just make a couple of small edits for purposes of a couple of very small spelling and grammatical typos ("brought me alone"-->"brought me along", for example) so be sure to review them again. And you're very welcome--I'm happy to be of help! :) Snow 01:53, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I would say that is entirely probable, especially as the more literal translation for the parenthetical is "upon receiving, would then also attack". Furthermore, that would solve the main issue I had with that sentence that made feel I might be missing something because of lack of familiarity with the sport's vernacular in Italian--namely that the combination of that verb and the preposition that follows were atypical; normally that combination would suggest "beating on" in a physical sense, not just "beating". Now that I know it is the used as the verb for serving in volleyball, it is clear that it means "to serve at", and thus the entire clause should be read as "it is obvious that no pair dreams of serving to her (and facing the return attack when she receives it)." I'm glad you caught that because it drove me a little nuts and none of my dictionaries had that meaning for battere. (Although in retrospect, it's obvious that I should have read it as something in the vein "striking at", because the verb more typically adopts a meaning with more physicality than I finally settled upon there; it can be used in the sense of "to prevail", same as its cognate in English, but it's less common.) Snow 02:18, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

• Op-ed: Random Rewards Rejected

• In focus: The Collective Consciousness of Admin Userpages

• News and notes: WMF staff turntable continues to spin; Endowment gets more cash; RfA continues to be a pit of steely knives

• In the media: The Signpost's investigative story recognized, Misplaced Pages turns 18 and gets a birthday gift from Google, and more editors are recognized

• Discussion report: The future of the reference desk

• Featured content: Don't miss your great opportunity

• Arbitration report: An admin under the microscope

• Traffic report: Death, royals and superheroes: Avengers, Black Panther

• Technology report: When broken is easily fixed

• Gallery: Let us build a memorial fit for such pain and suffering

• News from the WMF: News from WMF

• Recent research: Ad revenue from reused Misplaced Pages articles; are Misplaced Pages researchers asking the right questions?

• Essay: How

• Humour: Village pump

• From the archives: An editorial board that includes you

A barnstar for you!

		The Linguistic Barnstar
		Thanks for helping me with the Italian-to-English translations. You've been a great help. Bennv3771 (talk) 02:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Awww, thanks so much! I'm glad i could be of help, not withstanding my sport agnosnia! You've made me think I should start checking the requested translations pages again; I used to love contributing in that capacity, but somehow it became less and less a part of my editing. Snow 02:42, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Killing of Aya Maasarwe

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Killing of Aya Maasarwe. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pamela Geller

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Pamela Geller. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Cate Blanchett

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Cate Blanchett. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

NOTE:COI REFDESK attacks in centralised discussion. You are involved in a discussion I tried to request should not be permitted to be had and have not debated you about. I have responded, however, to your addition to a discussion of me. I wish to encourage you to come out with the events you have witnessed by producing diffs, as I will now do, so that you can make no mistakes what is going on, on my expense, okay?

Regarding your declarations about me at the ANI:

Now I'm sorry, that implies I reverted an admins action four times. It was not admin in either case which closed my request. I would not go four rounds with an admin who had been called in to examine a dispute. In fact, the first close was made to a village pump proposal, by User:Mandruss, not an admin as I had thought. This prevention of my being able to make my suggestion to village pump, caused an argument. I demanded nobody interfere with my request. Once four or five were deleting my attempt to use the talk page I went to ANI for help. Again, another editor summarily close-templated the request for admin before one had responded, with messages threatening discipline I must stress there had been no 3RR at that point and no breach of civility then or after, nor threat to content, just a proposal to deny vandalism, as a vandal has just made a successful swoop at the refdesk. So I waited for an admin and people proceeded to edit war my ability to request an admin off the ANI. It went on for hours and no admin would answer. So I did a 4th RR. And none of the attackers have responded to my requests to make this debacle a sharing of the diffs, or else, after half a dozens challenges, I say lies. I have not broken WP:CIVIL or threatened any kind of content. This is not even a content dispute. I was just making an administrative suggestion. I have no bloody interest in all this nonsense but you must admit this accusations continue to grow no substance in diffs. I am not the one doing this. !I don't doubt..." Maybe not but I do where are your DIFFS? ALL I DID WAS PROPOSE A COMMENT AT VILLAGE PUMP. SUBSTANTIATE, OR DONT MAKE ACCUSATIONS ABOUT ME, OR ANYBODY ELSE, thanks. ~ R.T.G 08:50, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

The discussion about me is closed, however this individual comment by you still lingers unaddressed, and once I have responded, I'll have answered you all, which will be handy for me if you should pursue, thanks loads. Unless of course you want to back up your words with diffs and then you'll find, well maybe I did make one revert, over 3RR once. What was all that other stuff you said. And good luck. ~ R.T.G 08:50, 6 February 2019 (UTC)