This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi FeralOink, I’m currently working on the page for David M. Cote and noticed you'd been active on Honeywell. I'm fairly new to Wikipeida (at least on the editing side) and I’m reaching out to experienced editors to collaborate with on future projects, so that I might more quickly learn the ins and outs of what makes a good article (in practice, rather than theory), as well as more about the Wikipedia community in general. I’d appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have for me on my Wikipedian adventure. Thanks! -- FacultiesIntact ( talk) 23:36, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for stopping by, User talk:FacultiesIntact! I left comments and feedback for you on your talk page.-- FeralOink ( talk) 17:33, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey FeralOink, thanks for getting back to me! I actually have a draft for a revised version of David M. Cote here on my sandbox. I should have clarified that on this particular article I do have a COI, which I've disclosed on the Cote talk page. At this point I'm trying to garner a consensus on my draft so that I can submit it for an edit request (I wouldn't publish it myself), but I really would appreciate any feedback or help you can give now or in the future. -- FacultiesIntact ( talk) 00:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Ellie, Great to hear from you! And your note suggests a few q's. Why not the visual editor? I found it quite useful for some aspects, e.g., formatting. More importantly, I'm curious about your ideas for motivating students. What do you have in mind? I'm hoping to survey the registered students soon, a few weeks before the semester, to gauge their interest and hopefully pave the way for a positive reception to WP assignments. Would you be willing to serve as an online ambassador for the course? See Wikipedia:Education program/Ambassadors. You could then be listed on the course page as a volunteer for the course. In any case… Happy 2015 CE back at ya! :) ProfGray ( talk) 01:05, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you FeralOink for your comments. I will work on a new draft over the next couple of weeks. Have a good New Years holiday. Steven Yvan

Steven Yvan ( talk) 04:07, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (consult) @ 21:03, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

There is a proposal at the IdeaLab that may interest you. Lightbreather ( talk) 20:01, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Did you know that you have your Internationalisation preference set to "She edits wiki pages" (yeah!), but you aren't a member of [[Category:Female_Wikipedians|Category:Female Wikipedians]]? I hope that you'll add yourself! Lightbreather ( talk) 23:46, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Since WikiProject Women as proposed at the IdeaLab may take some time to realize, and based on a discussion on the proposal's talk page, I have started a test Kaffeeklatsch area for women (cisgender or trans-woman, regardless of sexual orientation) only. If interested, your participation would be most welcome. Lightbreather ( talk) 19:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Economy of Iran. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi FeralOink! A week or so ago, I resubmitted my piece on “Steve Ellner.” I attempted to address your observation that “we need independent references that are about the subject, not by the subject.” As it stands now, there are 31 footnotes of which 16 are by authors other than the subject. Please let me know if this is along the lines of what you had in mind. Thanks Steven Yvan ( talk) 02:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Steven Yvan ( talk) 02:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Steven Yvan! I will take a look at it. -- FeralOink ( talk) 09:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi FeralOink, I have corrected the errors that you picked up in the entry on Steve Ellner. Specifically I added the ISBN numbers for books, changed the word order of phrases that are linked to Wikipedia, corrected the spelling of the Joseph Ellner book and corrected the number 1 in various entries. Please let me know if you have additional observations. Thanks. Steven Yvan ( talk) 21:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Steven Yvan ( talk) 21:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

FeralOink, You made some edits to Joe Lonsdale which were deleted. I started a discussion about that on the talk page Talk:Joe Lonsdale. You might want to contribute to that discussion. -- Nbauman ( talk) 03:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ken Ham. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at feedback request service. — Legobot ( talk) 00:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Continuing discussion at George Church article. Progress, finally. Leprof 7272 ( talk) 20:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

…see the last Talk entry at Human sexuality. I was asked to do a citation review there, and have been paying for it ever since. Cheers, good week. 71.239.87.100 ( talk) 00:25, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, FO, like you both, for your engaging manners, passion for your ideas, contrasting styles, not to mention energy and rhetorical talent. I'm reminded of a children's story where two aristocratic protagonists, one of the two being unaware of their birthright, grow up side by side, battling as they go… wherein the author closes the story with "…and the two married [forgive, if perceived as an anachronism, it is in the story]… so they could fight more conveniently." I will cherish trying to be a peacemaker between you, if only because it will mean I can continue to relate to you both. Cheers, bonne unit. Leprof 7272 ( talk) 04:38, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Einstein Cross. Legobot ( talk) 00:04, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I just declined your PROD thus: "Declined prod. Not averse to AFD. Possible WP:NOTCRYSTAL, but press coverage exists. Conundrum. Discussion required." I was tempted to approve it and then AfD it at once, so I am glad you noticed it. If you take it to AfD I will remain neutral as the accepting WP:AFC reviewer. I feel it needs further discussion, but may be almost unique in being a notable entity that 'does not yet exist'. Fiddle Faddle 07:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Why the Talen Energy article does not fall under WP:NOTCRYSTAL guidelines.

• The event is verifiable – numerous reliable independent secondary sources have commented.
• The event is noteworthy – large company noted in mainstream news.
• The event will almost certainly to take place – most analysts expect 2nd quarter 2015 completion; no speculation here.
• There is no undue bias –
• There is no attempt of advertising
• The event is already in progress – offices exist, a CEO has been named. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has granted conditional approval.
• There is no OR.

Cheers. Grahamboat ( talk) 18:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello Wikipedia Library Users,

You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your HighBeam account; if you are having trouble feel free to contact me for more information. When your access expires you can reapply at WP:HighBeam.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed. For more information about citing this source, see Wikipedia:HighBeam/Citations
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, let us know and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tensor. Legobot ( talk) 00:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

…at a bloke in trouble… [1]. 71.239.87.100 ( talk) 04:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Best user name ever barnstar! :) - Wikidemon ( talk) 05:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, FeralOink. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Invitation To Participate In wigi.wmflabs.org Usability Study.
Message added 17:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

—M@sssly ^✉ 17:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

My apologies for accidentally reverting you. —  JJMC89 ( T· C) 04:53, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

You are entirely forgiven, JJMC89! No harm done. I would be remiss in not forgiving you, as we are fellow mathematical statisticians ;o) Don't be a stranger! -- FeralOink ( talk) 04:15, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Re this edit summary: an anonymous IP editor put that mess about the Port Authority into the template {{ Common logical symbols}} for some reason. It had nothing to do with your edit, but your edit summary helped me discover the problem, so thanks. — David Eppstein ( talk) 06:53, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh wow, you are THAT David Eppstein, the famous mathematician! I wrote about you on Quora, see here: Ellie Kesselman's answer to Who are some of the active Wikipedians who are famous enough to have their own entry on Wikipedia? I am Ellie Kesselman ;o) You actually appeared twice, but someone collapsed the earlier answer. I also read your blog on LiveJournal. I like your periodic arXiv highlight entries. In my Quora answer, I used a photograph of you that I found in the collapsed answer, but I don't know if it is a copyvio. If you would like to provide another BIGGER photo, that would be great. My answer, i.e. YOU, is the only correct one, other than Jimmy Wales. All the rest are just frequent editors. You are actually notable outside of Wikipedia!

As for that template spam, it looks a lot better now! The reason why I noticed it was because I was trying to remove all the white space in the Triple Bar article, just prior to the references. I still see that there, even after your edit. It isn't a big deal of course, but it is a little odd. Any ideas, or should we just leave it alone? Thank you for stopping by!!! -- FeralOink ( talk) 02:24, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

• RevengeOfTheRobots ( talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Online Kratom ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Im trying to submit an article and it's been rejected two times. The first time I understand. However the second one seems more like a bias opinion with nothing really concrete. For example the line when stated like an advertisement. There's no real clarity to what that means or how that conclusion was came about. Lastly, when it was said not just articles created by the creator. Well obviously I did not create the articles that are referenced in the content. Im wondering how this person came to the notion that I wrote the content that this article is linking back to you? Def need some assistance.

This is for the Online Kratom article /info/en/?search=Draft:Online_Kratom RevengeOfTheRobots ( talk) 04:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi FeralOink! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 00:17, Monday, February 15, 2016 ( UTC)

Hi there. I noticed you're a member of the biography wikiproject. Could you please weigh in at this RfC regarding the anthropologist/linguist Georgiy Starostin and whether his hobby as a music blogger should be included in the article? Some editors have argued for including it in the lead, others for mentioning it briefly somewhere in the article body, and others for excluding it altogether. Dan56 ( talk) 12:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Altegrity Risk International, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page USIS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:13, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Some of your changes to the Quora article appear to have been reverted by the page creator; please check to make sure. I thought most of your edits were sound. 183.83.5.231 ( talk) 06:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. — MusikAnimal ^talk 04:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

hello,

in your edit from 2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Baltic_Dry_Index&diff=695873121&oldid=695492199 you've removed a mention of data vendor Macrobond, while left other Bloomberg and Thomson Reuters. can i ask you to reconsider / revert that edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pqd ( talk • contribs) 10:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

thanks for the prompt reply! i believe that Thomson Reuters also does not provide free access to the BDI historical data, yet it was listed there. that's why i decided to add reference to Macrobond and was surprised with it being removed, while other reference kept intact. Pqd ( talk) 07:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I undid my contribution to the talk page, because a WOT moderator seemed to have evidence of this "TOW Software" being WOT, and I found some evidence on Google too.

As for the claim in July TOW went out of business, the only thing I noticed on WOT was they moved the servers from the Finnish ISP Nebula OY to the Amazon cloud, triggering weird bugs, as well as poor performance for a while. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BFeely ( talk • contribs) 12:25, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

No offense. But why won't you folks let me bring that article in line (as much as possible) with the others? United States presidential election, 2012 & the others before it, have Elected President. PS - Will I have to change all 57 other infoboxes to President-elect, so to make them all consistent? GoodDay ( talk) 21:33, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi GoodDay. As of now, Obama and previous presidents were elected presidents, since the electoral college is completed for those elections. At the moment, Trump has the official status of president-elect. Also, I don't want people to keep editing the article, implying that the election results are uncertain in any way. Trump IS the elected president of the United States. Some of the other editors were writing that Trump was "projected" to win! That makes it seem like the election isn't over yet, or that there remains some uncertainty of the status of the outcome.

By the way, I am not happy with the person who keeps on reverting your changes to the electoral college count of 306 and lowers it to 200-something. I am going to comment on the talk page about that. You are correct. That other user is not, and has reverted at least 3 times today on the electoral college vote count for Trump.-- FeralOink ( talk) 21:43, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

He's going to continue to be President-elect after the Electoral College votes, as well. I put Projected Elected President as a compromise & also because the Electoral Votes are listed a projected. IMHO, the bottom of the infobox should be Elected President per the numerious sources. GoodDay ( talk) 21:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

GoodDay, tell me what you mean by the other 57 infoboxes please? I'm sorry, but I just noticed that you added that now. Do mean for the US presidential election 2016 article, or for the other articles on presidential elections? Those other election infoboxes should stay the same. Only this article will change. Unless I have misunderstood you. Thank you.-- FeralOink ( talk) 21:49, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

The 57 others: United States presidential election, 1788 to United States presidential election, 2012 which use Elected President. The 2016 article should do the same per vast number of sources. GoodDay ( talk) 21:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Correct, GoodDay, those 57 others ARE "Elected Presidents". They should remain as they are. Obama and previous presidents were elected presidents, since the electoral college is completed for those elections. Trump is the president-elect until he assumes office on January 17, 2016. You are correct that he is not the president even after the electoral college vote. But he IS the president-elect now, and all those other past presidents are correctly noted as "Elected President".-- FeralOink ( talk) 21:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Thus the reason I put Projected Elected President. It's projected that the Electoral college will elect Donald Trump president. As for the title President-elect, Trump will continue to use that title up until he takes office on January 20, 2017. GoodDay ( talk) 22:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Please note that United States presidential election, 2016 and several related articles are under a 1RR (see the talk page for more information). Ks0stm ^{( T• C• G• E)} 03:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi FeralOink,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello, FeralOink. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, FeralOink! As per your request, I've replaced most of the Twitter and Facebook citings with other sources, with one exception: The discontinuation of the game OvenBreak 2, which was only announced on the official Facebook page. The draft text says "Discontinuation of service announced" instead of "servide discontinued", so the self-source reference might be acceptable for that? If not, "citation needed" or simply removing that piece of information appear to be the only alternatives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.209.60.232 ( talk) 09:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

NPOV linked references added. All references verified. Eli blu ( talk) 05:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) ( user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Please don't comment in-between someone else's comments, as you did here: [2]. That's rude.

Thanks. -- 87.156.235.113 ( talk) 14:56, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

@Editor from Bonn 87.156.235.113 Sigh, I was replying to YOUR responses to MY previous comments. That was awhile ago. YOU were rather rude to ME, and overtly so, by saying that I didn't "use my head" because I disagreed with your erroneous chronology of Christopher Steele's MI6 service record. Enough already with Christopher Steele, please. Donald Trump is my duly elected, inaugurated and official U.S. President, so I don't want to get involved in any more of these Wikipedia editor discussions on talk pages about articles that have thinly-veiled pejorative connotations about him.-- FeralOink ( talk) 00:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks for the answer. But your attitude is even worse than what I had imagined. As you are cleaary here to make politics, not to work on an encyclopaedia, tell Spicer that every phone is a microphone for CIA+NSA & MI6+GCHQ. [3] ;-) -- 87.159.126.219 ( talk) 12:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

FO, I have been working a bit on the Fred Trump article, after some citation issues were brought to my attention. There, I have taken the same tack as you, that the philanthropic section content is valid. Please keep a look in at that article, in case a war erupts, so I am not responding alone. Thanks. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 ( talk) 19:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Look in once, I am done arguing. I'm accused of being a Prof at Trump Univ, and we both it seems, of being paid editors in the pocket of Fred and Mary Anne Trump (from beyond the grave). Hope you are less exasperated, and well. Cheers, Le Prof 73.210.155.96 ( talk) 01:59, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I would spout undying love for your professionalism, clarity of thought and communication, etc., but would not wish to be misunderstood. I finished with Philanthropy (sources, sources, everywhere)—does it escape others, the Greek root of this term?—and will only go back to it if it is vandalised or a very good additional source surfaces. Hope it is OK for you—the repeat appearing citations are only to make clear what facts come from where. Cheers to you, thanks for the continuing sensible effort, et bonne nuit. Le Prof 73.210.155.96 ( talk) 04:35, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright web page https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/a-legal-bane-of-wall-street-switches-sides/?mcubz=1. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 12:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.