Radio Project‑class | ||||||||||||||
|
Radio Stations Project‑class | |||||||
|
Television: Stations Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
I've moved this material from the main WP:Naming conventions page, where is was taking up too much space (as announced without objection at WT:WikiProject Radio).-- Kotniski ( talk) 13:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Over the past several months there has been contentious debate over aspects of WP:Article Titles policy. That contentiousness has led to efforts to improve the overall effectiveness of the policy and associated processes. An RFC entitled: Wikipedia talk:Article titles/RFC-Article title decision practice has been initiated to assess the communities’ understanding of our title decision making policy. As a project that has created or influenced subject specific naming conventions, participants in this project are encouraged to review and participate in the RFC.-- Mike Cline ( talk) 16:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
There is no consensus to make any changes after one relist.
Whatever the methods the companies use to provide multichannel television services ( cable, satellite, analogue terrestrial, DTT, IPTV or OTT), I believe there should be a new disambiguation suffix for such service. How about ([country or area] TV provider)? RfC relisted by Cunard ( talk) at 06:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC). JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 06:57, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Also, there are companies that provide more than one method of delivering multichannel television, like Foxtel in Australia (cable and satellite) and Telefónica's Movistar+ in Spain (IPTV and satellite). So I say keep it simple by using (TV provider), with addition of country and area name when necessary. JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 10:34, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should articles about defunct radio and TV stations using the disambiguator (defunct) be changed to more specific disambiguators? Raymie ( t • c) 07:03, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I have just closed two Requested Moves on these defunct radio stations as no consensus. This is disappointing as the discussion above seemed to result (weakly) in a consensus to move. So I will make the following suggestions:
Good luck — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 22:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
An RfC has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RFC: What disambiguation should shows from the United States and United Kingdom use?. Additional participation is welcomed. -- Netoholic @ 19:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
After months since the previous discussion, I still think there should be a new suffix for the articles about multichannel television services. Look at the article titles with disambiguation suffix at these categories. Can you find the inconsistencies?
I'd name it ([country or area] TV provider); since some companies do provide more than one method to provide multichannel services under the same brand (for example, Foxtel in Australia [cable and satellite], Telefónica's Movistar+ in Spain [IPTV and satellite], StarTimes operations in Africa [DTT and satellite] and Altice Dominicana [cable and satellite]), it would be too much to have (cable TV provider), (satellite TV provider), (IPTV provider), etc..
Additionally, I'd suggest (radio provider) suffix for cable radio and satellite radio providers.
But what about services like Music Choice and Stingray Music that provide non-stop music streams to TV providers? Should they be suffixed with (audio service)?
Also, what about (video service) for
JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 16:00, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Paging @ Gonnym and ViperSnake151: JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 05:14, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
What is the appropriate titling scheme for articles on television stations in Argentina outside of Buenos Aires? Raymie ( t • c) 05:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Our articles on television stations in regional Argentina have disparate and inconsistent titles.
A fair number are "article — location", such as Channel 6 – Bariloche. A few are more compliant with disambiguation styles on enwiki, such as Channel 7 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina), as the result of moves. There are two stations where a call sign is the title— LT 83 TV and LW 83 TV—and one article at the station's brand name, Telefe Rosario.
In eswiki—where the articles are more current and maintained, and there are quite a few more of them to boot—there is similarly a disparity. Most articles are titled with parenthetical disambiguators, like es:Canal 7 (Bahía Blanca). All of Telefe's owned-and-operated regional stations are at brand name titles (like the aforementioned es:Telefe Rosario), which is not matched by any of the other articles in the field. None have call sign titles.
While I would normally go for a call sign title—at least all the stations have them—it's evident that call signs do not have the WP:COMMONNAME weight in Argentina that they do in the US or Canada. The Buenos Aires titles should remain at network name, as I have advocated for in past RMs.
Worth noting here too is that in the case of Telefe, the change from channel number branding, made in 2018 across its owned stations, also is a provision for the coming digital television transition (slated for 2021). ISDB-T countries like Argentina don't really make use of virtual channels, so historic brands like "Channel 8" will end up having to adapt.
What should article titles use: a call sign, a brand name, channel/disambiguator, or a mix (particularly with regard to the Telefe stations)? I've added a table below to help gauge the options. It's worth noting that some new digital TV licenses seem not to get call signs assigned to them at all, and even a few of the articles eswiki has that we do not lack matching call letters in ENACOM's databases.
Current article title | Channel (Location) | Call sign | Name |
---|---|---|---|
Channel 8 (Tucuman, Argentina) | Channel 8 (Tucumán, Argentina) | LRK 458 TV | Telefe Tucumán |
Channel 6 – Bariloche | Channel 6 (Bariloche, Argentina) | LU 93 TV | El Seis |
Channel 7 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina) | Channel 7 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina) | LU 81 TV | Canal Siete |
Channel 7 – Mendoza | Channel 7 (Mendoza, Argentina) | LV 89 TV | El Siete |
Channel 7 – Santiago del Estero | Channel 7 (Santiago del Estero, Argentina) | LW 81 TV | Canal 7 |
Channel 8 San Juan | Channel 8 (San Juan, Argentina) | LV 82 TV | Canal Ocho |
Channel 9 – Bahía Blanca | Channel 9 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina) | LU 80 TV | Telefe Bahía Blanca |
Channel 9 – La Rioja | Channel 9 (La Rioja, Argentina) | LV 91 TV | Canal 9 |
Channel 10 – Córdoba | Channel 10 (Córdoba, Argentina) | LV 80 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 10 – Junín | Channel 10 (Junín, Argentina) | LRH 450 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 10 – Mar del Plata | Channel 10 (Mar del Plata, Argentina) | LU 82 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 10 – Río Negro | Channel 10 (Río Negro, Argentina) | LU 92 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 12 – Misiones | Channel 12 (Misiones, Argentina) | LT 85 TV | (Canal) Doce Misiones |
Channel 13 – Santa Fe | Channel 13 (Santa Fe, Argentina) | LT 82 TV | Telefe Santa Fe |
LT 83 TV | Channel 3 (Rosario, Argentina) | LT 83 TV | El Tres |
Telefe Rosario | Channel 5 (Rosario, Argentina) | LT 84 TV | Telefe Rosario |
LW 83 TV | Channel 10 (Tucumán, Argentina) | LW 83 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel X (Location), except for the ones owned by Telefé, which should stay as
Telefé Location, as Telefe Rosario is. I'm from Argentina, call signs aren't used as a commons means of identification. Telefe is the common name for all its media, as it has different channel numbers depending on where it's from, and the Telefe channels are the only ones of those whose name isn't a number. El Millo ( talk) 06:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Should the revised text at
User:Sammi Brie/NCBC be adopted as an update to this guideline?
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c) 03:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
The most succinct explanation of what this rewrite does is also included as a statement of purpose comment in the proposal:
This proposal has been made with these goals in mind:
- Bring the network/channel/station terminology, which impacts especially categories and disambiguators, to vastly improve consistency and update it to align with today's media realities.
- Create a single source of truth, especially on the radio stations side where guidelines on the project page cover some different material.
- Enshrine several large RMs and RfCs of the last three years, particularly pertaining to disambiguation concision and completeness, to bring this guideline in line with the Manual of Style.
- Use cleaner, more internationalizable text, so as to make the page less reliant on the US and to aid non-topic editors who may not be familiar with the detail-oriented call sign titling environment.
The vast majority of pages won't move, and most of the moves will be of disambiguated pages and categories.
The first bullet point is something that has aggravated me. We have inconsistency in definitions used in disambiguation, exacerbated by a really fast-moving media landscape. This is a bit more acute with the United States because of metonymy issues around "channel" versus "network"; see TNT (American TV network) and TBS (American TV channel), articles on topics that common sense would dictate should have the same disambiguation terms. The network-channel-station table was previously submitted for comment to WikiProject Radio Stations and the Television stations task force, and the revised text as a whole also received one change suggestion in the process (an update for Canada).
As one of the most active editors in the topic area, I've noticed in the last few years that several MOS guidelines do not neatly match up with recommendations in the naming conventions, especially around disambiguators. This rewrite fixes that (bringing NCBC in line with MOS) and incorporates several pieces of precedent that have accumulated since 2019. It also aims to increase clarity for non-topic readers, which is particularly important as we have some of the most detail-oriented naming areas on the whole encyclopedia, and bring in more non-US/Canada examples. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
bringing NCBC in line with MOS". I've looked at the entirety of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television, and find that universally uses "network", not "channel". Is there some other MOS you are referring to? -- Netoholic @ 07:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Disney Junior (X TV channel), though there is no other item titled Disney Junior that requires disambiguation (there's a stage show whose name is naturally disambiguated), so these should really have titles in the form of
Disney Junior (X), e.g. "Disney Junior (Poland)" instead of "Disney Junior (Polish TV channel)". If one can reasonably expect that every parenthetically disambiguated page with the same base title, like Disney Junior or TVN, is a television channel, the first disambiguation should be by country. Of course, it's also the case that some disambiguated titles are needed to distinguish by type or by nationality and type (e.g. National Geographic (American TV channel), which has to be differentiated from the PRIMARYTOPIC magazine and other TV services with the same name).
- Distributes programming to a network of stations, either owned-and-operated by the network or affiliated and owned by a third party.
- May have windows in its program lineup for regional programming.
- Historically owned or owns a transmitter network with national coverage.
Wanted to float for people that do watch this page a minor revision specific to some Mexican stations.
In Mexico, virtually all new call signs for broadcast stations assigned in recent years are templated in series by station type and sequentially-ish assigned letters: XECPAE-AM, XHCSAG-FM, XHCPAG-TDT, XHSCIX-FM, XHSIBT-FM, etc. (The middle two letters are the concession type: Concesión Pública, Concesión Social, Concesión Pública, Social Comunitario, Social Indígena.) Mexico just awarded 87 FMs that go, predictably, from XHCCAA-FM to XHCCDI-FM (Concesión Comercial).
I've been thinking of a tweak for Mexico:
If the station's call sign is part of a templated series—that is, it is assigned based on the type of concession (e.g. XHCCDI-FM, XHCPAG-TDT, XHSCIX-FM)—or was replaced with a templated-series call sign as a result of the award of a new concession to replace an expiring one, the station article should be titled at the common name.
There are not that many articles that would be affected, but I think that these call signs push Mexico toward some of the South American countries in how these should be handled. For instance, there is an XECSAG-AM, an XHCSAG-FM, an XHSCAG-FM, an XHCPAG-FM (which mercifully changed its call sign, quite the rarity), and an XHCPAG-TDT. With the radio auction, stations in the same city have call signs that are sequentially near: XHCCCB-FM and XHCCCC-FM are both to be located in Culiacán.
I've curtailed writing new Mexican radio station articles largely over GNG concerns (sourcing is an issue south of the border, and ideally I'd like to get good state lists set up as redirect targets), but these are the articles that would be retitled. In the SC series, there are four pages that are examples of old stations getting new call signs on new concession awards (plus one in the CP series) something that has been ongoing because Mexican broadcasting law has required most stations to file 2.5 years in advance for renewal (and many, including some federally owned stations, are missing the boat). Some of the AMs are oddballs.
An exception is XHCPDE-TDT, which with fresh eyes might even be a merge candidate again.
Would like some feedback. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 15:12, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Radio Project‑class | ||||||||||||||
|
Radio Stations Project‑class | |||||||
|
Television: Stations Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
I've moved this material from the main WP:Naming conventions page, where is was taking up too much space (as announced without objection at WT:WikiProject Radio).-- Kotniski ( talk) 13:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Over the past several months there has been contentious debate over aspects of WP:Article Titles policy. That contentiousness has led to efforts to improve the overall effectiveness of the policy and associated processes. An RFC entitled: Wikipedia talk:Article titles/RFC-Article title decision practice has been initiated to assess the communities’ understanding of our title decision making policy. As a project that has created or influenced subject specific naming conventions, participants in this project are encouraged to review and participate in the RFC.-- Mike Cline ( talk) 16:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
There is no consensus to make any changes after one relist.
Whatever the methods the companies use to provide multichannel television services ( cable, satellite, analogue terrestrial, DTT, IPTV or OTT), I believe there should be a new disambiguation suffix for such service. How about ([country or area] TV provider)? RfC relisted by Cunard ( talk) at 06:01, 18 November 2018 (UTC). JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 06:57, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Also, there are companies that provide more than one method of delivering multichannel television, like Foxtel in Australia (cable and satellite) and Telefónica's Movistar+ in Spain (IPTV and satellite). So I say keep it simple by using (TV provider), with addition of country and area name when necessary. JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 10:34, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should articles about defunct radio and TV stations using the disambiguator (defunct) be changed to more specific disambiguators? Raymie ( t • c) 07:03, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
I have just closed two Requested Moves on these defunct radio stations as no consensus. This is disappointing as the discussion above seemed to result (weakly) in a consensus to move. So I will make the following suggestions:
Good luck — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 22:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
An RfC has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#RFC: What disambiguation should shows from the United States and United Kingdom use?. Additional participation is welcomed. -- Netoholic @ 19:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
After months since the previous discussion, I still think there should be a new suffix for the articles about multichannel television services. Look at the article titles with disambiguation suffix at these categories. Can you find the inconsistencies?
I'd name it ([country or area] TV provider); since some companies do provide more than one method to provide multichannel services under the same brand (for example, Foxtel in Australia [cable and satellite], Telefónica's Movistar+ in Spain [IPTV and satellite], StarTimes operations in Africa [DTT and satellite] and Altice Dominicana [cable and satellite]), it would be too much to have (cable TV provider), (satellite TV provider), (IPTV provider), etc..
Additionally, I'd suggest (radio provider) suffix for cable radio and satellite radio providers.
But what about services like Music Choice and Stingray Music that provide non-stop music streams to TV providers? Should they be suffixed with (audio service)?
Also, what about (video service) for
JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 16:00, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Paging @ Gonnym and ViperSnake151: JSH-alive/ talk/ cont/ mail 05:14, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
What is the appropriate titling scheme for articles on television stations in Argentina outside of Buenos Aires? Raymie ( t • c) 05:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Our articles on television stations in regional Argentina have disparate and inconsistent titles.
A fair number are "article — location", such as Channel 6 – Bariloche. A few are more compliant with disambiguation styles on enwiki, such as Channel 7 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina), as the result of moves. There are two stations where a call sign is the title— LT 83 TV and LW 83 TV—and one article at the station's brand name, Telefe Rosario.
In eswiki—where the articles are more current and maintained, and there are quite a few more of them to boot—there is similarly a disparity. Most articles are titled with parenthetical disambiguators, like es:Canal 7 (Bahía Blanca). All of Telefe's owned-and-operated regional stations are at brand name titles (like the aforementioned es:Telefe Rosario), which is not matched by any of the other articles in the field. None have call sign titles.
While I would normally go for a call sign title—at least all the stations have them—it's evident that call signs do not have the WP:COMMONNAME weight in Argentina that they do in the US or Canada. The Buenos Aires titles should remain at network name, as I have advocated for in past RMs.
Worth noting here too is that in the case of Telefe, the change from channel number branding, made in 2018 across its owned stations, also is a provision for the coming digital television transition (slated for 2021). ISDB-T countries like Argentina don't really make use of virtual channels, so historic brands like "Channel 8" will end up having to adapt.
What should article titles use: a call sign, a brand name, channel/disambiguator, or a mix (particularly with regard to the Telefe stations)? I've added a table below to help gauge the options. It's worth noting that some new digital TV licenses seem not to get call signs assigned to them at all, and even a few of the articles eswiki has that we do not lack matching call letters in ENACOM's databases.
Current article title | Channel (Location) | Call sign | Name |
---|---|---|---|
Channel 8 (Tucuman, Argentina) | Channel 8 (Tucumán, Argentina) | LRK 458 TV | Telefe Tucumán |
Channel 6 – Bariloche | Channel 6 (Bariloche, Argentina) | LU 93 TV | El Seis |
Channel 7 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina) | Channel 7 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina) | LU 81 TV | Canal Siete |
Channel 7 – Mendoza | Channel 7 (Mendoza, Argentina) | LV 89 TV | El Siete |
Channel 7 – Santiago del Estero | Channel 7 (Santiago del Estero, Argentina) | LW 81 TV | Canal 7 |
Channel 8 San Juan | Channel 8 (San Juan, Argentina) | LV 82 TV | Canal Ocho |
Channel 9 – Bahía Blanca | Channel 9 (Bahía Blanca, Argentina) | LU 80 TV | Telefe Bahía Blanca |
Channel 9 – La Rioja | Channel 9 (La Rioja, Argentina) | LV 91 TV | Canal 9 |
Channel 10 – Córdoba | Channel 10 (Córdoba, Argentina) | LV 80 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 10 – Junín | Channel 10 (Junín, Argentina) | LRH 450 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 10 – Mar del Plata | Channel 10 (Mar del Plata, Argentina) | LU 82 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 10 – Río Negro | Channel 10 (Río Negro, Argentina) | LU 92 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel 12 – Misiones | Channel 12 (Misiones, Argentina) | LT 85 TV | (Canal) Doce Misiones |
Channel 13 – Santa Fe | Channel 13 (Santa Fe, Argentina) | LT 82 TV | Telefe Santa Fe |
LT 83 TV | Channel 3 (Rosario, Argentina) | LT 83 TV | El Tres |
Telefe Rosario | Channel 5 (Rosario, Argentina) | LT 84 TV | Telefe Rosario |
LW 83 TV | Channel 10 (Tucumán, Argentina) | LW 83 TV | Canal 10 |
Channel X (Location), except for the ones owned by Telefé, which should stay as
Telefé Location, as Telefe Rosario is. I'm from Argentina, call signs aren't used as a commons means of identification. Telefe is the common name for all its media, as it has different channel numbers depending on where it's from, and the Telefe channels are the only ones of those whose name isn't a number. El Millo ( talk) 06:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Should the revised text at
User:Sammi Brie/NCBC be adopted as an update to this guideline?
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c) 03:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
The most succinct explanation of what this rewrite does is also included as a statement of purpose comment in the proposal:
This proposal has been made with these goals in mind:
- Bring the network/channel/station terminology, which impacts especially categories and disambiguators, to vastly improve consistency and update it to align with today's media realities.
- Create a single source of truth, especially on the radio stations side where guidelines on the project page cover some different material.
- Enshrine several large RMs and RfCs of the last three years, particularly pertaining to disambiguation concision and completeness, to bring this guideline in line with the Manual of Style.
- Use cleaner, more internationalizable text, so as to make the page less reliant on the US and to aid non-topic editors who may not be familiar with the detail-oriented call sign titling environment.
The vast majority of pages won't move, and most of the moves will be of disambiguated pages and categories.
The first bullet point is something that has aggravated me. We have inconsistency in definitions used in disambiguation, exacerbated by a really fast-moving media landscape. This is a bit more acute with the United States because of metonymy issues around "channel" versus "network"; see TNT (American TV network) and TBS (American TV channel), articles on topics that common sense would dictate should have the same disambiguation terms. The network-channel-station table was previously submitted for comment to WikiProject Radio Stations and the Television stations task force, and the revised text as a whole also received one change suggestion in the process (an update for Canada).
As one of the most active editors in the topic area, I've noticed in the last few years that several MOS guidelines do not neatly match up with recommendations in the naming conventions, especially around disambiguators. This rewrite fixes that (bringing NCBC in line with MOS) and incorporates several pieces of precedent that have accumulated since 2019. It also aims to increase clarity for non-topic readers, which is particularly important as we have some of the most detail-oriented naming areas on the whole encyclopedia, and bring in more non-US/Canada examples. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
bringing NCBC in line with MOS". I've looked at the entirety of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television, and find that universally uses "network", not "channel". Is there some other MOS you are referring to? -- Netoholic @ 07:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Disney Junior (X TV channel), though there is no other item titled Disney Junior that requires disambiguation (there's a stage show whose name is naturally disambiguated), so these should really have titles in the form of
Disney Junior (X), e.g. "Disney Junior (Poland)" instead of "Disney Junior (Polish TV channel)". If one can reasonably expect that every parenthetically disambiguated page with the same base title, like Disney Junior or TVN, is a television channel, the first disambiguation should be by country. Of course, it's also the case that some disambiguated titles are needed to distinguish by type or by nationality and type (e.g. National Geographic (American TV channel), which has to be differentiated from the PRIMARYTOPIC magazine and other TV services with the same name).
- Distributes programming to a network of stations, either owned-and-operated by the network or affiliated and owned by a third party.
- May have windows in its program lineup for regional programming.
- Historically owned or owns a transmitter network with national coverage.
Wanted to float for people that do watch this page a minor revision specific to some Mexican stations.
In Mexico, virtually all new call signs for broadcast stations assigned in recent years are templated in series by station type and sequentially-ish assigned letters: XECPAE-AM, XHCSAG-FM, XHCPAG-TDT, XHSCIX-FM, XHSIBT-FM, etc. (The middle two letters are the concession type: Concesión Pública, Concesión Social, Concesión Pública, Social Comunitario, Social Indígena.) Mexico just awarded 87 FMs that go, predictably, from XHCCAA-FM to XHCCDI-FM (Concesión Comercial).
I've been thinking of a tweak for Mexico:
If the station's call sign is part of a templated series—that is, it is assigned based on the type of concession (e.g. XHCCDI-FM, XHCPAG-TDT, XHSCIX-FM)—or was replaced with a templated-series call sign as a result of the award of a new concession to replace an expiring one, the station article should be titled at the common name.
There are not that many articles that would be affected, but I think that these call signs push Mexico toward some of the South American countries in how these should be handled. For instance, there is an XECSAG-AM, an XHCSAG-FM, an XHSCAG-FM, an XHCPAG-FM (which mercifully changed its call sign, quite the rarity), and an XHCPAG-TDT. With the radio auction, stations in the same city have call signs that are sequentially near: XHCCCB-FM and XHCCCC-FM are both to be located in Culiacán.
I've curtailed writing new Mexican radio station articles largely over GNG concerns (sourcing is an issue south of the border, and ideally I'd like to get good state lists set up as redirect targets), but these are the articles that would be retitled. In the SC series, there are four pages that are examples of old stations getting new call signs on new concession awards (plus one in the CP series) something that has been ongoing because Mexican broadcasting law has required most stations to file 2.5 years in advance for renewal (and many, including some federally owned stations, are missing the boat). Some of the AMs are oddballs.
An exception is XHCPDE-TDT, which with fresh eyes might even be a merge candidate again.
Would like some feedback. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 15:12, 4 October 2022 (UTC)