Talk:Dennis L. Montgomery

Unexplained blanking & Vandalism

Vandalism - An anon user masking their IP 2001:470:0:290:0:0:0:1E appears to be attempting to recast this article with unsupported promotional claims and has deleted well referenced and accurate descriptions that should more than meet the BLOP standards. Trnsproducers (talk) 06:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for all that... Now editing appropiately... 2001:470:0:290:0:0:0:1E (talk) 19:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

A series of unexplained blankings, section deletions and editing of appropriately referenced and relevant content in this article are being done by WordSlayer who appears to be solely focused on this article and may be Dennis Montgomery or have a related undisclosed conflict of interest.CinagroErunam (talk) 18:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Restoring February 2015 Deleted Content

As noted above, several users (named and anon-IP editors) who all appear to be the same editor, have been blanking sections, removing the info box and deleting referenced and accurate content associated with this BOLP article. The users' rationales for the content blanking and removals appears to be non-sourced, first hand, personal information and allegations that those named in the is article are somehow being targeted with some kind of personal threats and intimidation because they are named in the article. This would, of course, be terrible and something the users making these claims should report to appropriate authorities with their evidence of any cyber or related crimes. The subject of this article, Dennis L. Montgomery, is a well described public figure, whose family members have been named as parties to the various reported investigations, lawsuits and news articles about him. As such, their basic and factual inclusion as his relatives would seem appropriate and reasonable. At a minimum, the removal of the info box with Mr. Montgomery's basic details should be restored as he is the focus of this article and the information found in this info box was sourced and already part of the public record about him. CinagroErunam (talk) 21:58, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

NPOV/BLP issues

Dennis Montgomery criminal charges

• This article references allegations of criminal activities, some of which the only citations/references appear to be court records. The cited "drunken driving" arrest, for example, does not appear to be supported by any other news sources. While this may be an accurate item, it lacks notability and is of questionable relevance to the article and should probably be removed. The check fraud criminal issue does appear to be supported by reputable mainstream news reports.

• The FBI "investigation" poses a bigger challenge. Allegations (investigations) typically should not be included unless they have some broader relevance and importance to the article and are substantiated via reputable sources. In this case, the references to the FBI investigation are well known and mainstream news media sources (New York Times, Reno Gazette) and the existence of the investigations appears to be relevant to the software hoax/scandal; however, the inclusion in a BLOP article may merit more discussion. LawlessBill (talk) 20:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The investigation into Dennis Montgomery was extensively reported in the press and involved a well publicized raid and search of Montgomery's home by the FBI. A judge ruled the FBI search violated Montgomery's rights and blocked the government from using the evidence found against him, but the judge did not quash the investigation into Montgomery. This investigation, which was joined by the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations, was extensively reported in the mainstream media and involves well publicized questions about the use of U.S. taxpayer dollars and the government's "War on Terror" use of technology. These investigations remain open pending resolution of ongoing civil litigation (which was associated with the court's determination that the raid and search violated Montgomery's civil rights) and are the point of extensive public debate over whether or not the USG is attempting to use secrecy laws to block exposure of their being duped into using intelligence to make major terror-related decisions based on software that reportedly doesn't exist. The information in this section should remain in the article. I agree, inclusion of Dennis Montgomery's drunk driving arrest record should be deleted. Trnsproducers (talk) 14:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis Montgomery sexual harassment & SEC violation claims

• 2ruthseeker edits and links to court documents for sexual harassment charges against Dennis Montgomery are not supported by other reference materials and I do not believe belong in this article. They do not appear to add any value other than to add additional disparagement the character of Montgomery and should be removed.
• 2ruthseeker also includes references to false statements and SEC violations with links to the SEC.gov website hearing which does show 3NET misled and violated SEC rules; however, the document does not name Montgomery specifically. As such, this allegation - which might have relevance to this article - needs further relevant and credible sourcing to remain.

LawlessBill (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

• I've used the info provided by 2ruthseeker and found that the sexual harassment claims and case verdict against Mr. Montgomery were in fact carried by several credible news sources (NBC News and the Las Vegas Review Journal) and will try to make edits to that section to include them so it meets standards. I would recommend this section be modified but kept.Trnsproducers (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Entry is Inappropriate, not Newsworthy, and Should be Deleted

Dennis Montgomery is not a public figure or a publicly notable person. He may be a successful and valuable private businessman, but that does not make someone newsworthy to qualify for a Wikipedia encyclopedic article.

The only way in which Dennis Montgomery comes to public attention is by being smeared by reporters James Risen and others.

Houghton Miflin and James Risen have received legal demands to retract their defamation of Dennis Montgomery. While this is not a forum to explore those issues, it is important to notice that Dennis Montgomery does not have any public footprint so as to be newsworthy other than being libeled and slandered. As a result, the qualifications for a Wikipedia article of an otherwise private citizen living out of the public eye have not been met. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.50.47 (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Explained blanking & non-Vandalism

As I understand it, someone has been posting private information such as about Dennis Montgomery's children.

That is terrorism and intimidation, intended to cause emotional distress and to place his children and their parents in fear of imminent harm.

Such content is improper and should not be tolerated at Wikipedia.

If such material is re-posted, a lawsuit for intentional infliction of emotional distress can be brought against Wikipedia and against the person's posting the information, whose IP address can be obtained by subpoena. The repetition of reposting such personal information will prove both actual malice and intention. I trust that the Wikipedia Foundation is good for the money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.50.47 (talk) 03:50, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Implication is not Neutral Voice or Content

The sentence "Dennis Lee Montgomery (born 1953) is an American software designer and former medical technician credited with "bamboozling" federal officials ... "

is not neutral either in language or in substance as is necessary for an encyclopedia article.

The phrasing "credited with" suggests a level of consensus and proof that is lacking.

This theme exists only in accusations made by reporter James Risen and one or two other reporters....

... and which originate from unnamed, unaccountable government sources, allegedly.

To suggest a level of certainty that does not exist is inappropriate.

Montgomery is accused of these things by 2 or 3 reporters all based upon the same anonymous sources.

Assuming that merely being accused of something makes a biography notable, unproven and unprovable accusations should not be presented as truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.50.47 (talk) 04:00, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

BLP Pending Changes Protection

Recommend BLP Pending Changes protection once FPP is over. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 09:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Also I agree the information about family members should be left out of the article. That aside, legal threats are not allowed on wikipedia. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 10:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

It would seem the time period for the protection has expired. --Weazie (talk) 03:06, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The time period has not expired. It is set to expire at 08:38, 19 February 2016, see the protection log. If you want this to be altered to pending changes, Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:57, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The hover text on the article's protection lock says the the protection expired on February 23, 2015; perhaps that text can be changed. --Weazie (talk) 18:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, if the protection had really expired, instead of just the displayed date being wrong, the padlock wouldn't get displayed; so Done amended to 08:38, 19 February 2016 which gets reformatted to February 19, 2016. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:16, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 17 February 2015

Trying to protect Montgomery Family members from additional threats. PageOneEditor (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

 Not done No specific edit has been suggested. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:58, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

BLP policy reminder and page protection

I strongly suggest that everyone who is involved in this article re-read our policy on biographies of living people. This article was in such a poor state that I, a an enforcement action, turned this article into a stub and full protected it for a year. Work on this biography can be done at Draft:Dennis L. Montgomery and then imported here when it meets the basic criteria for sourcing, biographies, and original research. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 08:37, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

It appears that the blanking and deleting of materials by Mr. Montgomery was an effective pre-litigation tactic as now the prior well-documented history of publicly reported schemes in which he was reportedly involved is absent from Wikipedia just in time for him to filed a major defamation lawsuit against New York Times reporter James Risen.CinagroErunam (talk) 23:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

References

Meh, the article still quite clearly calls him a fraud. And if there is one thing lawyers are good at doing, it's finding stuff that people are trying to hide. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Info about defamation lawsuit

Please add this paragraph to the end:

In February 2015, Montgomery sued journalist James Risen for defamation, stating that his software wasn't fraudulent and that Risen's reporting was inaccurate. In the suit, Montgomery suggests that Risen fabricated accounts of his wrongdoing and that the allegations against him were politically motivated.

References

Thank you, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

To keep this NPOV, it's going to need quite a bit of balancing material. This appears to be a SLAPP suit. Cinteotl (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Dennis L. Montgomery

Background:

• This article was recently a bit of a mess, with some well-crafted and properly cited material, as well as a lot that was POV, original research, and not cited to reliable sources.
• On Feb 15, 3 or 4 editors got into an editing war, mostly about including information about Montgomery's wife and children in the infobox (Note: The risk of harassment to his wife and children, none of whom are individually notable, argues strongly against their inclusion. See WP:BLPNAME. Absent any forthcoming well-reasoned arguments to the contrary, I suggest we should assume consensus on this issue.)
• In response to a post on the BLP noticeboard about the edit warring, administrator Callanecc fully protected the article for 1 week. This stopped the disruption.
• On Feb 19, administrator @Guerillero, based on discretionary sanctions authorized by WP:NEWBLPBAN, WP:stubifyed and fully-protected the article for one year. See [1].
• I have posted an appeal of the full protection on Guerillero's talk page (see [2]). If you have any opinions on this, please post them there, rather than here. The proper procedure is to appeal to the administrator who applied discretionary sanctions first, following up at [[WP:AE|Arbitration Enforcement] only as the last resort. (Let's give Guerillero some time to respond, and have a discussion on the subject.)

Guerillero suggested working on the article at Draft:Dennis L. Montgomery, and importing it here after it meets the basic criteria for sourcing, biographies, and original research. So far, no one has taken any steps towards doing that... so I took an initial stab at it. Feel free to go to Draft:Dennis L. Montgomery, and add your edits. Cinteotl (talk) 07:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

On the draft page, I added a short paragraph about the defamation suit to the "hoax" section. --Weazie (talk) 19:07, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

It has been a month since the draft page was created, and there have been no objections to it. How can it be incorporated into the article? I suspect an edit request based on the draft's current state (extensive strikethrough, insufficient citations, etc.) will be summarily denied. Weazie (talk) 14:32, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Arpaio investigation

Suggested addition to end of article:

In June of 2014, reporter Stephen Lemons of the Phoenix New Times wrote that Dennis Montgomery had been hired by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office as a confidential informant. Lemons, citing an anonymous source in the Sheriff's Office, said that Montgomery claimed he could prove, using data he had obtained while working for the CIA, that there was a conspiracy between the Department of Justice and federal judge G. Murray Snow against Arpaio. Arpaio confirmed the confidential informant relationship in testimony before Judge Snow in April 2015. Dr. Conspiracy (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

References

Agreed? Dr. Conspiracy (talk) 23:18, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Why not add it to the draft article, at Draft:Dennis L. Montgomery? Cinteotl (talk) 23:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 19 October 2015

Correctrecord (talk) 19:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 7 December 2015

Remove this Wikipedia webpage. It is full of lies, and serves no purpose but incite violence against Montgomery Family. Fixtherecord (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Most of this article has already been deleted since February 2015 and the remainder fully protected. If there are still genuine concerns about the article, then we can play this two ways:

• Fix / remove the errors: please provide a reliable source to back up each correction. If a claim is unsupported by references it can be removed forthwith.
• Initiate a discussion about the article's deletion: you will need to provide a rationale using Wikipedia's policies (e.g. WP:BLP, WP:BIO) about why this article should not exist on Wikipedia. A request from the subject will be given some weight, so please make it clear if you represent him in some way.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Restoration of well-sourced article content

Now that the block has expired, I restored the sourced, noncontroversial information. Hopefully more information can be added, and WP:BLP concerns can be avoided. --Weazie (talk) 00:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Weazie: You removed most of the problematic material. Good job --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 00:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Guerillero: Thanks. My intent was to remove all problematic material, so please remove/edit/improve anything that might still be problematic. --Weazie (talk) 01:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Collapsed series of repetitive edit requests made by suspected sockpupets

Semi-protected edit request #1 on 21 February 2017 Remove Mike Flynn statement in first paragraph. Statement was made to extort more $$ out of Montgomery. Hearsay. DLM45 (talk) 00:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. I checked the cited source, and it appears to be a reliable independent source that supports what the article says that Flynn said. You do not seem to dispute that the sentence is accurate (i.e., that Flynn made the statement). We do not have any identified reliable independent sources that say that Flynn was misquoted or was ill-motivated when he said what he said, so I see no clear basis for removing that from the article. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:09, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #2 on 21 February 2017 Remove The software was later exposed as an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's own lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud".[3] There is no truth to this statement. Used to extort more $$ out of Montgomery. DLM45 (talk) 00:08, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Do you have any kind of citation for this? Assuming you're Dennis Montgomery, I can see why you might want to have a few changes made to the article. But just saying that material should be removed because your lawyer was trying to extort you is not likely to fly. Cinteotl (talk) 00:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done, for reasons explained above and in other neighboring sections. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #3 on 21 February 2017 ADD This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia The neutrality of this article is disputed DLM45 (talk) 00:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. You have not identified any substantial part of the article that is not verified by citations to reasonably reliable sources or that has a significant problem of tone. You have also not identified any additional sources of independently verifiable reliable information. If you can identify a part of the article that has such problems, please do so. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:32, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #4 on 21 February 2017 "For several months starting in the fall of 2003, Montgomery's analysis led directly to national code orange security alerts and cancelled flights. The only problem: he was making it all up." Montgomery was under a US Protective Order and the State Secrets Privilege preventing him from responding to these baseless allegations. DLM45 (talk) 00:21, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. Please cite a reliable source when making factual assertions. Also, please note that an edit request should identify a specific change that is requested to be made to the content of the article. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:39, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #5 on 21 February 2017 Terrorist software "hoax" There was no hoax. All the technology Montgomery built for the US Government worked and saved lives. DLM45 (talk) 00:24, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. Please cite a reliable source when making factual assertions. Also, please note that an edit request should identify a specific change that is requested to be made to the content of the article. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #6 on 21 February 2017 The software was later exposed as an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's own former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud".[3] It was never exposed as a fraud, because the technology worked as advertised. DLM45 (talk) 01:06, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. Please cite a reliable source when making factual assertions (or at least provide some persuasive indication that the currently cited sources are not sufficiently reliable or that there is no source cited for some current statement in the article). It may be helpful to review the Wikipedia policy called Wikipedia:Verifiability and the guideline called Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Also, please note that an edit request needs to identify a specific change that is requested to be made to the content of the article. As the {{edit semi-protected}} template displayed text says, "'Please change X' is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form 'please change X to Y'." —BarrelProof (talk) 01:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #7 on 21 February 2017 remove. hearsay nothing more than an opinion. Mr. Flynn had no security clearance to investigate matter. The software was later exposed as an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's own former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud".[3] DLM45 (talk) 02:30, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Partly done. I changed "exposed as" to "reported to have been". You do not seem to dispute that the sentence, as modified, is accurate, and you have not cited any new source of information. Wikipedia is not a court of law, where you can make a "hearsay" objection. If a reliable source says that someone said something, we can report that (especially when there seems to be no dispute over whether the person said what they are reported to have said). —BarrelProof (talk) 03:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #8 on 21 February 2017 There was no hoax. DLM45 (talk) 22:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #9 on 21 February 2017 Remove; just hearsay. Montgomery was under US Protective Order prohibiting responding to reporters or Mike Flynn public comments. US Protective date 9/25/06 and still in place. http://03bddc8.netsolhost.com/dlm/docs/po.pdf DLM45 (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. As explained, reliable sources reported Flynn's statement. Any purported barrier to Montgomery responding does not negate that Flynn made the statements. --Weazie (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #10 on 21 February 2017 Terrorist software "hoax" object to title. There was no hoax. Just heresay. DLM45 (talk) 22:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #11 on 21 February 2017 In July 2016, a federal court dismissed Montgomery's lawsuit.[12] The court's decision has been appealed. DLM45 (talk) 22:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done (at this time). The 2016 lawsuit remains dismissed. If a higher court reverses the dismissal, at that point that section can be updated. --Weazie (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #12 on 21 February 2017 who sold federal officials computer program...no computer programs were ever sold regarding this matter. This is wrong. DLM45 (talk) 22:40, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. No reliable source provided for factual assertions. --Weazie (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #13 on 21 February 2017 The only problem: he was making it all up."..This is a lie. just an opinion which is wrong. DLM45 (talk) 22:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. A reliable source confirms that the opinion was expressed, which is sufficient. --Weazie (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #1 on 22 February 2017 Montgomery's own former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud". Then take out the word own...then DLM45 (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)  Done. "Own" removed per request. --Weazie (talk) 00:43, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #2 on 22 February 2017 later reported to have been an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's own former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud". Montgomery ex attorney Mike Flynn sanctioned by the 9th circuit. reference: http://03bddc8.netsolhost.com/dlm/docs/flynn.pdf DLM45 (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. Flynn is not the topic of this article; in addition, the basis of Flynn's sanction is rather attenuated from his comment about Montgomery. --Weazie (talk) 00:51, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #3 on 22 February 2017 The software was later reported to have been an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud". Remove this. It is hearsay from disgruntled ex attorney who was sanctioned by the 9th circuit. It is a lie. DLM45 (talk) 23:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 23:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #4 on 22 February 2017 Terrorist software removed the word hoax DLM45 (talk) 23:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 23:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #1 on 23 February 2017 The software was later reported to have been an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud". remove this, just hearsay and an opinion. Mike Flynn sanctioned by the 9th circuit in 2015. DLM45 (talk) 22:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 22:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #2 on 23 February 2017 Terrorist software "hoax" Remove the word hoax. There was no hoax! DLM45 (talk) 22:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 22:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request #3 on 23 February 2017 The software was later reported to have been an elaborate "hoax" and Montgomery's former lawyer Michael J. Flynn called him a "con artist" and "habitual liar engaged in fraud".[ Mike Flynn was sanctioned by the 9th circuit for making baseless accusations in court documents. That is serious. DLM45 (talk) 22:52, 23 February 2017 (UTC)  Not done. This request repeats (and has the same problems as) previously rejected requests. --Weazie (talk) 22:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC) Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2017 A 2010 Playboy Magazine investigation called Montgomery "The man who conned the Pentagon", saying he won millions in federal contracts for his supposed terrorist-exposing intelligence software.[2] Remove item Reference #2 was removed after MONTGOMERY threatened Playboy with lawsuit! Gone from the internet! Sniper605 (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2017 (UTC)  Not done. Numerous reliable sources (e.g., here's one) reported that Playboy did, in fact, publish this article. That the article is no longer available on Playboy's site is not meaningful. (And Playboy's suggested motive for removing it appears to be, at this point, original research.) --Weazie (talk) 19:18, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2017

Eric Lichtblau CNN editor forced to resign over FAKE NEWS story about President Trump associate. Same allegations Montgomery made against Eric Lichtblau in 2011 "FAKE NEWS" story about him! Nytslayer (talk) 18:10, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2017 (UTC)