User talk:72Dino/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:72Dino. 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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Welcome!
Hello, 72Dino, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! BlankVerse 04:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:Panama Mount.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Panama Mount.JPG. The copy called Image:Panama Mount.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 02:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
BYU
The intro should have admissions info for BYU since this is major information. JackWilliams 21:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay, it was just a thought. By the way, U.S. News and World Report indicates that BYU's admission process is "more selective". Perhaps just noting the actual percentage rather than making a judgment call on the selectivity would be appropriate. I understand that around 70% may not seem selective (unless you're one of the 30%), but I'm not sure what percentage makes a university selective. Alanraywiki 22:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree with Jack. Have you seen other university articles? Seems like an exception is being made for BYU. I'm willing to be proven wrong, of course. I have also sought to explain why BYU is viewed as "more selective," as you pointed out, but an anonymous editor has continued to undo that documented information I provided. --tortdog 20:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Some universities mention admission rates, some do not. I did not see any university pages where acceptance rates were mentioned in the lead section, including Harvard. One of the concerns I have is the unsourced POV of "unselective" being put in an encyclopedia. The sources quoted indicate otherwise, and the numbers are what they are. Anything beyond quotes and facts are not appropriate. The rates do not seem notable as either too low or too high. Frankly, I think (my POV) there is a lot of student self-selectivity for those applying to BYU which skews the results. Hopefully this issue can be resolved on the talk page rather than a revert war. Alanraywiki 20:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your recent edits! Just wanted to invite you to take part in the recent discussion on the intro, since you seem to have taken part in such discussions before. Wrad 04:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
BYU's business school is not ranked nationally. It shouldn't be described as highly ranked in the intro. JackWilliams 21:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- I was going by the business program's ranking in the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, and BusinessWeek per the section on Rankings and notability. I do not want to add too much in the lead section, but I think it is reasonable to include the Marriott School of Business. Alanraywiki 21:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- BYU is not highly ranked in Wall Street Journal's national rankings, just the regional ones. Big difference. It is a mediocre business program. JackWilliams 18:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
CSULB endowment
First of all, thanks for the barnstar from a while ago. :)
Second, I noticed that you edited the CSULB page a while back and added the University's endowment. You made the number to be 30.3 million (as of 6/30/06), which seemed a pretty exact figure. Well, I just read a University press release from 8/6/07 that stated the endowment recently surpassed 35 million for the first time. Unfortunately, that's the only recent information I've been able to find, and it's not exact at all. In short, I was wondering if you might be able to help. Where did you get your information from before, and would it be able to help at all in finding the newest figure? --Foolishgrunt 05:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- The exact number from last year comes from the annual report of the CSULB Foundation [1]. The market value of the endowment is included in the financial statements of the Foundation. I can put down the exact 6/30/07 number because I gave it to President Alexander (I'm the CFO of the CSULB Foundation), but it has not been published anywhere in public yet so I assume that is considered original research. Let me know your thoughts on if I should put it down now, or wait until it comes out in the next annual report or in the NACUBO Endowment Study, another published source of this information. Neither of those documents will be out for a while, though. Alanraywiki 15:43, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- I guess that would have to be considered original research. I suppose it would be best to wait until it's published, though it's somewhat annoying to know that primary source research isn't allowed. --Foolishgrunt 06:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Request for review on multi-reverter labeling LDS scriptures as "pseudepigrapha"
Hi Alanraywiki,
You have a strong history of correcting inappropriate edits to LDS-related articles. I hope you can provide some input to a current situation. An IP user has been re-reverting against the reverts of myself and at least three other editors (and way over violating the 3-revert rule in the process), to keep inserting Category:Modern pseudepigrapha in the articles for Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, and Book of Moses, and inserting those titles in the article Modern pseudepigrapha. Besides the histories of those articles, please see the discussion at Talk:Book_of_Mormon#.22Modern_pseudepigrapha.22_is_NPOV-vio and User_talk:Val42#Re._LDS_Scriptures_.3D_.22pseudepigrapha.22. Thanks for taking a look.
- Reaverdrop (talk/nl) 21:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
This category you created has been nominated for deletion. See the discussion HERE. Rich Uncle Skeleton (talk) 09:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I've tagged this for speedy deletion, as there are no independent sources, and no assertion of notability. Let me know if you have queestions. Thanks. --Finngall talk 22:13, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Request for input
Alan, I just want another person to review some articles; I may be off base. Could you check Satanic ritual abuse and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Glenn L. Pace. I am getting progressively concerned that balance is being lost among other things. --Storm Rider (talk) 16:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I wasn't aware of that article. I'll also check it out. Alanraywiki 16:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Sportspeople
In regards to the List of Latter-Day Saints, I see your point about Olympians and coaches not being professional athletes, and since on e of the athletes I added isn't professional, "Professional Athletes" just isn't appropriate. At the same time, "sportspeople" is not a word, which inspired me to change it in the first place. How about "Sports Figures"? If you can think of a better and more appropriate title I'd love to hear it. Darkage7 14:52, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sports figures works for me. I did not come up with the change to sportspeople and it did seem a little awkward to me, so I would support the change to sports figures. Alanraywiki 15:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 12:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue I (September 2007)
The September 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! -- Noetic Sage 19:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edit(s) to List of social networking websites
Your addition to List of social networking websites has been reverted. In the future, please only place entries there that are internal links to actual Wikipedia articles about notable social networking sites. External links, redlinks, substubs, non-notable sites or things that are not social networking sites will be removed. If you have questions, use the talk page. Thanks. Leuko 09:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)
The October 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 19:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Reference
A reference is used to back a claim and must be retrievable to all free of charge. You can't use a three sentence pay per view article you found via Google to help an article you think should exist. You have an odd obsession with the West Garden Grove article. It's scary. Seriously though, if you want to add references, don't add pay per view, add real references that link to real articles, not paid advertisements. CelticGreen 04:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- One can access the article from the Orange County Register for free from any library, at least any library in Orange County. So, like so many references, it may not be available online for free but it is a published source. However, I saw no mention of pay-per-view articles not being acceptable under Wikipedia:Verifiability, even though that is not the situation here because there other free options. Anyway, I was just trying to clean up another editor's reference. I'm not sure why my interest in West Garden Grove is so scary for you. I know the area well and I just want to make Wikipedia a good source of information about it. I've thought that I've been pretty civil, unlike some of the other editors. Alanraywiki 04:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Alanraywiki - I've seen CelticGreen be rude, that's not rude for her. I just stopped by to say don't remove your vote. You think the article should stay and I respect that, you've been honest and you are obviously from the area (based on your user page). If you think it should be kept, keep your vote. I grew up there, called it West Garden Grove but always did it tongue in cheek because we did it to segregate ourselves. What I find even LESS notable than WGG is El Modena, California as an article but I'm afraid to nominate it now after what took place on the WGG article. I look at notability as "do others recognize the area if they aren't from the area?" For example, Newark was mentioned, I've never been to New Jersey, but I have heard of Newark. I have neighbors from So Cal that have never heard of WGG. That's why I deemed it not notable when I nominated it. If you believe it's notable, you should leave your vote, at least you are doing it with a sense of purpose. I admit reading the comments, since there were two Alans that I originally mixed the two of you up, could that be the case with CG? She said on Flyer's page she wouldn't be around today so I guess you'll have to wait and ask her. I still think you should keep you vote there. Please reconsider. Thank you. IrishLass0128 15:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- IrishLass, you've seen me be a downright bitch. Part of the personality I'm not always proud of but not one I deny. Alan, SORRY. I did actually think you were the Alan from Jersey who was being so insistent about the article that didn't know anything about the town. Not that I do either, but all I wanted to do was leave a vote and move on. He didn't actually like that and pushed a button. He seems to be good at that. So I'm sorry for the misunderstanding and I offer an admission of harshness. I still don't think a reference should cost people to look, and that would include the cost of a plane ticket to OC to read a newspaper :). Your involvement doesn't scare me, it was that other Alan that did. He was so insistent and didn't even know the town. You and Irish and Tony the Tiger (I think that's his name) did and made decent arguments. Please accept the apology. One big misunderstanding. CelticGreen 02:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you and accepted. I understand the confusion. Before I possibly relook at the article, I am going to try and look at an "Images of America" series book by the Garden Grove Historical Society on Garden Grove. This series has books on nearby Huntington Beach (where I live) and Seal Beach (where I used to live) that show a lot of the history of the communities. If I see something notable about West Garden Grove, I will add that to the article. If I cannot find anything, I will probably change my vote to delete. As an aside, although it is both OR and probably COI, my wife grew up in WGG by Edgar near Lampson and Valley View (IrishLass will know where that is). She said they referred to their area as Garden Grove and called the area east as East Garden Grove. It probably just depends on the groups you ran with. In any case, it is definitely distinct, but not necessarily notable. Thank you both for your comments. Alanraywiki 04:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- I should know where Valley View and Lampson are. I actually have it bookmarked on my Google Earth page. I could hop my fence and be at Burger King in less than 10 seconds. Mobile station, Blockbuster, Burger King, and B of A (formerly Security Pacific). Does it sound like I know the area? I did the Enders, Bell, PHS route through the school system. It's why I feel like I shouldn't edit the article because of OR issues. I also lived in HB (Heil and Bolsa Chica) for three years and dated a guy from SB about 20 years ago. I even remember why Garden Grove has a Strawberry Festival every year ~ it used to have strawberry fields. My daughter went to Barker and my niece and nephews are split between Garden Park and Patton (one is in the Gate program) so I am painfully acquainted with GG and WGG and do have the knowledge of the area to question its validity as a notable article worthy area. It's sad that "Other Alan" can't get that I don't hate the name or the area, it's just I know it's not "special." IrishLass0128 17:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you and accepted. I understand the confusion. Before I possibly relook at the article, I am going to try and look at an "Images of America" series book by the Garden Grove Historical Society on Garden Grove. This series has books on nearby Huntington Beach (where I live) and Seal Beach (where I used to live) that show a lot of the history of the communities. If I see something notable about West Garden Grove, I will add that to the article. If I cannot find anything, I will probably change my vote to delete. As an aside, although it is both OR and probably COI, my wife grew up in WGG by Edgar near Lampson and Valley View (IrishLass will know where that is). She said they referred to their area as Garden Grove and called the area east as East Garden Grove. It probably just depends on the groups you ran with. In any case, it is definitely distinct, but not necessarily notable. Thank you both for your comments. Alanraywiki 04:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- IrishLass, you've seen me be a downright bitch. Part of the personality I'm not always proud of but not one I deny. Alan, SORRY. I did actually think you were the Alan from Jersey who was being so insistent about the article that didn't know anything about the town. Not that I do either, but all I wanted to do was leave a vote and move on. He didn't actually like that and pushed a button. He seems to be good at that. So I'm sorry for the misunderstanding and I offer an admission of harshness. I still don't think a reference should cost people to look, and that would include the cost of a plane ticket to OC to read a newspaper :). Your involvement doesn't scare me, it was that other Alan that did. He was so insistent and didn't even know the town. You and Irish and Tony the Tiger (I think that's his name) did and made decent arguments. Please accept the apology. One big misunderstanding. CelticGreen 02:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- Alanraywiki - I've seen CelticGreen be rude, that's not rude for her. I just stopped by to say don't remove your vote. You think the article should stay and I respect that, you've been honest and you are obviously from the area (based on your user page). If you think it should be kept, keep your vote. I grew up there, called it West Garden Grove but always did it tongue in cheek because we did it to segregate ourselves. What I find even LESS notable than WGG is El Modena, California as an article but I'm afraid to nominate it now after what took place on the WGG article. I look at notability as "do others recognize the area if they aren't from the area?" For example, Newark was mentioned, I've never been to New Jersey, but I have heard of Newark. I have neighbors from So Cal that have never heard of WGG. That's why I deemed it not notable when I nominated it. If you believe it's notable, you should leave your vote, at least you are doing it with a sense of purpose. I admit reading the comments, since there were two Alans that I originally mixed the two of you up, could that be the case with CG? She said on Flyer's page she wouldn't be around today so I guess you'll have to wait and ask her. I still think you should keep you vote there. Please reconsider. Thank you. IrishLass0128 15:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Templates
Hiya. You accidentally created Alanraywiki/templates in the mainspace. I've moved it to User:Alanraywiki/templates for you. Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 21:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry . . . first time with a subpage. Noted for next time. Thanks, Alanraywiki 21:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- No worries. We all do it from time to time. ;-) Giles Bennett (Talk, Contribs) 21:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
West Garden Grove
Hello. I was wondering if you know of a rule where a person cannot place a comment at the top of a "Request for Deletion" page. The opening statement on the page is so one sided that it almost shows favoritism towards deleting the article. The introduction only presents one side of arguements, for deletion, but doesnt state anything as to why it should be kept. There was an Anon who, earlier, tried to add a comment to the intro to sort of present both sides of the arguement, but it was continuously reverted by one editor. He/she added it as a comment and did not edit the opening statement in ANY way. Was there any merit for it being deleted in your opinion, or do you see it as a valid way to present both sides in this lopsided introduction? I would appreciate your input. Marinidil 06:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- [2] This is what he/she did. As you can see, the opening comment was not modified, the author simply just added a comment to the opening statement. Why couldnt this stay? Marinidil 06:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Here is what I was able to determine. First, the editor requesting deletion does need to state the reason. One of the steps listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion is to "Give a reason for the deletion and a category for the debate". I then looked under Wikipedia:Guide to deletion regarding the placement of comments. The policy does say "For consistency, the form for the discussion is a bulleted list below the nomination text." In other words, one cannot add to the nomination text, even to make it more balanced. The following talks about the order in which comments are listed: "Please do not refactor the discussion into lists or tables of recommendations, however much you may think that this helps the process. Both the context and the order of the comments are essential to understanding the intents of contributors, both at the discussion closure and during the discussion. Refactoring actually makes the job of making the decision at the closure of discussion much harder, not easier." Overall, I think that by placing a comment in a certain area, even to try to strike a balanced discussion, may actually thwart that effort by the refactoring referred to. I will gladly defer to those with more knowledge than me in this area, but that is my opinion based on my understanding of the policies. Alanraywiki 07:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Although I dont agree with the policy, I do respect the rules. I know that you must read the introduction, and see how one sided it is currently although the rules state we cant change this. I guess I was thinking of it as, for example, a political ballot. When you are listing a proposition or a candidate for president, you present the arguement from both the opposition and defense side. Like a proposition on more money for education, the ballot wouldnt say "this will destroy education because it puts money into the hands where it doesnt belong", the ballot would present a much more neutral view like "this money will give local authorities more power to put grants into local schools". I guess that is how I see it, because if you word something so negative or so positive on a ballot, it will essentially determine how that ruling will go, and I see it as that way in this situation. Marinidil 07:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, Alanraywiki ~ I went to the AdF this morning....turns out Marinidill is a banned (not just blocked) user that has used numerous socks to go around the ban. He is banned again and all his comments stricken from the AdF and his contributions to the article removed based on policy. Time to move on and concentrate on either improving the article or the AdF for the article. As for his "respecting of the rules", if he respected the rules, he never would have created a sock, posted as an anonymous IP (he's the same one that reordered the comments and added to my original nomination) and he wouldn't have voted 4 times under different user names. I thiink that screams "I DON'T RESPECT THE RULES" in big bold letters.IrishLass0128 13:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Although I dont agree with the policy, I do respect the rules. I know that you must read the introduction, and see how one sided it is currently although the rules state we cant change this. I guess I was thinking of it as, for example, a political ballot. When you are listing a proposition or a candidate for president, you present the arguement from both the opposition and defense side. Like a proposition on more money for education, the ballot wouldnt say "this will destroy education because it puts money into the hands where it doesnt belong", the ballot would present a much more neutral view like "this money will give local authorities more power to put grants into local schools". I guess that is how I see it, because if you word something so negative or so positive on a ballot, it will essentially determine how that ruling will go, and I see it as that way in this situation. Marinidil 07:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Here is what I was able to determine. First, the editor requesting deletion does need to state the reason. One of the steps listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion is to "Give a reason for the deletion and a category for the debate". I then looked under Wikipedia:Guide to deletion regarding the placement of comments. The policy does say "For consistency, the form for the discussion is a bulleted list below the nomination text." In other words, one cannot add to the nomination text, even to make it more balanced. The following talks about the order in which comments are listed: "Please do not refactor the discussion into lists or tables of recommendations, however much you may think that this helps the process. Both the context and the order of the comments are essential to understanding the intents of contributors, both at the discussion closure and during the discussion. Refactoring actually makes the job of making the decision at the closure of discussion much harder, not easier." Overall, I think that by placing a comment in a certain area, even to try to strike a balanced discussion, may actually thwart that effort by the refactoring referred to. I will gladly defer to those with more knowledge than me in this area, but that is my opinion based on my understanding of the policies. Alanraywiki 07:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- [2] This is what he/she did. As you can see, the opening comment was not modified, the author simply just added a comment to the opening statement. Why couldnt this stay? Marinidil 06:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- I withdrew the nomination. The "other Alan" brought me to tears this morning/afternoon with false accusations and claiming I was vandalizing the article. It's just not worth it anymore. IrishLass0128 17:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Since you have encountered this user, your input would be helpful here.--Southern Texas 19:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Re:Re:LatterDay Wiki
The Mormon Wiki is all videos that dont even work. They dont have any contributors, and no active admins.-Matoro183(Talk | Contributions) 21:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- ooops, I thought you were talking about MormonWiki on wikia. Basically Wikia attracks more visitors. -Matoro183(Talk | Contributions) 21:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue III (November 2007)
The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! Noetic Sage 19:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
The Book of Mormon - Proposed Changes
Hello Alanraywiki:
I'm putting this note here because I see your name in the edit history of the Book of Mormon article. There have been two "batches" of changes to the article recently. As I explained in the Talk, I reversed these changes, not because of the substance of the changes but because of the "process". Talk:Book of Mormon#Reversal of Changes
I'm hoping you and others will look at the substance of these changes. I don't want the people who made the changes to think their efforts were reversed and then simply ignored. (And I'm not able to comment seriously on the proposed changes.)
The two batches of changes I'm referring to are the ones made on December 15 by 24.2.75.193, and on December 17 by DJ Clayworth. (Because the changes were reversed, the best place to see them is through the article history.)
Thank you, Wanderer57 (talk) 18:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Greater LA
Hi Isaw you change the Greater LA topic to Los Angeles Long Beach , But it gets people con fused with the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, so we we decided to leave it Greater La... any questions feel free ill be changing it back just cheak with me and we wil come up to a conclusion. House10902 (talk) 22:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- House - As I noted in the edit box, the reason I changed the name is because that is the official name of the Metropolitan Statistical Area, which is what is being asked for in the infobox. Just below the map is the common name of Greater Los Angeles, so both are listed. Alanraywiki (talk) 00:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue IV (December 2007)
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 23:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
PHS
When I remove a person, I've looked high and low for that person's information on the internet to confirm they are a PHS graduate. I do not think your reference holds up as you don't have verification that it's the same person but I won't delete it. I have books with Norm in them and have followed him, although that's personal, but those books are also in the library and his UCLA stats used to list him as a graduate, same with Terry. Is there actual proof that the addition is the same person? Joel Bishop is a common name.IrishLass (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- PS ~ Joel Bishop's personal biography makes no mention he graduated from PHS. [3]&[4] IrishLass (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
| This is an archive of past discussions with User:72Dino. 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. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |