Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates

Featured and good topics in Wikipedia

A featured topic (FT) is a collection of inter-related articles in which at least half are featured articles or featured lists. The remaining articles must be at least good quality.

A good topic (GT) is a collection of inter-related articles that are of a good quality (though are not necessarily featured articles) with a less stringent quality threshold than a featured topic.

This page is for the nomination of potential featured and good topics. See the featured and good topic criteria for criteria on both types of topic.

Before nominating a topic, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at the Featured and good topics talk page. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FTC/GTC process. If you nominate something you have worked on, note it as a self-nomination. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the articles of the topic should consult regular editors of the articles prior to nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

The featured and good topics coordinators Aza24, MaranoFan and Kyle Peake determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FT or GT status, consensus must be reached for a group to be promoted to featured or good topic status. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates topic and archived.

To contact the FGTC coordinators, please leave a message on the FGTC talk page, or use the {{@FGTC}} notification template elsewhere.

You may want to check previous archived nominations first:

Purge the cache to refresh this page

Shortcuts

Featured content:

Good content:

Featured and good topic tools:

Nomination procedure

To create a new nomination use the form below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Saffron/archive1) and click the "Create new nomination" button.

Once the nomination page is created, remember to transclude it in the appropriate section below, to leave nomination templates on the talk pages of the articles nominated for the topic. For detailed instructions on how to nominate topics or add articles to existing topics, see Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Nomination procedure.

Supporting and objecting

Please review all the articles of the nominated topic with the featured and good topic criteria in mind before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the article nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link).
If you approve of a nomination, write '''Support''' followed by your reasons. Supports that clearly evaluate the criteria will be weighted more than those that do not.
If you oppose a nomination, write '''Oppose''' or '''Object''' followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to fix the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored.
- To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.

For a topic to be promoted to featured or good topic status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. The FGTC coordinators are usually the ones to assess this consensus and close FGTC discussions. If there is a consensus to promote, the promote instructions are located here. If enough time passes without objections being resolved (at least one week), nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived. Nominations will stay here for ten days if there is unanimous consent, or longer if warranted by debate.

Featured topic nominations

1989 (album) (5th supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/1989 (album) for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Wonderland (Taylor Swift song)

1989

18 articles

"Welcome to New York"

"Blank Space"

"Style"

"Out of the Woods"

"All You Had to Do Was Stay"

"Shake It Off"

"I Wish You Would"

"Bad Blood"

"Wildest Dreams"

"How You Get the Girl"

"This Love"

"I Know Places"

"Clean"

"Wonderland"

"You Are in Love"

"New Romantics"

The 1989 World Tour

1989 (Taylor's Version) ^(subtopic)

after seven months of hard work, i have finished the first goal of project 1989: add every song from 1989 onto this fine wikipedia and maintain the status of featured topic, finishing off with Wonderland (Taylor Swift song)

i would love to shout out a few names:

Medxvo, for their hard work on How You Get the Girl, and helping me promote it to GA status (I'll give the credit to them for it) and boldly bringing it up to FA status (and also one of the few editors i consider a friend)
Ippantekina, for just being there helping out and improving them alongside the community (also GA nommed All You Had to Do Was Stay (AYHTDWS))
Sam S, for signing up (tysm)

and for those that GA reviewed the 1989 articles, pushing it one step closer:

How You Get the Girl reviewers

Heartfox (who also reviewed So It Goes..., on an unrelated note)
MaranoFan
Aoba47
CatchMe
Lee Vilenski
Dxneo (GA reviewer)

GA reviewers:

Santi, one of my friends in Wikipedia. (You Are in Love)
Intron, another friend (and twitter moot) I met in List of Roblox games (I Wish You Would)
Dora the Axe-plorer (AYHTDWS)
Med (I Know Places)
Vestrian24Bio (Wonderland)

thank you all for helping and i wish you well on wikipedia =D brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 23:28, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Medxvo (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 00:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Zoo Blazer 05:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the story's over, why are you still writing pages? Just kidding! Support--N Ø 06:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Green Bay Packers players

Since joining the National Football League in 1921, over 1,800 players have played at least one regular season or playoff game for the Green Bay Packers. Many of the players were acquired through the NFL draft, with others being signed as free agents. Various Packers players have been recognized by the NFL, by the team itself and by news agencies for their on-field performance, which includes setting numerous NFL and team records. Packers players have helped the team become one of the most successful in NFL history.

Contributor(s): Gonzo_fan2007

Cohesive and complete topic about people who have played for the Green Bay Packers. All of the articles are included in {{Green Bay Packers}}. Meets all other criteria. -- « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cos ^{(X + Z)} 15:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a Lions fan, I'm disgusted by this. I'm also disgustingly, and begrudgingly, voting support. I'd also recommend moving the All-Anniversary Team selections to the middle column for balance. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a Packers fan I think this cements the fact that the Lions suck so I support Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:21, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wow @OlifanofmrTennant. This betrayal will not soon be forgotten... Hey man im josh (talk) 14:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great work! As a Seahawks fan, we've definitely had some interesting games over the years with the Packers... -- Zoo Blazer 19:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- ZooBlazer, one of these days I want to get a Packers-Seahawks rivalry Good Topic! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  @Gonzo fan2007 Let me know whenever you commit to working on it and I'll try to help you out with it. -- Zoo Blazer 05:00, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  ZooBlazer I've been working on getting all the games to GA. Just have Fail Mary left. Already got the rivalry page to GA. After that, its two big ones: the team pages. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:02, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 08:47, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as someone who isn't a fan of any NFL team but who did once go and watch the London Monarchs play...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support As a Ravens fan, I am ambivalent on this. charlotte ^👸♥ 19:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

support omg well done brachy08 _{(chat here lol)} 03:36, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good topic nominations

Svalbard studio albums

The British post-hardcore band Svalbard have released four studio albums since their formation in Bristol in 2011.

Svalbard studio albums

5 articles

One Day All This Will End

It's Hard to Have Hope

When I Die, Will I Get Better?

The Weight of the Mask

Contributor(s): Chchcheckit

After almost 2 years and much chaotic editing/deliberation/burnout/mental & personal development, all of Svalbard's four studio albums (to date) are listed at GA status since December 2024, and discography has just been promoted to FL (February 7, 2025). On a personal level, and without further context, I wouldn't be here/where I am today without them. Plus they're underrated. This was the least I could do. thank you :) P.S. thanks to the people who reviewed the articles. // --Chchcheckit (talk) 01:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, good work. charlotte ^👸♥ 19:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Clearly-defined, complete scope. Excellent work. (note: I did participate in the FLC.) mftp dan ^oops 04:32, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 03:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who (2005–present)

Doctor Who is a British science fiction television show which began in 1963 and resumed airing in 2005, after having ceased broadcasting in 1989. The revived version of the show, though a continuation, made many changes from the original series, most notably longer episodes and more self-contained episodes, interspersed with occasional multi-part stories, structured into loose story arcs, instead of multi-episode serials of shorter length. 14 series and various specials have been broadcast as of February 2025, with another series close to broadcast.

Contributor(s): Alex 21, Chompy Ace, DoctorWhoFan91, Glimmer721, OlifanofmrTennant, TheDoctorWho

A number of editors have improved the articles relating to the revived series to GA status. This topic is a comprehensive set of all of its series and quasi-series up till now, which together meet the criteria listed at WP:GT?.(~~Series 15 is at PR, but it's basically done, so I'll formally close it by tomorrow~~ edit-peer review done) They have similar layouts and are connected through, links, categories, and templates. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support as contributor. Fun fact of the six open GTCs WP:DRWHO has 3 of them. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:33, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

changes made, discussion became unhelpful, collapsed

Can this be moved to the title "Doctor Who (2005–present)", rather than "Doctor Who (2005-present)"? -- Alex_21_TALK 20:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any difference (if it's about apostrophes, then there was an issue with it regarding nom creation, so I had to do it without them). DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: "Doctor Who (2005–present)" has an en-dash, "Doctor Who (2005-present)" has a hyphen-minus. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. I actually pasted the notification on all the articles, so if it needs moving, it probably needs to be edited on every page too? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would be correct, yes. En-dash is the correct usage for date ranges. -- Alex_21_TALK 09:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that 20 article talk pages would have to be edited, so is there a faster way to do it than manually- if yeah, then the page can be moved at the same time. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 10:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20 article talk pages were already edited, I'm sure it'll be a piece of cake, though the community can support you with such a heavy load. -- Alex_21_TALK 20:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving the page- I forgot that the prev page would still be a redirect, so change is technically not required on the 20 articles. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20 talk pages still use "2005-present", an incorrect usage of dashes. Do you intend to correct this? -- Alex_21_TALK 07:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this passes, then the bot will add it with an en-dash; if it fails, it will get removed. Given that the redirect is working, I do not intend to do it. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate editing practices. I'll fix your mistakes for you once again. -- Alex_21_TALK 20:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would have done so myself if more than one editor said they had an issue with you. You don't need to be passive-agressive with the "I'll fix your mistakes for you once again". Or mention me 19 times in the edit summaries lol.DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Burden lies on the editor who made the mistake and is aware of it; you were cited on why we use en-dashes. -- Alex_21_TALK 23:43, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DoctorWhoFan91 is being helpful. Why are you so hostile? Cremastra (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not. I'm educating. What would be helpful would be fixing mistakes that are known, which I happily did. Thank you for your opinion. -- Alex_21_TALK 01:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would be even more helpful would be waiting for someone else to also mention they have an issue with it, instead of leaving passive-aggressive edit summaries. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:49, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that it's an issue, it's that it's a standard Wikipedia MoS. -- Alex_21_TALK 07:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and fix hyphens to en-dashes across the whole of wikipedia while you are at it. Why wait to change a re-direct, especially ones that will be replaced with a pass or fail soon enough. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 09:31, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and fix hyphens to en-dashes across the whole of wikipedia while you are at it. There's bots that do that, how is that related to the issue at hand? -- Alex_21_TALK 20:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's related bcs you are editing 20 pages which are linking correctly via a redirect. And the 20 pages don't need to be changed with haste, bcs they are temporary until this passes or fails. You bring up MoS to say that those changes were needed-but we are not in article space, the pages were talk pages. I WP:IARed it for the time being, bcs only one editor brought it up at the moment. Maybe my mistake was not realising you would throw a temper tantrum once again, and leave 19 passive aggressive edit summaries. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IAR? I can see the basis of your argument here, I'm fond of THICK. Glad to have helped you out here. Happy editing! -- Alex_21_TALK 00:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unacceptable language on a featured/good topic candidate. I hope this doesn't continue. -- Alex_21_TALK 09:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have posted a GA concerns thread on the talk page of Doctor Who series 3. If these are unaddressed this article may be nominated at GAR. I would suggest that interested parties look at the article and ensure everything is cited according to the GA criteria. Z1720 (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are also some {{Citation needed}} tags on series 4, 8, 9, and 2023 specials that should be addressed. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:46, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I missed that, I'll fix series 3 and all the articles in the upcoming days. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed series 3 cn tags, and all the other mentioned articles too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support since all outstanding issues seem to be addressed by the nominator. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:20, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as contributor. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Two films

Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) is a group of American superhero films produced by Marvel Studios based on characters that appear in publications by Marvel Comics. The films include Iron Man 3 (2013) with Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark / Iron Man, Thor: The Dark World (2013) with Chris Hemsworth as Thor, Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) with Chris Evans as Steve Rogers / Captain America, Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) with Chris Pratt as Peter Quill / Star-Lord, Zoe Saldaña as Gamora, Dave Bautista as Drax the Destroyer, Vin Diesel as Groot, and Bradley Cooper as Rocket, the crossover film Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) with Downey, Hemsworth, Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, Mark Ruffalo, Don Cheadle, Paul Bettany, and Anthony Mackie reprising their roles, and Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Pietro Maximoff and Elizabeth Olsen as Wanda Maximoff, and Ant-Man (2015) with Paul Rudd as Scott Lang / Ant-Man. Evans appeared the most in the phase, starring or making cameo appearances in four of the films. The six films of the phase grossed over US$5.2 billion at the global box office. Phase Two, along with Phase One and Phase Three, constitutes "The Infinity Saga".

Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase Two

7 articles

Iron Man 3

Thor: The Dark World

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Guardians of the Galaxy

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Ant-Man

Contributor(s): ZooBlazer, Chompy Ace, Facu-el Millo, Favre1fan93, Richiekim, TriiipleThreat, among others

It's been a little while since the first phase of films was promoted, but I'm finally back with Phase Two of the MCU. Like Phase One, the topic encompasses the main phase article, plus each of the six films. -- Zoo Blazer 17:00, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 00:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 03:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the Olympics (1st supplementary nomination)

This topic is already featured. It is being re-nominated to add additional items. See Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Saint Kitts and Nevis at the Olympics for discussions of the topic's previous nominations. The additional items are:

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the Olympics

10 articles

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 1996 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2000 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2004 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2008 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2012 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2016 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2020 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics

Saint Kitts and Nevis Olympic Committee

Getting the process going as Saint Kitts and Nevis at the 2024 Summer Olympics became a Good Article on 13 January. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Straight forward addition. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cos ^{(X + Z)} 17:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:05, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 08:50, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Zoo Blazer 05:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Topic removal candidates

Period 1 elements

3 articles

Hydrogen

Helium

Techincally fails criterion 3.b as Helium was demoted from being an FA on September 1, 2024, and doesn't appear anyone is working on getting it back to at least GA. I say technically because the topic is a GT, but it should have been an FT as with Helium, 2/3 articles were featured. -- Zoo Blazer 03:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove – Idiosincrático (talk) 07:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nominator. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:40, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom and lack of movement. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tuvalu at the Olympics

7 articles

Tuvalu Association of Sports and National Olympic Committee

Tuvalu at the 2008 Summer Olympics

Tuvalu at the 2012 Summer Olympics

Tuvalu at the 2016 Summer Olympics

Tuvalu at the 2020 Summer Olympics

Tuvalu at the 2024 Summer Olympics

Fails criterion 3.b as Tuvalu at the 2024 Summer Olympics is not a WP:GA, isn't being worked on, and is past the three month grace period (the Olympics ended on 11 August 2024). The article's recent GA nomination also failed. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Idiosincrático (talk) 21:00, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom and lack of movement. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parachutes

Parachutes

7 articles

"Shiver"

"Yellow"

"Trouble"

"Don't Panic"

"Sparks"

Parachutes Tour

I really hate to be *that person* (especially since I don't really linger around the Topics space too much), but I regrettably don't think that this qualifies as being a Good Topic anymore due to the creation of pages for "Sparks" and the Parachutes Tour, the former having been created almost one year ago and the latter having been created almost two years back. While both articles have seen relatively consistent and recent editing by User:GustavoCza (who has also created the articles in question), neither seem like they are currently in any shape to be nominated for GA, and in any case it seems to be well beyond the three month grace period allotted for in WP:GTCRITERIA. I'm terribly sorry if I've made a mistake somewhere here. Leafy46 (talk) 02:06, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove – per nomination. Idiosincrático (talk) 20:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:50, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:59, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:47, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guitar Hero series

Guitar Hero was demoted on 31 July 2024, there is no effort to change that, and without it the topic fails criterion 3.b. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist – real shame this, hopefully someone works on the lead article soon. Idiosincrático (talk) 09:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm concerned that the GH article was delisted with no comments, and given I was the one that progressed it and the topic through GA and FL, got no notification of it (I have a huge watchlist so that could easily fall through). I'm not disagreeing with the issues about the article's problems but they were all readily fixable if I had been notified. --Masem (t) 13:49, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist: That's a bummer, I always thought this was a pretty cool / great topic. Hopefully someone steps up to work on it, and I'd be happy to let it be on hold if someone was interested in doing so, but alas, no sign of that at the moment. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Too bad. -- Zoo Blazer 04:04, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nom and lack of movement. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:47, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UEFA European Championship finals

Fails criterion 3.b as UEFA Euro 2024 final is not a WP:GA, isn't being worked on, and is past the three month grace period (the match was played on 14 July). Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove – Hopefully someone picks this up. Idiosincrático (talk) 09:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - doesn't look like the 2024 article is moving towards GA. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove per nom and lack of movement. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:47, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]