User talk:Redrose64

  1. Home
  2. Wiki
Hello, Redrose64! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! --Jza84 |  Talk  13:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Train wheels

[edit]

Hiya! Do you have any idea where I might find a drawing or photo of the type of wheel that caused the Shipton-on-Cherwell train crash? Thanks Bob (talk) 16:33, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Robertpedley: I don't know of any diagrams, but Colonel Yolland's report has a description on page 5, column 2, paragraph beginning "The tyre which broke on this occasion". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:43, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great suggestion! Unfortunately they didn't scan the illustrations in that report. I'll see if the Bod has an original. Bob (talk) 18:56, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Couldn't get anywhere at the Bod. However Yolland's report says that it was a Mansell wheel with an obsolete form of tyre fixing. I've reworded the page to make this clear. Bob (talk) 11:12, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Robertpedley: I have been looking at your edit; and I am afraid that you have made an error here. The faulty wheel was definitely not a Mansell wheel. First, it was all-iron, where a Mansell wheel makes use of wooden blocks between the wheel boss and the rim (sixteen are shown in this diagram). Second, the faulty tyre was secured to the wheel centre by means of four countersunk rivets fitted through holes drilled radially through the tyre; a Mansell wheel uses nuts and bolts passing from one side of the wheel to the other, one bolt per segment - at no point is the tyre itself drilled. In Col. Yolland's report, pages 4-5 describe the faulty tyre and pages 7-10 describe various means of fastening the tyre to the rim. Indeed, page 8 makes it clear that the faulty wheel was not a Mansell wheel. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:53, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. I shall revert the edits. Thanks! Bob (talk) 15:39, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:45, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

North Western Road Car Company (1923)

[edit]

You claim the description "Bristol KG5 ECW" is meaningless but that is how a large number of British bus pictures are captioned. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:42, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The chassis is a Bristol K5G. The bodywork is by ECW. These are two separate pieces of information. Pushing them together makes it seem like ECW is some variant on the basic K5G, like VW Golf GTi. Also, examples please for your statement "that is how a large number of British bus pictures are captioned". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be cheeky :-), quite a few here Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:34, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shouting

[edit]

Hi Rose. I am here to explain my use of capital letters. Occasionally, if I ask for clarification within the bare code of a page, such as today when I added a Clarify template, my block letters are not intended as rudeness or shouting, rather, I deliberately deploy capitals for legibility within the visual busyness of bare article code, which ordinary article readers do not see. Indeed, the legibility I provide using capitals is intended as ergonomic helpfulness.

Of course, I understand another reading is possible (shouting) but that is not what I am, in fact, doing. As Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." As I say, sometimes capital letters are just big letters – to help other editors to find and see among all the article code what kind of clarification is being requested. Cheers. Spideog (talk) 22:42, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#shouting. It applies to non-talk pages too. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:15, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. I went to some effort to explain that it wasn't shouting, and concluded clearly that "sometimes capital letters are just big letters". I thought that clarification couldn't be clearer. It was, as I said, for ergonomic clarity. As someone with professional experience in ergonomics and documentation, I have form in this area.
The link you provided above is for Talk pages but I did not use capitals in a Talk page. Also, that guideline says capitals are "rarely appropriate" – it says rarely, not never.
But I'll leave it at that. I'm not convinced you will let the "shouting" interpretation go, no matter what I say. Spideog (talk) 04:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saxby railway station

[edit]

There were two different station sites in this settlement. Was the reason for the second of these two stations anything to do with the line connection of the Midland and Great Northern Joint Railway?

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 07:18, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No; see Saxby railway station#History, first paragraph. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:54, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. I have now had sight of a very old OS large map with both stations marked upon it since I wrote to you. Do I take it that the small Saxby stations line drawing on the Wikipedia article showing Saxby Goods will be that of the first of those two stations, which goods were handled upon after the opening of the second station?
Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As our article states, the original station on a stub of the original line continued in use for goods. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page rating

[edit]

Thank you for fixing my errors in rating the pages! Hi I'm Sailing427, but you can call me Sailing. Look at my profile. (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed, please.

[edit]

Good Evening! Back in early May, you helped out with an image placement problem at Grand Prix de France (figure skating). I now have what appears to be a similar problem at Denis Ten Memorial Challenge, but the solution you implemented at the French article is not working here. The image of Denis Ten should be at the very beginning of the History section, on the left. Any help you can provide would be appreciated! Thank you so much in advance. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You refer to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 219#Help with image placement on article. But I didn't implement anything at the French article - I suggested the use of {{stack begin}}/{{stack end}}, which you used in this edit, but seem to have subsequently removed.
Also, I don't see any similar problem at Denis Ten Memorial Challenge. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Denis Ten image should be at the beginning of the History section, but is currently displaying midway through the section, at an elevation just below where the infobox ends. I tried the stack method with the infobox and the quote box, but it just pushed everything else below it.
BTW, I liked the right hand stack of images at the France article, but the people at the Featured List Project did not due to the white space it left. I was sorry to have to convert it to a gallery. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are three floated objects of relevance: (i) the infobox - this is at the top of the lead section, as may be expected; (ii) the image c:File:Denis Ten at the 2016 Trophée de France - Awarding ceremony (cropped).jpg - this is at the top of the history section, as intended; (iii) the {{Quote box}} beginning "One of Denis’s main goals was to develop ..." - this is aligned wity the paragraph beginning "Organized by the Denis Ten Foundation". I see no issues here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:27, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reshuffled the quotebox after I messaged you last night; it seems to have fixed the problem. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your review needed

[edit]

Hi RedRose, I am requesting you as you were active to please review/check the following reviewed page per AFC history and help if any redirect or removal needed. Capo_Orlando_Prize I had AFCH opened in decline but checked more sources and read more mentions in new tabs just to make sure. The subject does have recognition in sources with good mentions building up basic notability even with many being primary/related sources. When I returned back to the AFCH screen with decline option already clicked, I tapped on submit by error while going back to options. I reverted the error submit and accepted it with notifying submitter about this as well. HilssaMansen19Irien1291S • spreading wiki love ~ Message here; no calls 23:45, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HilssaMansen19: The article does not exist, and neither does Draft:Capo Orlando Prize; there is no evidence that either of them has ever existed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:56, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the trouble, it was a typo. Capo D'Orlando Prize it is. HilssaMansen19Irien1291S • spreading wiki love ~ Message here; no calls 11:37, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what's wrong. Mind, I'm not an AfC expert. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:09, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry have been busy in the work, no worries, I will find and ask an AFC related admin as well. Thanks mate HilssaMansen19Irien1291S • spreading wiki love ~ Message here; no calls 16:40, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Request for Neutral Review: Repeated AfC Rejection Despite Independent Sources. Polygnotus (talk) 11:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphen-minus

[edit]

But yes, in an ideal world, we would discourage Cro-Magnon in favour of {{nobr||Cro-Magnon}} to avoid abominations like ... with the arrival of Cro
-Magnon culture.... But right now, I'd rather not bury the discussion under a variety of loosely related topics that might require "MOS creep". If we can get templates to embed good practice, that will be a major step forward. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:47, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In my experience, most browsers will wrap after the hyphen-minus, not before it. I say "most" because I've not yet come across one that wraps before, but one may exist out there somewhere. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:51, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. That hadn't occurred to me though it should have. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Bloxham Steam and Country Fair

[edit]

got some pics well rather a lot of pics. Thats what I've uploaded so far.©Geni (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:59, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

[edit]

My reason is to help others quickly find the term 'interim.' After that, it no longer appeared in the RFC listing. I also revised my statement to make it more neutral. Thank you for noticing it quickly—I know this is my first time conducting such a request. HurricaneEdgar 23:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

West Bridgford

[edit]

Hi There,

Thank you for your alert for the reference that I completed today. I was however, slightly disappointed by your sentence ‘fixup mess caused by MatthewDavid41’ presented in a public way on the wiki page. I would have been more than happy to edit the reference which I realise I fell short on. But I really didn’t appreciate your words.

thanks again MatthewDavid41 (talk) 22:38, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 5 § Music of Fooland by city

[edit]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 July 5 § Music of Fooland by city on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. NLeeuw (talk) 08:04, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this relates to Category:Ukrainian music by city. I don't recall creating any others like this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:26, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Casserly

[edit]

Thanks for correcting me on Casserly’s page. I did not mean to use traveling wrong it just came up underlined red and I clicked it. Is Wikipedias policy on different forms of English to use the form that the person/thing’s country would? Thanks. Howdy69 (talk) 01:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Howdy69: Yes, please see MOS:ENGVAR and its subsection MOS:TIES. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Howdy69 (talk) 15:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimeet Oxford

[edit]
wikiflag
Just the 2 of us... that almost sounds like a date !!. But seriously, has turn-out ever been an issue? issue enough to have to cancel. I am game either way, wait till the next. I am curious about maybe becoming an administrator. Or just to meet my clones, yes i have seen the photos of these fantastic people. James Kevin McMahon (talk) 21:07, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@James Kevin McMahon: It's still five days off. Also, some people sign on the day - or even arrive without signing up. I've never cancelled. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

dashed lines for listgaps

[edit]

please could you leave a message at User talk:Thryduulf with the code (and which page I need to put it on) for your listgap highlighting code. Thanks. Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 15:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC) Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 15:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WIkiProject Doctor Who: June 2025 Newsletter

[edit]
The Space-Time Telegraph
Volume III, Issue II — June 2025
Brought to you by the editors of WikiProject Doctor Who
People assume that a newsletters are a strict progression of stuff happening to author's writing,
but, actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of spacey-timey teley-graphy... stuff
This is my Space-Time Telegraph Detector: 🕹️
It goes *ding* when there's a new newsletter out
Welcome to the second 2025 issue of the Space-Time Telegraph. Apologies that we're a little late, sometimes this newsletter takes us when we need to go instead of when we want to go. In this edition you'll find everything that you need to keep you updated on things going on around the project as well as within the Whoniverse.

Am I a good (or featured) man Wikipedia article?

Since last Newsletter, many new GAs have been added to the Project. These include every individual episode in Doctor Who series 15 and a number of fictional characters, including Belinda Chandra, the companion of Series 15. A full list of Good promoted content can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who#Articles with Good Article status. So far, we've promoted 33 GAs this year, and we're on track to beat our previous record of GAs promoted in a year (36 in 2012).
In terms of Good Topics, Wikipedia:Featured topics/List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present) and Wikipedia:Good topics/Doctor Who series 14 were both promoted in May.
Additionally, with the promotion of Yeti (Doctor Who) to FA status just this past month, the project has gotten its first FA status article in nearly a decade, with the last FA promotion being From The Doctor to my son Thomas in November 2015.
Congratulations to all involved with these articles, and keep up the good work!

Space-Time Telegraph Materialization Schedule

With uncertainty surrounding when production of the parent show will resume, newsletter editors have decided to shift the publication schedule from quarterly to triannually for the time being. This means that the next issue will be published in December, and then every April, August, and December thereafter. When the future of the series is more certain, the schedule may update once more at that time.

Their songs have ended... but their stories, never end 🌹

Since the previous issue was published, some people related to Doctor Who have sadly passed away:
Intelligence Bulletin from the Subwave Network
  • The War Between the Land and the Sea, an upcoming Doctor Who spin-off released its first trailer at the conclusion of series 15. The 5-part mini-series is expected to be broadcast later this year. The BBC has also commissioned an animated Doctor Who spin-off series targeted towards younger audiences. The 52-part programme is set to air in two parts of 26-episodes each between 2027 and 2029.
  • In home media, the fifteenth series will be released on DVD, Blu-ray, and Steelbook in August. The Peter Cushing spin-off films, Dr Who And The Daleks and Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D., were recently colourised and re-released in June/July in 4K, along with new special features. Season 13 will be the next season to receive release in "The Collection" format, featuring remastered episodes and new special features.
  • In print, three new Doctor Who novels, written by Emily Cook, Hannah Fergesen, Kalynn Byron came out in May. Another, authored by Esmie Jikiemi-Pearson is due out in November. Dan Watters and Sami Kivelä are also collaborating on a new series featuring for Titan Coomics. Finally, Pete McTighe and Carole Ann Ford are authoring new shorts to expand on previously unseen stories to be released in August and November in larger collections.
  • Big Finish Productions have released several new Who-related audio dramas, and announced many more set to enter production soon. An audio vinyl release of The Moonbase, of which two episodes are missing, is expected to be out in September.
  • New action figure sets taking on the appearance of Fourteenth Doctor and the Meep became available in June. Mattel also collaborated with the BBC to create Barbie dolls taking on the appearance of the Fifteenth Doctor and Belinda, first making their appearance in May at MCM Comic Con. Doctor Who will also once again have a presence at the 2025 San Diego Comic Con, featuring photo-ops and other new exclusive products.

Contributors

If you wish to contribute to future editions of the newsletter, leave a message on the WikiProject talk page or reach out to one of the current contributors listed above.
If you do not wish to receive future editions of the Space-Time Telegraph, please remove your name from our our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the cleanup

[edit]

Hi, I wanted to thank you for cleaning up Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. the anchor must have been accidentally removed while I was using the visual editor. I have now removed the whitespace that that prompted me to make the change.

You mentioned bulleted lists shouldn't contain new lines between the items for accessibility reasons. I was wondering why that is, as I have used newlines extensively in another Wiki and didn't know about any downsides. Thanks. FaviFake (talk) 22:18, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I now notice you did in fact point to the relevant article within the edit summary. unfortunately I didn't know the Wikipedia mobile app removed links from edit summaries. feel free to remove this message or ignore it. FaviFake (talk) 22:40, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Channel Tunnel

[edit]

How is someone supposed to know which book authored by Wilson is referred to when the reference states 'Wilson pp. 44' for example? LateFatherKarma (talk) 07:35, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LateFatherKarma: By including either the other author(s), the year, or both like this, see WP:CITESHORT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:01, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've also reviewed the guidelines you linked initially. I feel you were wrong to revert my edits. Please view repeated citations and citing multiple pages of the same source. The problem is heightened by the fact that there are two books authored by Wilson. Unless you are willing to make an edit that clarifies to readers which book is referred to and provides more to them in terms of references than those that just state Wilson and the page number, I feel very strongly you should undo the revert. I went to the effort of reviewing page edit history, just to be sure which of the books authored by Wilson the unhelpful references of Wilson plus page number referred to and am also trying to avoid the same book listed in the references multiple times, where in most instances the reader cannot even tell which book, which publisher or even which author these unhelpful references refer to. Please can you reconsider what you did.LateFatherKarma (talk) 08:04, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think rather than us direct eachother to guidelines, we should be thinking about the fact what I did helped the people reading this, by providing clarity (which of the two books authored by Wilson this referred to), de-cluttered the references from multiple references to the same source and provided a full reference to the source. I cannot see how that is unhelpful, but how the page is now, after you reverting my edit is unhelpful.LateFatherKarma (talk) 08:14, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changing an article to use {{rp}} without prior consensus is against WP:CITEVAR (including its "Generally considered helpful" and "To be avoided" subsections), as it introduces a different method that was not previously in use. You've only been editing Wikipedia for two weeks, so you probably wouldn't have known about that. My addition of coauthor and year is permitted by the "Generally considered helpful" subsection.
Prior to this edit, there was only one Wilson source, which was the one co-authored with Spick. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:18, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately you are incorrect which is why I did this: Keith, Wilson (1 July 1995). Channel Tunnel Visions, 1850-1945: Dreams and Nightmares (1st ed.). Hambledon Continuum. ISBN 9781852851323. LateFatherKarma (talk) 08:22, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that often consensus should be sought, that is why I did not do this where the same style is used for other authors, but with the other authors, this confusion doesn't exist. Is it better readers can be clear on the actual source or for them to be unable to know what author or even book a reference is referring to?LateFatherKarma (talk) 08:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully ask you to reconsider what you did.LateFatherKarma (talk) 08:37, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I can see you appear to be currently editing in a way that will result in the same source being listed multiple times in the references, with it in most instances not showing the book title and a helpful and full reference. Is there a reason for that and how is that helpful? LateFatherKarma (talk) 08:56, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I would suggest if you disagree with how the sources are listed that you start a discussion on the article talk page so that other editors can add their thoughts. At the moment, this is a classic content dispute - you believe the article should be written one way, and Redrose disagrees. The best course of action is to find out what general consensus is - and the best place for that is the article talk page. Danners430 tweaks made 09:58, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that is what this user asked me to do, which I did, before they then began to make further changes, before any consensus was agreed or before contributing to that discussion. LateFatherKarma (talk) 11:59, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They are keeping the existing format, just improving what’s already there. You are changing the format. That’s the main difference. Danners430 tweaks made 12:38, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These "further changes" may be explained as follows:
  1. These three edits reinstated some changes that had been made by Ehrenkater (talk · contribs), which had been lost
  2. This edit split a coauthor's name into its components, for consistency
  3. These two edits addressed the original issue, i.e. which Wilson the refs refer to
It is common practice for a source to be used multiple times, but generally we would provide the full details just once; repeated uses being of a shortened form. If you look at a featured article - such as Value theory, which is today's featured article as I type this - you will often find that many refs give just surnames, year and page, with the full details being given separately. This is why I directed you to WP:CITESHORT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:56, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question...

[edit]

...regarding the gallery thing on the rfc at Talk:Hamas, is there a reason for that? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 19:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RfC statements should be neutral and brief. Also, a gallery brings undue attention to your RfC at the RfC listings - your RfC is no more important than any of the others. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:25, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bro

[edit]

La pagina del draft:EFootball wolrd cup part 16 la que se redigio por que estaba mal escrita ya esta en ingles 2800:320:4218:1700:3052:8477:B13:F125 (talk) 15:07, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Translation: The page of Draft:EFootball World Cup Part 16...the one that was redirected because it was poorly written is already in English. It looks like this user, FWIW, has trouble spelling "Wolrd" so they moved the page from the misspelled title.
This is the English Wikipedia, and I cannot read Spanish, so please write in English. I see that you have already been informed of this. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Broder ya puse en ingles osea ya lo escribi en la que me redigio el usuario por que estaba mal escritor el nombre de la pagina fijatw 2800:320:4218:1700:3052:8477:B13:F125 (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Translation: Brother, I already put it in English. I already wrote it where the user [1isall] redirected me because the page name was poorly written in English. Take a look. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 17:44, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Sammi. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:03, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Great Central Railway (heritage railway)

[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Great Central Railway (heritage railway), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:03, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]