User talk:Mrcl lxmna

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Mrcl lxmna!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 16:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Please sign your postings

---

Click the "Signature and timestamp"-button to sign your talkpage contributions

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 14:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Stop mass nominations

You were asked several times to stop doing mass nominations like Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buildings in Bacolod City. You're being disruptive so please stop for now. I already spotted several photos of buildings build before 1950 so these should be covered by Commons:FOP Philippines. Besides that: Have you edited before on any Wikimedia project using a different account? Multichill (talk) 10:32, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

multchill first of all, i didnt edit wikipedia using a different accouny. I just edited here at this present time, but i am a smart one who remembers wikimedia help and how tos in just few days.

second fyi, i am doing this on my concern that numerous fotos of phil buildings and sculptures are recent enough to be copyrightwd still. i raised the concern at ur venue which you call village pump. though im first glad at one of ur moderators response to delete edsa shrine potos, im getting impatient. hence with study on commons:dletion policy on weeks befor raising my conern to ur forum, i got a knowledge to use ur nominate for del functionality. plus the easiest way to delte severalfotos which is ur visualfilechange Has a button to let novice people like me to try. i m becoming impatient over the concern raised by me. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 12:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

We value quality over speed. I see you decided to ignore my request. Maybe I wasn't clear: If you do another mass nomination I will block you for disruptive editing. Please wait until at least several of your deletion requests have been closed. Multichill (talk) 08:24, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

@Multichill: At least 8 more mass noms have happened, see the last 8 edits to User talk:Ramon FVelasquez.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 04:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Nomination to delete the Quezon Memorial Shrine photo

Hi! The Quezon Memorial Shrine is a historical location located in Quezon City, Philippines. It was built by the Philippine government, local government unit of Quezon City in specific, in honor to the late President Manuel Quezon.

Please stop doing nomination of several photos into deletion requests. Check your facts straight. Be a responsible user of Wikimedia. Jsnueva1022 (talk) 15:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jsnueva1022: I've already urged this user to halt more DR's. P199 has also cautioned them to be more selective in deletion requests. For the issue of Quezon Memorial Circle, I'm inclined to say to keep them all, but there is new issue about this monument, which was raised at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Quezon memorial.jpg, an attempt by me to undelete a 2000s-era (probably) photo of this shrine. If you wish you may bring your inputs there. You may also reply at the new deletion request created by this user, at the second section of Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Quezon Memorial Shrine just below the blue box of the first section of the DR. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:06, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I will be more cautious in dealing with photos with deriv works issues. im gonna focus on sculptores and skyscraper bldgs first Mrcl lxmna (talk) 16:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Those are also FOP issues.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 17:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Mrcl lxmna. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 04:49, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

my response: im trying to be more cautious in making those deletion requests. but pls take into account the no freedom of pano situation in the phils, strengthened by fair use like provisions in the copyright law of that country in terms of reproductions of copyrighted works in the country. it is becoming evident that defenses made by jwilz, p199, exec8, et al are being unheeded bcos these are not complying to the copyright law of the phils. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 07:57, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Please, no more simple "No FOP in the Philippines"

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikimedia Commons. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

The COM:FOP Philippines, while is written fairly unusual, really can't be extended to mean "No (commercial) FOP", it does explain that many new, complex buildings are not ok, yes, but really not all, such buildings can be public domain if and when used by governments of the Philippines, diplomatic-related (e.g. United States embassy in Manila) and other public affairs related. All simple, commonly build-able buildings are also FOP-okay. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:20, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

ok Liuxinyu970226. you may have a point, but i think your argument is invalid. why do many bldgs deleted still at Category:Philippine FOP cases/deleted? Such as Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Pulilan, Bulacan Municipal Hall - Interior? And fyi, the public domain claim that youre talking about is about written texts and does not cover government owned and operated bldgs and sculptures. the government itself is not obliged to force architects or sculptors to surrender their moral rights to them. does the phil gov ALWAYS FORCE archi and sculptural community to sureender their copyrights on cultural center, quezon monunent, folk arts tgeatre, and many others to them? please read the copyright law of the phils FULLY. and i disagree with claims by jwilz and seav - two of your contributors with wrong interpretations of copyright law of the phil - that the persons who created the plaques and markers surrendered their creative and artistic rights to ngcp or to any govt entity. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 10:01, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your mass censorship actions

My response: I oppose almost all of your irresponsible, curtailing and anti-patriotic actions. Please stop making any new nominations to remove the photos of the Philippines. This country is still in press freedom crisis in the wake of controversial closure of ABS-CBN network. Your petitions to delete pictures depicting so-called "copyrighted Philippine places" could not only worsen the crisis, but also affect Philippine tourism, compromise the free rights of creative artists and photographers, and make most forms of photography in this country potentially illegal. (I saw that you also nominated one of my pictures of ABS-CBN protests, especially some of people in the picture were carrying "Defend Press Freedom" plakard.) Most creative artists who make and produce any form of media content would also lose reliable sources of legally-free-to-use photographs of Philippine places and events, since vast majority of images outside the platforms of Wikimedia Foundation are private property of respective website owners, publishers, photographers and authors.

You're more treating copyright and intellectual prperty as overbroadened forms of privacy rights rather than just economic and moral rights, thus it looks like you're more prioritizing to protect the "greedy private rights" of property owners and architects than advocate Philippine tourism and press freedom.

The worse here is you've tagged not only the images of private buildings especially those built after the '60s, but also government-owned structures and historical attractions including monuments of martyrs and ex-Presidents. I remind you that most of them are funded by the people of this Republic.

Also, assuming that you prove that it's illegal to take pictures of 'copyrighted structures', use them commercially and uplaod them on stock image libraries without written permission of or payment to respective owners, managements and architects, if you're targeting many Filipino photographers who upload their Philippines pictures to this platform, why don't you also target operators of blogs, websites, vlogs, local governments' information offices and others? I advise you that before doing any similar actions, please consult the lawyers, tourism offices and the media industry "in responsible way" first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrickroque01 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 9 September 2020‎ (UTC)

Perhaps my last warning for you

@Mrcl lxmna: , pls. stop "red-tagging" of hundreds of Philippine architectural and sculptural photos. Even if there's no FOP in the Philippines, this is currently being dealt with at Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/Philippines#New discussion on PHL FoP, including the possibility of seeking official opinions from several Philippine institutions, (right now, from one of our governmental institutions, the Department of Justice or DOJ). Any additional deletion requests will only result to tedious and time-costly closure of deletion requests which now have exceeded 200. Please stop while such discussions are taking place. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:06, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 week

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 week for the following reason: {{{2}}}. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

Several users asked you to stop with the disruptive mass deletion nominations, you didn't, so now you're stopped by me for a week. Multichill (talk) 19:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Mutichill blocking me doesnt mean I would not continue to police photos that contain copyrighted structures. If all of you insist that im wrong, then fine. But i tell all of you that intellectual property office recognizes the copyright protection of the structures and monumnets in the phils. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 03:22, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Look at that jwilz who claims in his or her comments that im foolish to start those deletions. Thats a big lie. You all google the structures and they are still copyrighted. Btw that user is more foolish. And im contended that he will eventually surrender his defense of the photos showing copyrighted structures, ie https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:People_Power_Monument_Looking_to_Ortigas.jpg and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:EDSAMonumentjf2030_04.JPG, both i visited again lately. Intellectual properry of the phils recogbizes copyrights of structures. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 03:27, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Got an idea. I will make a new request at your village pump, with link to those photos and / or categories and an external link. A website news article etc that will serve as an evidence. And its up to you admins to start those deletions. Hope this time you wont block me. My apologies if some of my deletion requests become disruptive. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 03:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

It will be like this: at village pump

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Saint_Vincent_Ferrer_Statue_(Bayambang) AND https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Saint_Vincent_Ferrer_Prayer_Park-Statue-Chapel-Stations_of_the_Cross,_Bayambang_2020 - https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2019/04/16/1910297/bayambang-makes-it-guinness-records/ AND https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1066754 ("JQS Builders, ARCHITECT Jerry Suratos, Engr. Aaron Villafuerte and Jericho Roble DATE OF COMPLETION 2019)

@Multichill: i hope my tagging of you is correct. Mrcl lxmna (talk) 05:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

My next requests for deletion: • https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Saint_Vincent_Ferrer_Statue_(Bayambang) AND https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Saint_Vincent_Ferrer_Prayer_Park-Statue-Chapel-Stations_of_the_Cross,_Bayambang_2020 - https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2019/04/16/1910297/bayambang-makes-it-guinness-records/ AND https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1066754 ("JQS Builders, ARCHITECT Jerry Suratos, Engr. Aaron Villafuerte and Jericho Roble DATE OF COMPLETION 2019)

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tirad_Pass_Monument.jpg - https://www.philstar.com/lifestyle/arts-and-culture/2002/12/02/186314/general-gregorio-del-pilar-philippine-painting-sculpture/ (The same image and narrative are also committed to sculpture. The likeness of Gregorio Del Pilar was executed in 2000 into an equestrian statue by history sculptor Apolinario Paraiso Bulaong. ........ Aside from this equestrian statue and numerous bust portraits of Del Pilar, Bulaong also executed in 2001 a relief sculpture depicting the battle at Tirad Pass. The sculptural mural is installed at the plaza of Bulacan, Bulacan, where Del Pilar came from.)

• pls also look at photos under the groups at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Monuments_and_memorials_to_Gregorio_del_Pilar and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Heroesbsu33jf.JPG most esp https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Gregorio_del_Pilar_Monument_in_Bulacan,_Bulacan

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Francisco_C._Baltazar_(Balagtas)_Monument-Marker_in_Pagasa-Wawa_(Poblacion),_Orion,_Bataan - https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1030605 (The statue made by world-renowned sculptor Julie Lluch was installed in Wawa in 2014.)

• Also pls look at some photos at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Francisco_Balagtas plus some groups at that category.

• Statues and or sculptures listed at https://www.triposo.com/poi/T__95d60dc5b826

(Meaning: Structure Provenance Site Location Artist)

1. Gat Francisco Balagtas Marble Bust 1950 Malolos Plaza and Rotounda Guillermo Tolentino,National Artist
2. Bronze Statue of Emilio Aguinaldo 1950 Barasoain Church Plaza, Malolos City Antonio Caedo,pre-National Artist
3. Gen.Isidoro Torres Monument 1950 Plaza Torres, Malolos Market n/a
4. President Ramon Magsaysay 1960 Bulacan Capitol Compound, Malolos
5. General Gregorio del Pilar 1950 Bulacan Capitol Plaza, Malolos n/a

• Capitol bldg photos at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Isulan,_Sultan_Kudarat - https://www.mindanews.com/c3-news/2006/11/sultan-kudarats-new-capitol-inaugurated/ (completed 2006)

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:San_Leonardo,_Nueva_Ecija_Map_and_Landmark (although owned by the government, the LGU is not obliged to force the creators to withdraw their moral rights to them whether architecture or sculptures, and this is reinforced in the new copyright rules for government works)

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:New_Washington,_Aklan - monument to the late Cardinal Sin - https://www.tripadvisor.com.ph/Attraction_Review-g10604034-d14774024-Reviews-Jaime_Cardinal_Sin_Monument-New_Washington_Aklan_Province_Panay_Island_Visayas.html#REVIEWS

• Photos of the sculpture of Rizal at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Dapitan reason: https://www.lakadpilipinas.com/2012/11/dapitan-city-rizal-landing-site-at.html?m=1 (The sculpture was conceptualized by Antonio Tuviera and was executed by Manuel Tolentino. The monument consists of five figures, including the three artillery escorts seemingly loading off from a small boat and the Spanish Captain on Rizal’s right side. It was opened to the public, 117 years after the actual event.)

Another one is unfortunately https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Malaca%C3%B1ang_Palace

Even in your wiki entry it says it underwent extensive renovations, and under the Marcos admin "The old Palace was gutted almost entirely, not only to meet the needs of the Presidential Family, but also because the buildings had been weakened by patch up renovations over a century that had resulted in unstable floors and leaking roofs. The building is now made of poured concrete, concrete slabs, steel girders and trusses, all concealed under elegant hardwood floors, panels and ceilings. It is fully bullet-proofed, cooled by central air-conditioning with filters, and has an independent power supply. Architect Jorge Ramos oversaw the reconstruction, which was closely supervised by Mrs. Marcos. The refurbished Palace was inaugurated on May 1, 1979–the Marcos' silver wedding anniversary." It indicates it is not the same bldg as the spanish or american era which was mainly made of wood. Can you check when Jorge Ramos died @Multichill: ¿ Mrcl lxmna (talk) 07:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Your nominations may very well be correct. However, it is disruptive to continue mass-nominating them while discussions about this entire class of images are ongoing. Otherwise, we have to repeat the same debate across dozens of different pages. Kaldari (talk) 18:49, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok @Kaldari: . Im gonna stop for a while. But im always concerned about the tendency of those photos bearing copyrighted structures and works of art, most esp post 1970s or those from artists who were still alive from 1970 today - in a country that only allows fair use for photos of their bldgs sculptures and other works of art. I can still remember a facebook comment saying that philippine rules cannot be applied on wikimedia becuase both have 'different house rules' on copyright. Thats what my main point of my deletion requests. And if Wikimedia Commons discourages fair use, then hundreds of phil. Photos depicting their copyrighted architecture and artworks are not ok. ====

@Multichill: This user cannot stop, please see this edit just 8 minutes ago.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 17:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

• (My midnight thoughts out of no FOP in the Philippines frustration) It seems you are a "disciple" or follower of Yuraily Lic! I can notice your DR's nearly similar to their's, and Yuraily had an issue similar to yours at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 79#Yuraily Lic, mass tagging and nominating copyrighted buildings and artworks for no FOP reasons with little or no evidences (other than links to Commons pages). Just my thoughts only. BTW, you seem to have some luck today, as the latest (as of today) copyright-related webinars in our country — the October 30, 2020 FB Live webinar of the Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution (OADR) (in which important people from IPOPHL were among its principal guests) — has no mention of FoP, de minimis or whatsoever. But nevertheless, our call and advocacy for full FOP in the Philippines continues, albeit intermittently now. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Jwilz, my responses are:

1. First of all im not a so callef duplicate account. I happen to be a person who knows the intricacies of http environments, and wiki seems a newbie friendly environment. Accusing me as an alter ego is a ground for what the judge Floro called cybercrime and cyberbullying. But my actions are not equiv. To cybercrime, but to uphold the copyright respect in the philippines as a steward of copyright. You are aware of a few complaints from some artists who saw their artworks being hosted here, with very light licensing that might make them defenseless against copyright infringements.

And number 2. Your statement and a facebook video that you sent proves there is not much need of freedom of panorama discussion on ANY wikimedia talk pages or the like. The IPOPHL may be thinking of applying the freedom of panorama to REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8293, but what you said means it is not an urgent or important matter. It doesnt give additional benefits on copyright or economic + moral rights to architects, designers, painters, and those in the artists in any way. So i doubt freedom of pano may not materialise in the philippines, a country that i see has very full respect and importance in their arts and culture, for a forseeable period of time. Freedom of pano concept is a Western concept anyway, and i have high doubts filipino artists community will ever welcome that, and if they did a welcome that freedom of panorama will be a truncated provision that only few works of art will be given such freedom of panorama privilege Mrcl lxmna (talk)

• Soon in this future, as well within no WP:FOP. that will be have a nomination. for a future blocks. Aichi Message me 13:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

• Artists can submit copyright strikedowns themselves, if it is that controversial for you then why the mass disruptive editing? You even strike down government owned buildings. PyroFloe (talk) 01:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion requests again

You're still petitioning to remove our contributions of quality images of what you call "Copyrighted Philippines". I see that your sole purpose here is to police private ownership rights of owners of buildings or structures too much by means of this kind of all-out censorship. Even government-owned buildings (CCP Theater, PUP campus, etc.) and also infrastructure (like what you did to pictures of LRT stations in Commons) have been also targeted. I repeat, what you're doing here in Wikimedia is very unpatriotic, and it also counters the promotion of Philippine tourism and culture. Many people and groups who make content, such as students, creative editors and mainstream media firms, are also losing reliable sources of freely-licensed landscapes because of your "unfree panorama" removal requests, especially lots of photos of the Philippines outside Wikimedia/Wikipedia may not be used in content projects without consent of respective authors or website owners because those are their private property [copyright-protected]. Now is my time to know what kind of a person you are (lawyer, law expert, tourism officer, photographer, etc.; but without telling your name), please answer mu question: if your actions are either backed or approved by the government's Intellectual Property Office (IPOPHIL) and owners/managements of buildings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrickroque01 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Patrickroque1, you are wrong in notion of copyright. Copyright is protected by architects, sculptors and the creators of the buildings, monuments, etc.. You dont have permissions from them when you take pictures of those and license them in commercial licenses which endangers the income of architects, sculptors, their families, kins, or companies. I dont have the right to expose myself to the point you will cyberbully me. The proper avenue is IPOPHIL and the congress. Why dont you exert effort in urging the congress and the senate to pass a law that legalizes commercial exploitations of you and all wikipedians pictures of buildings and sculptures by architects and sculptors who are living or 50 years deceased? The deletion requests are not censorships. Im only protecting the economic and moral rights of the architects, sculptors and their families - their heirs - from economic exploitations of their hardworked works that is made possible by images from you and your fellow wikipedians with commercial licensing.

@Patrickroque01: I've now less active here and on the other wikis, but I would have to agree with having to delete a lot of our photos of recent Philippine works of art (we can have local copies of such uploaded in our other projects for convenience until the Intellectual Property Code amendment with the FOP provision comes into force sometime - maybe no later than 2021 or 2022). That said, I don’t tolerate this kind of zealotry, whether you're a photographer, lawyer, or just a self-declared intellectual property police who knows what the IP Code (as of now) says. With the exception of those done under fair use (such as those used in textbooks), I'm still wondering why we do have photos of them elsewhere in the Net, especially at FB.-TagaSanPedroAko (Talk) 19:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

@TagaSanPedroAko: I am also hoping for the passage of the amended copyright law as soonnas possible. Using this search page of HOR, entering 8620 (for House Bill 8620, which contains the FOP provision) and going to the 18th Congress yields the bill's details, and the status is "Pending with the Committee on TRADE AND INDUSTRY since 2021-02-08."

Local copies may be possible, but Patrickroque01 was once notified by NickW557 over his highly numerous local images of copyrighted Philippine architecture. While enwiki only respects U.S. law (and can host unfree buildings worldwide via US FOP), enwiki is not supposed to be an indefinite host of images that are mainly unused on Wikipedia articles (Wikimedia Commons assumes the role of an image repository). That's why there are only four images of Burj Khalifa on enwiki and a single, heavily-used image of Dubai's Burj al Arab. So if local transfer warrants, maybe less than half are eligible for local transfer to enwiki. Or maybe none because Patrickroque01 has already provided images of unfree buildings there.

There's also another caveat, and I only knew it last year. While English Wikipedia accepts images of unfree artworks like national monuments, these images must be treated as non-free images subject to usages of NFUR description boxes and a non free license tag (w:Template:Non-free 3D art), even if these are uploaders' self-photographed images. Enwiki uses U.S. FOP, which does not extend to artworks. If the images contain uploader's commercial CC licenses, then w:Template:Photo of art is used. See the image of w:Bonifacio Shrine as an example. And since unfree, these must be used or otherwise be deleted as "unused non-free files for 7 days". This also means, it is not allowed to host high quality or original (full) resolution images of such works.

I don't know the standards on Tagalog Wikipedia, if they apply U.S. law or Philippine law (maybe latter, which is why a sole image of Burj Khalifa there is under fair use tag). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:27, 11 June 2021 (UTC)