Talk:Liana Alexandra

Notability

Alexandra is the recipient of multiple awards and honors. Her music has been recorded and issued on CD. Pkeets (talk) 02:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree - notability has clearly been established by the number of awards alone. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, two things?...

was married to Şerban Nichifor, and composed in all 7 symphonies (at least according to Women of Note at Oboeclassics.com, not just 2. Schissel | Sound the Note! 00:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Her last interview

Does this really have any encyclopedic value: "In her will video, and in her last interview (November 2010) Liana Alexandra said: I am deeply disappointed by the wickedness of my Romanian colleagues, the Romanian composers.. I did not imagine that I could meet some evils - the envy of my Romanian colleagues - so large that they pay them with my life, physically..."?--Mycomp (talk) 13:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

against the vandalism and the anti-semitism of "Biruitorul"--92.80.82.79 (talk) 06:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done: {{edit protected}} is not required for edits to unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. You can just edit it yourself. Also, it's not very clear what you mean in your request - if you can be more specific then I may be able to help you better. Regards — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 11:05, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I've just looked at the page history, so I see you are talking about User:Biruitorul. Two things - first, this is a content dispute, and it doesn't qualify as vandalism. You might want to read our definition at Wikipedia:Vandalism to see why. To resolve this dispute, you need to talk about it with Bitruitorul on this talk page and try and come to a consensus on what to do. If that fails - but not before - you can take the dispute to the dispute resolution noticeboard. Second, you need to read our policy Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Calling someone "anti-semitic" with no supporting evidence counts as a personal attack, and if you keep doing it you might end up being blocked. So you will probably want to be careful about that. Let me know if there is anything else you want to know. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 11:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Let me just make a couple of things clear. This is a tribute page, not a reliable source. At first glance, this looks a little better, only it's from a self-published online directory, and not really quotable here.

Now, to the second issue. The IP user had placed a wall of diplomas in the article, which I then combined into a Commons category and linked to that. I don't believe the Israeli prize is worth keeping - it's from a group no one's heard of.

And I'm sorry, but removing a photo of a random piece of paper that happens to be from Israel does not make one an "anti-Semite". Do you think removing a picture of a Polish award would make one "anti-Polish", or of a Danish award would imply being "anti-Danish"? If you find this offensive (or at least claim to), I wonder how you'd react if I said Israel is a flagrant, belligerent violator of international law that has maintained an illegal occupation for 45 years, where it practices ethnic cleansing, illegal settlement building and virtual apartheid; that it regularly and mercilessly bombs Palestinian civilians; that it's keeping 1.6 million Gazans prisoners, deliberately at subsistence level; that its current government has no interest in implementing a peace deal, etc. Of course, these are fairly common criticisms today of a country that's becoming ever harder to defend. Anyway, just stick to policy-based comments in the future and don't go making inflammatory accusations, please.

Same with the absurd "vandalism" charge - you don't throw that around lightly, and it's meaningless here. - Biruitorul ^Talk 15:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The Anti-Israeli slanders demonstrates the anti-Semitic attitudes of the Romanian user “Biruitorul”.--109.96.155.251 (talk) 18:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The award was given by ACMEOR - World Cultural Association of Jews emigrated from Romania - an institution of major importance.--109.96.155.251 (talk) 19:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

We're not here to litigate the Arab-Israeli conflict, but that kind of attitude is not working too well for the Jewish state, is it? As the recent vote on Palestine at the UN showed, its allies are down to America, a couple others, and the all-important Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru and Palau. It faces a very clear choice: dismantle the illegal settlements by standing up to the increasingly powerful lobby of settler fanatics; engage seriously for a peace deal (i.e., stop pretending to want peace while doing nothing to advance it); end the devastating blockades, ethnic cleansing and misery it imposes on the Palestinian people; provide full civil rights for all individuals under its sovereignty, whatever its final borders are. These are not "slurs", but easily verifiable facts that shape mainstream opinion. Or it can continue down the present path, cease entirely to be a democracy, and become about as isolated internationally as South Africa circa 1988 - and we know what happened to that regime very soon.
Now, on to the main subject. The two links you've inserted simply do not qualify as reliable sources under any meaningful definition, so please do stop inserting them unless you can somehow justify doing so.
And I'm sorry, but no one has heard of ACMEOR. Where are the independent sources discussing this group of allegedly "major importance"? Please show them, and then perhaps we can reconsider, although I'm still quite sure the scan belongs on Commons alone. - Biruitorul ^Talk 23:02, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

ACMEOR - The World Cultural Association of Native Jews Of Romania - is a Jewish institution of major importance - relevant independent surcces: The Romanian Jewish Community - http://www.romanianjewish.org/en/mosteniri_ale_culturii_iudaice_07_01.html , and the Press -http://www.asiiromani.com/sens-giratoriu/6743-acmeor-punte-de-legtur-intre-evreii-originari-din-romania-rspandii-in-lume.html .--92.80.93.136 (talk) 08:36, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism - Edit request

Vandalism: the relevant links of Vox Novus New York City deleted abusively by the Romanian Biruitorul: --Phorion (talk) 09:40, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

 Not done This is not the place to request page protection, see WP:RFPP. TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 10:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

References

Vox Novus and the other

All right, let's go through this again. This page is a vanity directory, self-published, including notable and non-notable figures alike. It is not quotable here, per WP:SPS. Clear?

This page is a promotional self-submitted tribute. (See here for how the listing was achieved.) "With my very dear wife LIANA ALEXANDRA, Brilliant Composer !!!"? Sorry, but that's a husband's lament, not a serious scholarly work. Again, I hope it's clear it has no place being quoted in an encyclopedia, per WP:RS. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:10, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Original article

Given the disagreements, I'm going to paste in the original article, which has the advantage of strong references, a list of selected compositions, etc. I'm sure that will take care of some of the problems. Pkeets (talk) 18:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I gather from the discussion that Liana Alexandra might be a Jewish composer? If there is a reference indicating that, the category can be added to the article. Can anyone point one out? Pkeets (talk) 18:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Liana Alexandra is Jewish composer.--Phorion (talk) 19:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you consider this and this to be "strong references"? Pretty much everything in that version is unsourced.

I have no idea of what connection she may have had to Judaism. I've seen no reliable sources comment on that aspect. - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LianaAlexandra_ACMEOR_Prize_Israel1998.jpg>--Phorion (talk) 20:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

@ Biruitorul - You manifest bad faith.--Phorion (talk) 20:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Stop it!

No more edit warring, please. Discuss it. Calmly and civilly, without getting off topic, and with no more reverts. CarrieVS (talk) 21:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Right. I prefer a version drawn from Grove because it's a reliable source and all that. This isn't, this isn't, this is probably disallowed under WP:ELNO, the works and prizes are unsourced, etc, etc. Do we really need spend much more time defending the mess that is the current version?

And she's not a Jewish composer until we find a source saying as much. - Biruitorul ^Talk 22:57, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• This page is NOT a promotional self-submitted tribute; *This page is a reliable source and NOT a promotional self-submitted tribute; * other reliable sources ((among very many sources): <http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n83194292.html> , <http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Lib/Alexandra-Liana.htm>, <http://www.unmb.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Liana-Alexandra-Moraru.pdf>, <http://www.last.fm/music/Liana+Alexandra>,

<http://cimro.ro/liana-alexandra/>, <http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-cultura-8197487-murit-compozitoarea-liana-alexandra.htm>, <http://www.certosaverlag.de/komponistin.php?c=232>, <http://www.klassika.info/Komponisten/Alexandra_Liana/index.html>, <https://portal.dnb.de/resolver.htm?referrerResultId=idn%3D1025526031%26any&referrerPosition=0&identifier=134933753>, <http://www.electroblogro.com/2012/03/biografiidiscografii-liana-alexandra-si.html>...--Phorion (talk) 04:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

"LIANA ALEXANDRA [Z. L.]" by Iulia Deleanu, Revista REALITATEA EVREIASCA, Publicație a Federaţiei Comunităţilor Evreieşti din România, Anul LV, Nr.354-355 (1154-1155), 1- 31 Ianuarie 2011, 25 TEVET, 26 SVAT 5771, page 20 <http://www.jewishfed.ro/fcer/public_html/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=594:realitatea-evreiasca-nr-354-355&catid=87:realitatea-evreiasca&Itemid=123>--Phorion (talk) 04:59, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

@ Biruitorul: "I prefer..." - You prefer? But who are you? You are in connection with this?--Phorion (talk) 05:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't doubt the subject is notable per our standards, but the only vaguely reliable and quotable sources of the ones you've pointed out are this and this.

The Realitatea Evreiasca piece is a bit frustrating: it doesn't actually come out and say she was Jewish, but I suppose it comes close enough for our purposes.

Sorry, but I've described Vox Novus and romania-on-line.net for what they are, and I intend to restore a version that is properly sourced to reliable sources, non-promotional and free of self-published fluff.

Please adhere to WP:3RR, or you will be blocked. Please also be mindful of WP:CIV and WP:NPA. And try to brush up on WP:RS and WP:V as well.

If I am a spy, I wouldn't admit it, would I? - Biruitorul ^Talk 06:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

@ Biruitorul:

• 1. I apply WP:3RR, WP:CIV, WP:NPA, WP:RS and WP:V - but you do not apply these regulations. You threaten me? OK, block me and report to your superiors:"Mission Accomplished".

• 2. You have made ​​the article <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Stratan>, based exclusively (NB) on promotional self-submitted sources: <http://www.cat-music.ro/home.php?identifier=stratan>. Why you're not objective and fair? Please adhere to WP:3RR. Please also be mindful of WP:CIV and WP:NPA. And try to brush up on WP:RS and WP:V as well.--Phorion (talk) 07:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

From this moment I will not interfere. I ask the Wikipedia community to solve the case. I have every confidence in the democratic spirit and fairness of the Wikipedia community.--Phorion (talk) 08:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

We need to go with the version drawn from Grove. That is the standard for composers. Without the Grove reference, the article will eventually be nominated for deletion because the current version shows no evidence of notability. As is, it reads like a puff piece for someone with no real accomplishments. The original article contains the elements that show notability. Revisions of the article need to take this into account, or else there will be no article to argue about. Pkeets (talk) 05:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• THE NEW GROVE DICTIONARY OF MUSIC AND MUSICIANS, Second Edition, British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data ISBN 0-333-60800-3, Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data ISBN 1-56159-239-0, Edited by Stanley Sadie / Executive Editor John Tyrrell, VOLUME 1 (A to Aristotle), the article “Alexandra, Liana (Moraru)”, pages 358-359.

• Faithfully Yours, Serban Nichifor,PhD - a.k.a.--Newconsonance (talk) 08:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• LIANA ALEXANDRA: “Musical Composition – an ineffable act between fantasy and arithmetrical and geometrical rigor”; Author: Liana Alexandra; Publisher: Editura Universităţii Naţionale de Muzică Bucureşti, 2005; ISBN-10: 973785702X, ISBN-13: 9789737857026 - <http://www.scribd.com/doc/122756605/LIANA-ALEXANDRA-Musical-Composition-%E2%80%93-an-ineffable-act-between-fantasy-and-arithmetrical-and-geometrical-rigor>
• Serban Nichifor,PhD - --Newconsonance (talk) 11:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

What exactly do you want to add? The fact that Liana Alexandra wrote that book? I think that would be ok, and I would think the book itself can be cited as a source for that.

The Grove Dictionary seems to be a reliable source as far as I can tell, but what do you want to use it as a source for? CarrieVS (talk) 12:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Grove is the gold standard for notability for women composers. Without that, she doesn't meet the standard for notability. There's very little to be found about her in other references, and the article will be challenged. Pkeets (talk) 05:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I said I'd detach myself from this discussion, but Pkeets, what on earth are you talking about? Have you taken the trouble to actually look at the article as it exists now? Aside from the reference to her Jewish background, and to the Vox Novus site which is not actually cited, is a promotional or memorial piece, and needs to be dropped, the whole article is drawn from Grove—Grove Music Online, to be precise. So please, I really don't know what you mean when you say we "need to go with the version drawn from Grove", when we have such a version, and a coherent one, right now.

If it's exactly taken from the Grove online, then it's a copyright infringement and a candidate for speedy deletion--it needs to be removed immediately. What I'm talking about is the original article, which I recently pasted back in and added a bit to, and which was reverted in favor of the current version. The original article referenced the printed Grove for the biographical details, and also listed evidence of notability including compositions, recordings and awards. Did anyone actually read the version I put up? Check back through the history for it. Pkeets (talk) 05:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

As for a bibliography, sure, go ahead and add one, but preferably without links to the copyvio site scribd.com. - Biruitorul ^Talk 15:06, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Biruitorul, the standard for notability for composers includes elements I've listed above, including compositions, recordings, awards, international play of the music, etc. If one solid reference is provided, then less stringent references do not make the article a puff piece. Please have a look at the article you reverted again. It's a considerable improvement over a nomination for speedy deletion. Pkeets (talk) 05:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I proposed her book. However you decide! I'm her husband and I do not want to break the rules. I will limit my interventions - exclusively in order to proposing on this talk page.--Newconsonance (talk) 16:44, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

About the tragic fate of Liana Alexandra, an important woman composer:

• The Video Testament of Liana Alexandra: [1]
• Serban Nichifor: ”Liana Alexandra: confesions about her music”

[2]

• Sincerely yours, Serban Nichifor,PhD--Newconsonance (talk) 17:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Compared to the accomplishments of other women composers, she's not that important. The article in Wikipedia needs to meet standards in order to stay in the system. Please keep that in mind when making additions to the article. Pkeets (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Two new links confirming the existence of the article "Liana Alexandra" in Grove: 1.The Europeana Foundation; 2.The contemporary music portal--Newconsonance (talk) 07:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The printed article "Liana Alexandra" in Grove (proof - only for Talk): [3]. This resource is available on-site here for any institution subscribing to the Grove Music Online.--Newconsonance (talk) 08:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Liana Alexandra - compositions, recordings, awards, reviews: Romania On Line - this is an official website.--Newconsonance (talk) 08:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

To Pkeets - Please compare with the references of other women composers – for example Doina Rotaru, Irina Odagescu, Grażyna Pstrokońska-Nawratil, Maia Ciobanu and so on – in order to apply consistently the Wikipedia standards. Serban Nichifor,PhD--Newconsonance (talk) 09:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Rotaru currently has no references and so is at risk of deletion. Do you notice who wrote those other articles? I'm not disputing that Alexandra should have an entry in Wikipedia. What I'm saying is that if her article is taken from the online Grove entry with the same or even very similar wording, then it is a copyright violation and needs a different wording or structure or it will be deleted. Period. The current revision has replaced another article which had more information and did not violate the Grove copyright. I'm recommending we put a revision of that back in place of this one. You can make additions or add references to it as long as you leave Grove as a source. Pkeets (talk) 13:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

To Pkeets - Dear Sir, I thank you for your recommendations! In this direction, Romania On Line is an official Romanian website, and this source contains her principal compositions (a very important aspect for a composer biography !), her international awards, eloquent reviews... In my opinion this source - corresponding to the Wikipedia standards - is a relevant reference for the article "Liana Alexandra". Faithfully yours, Serban Nichifor--Newconsonance (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but what exactly do you mean by "official website"? The site is, as far as I can tell, run by a private individual with no editorial oversight, featuring user-submitted biographies that are subjected to no particular scrutiny. Its material is not up to our normal standards. - Biruitorul ^Talk 16:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

To Pkeets - Dear Sir, I ask you to insert the Copyviocore also on Serban Nichifor.--Newconsonance (talk) 17:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Copyright review

I'm trying to look into the copyright allegations, but I'm a little lost. Someone posted a claimed excerpt from at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2013 January 30, however, the posting of copyrighted material isn't permitted, so I removed it. Before removing it, I compared it to this:

• Julie Anne Sadie; Rhian Samuel (1994). The New Grove Dictionary of Women Composers. W. W. Norton & Company. pp. 8–. ISBN 978-0-393-03487-5. Retrieved 22 March 2013.

and it doesn't match. Perhaps there are different editions, and the one I found is different that the one quoted?

The material at the link above doesn't match the text at the most recent version of the article. While matching is the right metric, as we disallow close paraphrasing,a s well as pure copy-paste, I'm not seeing that there is a violation. There is some overlap, as there almost has to be when writing a biography of a composer, and comparing it to a biography of the composer. The name of the school will match, and who she studied with, etc. If someone wants to identify something I'm missing please do so, but I'm not seeing a problem with the current wording, again subject to the possibility that I'm looking at the wrong edition.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:05, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

As I understand it, the suspected infringement is against the online article. Both the online Grove article and the disputed Wikipedia article can be found in the history of the complaint here. I personally think it is too close. The writer of the current article version attributed some of the wording with a quote, but not other wording which matches exactly. There are additional sources that can be used to provide a broader article, and it's an infringement to restate the Grove article in such close paraphrase. Pkeets (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

What needed to be quoted was quoted. What didn't, wasn't. "She studied composition at the Bucharest Academy of Music (1965–71) with Tudor Ciortea and Tiberiu Olah" was rendered as "she studied composition at the city's Music Academy from 1965 to 1971 under Tudor Ciortea and Tiberiu Olah" because, well, there are only so many ways of saying that, and while Grove may have a copyright on the wording, it does not have one on the facts. I did my best to avoid lifting anything directly, but really, let's not lose any more sleep over this non-issue.

And no, those "additional sources" don't really exist - neither this nor this nor this comes close to meeting the standards set by WP:RS, only the brief mention in Grove, and if we strayed much further from the original, we would veer into original research. - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:29, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The problems that develop with using only one source are what you pointed out - there are few ways to restate the information. Use of the same words in the current article, such as "minimalist" and "mathematical" tends to magnify the problems with the article. According to Wikipedia guidelines, once notability is established and one or two solid sources are provided, then less stringent criteria can be applied to other article sources. Pkeets (talk) 03:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

You keep making this assertion, but can you quote anything to back it up? Does WP:RS really say "find one acceptable source, but then you can go ahead and use any self-published/promotional/commercial fluff you want"? I kind of doubt it, and will continue doubting it until you produce some evidence. - Biruitorul ^Talk 18:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I would still like someone to address the question I asked: why does the text at the online link to Grove not match the text quoted in the copyright problem page? I'd like to resolve this, and maybe someone else will, but I cannot without getting an answer.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 01:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

The link you pointed out is to a scan of an old print edition of Grove, not to the current online article, which is only available by subscription. Is that the answer you're looking for? Pkeets (talk) 03:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

To Biruitorul in Romanian: daca toti agentii SRI - http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serviciul_Rom%C3%A2n_de_Informa%C8%9Bii - sunt la fel de stupizi ca tine, "Biruitorule", vai de Romania ! Ce ai realizat blocand aceasta pagina a unei mari compozitoare ? Pe cine ai "biruit" ? Ti-au dat un grad in plus ? --92.80.108.156 (talk) 20:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

To Biruitorul: if all agents of the SRI - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Intelligence_Service - are as stupid as you, "Biruitorul", woe to Romania! What you have done a great blocking this page of a great Romanian composer very appreciated in Israel and in USA? Now you have received a higher grade from SRI?--92.80.108.156 (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm unable to continue this review. I do not have access to the online version, so I cannot properly do the comparison. It will have to wait until someone with online access and an interested in copyright review can take a look at it.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Copyright and other issues

Copyright problems clerk here. I've restructured and rewritten this article. The copyright violation was allegedly from Grove Music Online. However, while there is some perhaps overly close paraphrasing in places, it was not in my view at the level of a copyright violation. Hence, I will be re-adding some of that material. I've also referenced this article to several highly reliable sources. She quite clearly passes the notability criteria for Wikipedia. It can be further built up again using the sources I've added. I would ask that future additions be referenced to these sources or ones of equal value and independent of the article's subject. The Romania-on-line article is not independent. Ditto Who's Who in Classical Music. I've seen an awful lot of needless acrimony and baseless accusations and personal attacks on this page. I hope this will cease and that you will all remember that this is an encyclopedia article and should be written as one—dispassionately, neutrally, and with meticulous referencing. I'll be keeping an eye on this article in future. Voceditenore (talk) 17:53, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liana Alexandra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.jewishfed.ro/fcer/public_html/downloads/realitatea/RE354-355.pdf
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130705223154/http://www.bucurestifm.ro/volum_de_marturii_dedicat_compozitoarei_liana_alexandra-7734 to http://www.bucurestifm.ro/volum_de_marturii_dedicat_compozitoarei_liana_alexandra-7734

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Symphony 9

1970 makes little sense. IMSLP has the manuscript and has 1990 rev 2008; also as a revision of the symphonic poem Ierusalem of 1990, 1990 rev 2008 makes more sense than 1970- what is good evidence for 1970? Not parrotence, but good evidence Schissel | Sound the Note! 05:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)