Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:25, 28 February 2022

Welcome to the miscellaneous section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/M

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

February 21

Foreign correspondents of media

If New York Times, Washington Post, BBC, CNN has local journalists working for them in Japan, then who decides, which news to cover among multiple news?

Let's say in Yokohama 5 people died, while in Kyoto 3 people were injured, and both news got coverage in Japanese newspapers. But CNN gives coverage to injury cases, not death cases. It can be assumed that the local correspondent is well aware of both cases.

Or say- A tweet by some Nigerian politician got coverage in Washington Post than terrorists killing 65 people in Nigeria.

So, are local correspondents staying in Japan, Nigeria responsible for this, or their boss sitting in New York, Washington took the decision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.105.0.163 (talk) 08:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A news editor’s general duties include choosing news items to be covered and assigning the articles to other writers. [1] Alansplodge (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, the correspondent on the ground makes a pre-selection; an editor sitting far away at their desk in NYC or Washington DC cannot possibly be aware of all potential news items in Japan and Nigeria. Even when a correspondent files a story as agreed, the news editor may still kill it to make room for other breaking news. --Lambiam 17:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regional news offices are traditionally called "bureaus" and are headed by a bureau chief. They will typically make the decision on what to research, cover, and write about. Different news organizations will use different terminology, but will likely have similar roles under different titles. For example, NPR, a news network I frequently use, has "senior correspondents" that act as bureau chiefs. These include Sylvia Poggioli (Rome), Soraya Sarhaddi Nelson (Berlin), Ofeibea Quist-Arcton (Dakar), etc. Once a story has been submitted, decisions on how and when to use such stories typically fall under the role of the editors, for print media, and producers, on radio and television, as managed by the news director. A good historical perspective on this is the film All The President's Men, which shows how newsrooms generally run; there are several scenes showing the editorial staff discussing what stories to publish, and not. --Jayron 32 18:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 22

Camp names for Camp 9-15 for Italian Wars of Prisoners in India from Second World War - urgent help needed

There was a camp at Sihore district in village DELAWADI (ABOUT 45 KM FROM BHOPAL), Madhya Pradesh, India. It housed Italian Prisoners of Wars (POWs) of Second World War for a few years.

After searching and speaking to British Library I managed the find that the ‘Camp number 9-16 housed Italian Prisoners of Wars’ in Bhopal, In India, but there is no information on camp number 9-15. We know that camp number 16 was hospital in Bhopal.

The Wikipedia confirms the above - https://wiki.fibis.org/enwiki/w/POW_Camps_in_India

I would be grateful if someone from the community can help or direct me in the right direction to obtain the answer to below question:

'''camp names and/or location for camps 9-15 within Bhopal or which camp number represents the camp at Sihore district in village DELAWADI (ABOUT 45 KM FROM BHOPAL), Madhya Pradesh, India.'''

I look forward to receiving the community support on the above.

Yours Sincerely — Preceding unsigned comment added by IOW63 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an answer for you I'm afraid, but I just wanted to point out that the link you posted above is not from Wikipedia. Rather, it's from a wiki maintained by an organization called the Families in British India Society. It just looks like Wikipedia as it uses the same software. Good luck in your search. --Viennese Waltz 11:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article describes the camp in question, the last photograph has an old sign in Hindi (?) which may help, but I haven't been able to find any information about numbering or the location of other camps in the area. Alansplodge (talk) 11:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I hope someone from the community know something or direct me in the right direction. It seems to be a nightmare to get the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IOW63 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Karsten Creek Drive, Five Forks, SC

I am doing some research on Scuffletown Road in Five Forks, SC. Karsten Creek Drive is connected to Scuffletown Road. There are many creeks in the area with roads named after the creek. However, I can't find any reference to a creek named Karsten. I'm trying to find the source of that name. There is a water runoff alongside the road, but it did not exist until the housing development was created. It is just a water collection route. I've asked the reference desk here and looked at maps of the area in the reference area, but I haven't found anything.97.82.165.112 (talk) 15:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This topographic map and the OpenStreetMap show an unnamed watercourse intersecting Scuffletown Road very near Karsten Creek Drive and flowing southward into Gilder Creek. The Geographic Names Information System has nothing for a Karsten Creek in South Carolina, but it's possible that that watercourse is–or was, if it no longer exists because of the development in the area—locally known as Karsten Creek. Not much of an answer, I know. One possibility would be to contact the company that developed that subdivision (it's usually the developer that comes up with the street names) and ask them for the source of the name of Karsten Creek Drive. Deor (talk) 16:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I just missed him. The roads in that subdivision are named after popular golf courses. I wonder if the reference desk is directing people to this reference desk. If so, there needs to be a way to relay the answers back. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 16:35, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would be This golf course in Oklahoma. --Jayron 32 20:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2-22-22=Tuesday

Today, 2-22-22 (in month-day-(two-digit year) format without leading zeroes) consists of all twos (hence "Twosday") but also happens to be a Tuesday. Well, what a coincidence!

In the next nine centuries (still in the same millennium), February 22 will be on a Sunday, Friday, Wednesday, Tuesday, Sunday, Friday, Wednesday, Tuesday, and Sunday in 2122, 2222, 2322, 2422, 2522, 2622, 2722, 2822, and 2922 respectively. The day of the week goes back one day from the previous century for 2422 and 2822 because 2400 and 2800 (divisible by 400) are leap years, while the day of the week goes back two days from the previous century for the other years because 2100, 2200, 2300, 2500, 2600, 2700, and 2900 (century years not divisible by 400) are not leap years. Clearly, the Gregorian calendar repeats every 400 years, so the next "Tuesday, 2-22-22" would of course be in 2422.

The year 2222 will be even more special considering that all four digits of the year are twos, but the day of the week for 2-22-2222 is not Tuesday, but Friday.

So, is this "Twosday=Tuesday" situation really special? There is even an existing draft for the special day at Draft:Twosday.

GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Using the current rules for leap year, 2/2/22 falls on a Tuesday in the years 1222, 1622, 2022, 2422, 2822, 3222, 2622, 4022, 4422, 4822, 5222, 5622, 6022, 6422, 6822, 7222, 7622, 8022, 8422, 8822, 9222, 9622... every 400 years. So, if you consider the average person can experience approximately 100 years of dates, that means that only 25% of the population will ever experience 2/2/22 on a Tuesday. Of course, most people don't live to 100 and as you go back in time, it was far less than it is today. So, I'd ballpark it around 20% of the population. Today, right now, it is 100% of the population. But, everyone born between tomorrow and about 2/22/2322 won't experience one. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 16:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"everyone born between tomorrow and about 2/22/2322 won't experience one" (emphasis added) statement seems flawed to me. While most people don't live to 100, some people do. Indeed nowadays centenarian is the sort of thing which while fairly unusual isn't so rare to be shocking, our article says 'In 2012, the United Nations estimated that there were 316,600 living centenarians worldwide.' and 'According to the UK ONS, one-third of babies born in 2013 in the UK are expected to live to 100.' both sourced and I verified the second [2]. At least to me, "about" doesn't save this statement, while death rates are fairly high at that age, it's not like in 2 years they're all dead. (E.g. our article also mentions how at least two countries send congratulations at 100 but only start yearly at 105.) Based on how things are at the moment, a reasonable cut off where we can much more safely say "everyone" is 125 years, since it's generally accepted the oldest verified age is Jeanne Calment's 122 years and 164 days, and she's also the only person who we can say with some degree of confidence lived past 120 years List of the verified oldest people. Maximum life span suggests an absolute maximum of 150 or maybe 160 is probably safe barring major medical breakthroughs or other weird things like brain "transfers" and arguably extreme high speed travel (since while this won't increase lifespan, it may allow someone born on 2297 to be alive when it's 2422 on earth). Likely by the time of e.g. 2296 we'll have a better idea of whether we can still safely say, to someone sorry but there's almost no chance you're going to see 2422. Nil Einne (talk) 01:49, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Constructions like "everyone will not..." are often used to mean "not everyone will...", not "no one will." --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Compare "All that glitters is not gold". --Lambiam 10:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Old scoreboard Hampden Park, Glasgow

Hi, looking at this scoreboard you can see that there was enough space to put just the teams and the score with the minute of play on it. The match in question is the 2002 Champions League final between Real Madrid and Bayer Leverkusen in Glasgow. The question is this: Three goals were scored in this match; is it possible that when the goals were scored, only then did the names of the scorers appear on the scoreboard for a moment? Thank you very much. [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.41.97.42 (talk) 16:17, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You asked the same question in October and nobody knew then. You may be better asking at a Scottish football forum like this or this. Alansplodge (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 24

The Great Gatsby 1974 movie poster font

What font is used on the movie poster and is there a freely available version for Windows? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dodger67 It's one of the Deco fonts, maybe Rousseau Deco. If you Google "deco fonts" I'm sure you'll find it.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tried identifont.com but the closest it came up with was Chalet London 1970, which it says did not exist until 1994. --184.144.97.125 (talk) 09:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that in 1974, titles were not computer generated. If it wasn't hand drawn it may have been from Letraset or something similar. Alansplodge (talk) 09:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's related to Bauhaus (typeface). Windows comes with "Bauhaus 93", which actually has the same oblique S glyphs as in the poster, but it is only offered in an unpleasantly bold weight, with square terminals, so it seems very different. I found a free clone of Bauhaus, but the poster's typeface has a flat bar on the lower case e, and the dramatic s, both missing from Bauhaus: and anyway this clone is still a bit too heavy, and the gaps in certain characters (the idea seems to be to avoid ever creating a counter) are so narrow that they might as well not be gaps. And it has square terminals, which make the gaps even less perceptible. So I think there's a better one out there somewhere. Card Zero (talk) 11:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The majuscule B on the poster is more like that of Bauhaus 93 than that of ITC Bauhaus, which looks confusingly like a German ß. It appears, though, that the majuscule S in Bauhaus 93 is less slanted than the S on the poster, while the majuscule E and R on the poster are more like that of ITC Bauhaus.^[4] The minuscule e of the poster does not really conform to either variant. Although there is no perfect fit, the indebtedness is clear. --Lambiam 15:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link to hi-res image --Verbarson ^talk_edits 13:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see now that the poster's B is actually more like that of ITC Bauhaus. Where ITC Bauhaus and Bauhaus 93 diverge (imagining a light weight for the latter), the shape of the characters on the poster is mostly more like ITC Bauhaus. Notable exceptions are the M and N, which have sharp angles at the ends of the verticals for ITC Bauhaus, but smooth arcs on the poster and for Bauhaus 93. Next to the minuscule e, the poster disagrees with either of the Bauhaus typefaces for the characters A and 4. The horizontal stroke of the A is closed on the poster, but open (at different ends) for both Bauhaus typefaces. The 4 on the poster is also closed, but open (in different ways) for both Bauhaus typefaces. --Lambiam 16:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered what you were ßanging on about, but you're usually right about everything so I didn't want to contradict. And I already linked to a high-res version of the poster, but I guess I should have made that clearer. I wasn't linking to the article about posters! I now have a (very specific) curiosity about where the slanty S in the 1974 poster, repeated in the 1993 font, originates from. Could it just be parallel evolution, or is the typeface in the poster something that was in widespread use and has since been forgotten? There must be large numbers of forgotten typefaces from the 20th century (a lot of them used in movie credits/intros/posters), I wish they could all be rescued from the encroaching mists of time and preserved as ttf. Card Zero (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, missed your hi-res link --Verbarson ^talk_edits 00:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 25

Mall of America shooting

Would the 2021 Mall of America shooting be notable for its own article? Here are news articles and here is the Wikipedia entry. --The Tips of Apmh 03:52, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it would have been, if there were fatalities. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:25, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I was joking, but there are so many shootings in the United States of Armaments nowadays that, unless something unusual happens, it falls afoul of WP:NOTNEWS. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PERSISTENCE is the relevant guidance here. To wit: "Events that are only covered in sources published during or immediately after an event, without further analysis or discussion, are likely not suitable for an encyclopedia article." Which is to say, if the shooting itself becomes the subject of writing separated in time from when it happened (that is, are books and articles written about it months or years after it happened) then it is likely notable enough for a stand alone article. If all of the reliable sources cover the event immediately after the event happened, and never again, then likely not. --Jayron 32 15:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Armored truck

This is about Hank the Tank, a 500 pound bear that has breaking into homes and raiding refrigerators here in California. People want to capture Hank and move him to a sanctuary, but that doesn't seem so easy. Hank apparently shrugs off tranquilizer darts, etc. I could imagine baiting the trailer part of a truck with a bathtub of rigatoni noodles and slamming the door once Hank clambered in, but he could probably claw his way right through the side. Question: would an armored truck work? They are probably strong enough to keep bears out, but they might not be designed to keep them *in*. Just wondering. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 (talk) 11:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, there's a bigger problem at play here. In capturing and transporting Hank to a different location, one needs to be concerned with more than just the integrity of the container holding Hank. One also needs to be concerned with the integrity of Hank as well. If it were as simple as just not having the bear invade homes, they would have just killed him by now. Authorities are obviously interested in protecting Hank as well, and making sure he is safe. Trapping a live, angry bear inside of a tight metallic space may contain him, but there is a very good chance that he may injure himself trying to escape, or because he is in a blind rage, or whatever. We don't want that. Unfortunately, Wikipedia's article Transportation of animals mostly covers livestock, zoo, and research animals. But in general, safe transport of animals needs to take the welfare of the animal into account. --Jayron 32 15:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are different types or armor for different purposes. For example, we have separate articles for Armoured fighting vehicle, Armored car (military), Armored car (valuables), and Armored car (VIP). That last also touches on the various types and levels of armoring that are possible. I've only been skimming articles in response to this question, but it seems to me that some (most?) armoring is about making the vehicle simply bullet-proof, which is a very different attack vector than an angry bear. Other types of armoring are about withstanding bomb blasts and collisions, which is at least closer, though I don't know how well they'd sustain the equivalent of multiple bomb blasts from the inside. All that aside, it seems weird to me that they'd send in the the police when California has a functioning animal control service. Matt Deres (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen bear trap trailers in Yosemite National Park and they are cylindrical in shape. Here is an article about one deployed in Reno which is not far from where this particular bear is breaking into people's homes. Cullen328 (talk) 16:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Yosemite Bear Team. "So Where Are You Taking That Bear?". www.nps.gov. U.S. Department of the Interior. --2603:6081:1C00:1187:1C8F:910:778:CC3A (talk) 20:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. Latest update is that the CDFW is working on it, and that "Hank" turns out to be (at least) 3 separate bears.[5] 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:C115 (talk) 21:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In a raincoat? —Tamfang (talk) 01:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Or a duffel coat? Alansplodge (talk) 10:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 26

North America Population

I am looking at the Population by region area of the World population web page on Wikipedia. I am trying to make sense of two charts. In one chart, it claims that the opulation of North America is 368 million with 333 million in the United States. That leaves 35 million for Canada and Mexico. I don't if it considers anything else to be part of North America, which would reduce the population it claims to be in Canada and Mexico. Then, on the other chart, it states that the population of Mexico is increasing from 103 million to 127 million to 148 million. But, that is not possible unless most of the population of Mexico is credited to the United States in the first chart. What am I reading wrong between these two charts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.165.112 (talk) 21:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That 35 million appears to be only Canada. They're probably considering Mexico to be part of Central America, even though it's geographically North America. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:05, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Central America is commonly considered part of North America. Anyway, usage varies. I personally think of the "real" North America as being just the US and Canada. But an encyclopedia page should make clear what meanings it is using. --184.144.97.125 (talk) 03:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A majority of reliable sources include Canada, the United States, Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean island countries and territories to be part of North America. Plus the French overseas territory of Saint Pierre and Miquelon in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence just off Newfoundland. Cullen328 (talk) 04:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want the highest number you can include Greenland, Bermuda, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa and all the other US territories, every Caribbean and north of Caribbean island, Mexico through Panama, everything else in the West Indies cricket team or the North American soccer confederation (2 or 3 guyanas are), the small part of Colombia that looks like the piece that's left after you pull all bananas off the stalk and even anything on the North American, Panama, Cocos or Caribbean plate (parts of Iceland, Portugal and Siberia are) and if you want the smallest number you can count just Canada, DC and 49 states and exclude Hawaii, Greenland, Saint Pierre and Miquelon as Oceania and Europe respectively. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a note attached to the figure for North America: "Excludes Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, which are included here under Latin America." So yeah pretty much what Bugs said. Card Zero (talk) 05:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 27

Userbox

I wanted to make my page more creative. Can anyone give me tips on making a Userbox. Thanks!

Eg:

This user has been editing Wikipedia for more than 15 years.

I Copied this from a random page

MynameisShaun (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One thing you can do is look at the code for userbox templates, and then custom-build your own. And in so doing, you can lose the pretentious third-person usage. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's Category:Userboxes. Do you want to create a new one or just browse the existing ones? Card Zero (talk) 06:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MynameisShaun: There's Help:Userbox Maker if you want to make a userbox yourself, and there's also a list of editors willing to make custom userboxes at Wikipedia:Userboxes#Users who make userboxes upon request (of which I am one). ––FormalDude talk 06:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MynameisShaun (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Westboro Baptist Church and the invasion of Ukraine

"We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate"

After reading this blog post, would it be correct to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is not condemning the recent invasion of Ukraine but instead expressing their approval? JIP | Talk 16:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In other news, the WBC has declared that the Pope is a Catholic. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this question considered a "request for opinions, predictions or debate"? Can't we respond by finding sources (besides the linked blog) where members of this "church" have indeed publicly expressed their views on the war in Ukraine? I'm not sure whether such sources exist, but surely it's not beyond the realm of possibility? I propose unhatting this question, even if the WBC are, um, (adjectives self-censored). Eliyohub (talk) 12:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 28

Reuters Fact Check

Does anyone know how to get in touch with Reuters Fact Check? They write on Twitter: Please get in touch, our DMs are open. Not sure what they mean by “DM”; presumably direct message, but I don't see any link for that on their website. ◅ Sebastian 08:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They say to email them at reutersfactcheck@thomsonreuters.com. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Clarityfiend! How did you find that URL? ◅ Sebastian 11:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Searched for "Reuters fact check contact". Clarityfiend (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teetotaller

I don't drink any alcoholic drinks. I saw most girls in my high school consuming alcohol. I thought as a boy I must do something. I tried beer and it tasted sour.

I tried Rum with two-three sips I got headache. I am careful not to get drunk. Only Vodka had some good feeling. Whiskey tasted like some cough medicine. The Wine tasted like bad grape juice.

All were good costly brands. Apart from Rum, I managed all for 500 ml. I haven't tasted Brandy, Gin, Alcopop, Breezer yet

In Hollywood movies, the heroes consume alcohol with style as if it tastes great.

The way people drink is as if they are great in taste.

As a beginner what should I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrinceofBaghdad9809 (talk • contribs) 10:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are many people who don't drink alcohol because they don't like it. If you're one of them, what's wrong with that? Heroes are heroes because of the heroic deeds they do, not because they like certain kinds of beverages. ◅ Sebastian 11:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chacun à son goût. To me, the one whisky I tried was a good imitation of either medicine or cough syrup, and beer tastes like rubber bands. Tequila was okay, and Grand Marnier wasn't bad (though rather strong). Clarityfiend (talk) 11:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 149: / Line 149: @@
 :In other news, the WBC has declared that the Pope is a Catholic. --←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 18:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 {{collapse bottom}}
+Why is this question considered a "request for opinions, predictions or debate"? Can't we respond by finding sources (besides the linked blog) where members of this "church" have indeed publicly expressed their views on the war in Ukraine? I'm not sure whether such sources exist, but surely it's not beyond the realm of possibility? I propose unhatting this question, even if the WBC are, um, ''(adjectives self-censored)''. [[User:Eliyohub|Eliyohub]] ([[User talk:Eliyohub|talk]]) 12:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 = February 28 =