Talk: Community portal

start new messages at the bottom of the page or click this link to add a new section.

Class Categories

How about adding categories for champion classes, it would be useful imo. Champions like Jaheira and others offer bonuses to specific classes and it would be nice to know which champions share the same class for this type of skill bonuses.

What it implies is creating new categories for each class type (Category:Fighter, ...Rogue, ...Cleric, ...Wizard, etc) and making edits to the Champion template so that the class field value provides a link to that category in the code. I'm confident I can make these changes myself but I'm posting about it here first mostly to avoid any potential issue with the wiki admins. I'm a wiki admin myself and I wouldn't want a new editor to start out by making broad changes like that.

Admins: feel free to comment on this suggestion!

Cheers,
SerRydian (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Not sure about editing the templates, especially for champions with multiple classes... but adding new categories doesn't seem like a bad idea. Thunder 2700 (talk) 06:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I'll create the categories and look at the Champion template afterwards. Maybe there's a way to add a "class2" parameter with the same if function and make the value appear after the "class" param on the same line, separated by " / ". We'll see. Thanks for your reply, SerRydian (talk) 00:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

How will you deal with Champions like Korth? Samurai (Fighter) must remain intact. (So no changing it to Samurai/Fighter or anything.) Hm... Thunder 2700 (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I've treated Korth and Spurt's classes as subclasses of the Fighter and Rogue classes respectively, have a look at the Champions category tree. It goes Champions > Classes > Fighter > Samurai (Fighter) in Korth's case. And for the changes to the Champion template, I think it turned out ok, not perfectly done but flexible enough. SerRydian (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Uniting this wiki with Fandom's Idle Champions community

For those who have not yet heard: Last year, Gamepedia and Fandom joined forces and are now two platforms on the same network. Later this year, we'll even become one unified platform. The teams at both Gamepedia and Fandom want to encourage our communities to work together now instead of splitting their efforts and competing with each other for readers and new editors.

I'd like to know how all of you here feel about uniting with Fandom's Idle Champions community. That would mean we archive one wiki - lock it from editing but keep the pages accessible to readers - and put a banner up that directs visitors towards the other, active wiki. Anyone who used to edit the now-archived wiki would be able to contribute to the active wiki, and any content on one side that's missing on the other can be moved over with edit histories intact. Note: No merger will take place if both communities don't agree to it.

The advantages of becoming one community working together are clear: By working together, all fans of Idle Champions could build a resource on the game more effectively, keep it up-to-date more easily, and players would no longer be confused as to which site they should turn to for information.

There are two questions

• Are you interested in merging with your partner community on Fandom?
• If so, where should the future active wiki live?

Both wikis have significant amounts of content. The Fandom wiki receives about 142,000 pageviews per month. Here on Gamepedia, it's about 124,000 per month. That would make Fandom the more likely choice, but what really matters is where editors want to edit. Could you see yourself contributing to the Fandom wiki? Would you love to see the two communities united, but only if it's here on Gamepedia? Would you prefer to keep the two communities separate entirely? Please speak up!

Can't wait to hear what you think! --Pcj (talk) 20:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Here are my thoughts about merging with Fandom: Pageviews are nearly identical with a 18,000 view difference per month. Just from that, I wouldn't call the Fandom wiki the more likely choice as the amount of pageviews are pretty even with each other. I'm willing to believe that most of Fandom's pageviews can be contributed to the Combinations page and where both wikis are advertised.

Considering the content across both wikis, I would say the Gamepedia is the ideal wiki. Gamepedia is much more up-to-date with the current content in this ever-changing game than Fandom. Trying to update every page on Fandom to match the same information on Gamepedia would be a nightmare of a challenge and completely unnecessary in my opinion, considering the general page layout of every page and the templates involved. In addition, I find the Fandom wiki much more difficult to navigate and the Fan Feed to be quite annoying.

I would like to say that the only things that Fandom has over Gamepedia are the Combinations page, the (former) Event Token Calculator, and the ability to comment easily on almost every page. The List of combinations on Fandom's Combinations page is constantly updated unlike the rest of the wiki, from what I could see. The Event Token Calculator on Fandom is also nice, but it broke during the Fandom/Gamepedia merge and hasn't been fixed since.

If our editors on Gamepedia were to give the same attention to our Combinations page as Fandom's page, I believe pageviews on the Fandom page would drop considerably.

• Am I interested in merging with your partner community on Fandom?

I am not sure. The "any content on one side that's missing on the other can be moved over with edit histories intact" statement is a bit of a concern as both wikis have pages with identical names and file attachments that could be the same across both wikis but have different names. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what is going on here and what will happen. As long as we have input on what gets moved or not, I would accept the merge provided that the future active wiki lives on Gamepedia.

• If so, where should the future active wiki live?

The future active wiki should live on Gamepedia if we were to merge. --Thunder 2700 (talk) 01:56, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I am currently the most active editor of idle champions on gamepedia, before choosing this platform to edit I had already observed the fandom, I found the layout very polluted, and they only update combinations and nothing else, when I want to see combinations I look for the discord or the steam forum. But the discussion is about the merger of the two wikis. Will one no exist anymore? The fandom is far behind in updates with 16 only in combinations last 30 days, I think I would stop editing instead of trying to update everything again, that's my opinion.

• Are you interested in merging with your partner community on Fandom?

I agree with thunder, how do we do with the templates and differences between the two wikis? Are there any tools that will help us to match? if there are I'm interested.

• If so, where should the future active wiki live?

Our database is bigger than theirs. I guess the best place will be on gamepedia --ThousandDaggers (talk) 03:46, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I think we should merge, and I think gamepedia should be the main wiki. The fandom wiki layout is extremely narrow, made narrower by a pointless sidebar. The layout is only suited for mobile, not for desktop like gamepedia. All the champion pages on fandom are difficult to read and ugly owing to the tall layout. Compare it to the compact layout on gamepedia. Txtsd (talk) 17:41, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Although I only rarely edit this or that, here's my thoughts.

• Are you interested in merging with your partner community on Fandom?

There is hardly a community to merge. If anything, we were interested already. The question is rather can a merged wiki be better then two seperated ones and this is mainly a question of what tools can be deployed. How easy is it to move templates? Groups of interwoven templates? Can we overwrite pages if a page of the same name exist on both wikis, but the one in the to-be-archived one is the better one? How about paragraphs? Would we need to determine all pages to be moved manually? We're not really talking about merging communities - we're hardly half a dozen ppl anyway - we're talking about merging content (and layout/templates/etc).

• If so, where should the future active wiki live?

Currently the gamepedia wiki has up-to-date content, the fandom has not. This might in part be mitigated if it was possible to overwrite pages.
One important question for me is: With the upcoming "Unified look-and-feel across platforms and devices" changes, will it be neccessary to rework all the templates on gamepedia anyway, because this wiki will not keep it's proportions, but get the ugly narrow unreadable look that fandom has?

☃ Kyōdō 02:39, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

It's not quite decided yet what the new unified skin will look like, so don't quote me on this, but things are pointing towards a skin that has neither the very narrow content area Fandom has, nor the no-limits width Gamepedia has. We're aiming for a combination of the best of both worlds. You might want to rework some templates when that skin comes to use the new layout and features in an optimal way. However, nothing should outright break with the introduction of the new skin, you can simply choose to update things then, or choose not to. I wouldn't make the platform's skin the sole reason for deciding in favor of one wiki over the other since that skin will be changing everywhere - but then no one here has named that as the only reason why they prefer Gamepedia.

So far, no one on the Fandom side has voiced any opinions on whether they'd be open to joining the community here, so it's still to early to say which way this may go. I can say this, though: If a merger were to happen, the community (you) would get to decide which pages from the archived wiki you want to move to the active wiki. We have tools (export and import) to move content automatically with edit histories, but especially if content with the same titles already exists on both sides, some manual reworking is required. If you just want to transfer individual paragraphs rather than entire pages, you'd have to do that the pedestrian way (copy & paste while attributing the original page that paragraph came from). You would not have to do this alone. You'd have to pick and choose what you want to keep, but staff could then help with the work to ensure the best content we have on Idle Champions ends up on the one and only active wiki. The other wiki would stay readable, always accessible for future exports of any contents that got overlooked, but all editing would happen on the active wiki. I hope that clarifies a bit how a merger would work! Mira Laime (talk) 00:19, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Export / Move requests

so reading the posts on fandom, we are just supposed to write here what is supposed to be moved. So I have two requests just to see how it works:

a) could you adjust the banner at the top, so it reads to come here when you wanna help with merging instead of when you wanna voice your opinion

b) Could you move all pages of https://idle-champions.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Transcript , along with the category page and all associated templates, media, etc. ?

thank you ☃ Kyōdō 16:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I've done what I could for part b, for now anyway. Probably the images have to be renamed to their gamepedia versions or look for them on the Fandom wiki and manually bring them over. As for the templates, I'm assuming they didn't export because they are default ones or something. The pages in Category:Transcript might have to be manually adjusted. Thunder 2700 (talk) 20:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I have adjusted the banner to reflect that the Fandom wiki is now archived, and that any additional help with moving content is welcome! Mira Laime (talk) 03:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Welcome

I would like to extend our warmest welcome. We are all happy and excited having talented new members and editors as part of our family. We hope to have a long and successful journey together. ThousandDaggers (talk) 20:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Upcoming FandomDestop appearance issues...

Soon everyone will have to use the upcoming FandomDesktop interface and... our wiki has some formatting and aesthetic issues in that UI. If you look at a champions page under that interface, the infobox formatting is a bit off. I'm still learning how to tweak the CSS source editing and could probably figure it out with trial and error, but... I'm sure there's someone in our community that's a bit better at it? Either way, we'll adapt to the change one way or another, just wanted to bring it up so no one's caught off-guard.

--Wimjet (talk) 07:23, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Sortable tables issue

Hello,

It seems that something is broken with sortable tables… the content is’nt sortable anymore!

I guess it’s a mediawiki global issue on fandom (I haven’t checked any other "sub-site").

If you know whom should be contacted or where to report about the issue globally (in the case all fandom sites are affected & not just Idle champions wiki), feel free doing so!

Thanks,

149.154.207.9 19:46, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, tables that are set as sortable still work. Do you have an example where you noticed a particular problem? --Wimjet (talk) 22:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Oops, my bad, apparently it was linked to an issue with my browser (noscript messed up). 149.154.207.9 05:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Champions by Role

Hi,

Is it possible to add another navbox to champions' pages for Champions by Role? Now we have them divided by race and class, but for a newcomer like myself, these doesn't mean much.

On the other hand, roles give at least some kind of idea on what this particular hero does. If it says Gold, I know that it has some kind of ability that utilizes extra gold creation. Or it says Speed, I know that it speeds up the game after some upgrades.

I saw that there are champions with multiple roles. In the current versions of Champions by Class navbox, champions with multi classes are divided by their first race, and second race is written inside a parentheses. That might work here as well. Third race is added after the second one, separated with a slash. Though I am new for wiki pages, I wonder if there is a more intuitive way to handle entries that belong to multiple groups.

Also, selecting the primary role for multi role champions seem important. For example, if a Champion is both Gold and DPS role, I would prefer it to be grouped inside the Gold and write DPS in parentheses, rather than the other way around, as I am guessing, there will be far more DPS heroes than Gold heroes. Grouped by the less common information. Of course, people with more knowledge on the game and the wiki pages could come up with a better way to deal with this.

Anyways, since the role information already been included in-game champion page and also here on wiki, is doing champions by role navbox reasonable, what do you think about it? --Acibiber53 (talk) 19:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Not an unreasonable idea, it'd be easy to copy and mod one of the other nav boxes for this. I'm a bit swamped at the moment to dedicate any time for it though, with the upcoming Midwinter content drop. If no one else gets to it, I'll probably have some free time after next weekend. Now if you'd like to cut your teeth on this project yourself, it would be great to have you be part of our wiki. If mistakes are made, other editors can catch them and contribute. Either way, welcome to our little corner of the internet! --Wimjet (talk) 10:18, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. I was expecting an email notification but never really got it, so came here to check what happened. Anyways, I would love to help with this aspect. I will try to copy the navbox this weekend. Let's see what's going to happen. --Acibiber53 (talk) 03:57, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I think I've finished the template. You can find it here. There are couple of things to share first.

First, I copied the navbar and doc info from Champions by Race page. Then just moved them around according to their role. How to properly credit that, or do we need it, I don't know.

Second, when a champion belonged to many roles, I chose the role with the least champions in it to write that character first. To make this easier to apply, I just went to this page (which I didn't know existed before), and started with the subcategory with least amount of champions pages. So the order was like this: Speed(14P), Healing(21P), Tanking(22P), Gold(25P), DPS(38P), and Support(96P).

Almost all of the champions belong to Support role somehow. So if I were to follow the opposite order and start putting all the heroes under Support group first, the navbar would have looked really weird and also would be less informative.

Third, for the majority of heroes that belongs to multiple roles, after following the above order, I wrote their other roles in parentheses. Here I basically followed the example of other navbars.

But there is an issue here. All the Healing heroes also belong to Support role. It feels redundant, but omitting it might also make the navbar incomplete. Don't know what to do about this.

Last, if this navbar is ready, is there a way to add it to all champions' pages easily or do we need to do it manually?

Another question: Is there a way to add username and time after each edit to this page? I just copy paste others and change it, for the sake of future reference, but feel like there is a better way to do that. --Acibiber53 (talk) 18:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

The template looks great and I'd go with your instincts on this one. It can be refined later, but the important thing is that it's a foundation that can be built upon. Sadly, the navbox will have to be manually added to all champions. Good news though, I'm still working on updating the new feat slots on Champions, so I can add the new template without issue on those Champions. Slots 1 - 6 Champions already have their feat slot info mostly done, so they'll need the addition of the new navbox. As for your last question... at the very top of the editing window, after Bold and Italic symbols, look for the "x followed by the loopy scribble with a line underneath" symbol. Click that and it'll automatically add your name and timestamp. --Wimjet (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

If we have a bot operating on Fandom / idlechampion wiki, then we wouldn’t have to add the newly created navbox manually on every Champion’s page (I’d also wish using such a bot, to replace the static Waves tables with the WaveLine template once it is considered good enough by the Community, for the adventures’ pages).

To answer Acibiber53’s last question, you can easily add signatures to your posts using this code: ~~~ (adds just your account name with links) or ~~~~ (standard signature with date/time) or ~~~~~~ (just the date/time), the same way as it works on Wikipedia. Regards, AnIdleEditor (talk) 11:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Tasks Reminders guide

Hello,

It took me several hours to write this editors’ guide, feel free to adapt it if I forgot something and/or have better ideas, and potentially using it if you haven’t already set a good routine (please take no offense if it suggests things you don’t feel important/don’t do/don’t wish to do).

People with a great routine may help even better documentate the best practice routine (helping other following it, when the "regular editors" are on vacantion, too busy, etc.).

I feel it would be very time consumming to check all the pages manually rather than following the guide (and in case some steps are bypassed, at lease mentionning about the undone steps in the Talk pages of the newly created pages, or at least in the edit summary).

I’ve found that several pages haven’t been updated since 2020 (e.g. Patron variants), maybe it’s not the priority… and I guess that some of the tasks could be at least partially automated, if someone have a working bot account.

On some Wikipedia’s talk pages, they add and use ToDo template to help having a better tasks follow-up. Maybe doing the same here would be a good idea.

Thanks for your comments/remarks.

AnIdleEditor (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

About the Waves data for Events

Hello,

I wonder if there is a specific reason (or is it just due to historicity of editing) to have a detailed (with Bosses images) Waves table on the Event Adventures (e.g. second table of The_Grandfather_Acorn_(Nixie)#Waves), and another summarized form of the table (e.g. The_Grandfather_Acorn_(Nixie) Free Play#Wave Information) for it’s Free Play and variants (the question is not just for The Grandfather Acorn/The Running Event, but should apply to all the 17 "yearly events").

Do we want to keep it like this, or should we used the detailed (with images) version on both the main Adventures and its Variants/Free Plays pages?

And should the WaveLine (formerly defined in a wiki table structure, e.g. first table of The_Grandfather_Acorn_(Nixie)#Waves) also be displayed on Variants & Free Plays, or should it just be shown once on the main adventures (the ones which unlock the new champions)?

What’s your opinion/preference about it?

AnIdleEditor (talk) 05:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Season 4 rewards layout

Hello,

Which layout do you prefer? Or maybe do you have a fourth alternative idea?

• First: Two lines per level, with an icon for the season pass reward
• Second: Two lines per level, with different background colour for the season pass reward (or as an alternative, the coulour could be applied instead for the free reward)
• Three: One line per level, with two (all levels between 1 & 60, and for odd levels between level 61-120) or one reward per line (for even levels, starting level 61+).

See Talk:Season Four: Legends of the Mithral Hall#Alternative presentations for my propositions (we have about 6 days before Season 4 starts).

• Side question:

should we use a static table, or should I create a template a bit similar to template:WaveLine (called once per level with all the needed data to procude the desired layout with the data relative to the 1-2 rewards per level)?

Pros & cons about a layout done via a template:

• it will be easier to change the layout (120 levels per season, starting on season 4) and/or produce the code of the page without having to worry about the number of columns, possibly the background coloring, etc. (the call could be something like: {{SeasonRewardLevel|level=|freeicon=|freereward=|freedetails=|passicon=|passreward=|passdetails=}}, at levels 62, 64… 120, there would be no "free" parameters, the template would generate one line or two lines depending on the layout choice/the level)
• possibly a higher server-CPU cost (contrary to WaveLine template, which has a major pro argument: no need anymore to edit hundreds of pages each time there are new Favored monsters/champions data that needs to be propagated on almost each adventures pages).

AnIdleEditor (talk) 13:32, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

• I prefer the third one. You can make a template if you want -- the benefits are generally that if you want to use the same code on a lot of pages, it will auto-update, or if you think you will change the layout a lot it can update everywhere, and I don't think either of those things are true for this season's page. Perhaps it could apply to future seasons though? Generally I find tables easier to understand.--Ryo Sangnoir (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

• I also prefer the third one. As for your side question, a template might be be better if they decide to keep this format for future seasons. Thunder 2700 (talk) 02:01, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for your answers. I guess I’ll soon create a template that will use third layout. I don’t think it will be as robust as the WaveLine template (error detection, etc.), but it should probably be good enough to provide the expected result (if some day we don't want anymore the template being used, it should be possible to "subst:" it to have the raw table code instead of the template calls). AnIdleEditor (talk) 02:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Due to an annoying bug, the header part is currently hardcoded, but I created a structure for the 120 levels, feel free fullfilling the table.
Notes: we may split the table into two, one for levels 1-60, and another for bonus levels 61-120, as they used in-game with two different tabs, and maybe should we also add the data from the buff tab (but it would add readability complexity to the page if we do so).
In order to reduce the coding needs to the minimum, here's a template of filled data for the level 3 {{SeasonRewardLevel|3|freeicon=Icon Gems.png|freereward=500x Gem|freedetails=500 Gems|passicon=Icon SeasonBuff LegendsofMithralHall.png|passreward=Buff Catti-brie|passdetails=}} as you can see, there is no need to specify the "File:" prefix nor the pixel size for the images (nor bold marks). Feel free asking any layout change if you feel it can be enhanced. I hope you will enjoy using it to fill the missing data/the final result it provides. AnIdleEditor (talk) 01:17, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Modron Emergence Event

Hello,

If someone can add the feats sold during the Modron Emergence to the related champions (as it was done for the Red Wizard for Fen, Hitch and Hew Maan) it would be cool… given I forgot taking note of them before buying the feats…

People that haven’t yet bought them could still see the available feats at the Thayan enclave shop for another 9 days. Afterwards, information probably will be lost forever!

Thanks,

AnIdleEditor (talk) 02:51, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Nrakk - Entertainer - CHA +2. I think there was only one as I don't remember buying anything. Thunder 2700 (talk) 00:53, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. AnIdleEditor (talk) 01:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

"Getting to know" section

Hello,

Do you feel it would be interesting for newcomers/new players mainly to add each of the three "Getting to know" for each Champion on its dedicated page, e.g. for Astarion, we may add the following code (probably slightly enhanced? or at least wikified to provide links for useful concepts which may have detailed expanation on another page, in the case the link isn’t yet mentionned on the Champion’s article):

== Getting to know ==
* Astarion’s specialization can increase the damage of Champions on the top or bottom edge of the formation. Make the best choice for your formation!

* Astarion’s gold find bonus increases as you include older Champions. Use your oldest Champions to get the biggest boost!

* When Astarion is buffed by his own Outflank ability, he can reduce the ultimate cooldown duration of other Champions in the formation.

Possibly mention about other Champions interactions/best categories, etc. that would match the criterium.

If you find this addition interesting, where should we insert it in the articles: between which sections, or maybe as a sub-section of an existing section (I would see it just before or after the Backstory section).

AnIdleEditor (talk) 05:24, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

New Patron : Elminster

Hello,

Very soon a 5th Patron will be added to the game, but due to the different restriction rule compared to previous ones, this time we have to make a bit more effort to reflect the eligibility than previously.

It seems that Champion’s release date (and maybe rework date too) will be taken in account, therefore, I’ve created a new "multipurpose" template (ElminsterEligibility), it’s made to be used in three different places, with various layout depending on the type of usage:

1. Champion’s infobox (but in fact it’s managed by the infobox template, so we just have to add the release date in the infobox parameters via e.g. | releasedate = 2022-12-31 (also used for the "Scavenged" items, currently used for Strongheart & Presto) rather than having to add ElminsterEligibility to the Patron5 parameter as we ordinarly would do, exception being the "(with feat)" & "(always)" cases), check the Champion template talk page for more info.
2. Champions table, where we should add e.g. {{ElminsterEligibility|2024-03-28}} to both "Patrons" & "Patrons w/ feats" columns (for the old season rework date, it’s probably wise to wait till the official 5th patron blog news or to its integration in the game, just in case old season rework date wasn’t part of the rule… in such case I’ll adapt the Champion infobox template to avoid using the rework date as a criterium for Elminster).
3. Elminster’s "Usable Champions" section, where we should (at least) add the "recent" Champions (well, up to three years old, and maybe also the old season reworked ones), sorted alphabetically. So we should add e.g. {{ElminsterEligibility|2024-02-01|slash=after|Champion=First champion name}} {{ElminsterEligibility|2021-12-11|slash=after|Champion=Second champion name}} {{ElminsterEligibility|2023-10-25|slash=after|Champion=Third champion name}} {{ElminsterEligibility|2022-08-14|slash=no|Champion=ZZZ last champion name}}

You can help adding the Champions’ release dates to the their infoboxes, the template with the release date to the Champions table, and the template with the release date and Champion’s name to the Elminster’s "Usable Champions" section. In order to help you in the process, the new "Other data" section in the Infobox will automatically generate the required wiki code (this is just temporary and as soon as all the Champions are added, the infobox will be "cleaned" from this wiki-code helping guide).

You’ll find more info about the supported parameters and recommanded use in the ElminsterEligibility template page.

Currently, the template is sort of hacked (via "+999 years") to avoid affecting the pages, but once Elminster is released, every call to the template with a date recent enough will cause the template to display the expected result (1. a link to Elminster patron’s page, or 2. just the patron’s name, or 3. the champion’s name).

All suggestions are welcome.

AnIdleEditor (talk) 14:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Side question related to new Patron(s): how should we manage time limited variant(s) see this talk page for more details (or that one). Thanks for your suggestions & remarks. AnIdleEditor (talk) 20:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)