User talk:BeenAroundAWhile/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mickey Cohen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• for Stompanato's funeral and then sold Lana Turner's love letters to Stompanato to the press.<ref>[http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1964&dat=19580411&id=WPYiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ec0FAAAAIBAJ&pg=927,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC) Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Weedpatch, California may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Gavin, "Weedpatch Comes to Life in Art Exhibit," ''Bakersfield Californian,'' September 19, 2007]]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brentwood, Los Angeles may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• lacity.org/PLN/complan/westla/pdf/genlumap.btw.pdf Los Angeles City Brentwood-Palisades area map]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Purple Heart may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• clerical errors, where a Purple Heart is denoted in military records but was simply omitted from a (WD AGO Form 53-55 (predecessor to the) [[DD Form 214]]. (Report of Separation), are corrected on
• {{cleanup

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:27, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Crenshaw, Los Angeles may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [http://www.leimertparkbeat.com]] Leimert Park Beat, a collaborative online community

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:59, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, I appreciate the barnstar. I do try to credit authors, but I'm curious if something in particular caught your attention? No big deal, just curious.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, BeenAroundAWhile. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 17:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

New York crime section

My understanding of the phrase "as of" is different and I have changed the wording at the start of the sentence. Let me know what you think, as I believe that by stating "as of", one is stating that "as of this date/year" something "is" the case, and the present tense is therefore relevant.--Soulparadox (talk) 20:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

No, if something is in the past, it takes the past tense. "As of 1914, Europe was on the verge of war." GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:18, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for this.--Soulparadox (talk) 09:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Request for editing

Hi GeorgeLouis, we met when collaborating on gastrointestinal cancer. I can't say I completely agree with all your editing / simplification, but I do admire your ability to synthesise and present complex information simply. I'm having a lot of difficulty with this article: Advanced glycation end-products, and would love if you could bring your editor's scythe and toolbox to help me improve it. Since I've seen what a parlous state it was in, I've been trying to improve it in bits and pieces, but it hurts my head to find a way to express the content in a readable fashion whilst preserving the content (which is quite specific). AGES are one of the major pathological pathways that cause the complications of diabetes mellitus, so this topic is quite important. Would value some help, if time permits! LT910001 (talk) 08:53, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

OK. I will look at it. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks; --LT910001 (talk) 23:06, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

It will take a while, so I would appreciate your not working on it until I've had a chance to go over it fully. Thanks. GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

No worries. If you'd like any assistance please let me know. LT910001 (talk) 07:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

AGE

Hi georgelewis. I watch the Advanced glycation end-product article and have seen your recent edits. I see that you are an experienced editor, but that you have not edited a lot of health-related articles. I just want to point out that sourcing content for health-related information is subject to the WP:MEDRS guideline, and your edits don't seem to be following that. There is a lot of hype around AGEs and ways to counter them in the longevity community, and you appear to be relying mostly on sources from that community, many of which fail MEDRS and do not express the consensus of the medical community. You seem to like others to stay out of your way while you restructure, so I will hang back but, much of what you have done so far will probably not stand under MEDRS. I have added a MEDRS-citations needed tag to the top of the article, for now. Best regards, Jytdog (talk) 12:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit Picture for Martin Ludlows page

Hi George,

I am attempting to edit Martin Ludlows profile. I would like to delete the current picture within the body of the article and I want to add two new pictures. I see that there is a block on the edit section for that part. I wanted to know if there is anyway you can remove the block or assist in this process.

I can be emailed at [removed].

Thank you,

Themba

76.169.18.121 (talk) 21:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Question about a location

Dear George,

I know this may sound silly and funny. But, I have a funny question... in the article about the Daily Telegraph you allowed the use of this photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Daily_Telegraph_building_in_London,_England,_1974.jpg There you say that you took this picture almost 40 years ago. And I want to ask you... Where was that building? I know it's a funny, somehow unexpected question, but i am writing a story and the daily telegraph has an important part on it. And i want to make it as realistic as possible... however, i'm having some trouble finding out where was the telegraph located in 1972. I've already ask the telegraph staff, but, they haven't answered... yet. So... although, this is weird... i ask for your help. I thank you for your time and patience.

By the way, My name is armando and if you remember anything, can you please send me the information to my email [removed] com

Thank you very much and have a nice day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.167.128.179 (talk) 06:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your work in addressing some of the issues raised by yesterday's New York Post article. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Catalan

Isn't it spoken in Italy too? (Islands). Andorra doesn't count as an EU state, of course. And M is common for currency values. Tony (talk) 05:03, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. The map shows only France, Spain and Andorra. Catalan is not spoken in Italy, to my knowledge. M can mean either a thousand or a million. Or lots of other things. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:27, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brentwood, Los Angeles may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * [[Margaret Sullavan]] – Actress<ref>[http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0837925/bio ''Architectural Digest,'' cited in InternetMovieDataBas[</

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:07, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Watts, Los Angeles may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• No Privacy These Days for 'Pit Boss' Star Shorty Rossi," ''The National Ledger,'' October 11, 2011]]</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 06:09, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Central LA: region or city?

Hi,

You recently reverted an entry on several LA neighborhood articles from "central region of the City of Los Angeles" to "Central Los Angeles, California." The latter is misleading because it makes it seem like "Central Los Angeles" is a neighborhood, address or city of itself when it isn't. The idea to call this area comes from the Mapping L.A. project which clearly designates this area as a "region" of LA, not its own address, city, or neighborhood. Thus, the reversion to Central Los Angeles, California is clearly misleading. Isn't it? --Daniel E Romero (talk) 21:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. Now that you mention it, I would refer to the area as the central region of Los Angeles, California, with the internal link going to Central Los Angeles, rather than a link to Los Angeles, California. I personally do not like a whole lot of links in the lede. Good catch. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:27, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Catherine Ashton -- Handling of Undue Weight Tag

Out of respect for your extensive record as an editor on Wikipedia, I think it only courteous to let you know that I have posted a short query on the Talk Page for Catherine Ashton questioning the approach you adopted to another editor's posting of an Undue Weight tag (a tag that, I am bound to say, seemed to me richly deserved). You removed the tag and told them, in spite of their candid admission that they lacked expertise in the field, that the answer was to "make the changes yourself. You can't expect other people to jump at your suggestion". (I gather you disapprove of singular "theys" but avoiding the usage here seems awkward). Perhaps you were merely the instrument of an institutional policy with which I am as yet unfamiliar? Your approach does, though, raise the question: "In that case, why have an Undue Weight tag at all?" Respectfully, Born only under Truman. Nandt1 (talk) 02:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I think you are correct. I was rude. I haven't looked at this article in a long time. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, thank you for this very courteous response. Undoubtedly none of us bats 1000. For whatever it is worth, I have made a concentrated effort over the past few days to address the Undue Weight issue in the Ashton article. All best wishes to you with your future editing! Nandt1 (talk) 02:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Editing Catherine Ashton (again)

I see you have picked up this challenge again, and find a number of your edits quite useful. On the list of activities, I am sure you are right that some of the items you deleted were puffery. But perhaps not all. I suspect that the business of developing the new EU diplomatic service (however it was phrased) may be quite important as a piece of institution building for the future. If we lack a source, I would tend to advocate looking for a source rather than deleting the fact. But unlike you, I am an East coaster, and this is my bedtime! Nandt1 (talk) 05:20, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Well it's morning here. Overnight you have done a lot of very valuable copy editing on Lady A. I hope you won't mind too much if I reverse just a couple of your more substantive cuts. One is the diplomatic service issue I mentioned above. The other is to reinstate the first sentence of Mr. Oborne's quote, which does -- and I think was clearly meant to -- emphasize the element of recantation here. Again, best wishes in your future editing! Nandt1 (talk) 12:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:56, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Image credits

Please note that the use of in-text credits in image captions is discouraged, because this information can be displayed on the file's page itself. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:44, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Ethnic Character of Neighborhoods

Hi George,

You wrote: Hello. I notice that you have been editing articles about the neighborhoods in Los Angeles to omit the ethnic characteristics from the lead paragraphs of said articles, with (usually) edit summaries decrying the information as having "racial" overtones, or similar wording. Don't you agree that the ethnic character of a neighborhood is one of the district's most salient features? Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

My reply: Yes, I agree it is a salient feature but only if it is an area known for it being the center of a particular ethnic group. For example, Pico-Union is known as a hub for recent latino immigrants. Pico-Robertson is known as a jewish area. Chinatown - Chinese. Korea town - Koreans. Little Armenia - Armenians. So on and so forth. However, what I notice instead is the highlighting of how white an area is in the lead. E.g. this area is 70% white, this other one is 85% white, this is 48% white, etc. I don't think that is appropriate for an encyclopedia. Why should only whites be singled out as the main ethnic group to determine to highlight the ethnic composition of a neighborhood? That seems like racial overtones. For example, one answer could be demonstrating how appealing an area is, along the thinking that more white % is better. While that might not be the only answer possible, and there might be answers to that question with no racial overtones, it seems suspicious that for example, Century City might be highlighted for how white it is when there is nothing particularly notable about that. If it is the area in Los Angeles County or LA City with the highest percentage of whites, it then would be notable for that feature. But I see this being done in many (if not most) of the areas in LA where there are significant percentages of whites. How is that helpful? Are there any wikipedia guidelines on leads highlighting one ethnic group over another? It seems to me like a simple case of ethnic bias. No offense. --Daniel E Romero (talk) 04:52, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

But why single out Hispanics, Jews, Chinese, Koreans, etc., to be featured in the lead? If a place is overwhelmingly white, why not say so in the lead, since the ethnic composition, especially in Los Angeles, is so important to understanding the community? And what do you mean by "known to be"? We only know what WP:Reliable sources tell us.

Anyway, I am open to opening up this discussion to the WP community at large, and it would be nice if you and I could agree on the wording of a WP:RFC and a place to discuss it. I suggest the notice be placed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography and the discussion take place at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_California/Los_Angeles_task_force. Do you agree, and would you care to propose some wording for the RFC that you and I can agree on before going to the community? Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I agree we should open it up for discussion. In general, we should also take advantage of this opportunity to answer the wider question of what a lead should look like in LA's neighborhood articles. I noticed a similar concern to mine addressed by user PlayCuz at another one of your entries on a local neighborhood article. I believe it was East Hollywood or Silver Lake]. There, he was concerned that the lead seemed like a real estate brochure: noting percentages of renters versus owners and income. He felt it was not appropriate for a neighborhood lead. I agree. While his concerns were not about race explicitly, my concern about race in the lead is a similar concern: an attempt to show how "desirable" an area is for visiting/investing/home purchasing purposes, etc. In Urban Planning literature, there is a multi-faceted approach taking to defining what a neighborhood is: a neighborhood is not only its population but its sights, landmarks, points of reference and unique non-quantifiable characteristics. Both my concern and PlayCuz's revolve around this idea. It seems to be that even if those entries of 80% white, etc. are not necessarily ethnically biased, the focus of having a lead start with population statistics hinders the opportunity and the reality of seeing a neighborhood as more than who lives there.

Therefore, I suggest that neighborhood leads should be no more than a few sentences highlighting the most salient features of a neighborhood (top 3-4 features) in every category: population, history, etc. Taking 1 sentence or a few words from each of the subsections in the article. Moreover, I propose that the lead should not focus on ethnic or income or education unless the distinction is truly unique: e.g. hub of a certain ethnic group's cultural institutions, or having the highest percentage of that ethnic group in the city or county, or any other population variable: education, income, etc. Otherwise, the article lead should simply state the most salient or notable feature that a neighborhood is known for. You question this later point, but it is easily sourceable by citing to tour guide books or newspaper articles.--Daniel E Romero (talk) 21:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Taking your and my concerns as a base, I think I can fashion a WP:Rfc today or tomorrow, and I can post it here to see if you agree with the wording before we actually open it for discussion. Suit you? GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:05, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Okay. There is a draft at User:GeorgeLouis/Sandbox. You can make suggest edits there if you like. GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:36, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I glanced at it, but I haven't had a chance to really examine it. It seems a bit lengthy, so if you want to edit it down somewhat, that would be nice. But, as I say, I haven't given it a thorough exam. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I concur with GeorgeLouis that it is lengthy, but it compensates with the virtue of offering contrasting examples that clarify the relevant differences we are considering. PlayCuz (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for raising the issue. I fully share and have elsewhere expressed similar concerns with the way in which L.A. neighborhoods are described, relying almost exclusively on the (well-meaning, but not always objective or current) L.A. Times as source which is then treated as impervious to correction or modification. My point in describing the "white only" stats is that this is notoriously how real estate redlining occurs: clients otherwise interested in homes based on affordability are often "steered" away by pointing out to potential buyers that the neighborhood is not predominantly white based on official statistics (real estate brokers claim that, based on their experience of what homebuyers seek, this is merely a time-saver: why take clients to a minority neighborhood whereupon they will then decide it isn't "white" enough, when you can simply show them the ethnic stats and save everybody the trouble {and embarrassment} of eyeballing the actual community in question?). I object to Wikipedia reflecting and re-enforcing that practice, therefore I suggest this alternative recommendation for editing these types of articles as more NPOV. PlayCuz (talk) 19:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Request for Participation - Merger Proposal

Hello, you have been selected at random to leave a comment regarding the proposed merger of Duke of Edinburgh's Award and International Award Association. Due to the low traffic these pages receive it is likely there will not be enough participation to establish a consensus in the absence of personal invitations of this type. Seven users were randomly selected to receive this invitation. The discussion is here. Thanks for any input you can offer. BlueSalix (talk) 10:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

thanks!

thanks for your careful review of the Genetically modified food controversies article! Jytdog (talk) 04:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello!

I haven't seen you pop up on my watchlist for a while, and I was just editing Eastside, Los Angeles and thought of you, so I thought I'd say hello!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I will go back to L.A. neighborhoods in a while, but I just got tired of fighting. GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I know the feeling. I hope I wasn't part of the problem. I just noticed this: File:Man wearing Purple Heart medal during Vietnam peace march, 1967.jpg while editing. It's a beautiful piece of work. I was there too. Oh what a time it was, what a time...Long ago, it must be, I have a photograph Preserve your memories; They're all that's left you...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Silver certificate (United States)

Hi GeorgeLouis- I saw the tag you put on the silver certificate list. I made some changes in a user space draft and wondered if you could give me your opinion if THIS is better. Thanks in advance.-Godot13 (talk) 08:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I am no expert, but I think you are on the right track. Here is what I did: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AGodot13%2FList_of_United_States_Silver_Certificates&diff=596510741&oldid=596460212. Thanks for asking, and I will leave it to you at that. GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I took your advice and cut and pasted the new version into the article space. Thanks.-Godot13 (talk) 18:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 27 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Eagle Rock, Los Angeles page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Commons

Howdy George! Never encountered you before, but I saw some of your photos at Chevrolet Master and was intrigued. I then saw your numerous and valuable image uploads here at WP. I think it is a loss for those who edit in other languages that you keep them here, and I moved one image to the Commons. However, it took me ten minutes and was very boring, so I would like to respectfully wish/request/hope that you upload your often amazing photos to the Commons directly. Thanks a lot, hope to interact with you again in the future. Do you have any old photos from Macau? That would be great to see. Cheers,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:13, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much! The reason that I don't place photos directly in Commons is that it is also, to me, a much more tedious process than just putting them in the English Wikipedia. Also, I have run across recalcitrant editors there who have questioned some of my work, so I just prefer to work with English-language people, who, although not perfect, are usually not so pedantic. But mainly the upload process in the English-language WP is just a lot easier. I am sorry that you have to bear the brunt of moving the photos to Commons, but isn't there an automated tool you could use?

Yes, I was in Macau, and I will look for the pix, although I think they have vanished. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:05, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I can kind of see why... when one just looks at the photos and the upload pattern, it looks like the photo stream of a copyvio offender (the photos are of rare times and places, uploaded in no particular order) - but ten minutes of following up your other edits should make things clear. I have often had to deal with meaningless deletions there; useful and perfectly safe (copyright wise) photos being deleted because an editor who retired seven years ago forgot to cross a "t" eight years ago, all because some busybody is looking to feel important. Anyhow, I'll see if those Macau shots won't turn up in an old shoebox after all!  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:21, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Recreation of Abby Martin

You really need to read Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Requested moves and Help:Page history. What you did was not "bold", it was disruptive. Viriditas (talk) 01:34, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I've reverted your copy-and-paste move. That is not how we edit Wikipedia. Process is important. Viriditas (talk) 01:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that you have violated the trust of the community. An administrator was kind enough to relinquish protection because he trusted editors would do the right thing. You did not, and you made every editor look bad. This is why we can't have nice things. Viriditas (talk) 01:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

We disagree, but I love you anyway, sweetie. GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you a lot for improving my article. Cheers! Ashish Lohorung (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2014 (UTC)