Jump to content

Talk:Peter Thiel: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 282: Line 282:


Is there a source for the proposition that he interviewed for clerkships with Justices Kennedy and Scalia? [[Special:Contributions/216.165.95.72|216.165.95.72]] ([[User talk:216.165.95.72|talk]]) 01:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Is there a source for the proposition that he interviewed for clerkships with Justices Kennedy and Scalia? [[Special:Contributions/216.165.95.72|216.165.95.72]] ([[User talk:216.165.95.72|talk]]) 01:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

== Modern TurboFan Engines on Commercial Airliners ==

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jet-Engine-Rolls-Royce/dp/B00KCS6S4W/ref=sr_1_1_twi_har_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488836501&sr=1-1&keywords=rolls+royce+the+jet+engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_GE90#Variants

You should have a good look at the Boeing 777

Best Regards

Darren Mark Horton

[[Special:Contributions/86.164.82.154|86.164.82.154]] ([[User talk:86.164.82.154|talk]]) 21:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:46, 6 March 2017

Why all the double quotes?

Some examples:

"American entrepreneur", "venture capitalist", "hedge fund manager", "social critic", "Thiel", "PayPal","co-founded", "chairman", "first", "social-networking", "stake", "board", "parents"

Are these necessary? Why? Zaurus (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


(I was going to ask this question, but since Zaurus has already asked it, I guess I'll just second it.)

Peter Thiel headshot

I've gone ahead and changed the photo of Mr. Thiel to a more contemporary, and clearer picture...the old one was out of date and poor in quality, and I don't know what anyone keeps switching it back. The current photo I've uploaded is superior, and fully CC licensed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandusky sweeper (talkcontribs) 02:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 01:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EDGAR reference

Reference #5, which uses the EDGAR service, appears to use an invalid link. Also, the citation is formatted incorrectly. http://edgar.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHtmlSection1?SectionID=1706843-282690-299054 Tweisbach (talk) 06:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peter thiel headshot.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Peter thiel headshot.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:14, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Views

I'm concerned about the "Views" section. It is rarely a good thing to have huge lists of opinions on any topic under the sun, even when the person is very notable this is problematic: the question of what is worth noting or not is extremely vague, and many of the entries tend to be irrelevant to what makes the person notable (in this case, business). All the other expanded sections about what he has actually done are obviously worth mentioning, but I'm going to go ahead and remove the views subsections that are not directly related to business or philanthropy of his. Steven Walling • talk 05:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

-- this seems like it still contains all kinds of irrelevant information: who cares about his views on Christianity, or on ? Sorry for the lack of formatting on this post I don't know how to do that. --User:someone else not the guy above 16 July 2012 (EST)

Sometimes Wikipedia articles get too large and begin showing subsidiary information. In such instances, Wikipedia policy suggests to separate some sections into articles of their own (see Wikipedia:Summary style). You may find an article about Peter Thiel's views irrelevant, but Wikipedia has article about all sorts of topics, including article about personal views of specific individuals (e.g., Political positions of Ron Paul). There's nothing holding Wikipedia back from expanding indefinitely. Everything Is Numbers (talk) 09:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about size, it's about appropriateness. As the author of forked articles like Domestic sheep reproduction I have no problem with forking into obscure/detailed/even weird topics. But the insanely detailed coverage of every opinion one venture capitalist has expressed is just too much. Unlike figures such as politicians or others whose opinions are a matter of public importance reflected in reliable source coverage, this is just an extreme amount of undue weight. Steven Walling • talk 04:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rene Girard

What is the basis for calling Rene Girard a "conservative Catholic?" This is probably baseless. I have read a lot of Girard and never got that impression, but I never really ran across clear evidence one way or another. The guy has done a lot of interviews, and he comes across as kind of a moderate. Maybe conservative in some ways, liberal in others. The terms are relative and mean little without context. Dan Knauss (talk) 02:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Net worth

Thiel 's net worth probably needs to be revised after he just sold the majority of his stake in Facebook.[1] Green Cardamom (talk) 23:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

miscellaneous section

I removed this section as trivial and poorly sourced. If any material is readded, can it go in an appropriate section and use high quality RS. --Malerooster (talk) 21:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Chess

this sentence is not clear: "Thiel, in his youth, was an under-21 chess player", perhaps it should be changed to: "Thiel, in his youth, was a very good chess player" 2:16 PM 11/2/16 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.4.180 (talk) 21:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thiel has talked a lot about that and even authored a program where he invested in people 100,000$ each to give up on college and pursue their business ideas instead. Probably should be mentioned in the article. EIN (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning should be rewritten

"Peter Andreas Thiel (German: [ˈpeːtɐ̯ anˈdʀeas tiːl]; born October 11, 1967)[1] is a German-born US (wholly internet) entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and hedge fund manager. Thiel cofounded PayPal with Max Levchin, and later, Elon Musk..."

1) What does "US (wholly Internet) entrepreneur" mean? Is it supposed to mean "US, Internet entrepreneur"? Right now it reads as though somehow he is only an American on the Internet.

2) "Thiel cofounded PayPal with Max Levchin, and later, Elon Musk..." How can simeone be a founder if they came later? At the very least this should be clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeneCallahan (talkcontribs) 13:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed Musk from this sentence. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 18:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

German-born?

The long-standing version of the article descibed Thiel as a "German-born American". This version was first changed by User:Fat&Happy[2] - and the editor keeps removing the information, although most contemporary sources describe him as such, e.g. Evgeny Morozov, To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism, Perseus Books, 2013 [3]. Often, Thiel is even laballed as (e.g. Daily News) "the German businessman, who co-founded PayPal" [4] In my opinion, per WP:OPENPARA → 3.2. the info is "relevant to the subject's notability." - if not relevant, why does the media mention it all the time? → see refs below, for example:

  • Peter Andreas Thiel (/tl/; German: [ˈpeːtɐ̯ anˈdʀeas tiːl]; born October 11, 1967) is a German-born[1][2][3][4][5] American entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and hedge fund manager.
  • References
  1. ^ "Early Facebook investor Peter Thiel sells majority of shares". Los Angeles Times. 20 August 2012. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  2. ^ "Early Facebook backer Peter Thiel offloads shares". The Daily Telegraph. 21 August 2012. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  3. ^ "Invest like a legend: Peter Thiel". The Globe and Mail. 30 January 2014. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  4. ^ "Facebook's first investor Peter Thiel makes London friends with $6M TransferWise deal". Business Matters. 14 May 2013. Retrieved 21 February 2014.
  5. ^ "Xero raises another $159m to fuel global growth". BRW. 14 October 2013. Retrieved 21 February 2014.

I would suggest following the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted until a consensus is reached on the talk page, however User:Fat&Happy prefers to edit war and to remove the content. --IIIraute (talk) 01:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He was born in Germany. The media mentions it. Media frequently mentions things about notable people, especially things that may seem interesting of different; that doesn't make every fact mentioned in the media relevant to their notability and worthy of being placed in the first sentence of the lead. Thiel is notable for being a rich, successful investor and entrepreneur. There is no indication he is particularly noted for his investments in German companies or for his support of particular German politicians or charities. He left Germany as a "toddler", so the culture of the country had little chance to profoundly affect his investment outlook. Would he be less notable if, all other things being equal, he had been born in Mexico, Ghana, Afghanistan, or Antarctica? Exactly how is his birthplace remotely relevant to his notability?
Additionally, IIIraute's version of history seems more than a little disingenuous. The "long-standing version of the article" would actually be the version which described Thiel as "an American businessman" for eight years before IIIraute arbitrarily added "German-born", a version which remained for 20 months before I happened upon it three months ago and reverted it as inappropriate and contrary to the guideline. The more stable version is clearly the version without the late addition. Fat&Happy (talk) 02:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, 20 months is a long-standing version - obviously other editors had agreed with my edit that is backed by countless sources. The media, as well as respected authors do not just mention it, but often even dropp the "American" part - calling him "the German-born", "the German businessmann", etc. meaning, that per WP:OPENPARA → 3.2. the info is "relevant to the subject's notability".
Thiel was not just born in Frankfurt - he was born a German citizen - he is of German ethnicity - he was raised by German parents who moved to the US - his first language was German and he did not obtain US citizenship until a much later age. I am sure that had some influence on him. Basically his whole family lives in Germany. In the German-speaking media he usually is described as being "German", i.e. "the German ..." → Süddeutsche Zeitung: "... der Deutsche Peter Thiel ..." [5] --IIIraute (talk) 03:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know when he gained US citizenship? Was it before or after he gained his notability? I have removed the "german-born" for now. --Malerooster (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:OPENPARAGRAPH "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." I have provided lots of sources that show that it is relevant to the subject's notability.

Most contemporary sources describe him as German-born, e.g. Evgeny Morozov, To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism, Perseus Books, 2013 [6]. Often, Thiel is even laballed as (e.g. Daily News) "the German businessman, who co-founded PayPal" [7] Per WP:OPENPARA → 3.2. the info is "relevant to the subject's notability." - if not relevant, why does the media mention it all the time? → see refs provided in the lead of the article. --IIIraute (talk) 01:34, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have not shown that it is relevant to his notability. --Malerooster (talk) 02:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IIIraute, please gain consensus for the lede before reverting. What do others think? Maybe go to the BLP board? --Malerooster (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that what you should do, before you remove referenced content; i.e. follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in, before you did your bold edit and remove content" (often called the status quo ante)? --IIIraute (talk) 02:13, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, as pointed out above, the article was "stable" for some 8 years? YOU changed the lede per your opinion and bold edit and have been called out on it by more than one editor. Why not have others comment? I will not revert for now. --Malerooster (talk) 02:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
23 months is not a stable, long-standing version? My "opinion" is well referenced. --IIIraute (talk) 02:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No. Looking at the edit history, and this talk page, shows this. --Malerooster (talk) 02:24, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I posted at the BLP board. Hopefully others will comment.--Malerooster (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. --IIIraute (talk) 02:37, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: At the BLP board, it doesn't look like there is consensus for using "german-born" in the first sentence. --Malerooster (talk) 23:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...nor for removing it - anyway, I have removed it for now. --IIIraute (talk) 00:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wish more people had commented, either way. Oh well, this can always be revisited and consensus can change. --Malerooster (talk) 01:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Thiel has been a New Zealand citizen since 2011 and owns a large property at Lake Wanaka. So I guess that makes him a "German-American New Zealander".

Why label Peter Thiel atheist?

The WP article on Peter Thiel states clearly he's views on the subject. Why is it then that some groups forcibly need Thiel to be branded with the atheist label? Why? I see it being done systematically all over Wikipedia by using no source or simply bad ones like NNDB. Wikipedia is not a place for spreading misinformation with clear ulterior motives. SO - Thiel has publicly identified himself as a Christian and the Peter_Thiel#Religious_views section make it also quite clear. Major Torp (talk) 10:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been corrected. Danski14(talk) 20:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Peter Thiel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Peter Thiel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hogan rumour

Has no actual nexus to Thiel from an actual reliable source of fact, alas. Collect (talk) 12:50, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New sources state Thiel has covered some costs of the lawsuit, but no nexus between Thiel and any specific claims by Gawker appear relevant in this BLP. Collect (talk) 13:15, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No comment on inclusion, but the BBC published this an hour ago. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Political Activities

I'm having a hard time understanding how the link to the Gawker lawsuit could be tied to political activities. The body of text really makes no attempt to do this either. Is there another section this would be more relevant in? More than anything it seems to be personally motivated. Mr Ernie (talk) 17:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I am going to move the section now.--MainlyTwelve (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Outing & Gawker lawsuit

Currently the article states that Thiel was 'openly gay' and that both Thiel and the Gawker Valleywag author agree on that, which by implication counters any idea of him being 'outed'.

The cited NY Times reference however states that Thiel was 'openly gay in a wide circle' and that the Gawker author considered that this group did not want this to be known to the public at large and that he disagreed with that notion.

With the best will in the world, that IS the textbook definition of outing someone. Many people historically were 'openly gay' within their own (often elite) social circles, Oscar Wilde for example.

Outing is not only revealing a gay person's sexual orientation if they are 'in the closet', it's also disclosing orientation of someone who is 'out' to those of their choosing, to the world at large, which this guy certainly did "Peter Thiel is totally gay people" being a direct quote.

Just my ten cents78.16.170.235 (talk) 01:43, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 discrimination lawsuit against Palantir

@Sleeping is fun: has three times added information about the lawsuit to the lead and been reverted twice by different editors. On the third addition, they added, somewhat clumsily, the information to the body as well. My position is that at this point, the lawsuit is more appropriately covered at Palantir Technologies, where I've started a similar discussion on Talk:Palantir Technologies. So far, all we have is a statement of the accusation against Palantir, not an adjudicated result. Until there is such a result, repeating the complaint in the lead, or in this Peter Thiel article, is WP:UNDUE.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 14:39, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will repeat what I said on the other talk page: "Given that tech companies are known to have employees monitor their Wikipedia pages, it's not surprising at all to be reverted upon posting the slightest damaging information. Any lawsuits (especially one by the United States government) that allege systemic wrongdoing within a company should be placed in the lead, just like doping scandals are placed in the leads of athletes even when they're not conclusive. It is not undue." I already made the appropriate adjustments to the lead to summarize rather than duplicate the body contents. Thanks for the unnecessary jab though. Thiel co-founded and chairs the company being sued, so he is directly relevant to the case. Any suggestion that this should be buried or hidden from the lead reeks of ulterior motives and conflicts of interest. —Sleeping is fun (talk) 23:10, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This material has been re-introduced to the lead by LibertyDash. As I understood the consensus of non-banned editors, there was no justification for it appearing in the lead, so I have done another revert.  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 05:38, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
An edit war has erupted over this very issue. Apparently now it's an issue of neutrality, censorship and bias, at least according to Empr1ze. While I'm all for neutral, uncensored, unbiased information, I disagree with that viewpoint in this specific scenario because the omission of that information isn't about neutrality, censorship or bias, but rather relevance to the subject in question. In other words, that statement should be kept off this article and kept on Palantir's article, seeing as how it's much more pertinent to Palantir than it is to Thiel. There is such a thing as too much information, even on Wikipedia. Blurp92 (talk) 16:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Views

The second paragraph in that section quotes nearly verbatim from George Packer's book 'The Unwinding' without quotation marks or referencing its original source. The source given is an article that quotes from the book. Shouldn't the original source be referenced here and the paragraph either be highlighted as a quote or be properly paraphrased?Creditisdue (talk) 21:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that "evangelical" here is a mistranslation of the German "evangelisch," which simply means Protestant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.213.61 (talk) 17:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Quotes" section

The 'quotes' section under political activities is awkward and flawed. It reads more like a selected compilation of catchy statements rather than an organized summary of his political positions. I'm not sure why his quotes warrant inclusion here anyway - they don't seem to be necessary to understand his other actions and activities, even the political ones. I'm tempted to redistribute the material into relevant spaces throughout the article and turn it from quotes into summaries. --K.Bog 03:17, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

I saw that there is a typo in the Palantir paragraph. It says: "..named after the Tolkein artefact,..". It should be "Tolkien" of course. Maybe someone could correct that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.23.137.162 (talk) 08:55, 15 December 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, "artefact" should correctly be spelled "artifact".

Semi-protected edit request on 16 December 2016

please change:

  • In 2004, Thiel founded Palantir Technologies, a big data analysis company named after the Tolkein artefact, and

to:

  • In 2004, Thiel founded Palantir Technologies, a big data analysis company named after the Tolkien artefact, and

per the typo-fix-request above. 47.222.203.135 (talk) 22:19, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Mlpearc (open channel) 22:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2016

I just wanted to add that he also wrote this book with Garry Kasparov:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Blueprint-Reviving-Innovation-Rediscovering-Rescuing/dp/0393081478

Someone else can add it too. It doesn't have to be me. Thanks. Knight victor (talk) 02:09, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  B E C K Y S A Y L E 20:51, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support for political candidates

It just seems not neutral to list out all those in political office that Peter has contributed to while George Soros and many others are free of this type of addition in their entry.--RedmondKane (talk) 22:21, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2017


please change:

  • In 2004, Thiel founded Palantir Technologies, a big data analysis company named after the Tolkien artefact, and

to:

  • In 2004, Thiel founded Palantir Technologies, a big data analysis company named after the Tolkien artifact, and

 Done "Artefact" is a valid British/Australian spelling, which would make sense in the Palantír article, but Thiel is American and mostly known for activities in the U.S., so I've changed it per MOS:TIES. Grayfell (talk) 23:13, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2017

Move New Zealand information and nationality "German-American New Zealand"? out of the opening paragraphs. Garry Kasparov has Bosnian and Croatian citizenship but is not called Russian-Bosnian-Croatian chess grandmaster... etc. 2A03:8600:1001:1023:0:0:0:1002 (talk) 19:12, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a tough call because examples of both exist on Wikipedia. Jim Carrey is a Canadian actor, but due to his dual citizenship in both Canada and the United States, Wikipedia calls him a Canadian-American actor. However, Mike Myers has Canadian, American and British citizenships, but Wikipedia refers to him as a Canadian-born actor with UK and US citizenship. Similar case with Elon Musk. I'm tempted to go for something similar to what is on Myers' and Musk's articles and say that Thiel is a German-born entrepreneur who also holds American and New Zealand citizenship. Blurp92 (talk) 21:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Jim Carey article is incorrect in its assignment of nationality. Carey was clearly already notable as a Canadian actor at the time he acquired his US citizenship. Hence he should have been referred to as only Canadian in the lead sentence. Likewise Thiel was already well known as an American businessman, so the reference to his recent NZ citizenship is not in accordance with the wiki guidelines. Theodore D (talk) 06:03, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Already done — Train2104 (t • c) 18:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerkships

Is there a source for the proposition that he interviewed for clerkships with Justices Kennedy and Scalia? 216.165.95.72 (talk) 01:38, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Modern TurboFan Engines on Commercial Airliners

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Jet-Engine-Rolls-Royce/dp/B00KCS6S4W/ref=sr_1_1_twi_har_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488836501&sr=1-1&keywords=rolls+royce+the+jet+engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_GE90#Variants

You should have a good look at the Boeing 777

Best Regards

Darren Mark Horton

86.164.82.154 (talk) 21:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]