Talk:Mulesing

message: This article desperately needs the attention of someone who is not an animal rights activist and knows something about sheep. SchmuckyTheCat 15:12, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cleaned up a bit by removing some superfluous information that seemed to stem from bias and fixing some grammar. I will probably continue to do as time permits. --208.44.234.50 00:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Skillions is not a word. Please do not use it on Wikipedia. 2001:569:5657:1000:EC90:F2E8:7CC2:86DE (talk) 01:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: POV template

message: According Federated Farmers mulesing is not carried out in New Zealand. New Zealand’s Merino industry imposed a voluntary ban from the end of 2010, but not all farmers adhere to it. . This needs to be verified and and used to update the article. Alan Liefting 06:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found that according to the Federated Farmers, 4% of sheep in New Zealand are currently mulesed.. No other leads though. I'd be interested if that's true since New Zealand doesn't attract the same controversy as Australia has recently. --208.44.234.50 00:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: PETA is upset about both mulesing and live sheep export - I don't know that NZ do both those activities? PETA has more members in Australia than NZ too I expect. Australia is more urbanised than NZ. So animal husbandry practices aren't as everyday to the urbanised Australian PETA members compared to the more likely to be rural PETA members in NZ. Garrie 00:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is less prevalent in New Zealand where about one-third of merino sheep farmers are understood to still practice mulesing. Garrie 02:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Note, although there are almost 40 million sheep in NZ, only about 2million are Merino's - same ref. Garrie 02:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mulesing in New Zealand 

message: One possible source of anti-mulesing activism photos might be this animal activism web site. There's a photo of Lucy the Sheep with Latham and Beatie. We'd probably have to ask for licensing though. Andjam 11:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos of anti-mulesing activism 

message: Sorry if this annoys anyone but this is the current model code of practice for sheep from CSIRO. Appendix 4 deals specifically with Mulesing.
Is there an article on pizzle dropping? It's red so I guess not. If PETA don't like mulesing, what have they got to say about cutting skin in front of the penis of an animal to reduce staining of wool (and as a bonus reduce fly-strike)?
 
Garrie 03:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Code of practice reference 

message: It should be noted that most of the pictures I have seen visiting the various animal welfare organisation sites, show animals which have been mulsed other than in accordance with the recommended techniques (ie, done badly). This is why there is so much blood in most of the photos - which are inherently POV photos taken and distributed with the goal to incite feelings that this practice should be ceased.
I am all for banning people who don't know what they are doing, from taking a cutting implement to an animal (or a burning implement for that matter). But taking photos of people who are doing it wrong, and using them to ban the practice altogether, is not exactly NPOV.
Unfortunately there are very few photos of well-mulesed sheep around. I think the article would be greatly improved by providing a clearly labelled picture of a sheep which 'has been mulsed in accordance with the recommendations of DPI, CSIRO etc.
Garrie 04:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: China produces more wool than Australia. The major problem fly for Australia is from South Africa, which also has merinos.
What is the status of mulesing in these countries? If Mulesing was routine in China - could PETA do anything about it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GarrieIrons (talk • contribs) 02:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  China, South Africa 

message: I was looking for something to go with "mulesing is illegal in the UK..." and I got this:
Britain produces less than 5% of world wool and is unable to influence the international market, which has suffered through generally reduced demand and little activity in China. In addition, because of adverse currency rates, in particular the strength of the $US, British Wool prices have suffered, in the same way as lamb prices, by being uncompetitive with comparable New Zealand types. 
However, it's still worth bearing in mind that French producers will be lucky to receive 23p/kg that, elsewhere in Europe, the price is so low that it is not worth moving off the farm and that, without the Wool Board British farmers would now have to pay to dispose of their wool. 
Now classed as a category 3 animal by-product waste, unwanted fleeces can only be incinerated and not burned, or buried, on-farm. In order to handle wool, all Wool Board depots are now required to have a Bio-Security clearance certificate and DEFRA is looking at on-farm collection centres. 
 from "The British Wool Marketing Board", Sheep Farmer - Wool Update - July/August, 01/07/06
ie - without subsidy in the UK it's not worth moving wool off the farm it's produced on - compared to in Australia where the 5+ year old merino weather is the waste product which we ship off to the UAE to get rid of.Garrie 02:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (but I still can't find a source for the law in the UK)Garrie 02:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree and I'm removing the statement. Anyone who can source it is free to put it back. Chances are they just don't have a code of practice for it but that's a lot different to it being illegal.Garrie 13:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something interesting from the UK 

message: We have to get someone to go to Abercrombie & Fitch Co. and see if they are stocking wool products. I have just returned from the USA and as I am interested in textiles I look at what is in the stores, they still haven't discovered good quality woollen jumpers but they have discovered good quality woollen suits. Charles Esson 09:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have taken the novel approach of leaving a message on the talk page. I'm assuming this is re: the PETA thing.Garrie 21:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another thing we have to do.

message: The section /*Controversy*/ includes:
Proponents of mulesing are largely from Australia where hot and humid weather is naturally conducive for severe fly strikes (unreferenced otherwise I wouldn't really question it).
I didn't think the humidity around Hay, New South Wales was particularly high - especially compared to say New Zealand or England humidity levels. Yet flystrike is still an issue (even in droughts - when I am guessing again, humidity is low). I don't think it's the environmental humidity that contributes to flystrike - it's the humidity within the wool layer which is probably fairly consistant regardless of ambient humidity.
But I'm easily swayed on this one...Garrie 13:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  stated cause of flystrike 

message: I formatted the reference added by Prester John but I don't believe it is reliable:
Mulesing is currently illegal in Britain where fly strike is a relatively controllable problem. 
Quotes in the article include:
*"Mulesing is the partial skinning alive of lambs..."
*"Stock hands carry out the operation with no demand for competence..."
*"Blowflies look like house files..."
How do we know this one is any better?
*"Mulesing is illegal in Britain."
--Scott Davis Talk 09:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been told my edit to this part of the article are pushing a personal bias so I'll step back from discussions about the reliability of the reference. But it may be difficult to find a single reference which supports both sections of this statement.Garrie 22:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've asked for reference assistance at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#Mulesing legality reference question. --Scott Davis Talk 01:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

text: In Legal Status in UK" section above, IP contributor has pointed out the comment in the BBC / Pink article...This one. I will directly cite the relevant part of the article.Garrie 21:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  reliable references 

message: I sent the following email to: info@peta.org.uk . I will let you know if I get a responce.
Could you please supply a reference for the statement "Mulesing is illegal in the UK". 
We need a reference for the wikipedia article on Mulesing.
Regards.
Charles Esson 21:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Email to PETA

message: The lede currently says that mulesing "is expected to be phased out by 2010." The two references at the end of that sentence relate to earlier parts of the sentence. Does anyone have a good source for the "phased out by 2010" bit? I'd guess that sheep breeders hope to produce ewes with bare backsides through genetic manipulation, and I wonder whether they plan to use the old-fashioned (several millenia, at least) GM methods or the 'new-fangled' approach. The latter would, of course, cause a whole new set of protests by ignorant city people. Cheers, CWC(talk) 23:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: See P. J. James, "Genetic alternatives to mulesing and tail docking in sheep: a review", Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, Vol. 46, No. 1 (Feb 2006), Pages 1-18. (I haven't read it yet.) CWC(talk) 11:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obsolete by 2010? 

message: Until recently, we had the following sentence:
:Mules discovered that, after being struck many times, one of his sheep was losing the wrinkles round her hind end due to close crutching when his hand slipped with the shears, removing skin.
I'm not the only one confused by this sentence, so I've just rewritten it to be simpler but less informative.
I've discovered that the reference for the history of Mulesing is  Beveridge, W. I. B., "The Origin and Early History of the Mules Operation". Australian Veterinary Journal 61(5), 1984, pp161-163 ()
but I couldn't find a copy. Does anyone have one? Cheers, CWC(talk) 11:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: What has the view of a pop singer and her back flip got to do with a encyclopedia article on Mulesing; if there is an article on Pink, or urban myths mention it there (I suspect she only got a mention because she gave legs to the urban myth that mulesing was illegal in england).
Charles Esson 21:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pink

message: I've just moved the following paragraph here. It was added last January. It is deeply misleading and contains some important outright lies.
:In their comprehensive, long-term study, Fell and Shutt (1989) found that stress-related behavior in sheep continued for up to 113 days following mulesing. Among other examples, mulesed sheep displayed abnormal postures most likely resulting from the painful mulesing wound for up to 48 hours following mutilation; they stood with head down, nose almost touching the ground, back arched, and body hunched (p. 288). Chapman et al. (1994) verified these findings in their own study, reporting that surgically mulesed sheep quickly assumed a hunched-up posture (p. 246). Normal daily behavior was also altered for up to 72 hours. Compared to sheep in the control group, mulesed sheep did not engage in routine feeding, lying, or grazing. Instead, they spent much of their time standing still, unable to engage in normal activities because of the severe trauma that they had experienced. Researchers did not observe any of the mulesed animals lying or resting on the day following mutilation or even drinking until the second day following mutilation. Chapman et al. (1994) also found that mulesed sheep lost weight during the week following mutilation, moved about less frequently and over shorter distances than the control-group sheep during the first eight days after treatment, and often simply stood still (pp. 244–45). 
Points to note:
#That link is to Google's HTML version of http://www.savethesheep.com/pdf/WoolReport12-04-02.pdf.
#That PDF is entitled "An Examination Of Two Major Forms Of Cruelty In Australian Wool Production: Mulesing And Live Exports". Woops, there goes Reliable Sourcing ...
#www.SaveTheSheep.com?! Could there be a bit of an agenda there?Well, yes: it's run by PETA.
#In a closely related development, the very title reveals profound ignorance: since when has "Live Exports" been part of "Wool Production"?
#"Fell and Shutt (1989)" actually refers to "Behavioural and hormonal responses to acute surgical stress in sheep", L. R. Fell and D. A. Shutt, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Volume 22, Issues 3-4, April 1989, Pages 283-294. Abstract here; a PDF of the paper costs US$30.  This is not a "comprehensive, long-term study" of mulesing: they studied 20 wethers for about 3 months.  (It is a very nice piece of research. They mulesed 10 wethers aged 6–7 months and measured their stress levels over the next few months, along with a control group. The abstract is certainly worth reading.)
#"Chapman et al (1994)" is "A comparison of stress in surgically and non-surgically mulesed sheep", Chapman R E, Fell L R and Shutt D A, Australian Veterinary Journal, 71(11):388 (Nov 1994). Article is not available online (?!), abstract here.  (They were trying "a quaternary ammonium compound" which damages the skin enough to prevent wool growth, and they compared the results of chemical mulesing and surgical mulesing on some 9-10 month old wethers.)
#Neither of those papers studied the mulesing of weeks-old ewes. Both studied mulesing of wethers at least six months old. (Note: anyone who does not know why the gender difference is vital has no understanding of this topic.)
#That text is a word-for-word copy from the PETA propaganda. Only a few punctuation marks have been changed.
Long story short: this text is (1) a Copyright Violation and (2) PETA propaganda masquerading as an academic study by radically misrepresenting real research. Bah. CWC 11:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academic studies 

message: Knowing a few farmers, they've told me that there has been heavy resistance to the 2010 phase out of muelsing, because of no viable alternatives. I want to add this in but I can't cite it. Goldfishsoldier 09:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand it, it's less that there are no viable alternatives, and more that they simply don't have the money to implement them. The vast majority of Merino farmers are like the vast majority of any other sort of farmer; they are not rich men, and many live within a single lousy season of losing the farm. Mulesing works, and costs next to nothing. In order to get the same level of effectiveness, they'd have to combine bi-weekly crutching with monthly Ivermectin injections. That's about 10 times as labor-intensive and expensive. And so now they're in a situation where, thanks to the ham-fisted ultra-leftist ignorance of PETA (and people like Pink, who I doubt has ever seen a sheep that wasn't on a PETA video) they face bankruptcy if they don't stop and bankruptcy if they do. Wonderfully intelligent response from a group of people that has made it amply clear that neither reality nor ruination of good, honest people are factors in their decision making. Bullzeye  (Ring for Service)  —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 17:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some folks around here have high hopes for breech clips. Let's hope they work out. Cheers, CWC 15:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So from what you say, the ONLY reason that there is resistance to phasing out mulesing is economic - "10 times as labor-intensive and expensive?" I think that agrees with what PETA says. Can you document that PETA is ham-fisted? I thought they were opposed to any animal use. As well, if you are going to call a group "ultra-leftist" I think you have to provide documentation - I searched the PETA web site and could find no mention of any political affiliation. Is merino wool a necessity? I understand that many farmers earn their living producing it, but is it necessary to life on earth? If not, and if cruelty to animals is a necessary part of its production, I don't think your economic argument holds up. Just trying to get a handle on this. Thanks Bob98133 18:14, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resistance to phase-out 

message: Some editors have been over-using the "Undo" feature, apparently to remove my description of flystrike as "being slowly eaten alive by maggots". However, I made other important corrections in this edit, so their reversions put bad/misleading/incorrect claims back into the article. Please stop doing that!
Anyone who wants to get rid of that accurate and informative description will have to
#Argue a case against it based on Wikipedia policies.
#Gain consensus for their argument.
#Do an actual edit to remove just that parenthesis, rather than just clicking on "Undo".
I have explained at some length above why I think this "dramatic" description is vital to the article. So far no-one has even attempted to counter my arguments. Cheers, CWC 08:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't expect Lester to offer any counter-arguments. He doesn't even recognise the argument that you are making. It doesn't occur to him that people reverting his nonsense are trying to write an encyclopedia. He prefers to live in his paranoid fantasy he is being "baited". Prester John  -(Talk to the Hand) 02:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Prester John, I reverted you revert a week ago (once) because there were active discussions taking place at the time that you had not participated in. You reverted the article, but I still don't see you discussing the article content. --Lester 11:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Prester, you don't make clear which part of the article you are talking about, however, if it is the description/definition of flystrike you are referring to, there is an existing discussion taking place in the section above, Dramatic description of Flystrike. Join us there for a discussion. --Lester 20:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  October-November 2007 

message: i thought i should better write here otherwise any changes i made would be dismised. all changes i mase are aimed at providing a more neutral view. for example in the intro i feel it is better to have the proffesional opinion before the activist one. and the first cite says that muelsing is a surgical procedure which is more truthful than the previous description. if you would like more rational for changes just ask and if you revert any changes can i please have your reasoning. ta Grinchsmate (talk) 07:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that the reference used refers to mulesing as a surgical procedure, so I guess it is although I'd think twice before I let a sheep farmer operate on me! I've added this to the controversy section since it is a relevant part of the controversy that a surgical procedure is being performed by unlicensed, essentially unregulated workers who have not been trained in veterinary medicine.Bob98133 (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: checking in

message: In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 
* "DPI SOP" :
** 
** 
DumZiBoT (talk) 03:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot report : Found duplicate references ! 

message: There's a mistake in the third chapter, mulesing is not being banned or phased out in Australia by the end of 2010, the decision was taken back last July and no new deadline has been set. 
Some references:
http://www.animalsaustralia.org/media/press_releases.php?release=121
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/28/2638991.htm
Would appreciate it if a more experienced editor than me would correct the article. Thanks!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.8.126.28 (talk) 10:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mulesing not being banned / phased out 

message: Soft rolling skin sheep (SRS) are just as susceptible to flystrike as most other Merinos. With the ~proposed phase-out of mulesing SRS sheep are now being touted as a breeding solution to flystrike problems. Australia: SRS wool leads to pilling: wool processor Cgoodwin (talk) 22:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What's with the little trademark symbol? Anyway I'll have a look at it tommorow, lloks like a copyvioTicklemygrits (talk) 11:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soft rolling skin sheep (SRS) 

message: So a farmer spots a sheep with flystrike and instead of treating it, the farmer leaves it to die? It seems to me that to go from not mulesing to death would require gross negligence on the part of the farmer.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.7.151 (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do flystrikes lead to slow and agonising deaths? 

message: Oreo Priest recently objected in an edit summary to a previous editor Ohconfucius making a request to use EE in this article.  This was on the grounds that mulesing is common in Australia and therefore should NOT use EE. I don't know why Ohconfucius wanted to post a tag to use EE but I lived in Australia for 12 years and EE is used, not AE so I do not understand the concerns of either editor.  Perhaps one or both would like to explain?__DrChrissy (talk) 20:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: EE? Do you mean British English? And Australian English says that it's the variety spoken in Australia. Oreo Priest talk 16:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, yes, I did mean British English.  Are there any differences between written British English and written Australian English?__DrChrissy (talk) 20:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just looked at Australian English and I concede that there are accepted differences to BE.   I find this amazing because I went to high school and University in Perth and I was never aware of these differences.  So, there may be a point to requesting the article is written in Australian English rather than British English.__DrChrissy (talk) 20:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: EE or AE (English)?

message: The (currently) eighth reference: 'Bob Garnant (30 July 2009). "AWI scraps mulesing deadline". Countryman. West Australian Newspapers Pty Ltd. Retrieved 2010-01-18.' appears to be a dead link. Should it be removed? I didn't find the original article by other means. --77.180.196.75 (talk) 21:55, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, dead links are not removed. Have you tried the Internet Archive? Oreo Priest talk 22:34, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have tagged it as a dead link to alert editors that we need to try and rectify this__DrChrissy (talk) 17:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to the West Australian Newspaper "AWI scraps mulesing deadline" seems dead 

message: This article doesn't seem to cover the instance of mulesing outside of Australia (and New Zealand somewhat). Is there any way this could be added, or at least mention something like "Mulesing is not common practice outside of these countries owing to XYZ"? 211.30.51.180 (talk) 03:45, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mulesing elsewhere 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mulesing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080315045211/http://www.news.com.au:80/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23349611-5005961,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23349611-5005961,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mulesing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091018045528/http://countryman.com.au/article/2581.html to http://www.countryman.com.au/article/2581.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Mulesing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070906155137/http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/livestock/animal-welfare/general/other/livestock/sop/sheep/mulesing to http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/livestock/animal-welfare/general/other/livestock/sop/sheep/mulesing
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.countryman.com.au/article/2581.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080907064910/http://www.wool.com.au/mediaLibrary/attachments/Publications/insight_Blowfly_211106.pdf to http://www.wool.com.au/mediaLibrary/attachments/Publications/insight_Blowfly_211106.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071009055705/http://permits.apvma.gov.au/PER8660.PDF to http://permits.apvma.gov.au/PER8660.PDF
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081121013331/http://www.animalliberation.com.au/issues/mulesing.html to http://www.animalliberation.com.au/issues/mulesing.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106062628/http://sl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/wool/general/peta-claims-another-retailer-joins-wool-boycott/1388691.aspx to http://sl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/wool/general/peta-claims-another-retailer-joins-wool-boycott/1388691.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Mulesing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070829232718/http://www.nff.org.au/get/2432305991.doc to http://www.nff.org.au/get/2432305991.doc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080801010544/http://avacms.eseries.hengesystems.com.au/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Search to http://avacms.eseries.hengesystems.com.au/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Search&template=%2FCM%2FHTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=6301
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509075107/http://blog.anta.net/2008/03/26/helsinki-protest-against-australian-cruelty-to-sheep/ to http://blog.anta.net/2008/03/26/helsinki-protest-against-australian-cruelty-to-sheep
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070108103310/http://www.wool.com.au/Animal_Health/Alternatives_to_mulesing/page__2050.aspx to http://www.wool.com.au/Animal_Health/Alternatives_to_mulesing/page__2050.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:15, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)