Talk:BT Group

message: Among the many documents released during the Edward Snowden revelations of 2013 it was revealed that BT and other telecommunication companies had been cooperating with GCHQ by deploying clandestine monitoring outposts in Oman and Yemen, among other things. Shouldn't these be included under the controversies heading?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark63424 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: BT's complicity in clandestine GCHQ operations

message: BT Group is rebranding according to their website. The logo for BT Group appears to have changed, but the BT brand logo remains the same.
https://www.bt.com/about/bt/our-brands  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:6388:2B01:9598:CEC8:6686:2267 (talk) 09:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo Change

message: well i have also been looking for which shareholder has majority control and come up on a blank, how ever i can tell you that BT is a PLC.
Can anybody see any share ownership data on the website? I can't see anything.--Jerry seinfeld 22:11, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As in, ownership of shares in BT plc? Data on the number of holdings of various sizes and their total weight in the company as a whole? It's on p.143 (or p.144 as the PDF counts it) of the last Annual Report.--rbrwr± 22:48, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership

message: "It has been suggested that BT's Northern Ireland operations may be merged into BT Ireland at some point in the future." - I can't find any source for this, and would find it highly unlikely given the different market and regulatory factors at play - never mind the political sensitivities it would impact upon 
Col mc 01:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: I've added a point about customer services. At present the comment is pretty general, as I don't want to use the article to promote individual customer complaints, but if references are required I'll set up a few specific references to illustrate points raised.
Do you think it would be worth mentioning the problematic waiting times that some people have had whlie trying to use BT's helpline.  If you're not sure about what I mean, check out this link.  The story stems from The Times.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20070818/tuk-britain-offbeat-telecom-company-bt-a7ad41d_1.html
The inclusion of this article seem a bit like a slagging-off ground for BT, rather than an informative and impartial encyclopedia article, in my opinion.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.155.212.216 (talk) 10:22:45, August 19, 2007 (UTC) 
BT are the only operator that are required by their licence to provide connections when requested -- other operators are free to 'cherry pick' their customers. In fact other operators often require the customer to already have a working BT line (the customer pays only line rental to BT). This gives BT a rather monopoly-like position, and with little practical competition it seems that customer service is not a priority for BT: Weeks  or even months to connect a line or fix a fault are not uncommon. Indeed, it is easy to find blog entries etc. of angry BT customers and the frequency with which BT enrage their customers is indicative of genuine incompetence.
unregistered user:     although i do agree that BT has problems with customer service i dont this edit really has a place on this article. i cant see what it brings to the article, if anyone wants to clarify this then fine. but i see no objective comparisons to other providers such as 'talk talk' or AOL who in most peoples opinions have worse reputations. just a smaller customer base. would someone like to clarify this please? or give relevant references as this section seems to me entirely opinion based, do sweeping statements like 'bt are renowned for.....' have a place on an encyclopedia?. thanks. i'll give until 23/11/07 for a reply or i will remove the section in the hope that if it is resurrected that it is more objective and verifiable
::OK.  I've deleted the section.  It's not proper to an Encyclopedia, it's poorly written and it's not NPOV.  It may well be justified, but not here. If someone wants to add a section presenting the issues properly (e.g. surrounding the fact that if BT doesn't provide a physical connection, no service is possible), that would be fine.  --Phil Holmes (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Customer service

message: Due to the recent revert war I have requested that the page is semi-protected. I have also reminded the main participants of the 3RR. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 21:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert war 

message: Someone has posted an advert at the bottom. Not sure on the rules for this, but I'm guessing it's against them. Anyone who knows for sure want to comment/remove it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deeem119 (talk • contribs) 09:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adverts 

message: :Image:BTLogo91.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:BTLogo91.png

message: Does anyone know when Buzby was used as the BT logo? I seem to recall it being used somewhere in the early 80s. Was it before the T, at the same time as the T, or was it used for another part of the BT organisation?81.107.205.91 13:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Buzby - the multi-coloured talking cartoon bird, was launched c. 1977 and was around well into the 1980s.  This puts it around the time of the GPO up to the T, but not sure if Buzby was still around during the T.
Darkieboy236 15:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  PS see Buzby!! Darkieboy236 16:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: The first Buzby ads were in May 1976, which was during the time of Post Office Telecommunications (not the GPO era as such, since Post Office Telephones had became a separate entity distinct from the GPO at the beginning of the decade).  For the TV commercials, Buzby was voiced by well-known actor and singer Bernard Cribbins.   Post Office Telecoms became British Telecom in 1980, and the last BT ads featuring Buzby were circa 1985, just after privatization.  So yes, part of the Buzby period was during the British Telecom "T" era.  146.90.61.45 (talk) 16:53, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buzby? 

message: I think that the external links section, especially the links to BT, is way too big. I do not think that every BT company and service needs to be linked to. I suggest simply linking to the BT home page (bt.com) and the BT Group home page (btplc.com). If people want to go to the other websites, they can search for them on Google or go to the BT or BT group websites. I do not think that the BT Suck link is appropriate either. The site is currently offline and may not be coming back, as it has been offline for months. However, I checked it out using the Internet Archive. It is just a message board for people to complain about BT and sometimes ask for help. Self-help links are not appropriate for an encyclopedia. -- Kjkolb 20:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: We have the initial share price for mmO2, but not for original BT shares.  Anybody recall what they were, around 230p /share I think?
A Taxed Mind (talk) 12:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Share Price at Floatation

message: :Image:GPO badge.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
:Rationale added. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:GPO badge.png

message: BT is not the largest communications operator in Europe. For one, [] France Telecom is larger by revenue, operating income, net income, and by number of employees. Deutsche Telekom is also considerably larger. There is no citation for the claim in the article.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.207.133.54 (talk) 00:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and have deleted the claim.  Please feel free to edit the article yourself where it is incorrect. --Phil Holmes (talk) 08:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Largest communications operator in Europe claim

message: The article states BT has 104,399 (2005-06) employees.  Does anyone have the breakdown of which are contracted staff and which are agency staff?  Does anyone have any breakdown on which department within BT these people work for?  Darkieboy236 (talk) 10:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This will almost certainly be full time employees - agency staff would be on top of this figure and are bot counted as employees. --Phil Holmes (talk) 14:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's certainly a possibility, but never found any official info on it. Darkieboy236 (talk) 23:34, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see.  Darkieboy236 (talk) 09:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Employees 

message: I replaced Dormskirk's deletion of ref in intro - most featured articles I have read contain refs in the intro, wp:style and Introductory_material do not mention this, and the claim of "operating in 170 countries" was previously challenged. Pontificalibus (talk) 10:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref in intro 

message: I've seen several youtube videos about the angry caller that got mad at BT for calling him around 2006.  Maybe there can be a reference to that somewhere in this article.  The youtube videos can be a good source for it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.6.138.214 (talk) 09:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angry BT caller

message: I see that the word 'leading' is used quite often, which is not a very neutral word, and anyway repeated words aren't good style. I would suggest 'major', 'large' etc which are more neutral and certainly true. Leading implies good, which in some cases is disputed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DominicConnor (talk • contribs) 21:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language in the article 

message: I've removed the below, as it's uncited, and uses leading phrases such as "dismal" and "forced"
:There is, however, increasing disquiet among analysts that the annual growth of the Global Services business has been unimpressive, and that BT has been using prior year adjustments to achieve favourable growth figures.
:Take the quarter ended 30 September 2005, for example.  At the time, BT said the external revenues of its Global Services division were £1,740m.  However, a year later, BT revised this figure downwards to £1,703m.  This enabled BT to claim growth of 3.5%, instead of the dismal 1.3% it would have been forced to announce if it hadn't adjusted the prior year's figures.
:BT has made a habit of adjusting the previous year's revenue figure every quarter.  Only once in the past year has BT adjusted the figure upwards rather than downwards.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.215.185 (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed uncited information 

message: The history of BT here is whitewashed. The text is very pro-BT. There is no criticism section. All we know is that privatization in 1984 was just great! and has been ever since! I'm sure there are plenty of opposing views there. - 22:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's difficult to describe any business' activities neutrally without somebody thinking it's marketing-speak; and "criticism" sections are not obligatory. The article already tries to strike a balanced tone; is there any specific criticism missing from it? bobrayner (talk) 07:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article looks pretty fair and balanced to me, if anything with too much emphasis on negative issues.Rangoon11 (talk) 01:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality? 

message: When I joined BT as an apprentice engineer in 1966, it was called General Post Office (Telecommunications). This should be included as it showed that Telecoms at the time was seen as a division of the Post Office. A lot different to today. Molbrum2 (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is referred to indirectly in both the lead and the history section but could be clearer. What would be useful is more precise information on all of the various name changes together with exact dates, which could then be put in a 'Name' section. Rangoon11 (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  1966 name at the time 

message: Possibly re-hashing Section 3. Customer Service here, but I've created a new section since this is a number of years later. 
Anyway, surely that section is related to the Customer service of BT Retail, and not the wider BT Group that this article relates to?  BT Group do not deal with end users, but with CPs and partners. L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 03:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As there is no response almost a week later, I'm removing that section.  Please reply here on on my talk page if you wish to raise anything. L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 13:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[BT_Group#Consumer_rating|Consumer Rating]] 

message: I have added an advert template to the top of the article for the following reasons: 
* The 'history' section has sections that read like like promotional content (WP:PROMO). For example:  a new trading name, BT, a new corporate identity and a new organisational structure. This structure focused on specific market sectors, reflecting the needs of different customers—the individual, the small business or the multinational corporation. - in my mind a discussion of the company's 'mission' or 'motives' is non essential. 
* The lead section has too many statements like the following: 
:It is one of the largest telecommunications services companies in the world'
:: it is a major supplier of telecoms services to corporate and government customers worldwide.
: Its BT Retail division one of the largest suppliers of telephony, broadband and subscription television services in GB, with over 18 million customers.
::the first company in the world to develop a nationwide communications network
A few of these statements need to be changed or removed as potential WP:PUFFERY. 
* The same problem as above except this time statements are dotted around the article for example BT has the largest defined benefit pension plan of any UK public company. 
* Adverts section - Is this really nessesary to refer to non notable promotional compaigns? 
* The controversy section includes non WP:NOTABLE material. Has BT group had any more recent controversies? 
Thoughts? I think the issue has to be raised. Thanks. KingHiggins (talk) 16:49, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi - I think I have toned down all the items you have rightly mentioned above. If you feel that I have missed any please feel free to tone down further. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 15:43, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional Content Issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on BT Group. 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:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2214152/bt-acquires-wire-one
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131110220950/http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/apropos.shtml to http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/apropos.shtml
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 16:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "In 1912, the General Post Office, a government department, became the monopoly telecoms supplier in the United Kingdom." This is just not true. A few local authorities, most notably Kingston-upon-Hull retained control of their telephone systems after 1912, and had local monopolies. They were eventually merged with the Post Office with the exception of Hull. Perhaps someone with better knowlege of the history of the telecomms industry in the UK could edit this article to reflect this. http://www.britishtelephones.com/histuk.htm claims that Hull, Portsmouth and Guernsey were licenced to provide telephone services, with Portsmouth being absorbed by the Post office in 1913. Also see http://home.bt.com/news/bt-life/history-of-bt/a-short-history-of-telecommunications-in-the-uk-11363870786446
86.139.43.209 (talk) 02:33, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "In 1912, the General Post Office... became the monopoly telecoms supplier in the United Kingdom" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on BT Group. 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/20110524153535/http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/peopleonpage.shtml to http://www.f-secure.com/sw-desc/peopleonpage.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:22, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on BT Group. 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/20071210095250/http://www.yellgroup.com/english/aboutyell-yelluk-yellukhistory-2000 to http://www.yellgroup.com/english/aboutyell-yelluk-yellukhistory-2000
*Added  tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DUJ/is_/ai_n9772149
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718134135/http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bt-pension-deficit-falls-2-9bn-on-cpi-inflation-link-change-tele-4c5fdd6acc90.html to http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bt-pension-deficit-falls-2-9bn-on-cpi-inflation-link-change-tele-4c5fdd6acc90.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140503162734/http://www.livingunderdrones.org/ to http://www.livingunderdrones.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140521031829/http://www.reprieve.org.uk/media/downloads/2013_07_15_PUB_Complaint_to_UK_NCP_re_BT_plc.pdf to http://www.reprieve.org.uk/media/downloads/2013_07_15_PUB_Complaint_to_UK_NCP_re_BT_plc.pdf
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) 02:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on BT Group. 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/20130501223523/http://connectedplanetonline.com/home/news/bt_consulting_business_120606/ to http://connectedplanetonline.com/home/news/bt_consulting_business_120606/
*Added  tag to http://www.computerwire.com/industries/research/?pid=6E892FE0-2D6A-4870-82DA-2EFD22D6D788
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081007031518/http://www.computerwire.com/industries/research/?pid=FFF73A29-8EAC-4FA6-BD80-883AD44E3CCB to http://www.computerwire.com/industries/research/?pid=FFF73A29-8EAC-4FA6-BD80-883AD44E3CCB
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110910105231/http://www.cwu-cctv.org/article.php?articleid=259 to http://www.cwu-cctv.org/article.php?articleid=259
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) 07:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on BT Group. 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/20150903212234/http://e-callconnect.co.uk/bt-plans-to-switch-off-isdn-network-by-2025/ to http://e-callconnect.co.uk/bt-plans-to-switch-off-isdn-network-by-2025/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111023103222/http://www.btpensions.net/41/scheme-report-and-accounts to http://www.btpensions.net/41/scheme-report-and-accounts
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) 06:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on BT Group. 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/20121030101249/http://www.silverlinings.eu/voice/telephone-lines/local-loop-unbundling/ to http://www.silverlinings.eu/voice/telephone-lines/local-loop-unbundling/
*Added  tag to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-home/article-23449601-details/Web+users+angry+at+ISPs%27+spyware+tie-up/article.do
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) 20:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as BT Group, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images from either web sites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://web.archive.org/web/20100527143141/http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/BTsHistory/History.htm, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
*Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:BT Group and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, BT Group, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
*If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:BT Group. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
*If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:BT Group with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:BT Group saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.
Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Banana19208 (talk) 07:45, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So this was the edit that introduced the offending copy. Fob.schools (talk) 09:36, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a COI, as an employee, so can't do it myself - but it would be fab if someone could restore the article - minus the identified copyrighted text - rather than leaving this rather embarrassing state of affairs. I'm sure this page gets quite a few views. Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 21:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright problem: BT Group

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you so much for taking the time to work through this! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:26, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed