Talk:Farang

Farang

we heard that "farang" means 'longnose' and was applied to all caucasians. then because of the many french in indochine, their country 'france' was called 'farangset' = 'land of the longnose'. ตาน้ำ (dtaa nam) = spring, natural fountain; mouth of a spring; subterranean course of water--Scyriacus (talk) 08:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I cannot find it at the moment, but I have read in different places that the word Farang dates back much farther then the 17th century and that it comes from other words. Francais -> Farangset is just a coincidence. I will see if I can find it again. Also kee nok refers more to someone being stinchy. Bird shit is white! Hence it is used more to refer to a white foreigner being stinchy. Thais themselves will say Kee niauw. Waerth 13:40, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Kee nok seems to have a range of meanings; I've updated the article to reflect that. Markalexander100 03:18, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• "Farang ta nam khao" Th: ฝรั่งตาน้ำข้าว) means blue-eyed farang, according to my wife. The Thai language is one that has had trouble distinguishing blue from green. The default word for Blue was recently สีน้ำเงิน literally, the colour of silver, a poetical reference to the silvery sheen of the deep blue sea. It now means Navy Blue, and the default word is now สีฟ้า literally, the colour of the sky, acording to Blue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pawyilee (talk • contribs) 13:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Origin of Farang

When Siam first open its door to trade with Europeans in Ayutthaya period, a land was given to the Portuguese merchants to conduct their business at "Baan Faraang" (Guava Village, these is a common naming conventions of village to name the locale by what ever is in abundance there) Thus the Europeans are referred to as Farangs ever since. I'll put this in to the article if nobody would dispute it.

Can you give a reference? Markalexander100 00:35, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I haven't got anything on my hands at the moment, but if you can read Thai, check out high school history text books, (it's been a while since I've seen one of those) --Bobbagum 11:14, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've added it to the article, giving them as alternative explanations. I suspect they're both just best guesses. Markalexander100 02:26, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've read somewhere that it's actually derived from the Persian word mentioned here, which is in turn derived from a similar-sounding Arabic word derived from "Frank"(i.e. the Franks).

There was a discussion back in 1993/1994 in usenet-newsgroup "soc.culture.thai" about Origin of the word "Farang". That discussion is still available under [1] and [2]. --hdamm 11:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

George A. Sioris in his 1998 article, PHAULKON, THE GREEK FIRST COUNSELLOR AT THE COURT OF SIAM: AN APPRAISAL, says

1688, Jan - The French soldiers become increasingly unpopular with the Thais due to their display of racist and insolent attitudes. Anti-foreign organizations are born and the religious prejudices of the people are likewise aroused. It should be noted that the term used by Thais until today for western foreigners is farang, an abbreviation of the original farangse - the Thai word for the French (Francais in French). The term farang had a negative connotation until after World War II.

Posted by Pawyilee (talk) 19:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

As the diskussion is still going on, I'd like to cite from my post above Mr. Gwyn Williams, Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Liberal Arts, Thammasat University what he wrote back in March 1994 in the usenet grout soc.culture.thai:

ORIGIN OF THE WORD "FARANG"

A wide-spread belief in Thailand is that the word "farang" (Caucasian) is derived from the French word "francais". This derivation is implausible on phonetic and historical grounds. It is in fact a popular misconception. It is true, however, that these words have the same ultimate source.

The word is attested in various forms in languages in Europe, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. It is clear that the word orginated as "Frank" in Europe and spread eastwards along Muslim trade routes.

Thai most likely borrowed the word from influential Muslim Persian or Indian traders in the 17th century or even earlier. The Persian word was "farangg". The term probably was used to refer to early Portuguese traders and subsequently to all Europeans (ie., non-Muslims).

It is possible that the Thai word "farangset" ("French") is a blend of the word "farang" and the French word "francais", ie., "farangset" is actually derived from "farang", not vice versa. Certainly, the word "farang" existed prior to, and independently of, "farangset".

Mr. Gwyn Williams Department of Linguistics Faculty of Liberal Arts Thammasat University March 26, 1994

If you're interested in the rest of the conversation, it is here and here --hdamm (talk) 14:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I find myself agreeing with both positions: "farang" existed prior to, and independently of, "farangset"; amongst Muslims, the Franks had already given it a bad odor; then the "farangset" in the time of Narai really made it stink. (Rev. comment) Pawyilee (talk) 13:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

PS: Frankly, I'm surprised nothing is said about what it means to be perfectly frank. Pawyilee (talk) 13:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Alanboatman (talk) 10:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC) I am inclined to believe that Farang is from the persian 'farangi', 'foreigners'and spread eastwards along Muslim trade routes. I also believe that this may have originally come from the old greek 'hoi barrangoi'. This word refered to ' traders that provide security for their part in the bargain' and refered specifically to Vikings. Vikings during the 9th and 10th century travelled up the rivers of Eastern Europe both for trade, pirating and mercinary activities to the Black and Caspian Seas. They were so respected as fiersome warriors (as well as traders) that they were invited to form an elite guard (Palace Guard)for the Basilus of Bysantium in Constantinople. This was on the grounds that they were less likely to be embroiled in the internal politics of the state and hence trustworthy. The Swedes refered to themselves as 'Varrangjar' or 'Varrangi' from the greek, while the Danes and Norwegians prefered 'Vikingr'. Hence the name for the elite troops of Byzantium as the Varangian Guard. Other persian and arab traders they met and did business with probably also refered to them as 'varangi' or 'farangi'. Since the Franks looked very similar (ethnically similar) and were the only other 'white northern folk' to be present in the area at the time both the Franks and the Varangjar were probably termed Ferengi - traders (with weapons).

Hence the Malay, Khmer, Thai, Lao, Hindi derivations of the Persian adaption of both Varagis and Franks.Alanboatman (talk) 09:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Maan farang and mhak farang

Maan farang (potatoes) and mhak farang (chewing gum) with the word farang refer to something imported. Since there are different Maan (another potato type) and Mhak (chewing stuff) in Thailand before, so when the potatoes and chewing gums were introduced in Thailand, they're assigned the name "farang." - User:Manop

literature and films

Sounds like an advertisement for Christopher Moore to me? His books are from the perspective of a foreigner living in Thailand. This article is about a Thai word for people like that, not about the people themselves, nor about their perspectives. Any resistance to removing this section? maxsch (talk) 03:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Keenok

ขี้นกสร้อยนกเขาทะเลข้างตะเภา PAINTED SWEETLIPS Diagramma pictum ลักษณะ ทั่วไป : เป็นปลาทะเล ที่มีขนาดค่อนข้างใหญ่ ลำตัวค่อนข้างยาว ด้านบน แบน ข้าง สันหลัง โค้ง นูน ท้องแบน เรียบ ปาก เล็ก มี ริม ปาก หนา มี ฟัน ขนาดเล็ก บน ขากรรไกร ทั้งสอง ข้าง ใต้ คาง มี รูพรุน 6 รู เกล็ด มี ขนาดเล็ก ปกคลุม ตลอด ลำตัว และ หัว สี ลำตัว จะ เปลี่ยนแปลง ไป ตาม ขนาด อายุ ของ ปลา คือ ปลา ขนาดเล็ก ลำตัว มี สี ขาว ส่วนหัว ด้านบน สี เหลือง และ มี แถบ สีน้ำตาล ปน ดำ 5 แถบ พาด ไป ตาม ความ ยาว ลำตัว เมื่อ มี ขนาดใหญ่ ขึ้น แถบ สี จะ จางหาย ไป และ มี จุด สีน้ำตาล ปน ดำปรา กฎ ขึ้นมา แทน และ จุด สี จะ จางหาย ไป เมื่อ ปลา อายุ มากขึ้น ถิ่น อาศัย : อาศัย อยู่ ตาม หน้า ดิน หรือ แนว ปะการัง พบ ทั่วไป บริเวณ ชาย ฝั่งทะเล ทั้ง อ่าวไทย และ ทะเล อัน ดามัน อาหาร : กิน ปลา และ สัตว์น้ำ ที่ อาศัย อยู่ ตาม หน้า ดิน และ แนว ปะการัง ขนาด : ความ ยาว ประมาณ 35-45 ซ. ม. แต่ เคย พบ ว่า บาง ตัว มี ความ ยาว ถึง 60 ซ. ม. ประโยชน์ : เนื้อ ใช้ ปรุงอาหาร

http://www.amonline.net.au/FISHES/fishfacts/fish/dpictum.htm Painted Sweetlips Diagramma pictum (Thunberg, 1792) Painted Sweetlips Above and below: Painted Sweetlips at a depth of 22 m, Maewo Island, Asanvari Bay, Vanuatu, July 2003. Photo: E. Schlögl. View larger image. Painted Sweetlips Photo: E. Schlögl. View larger image. Painted Sweetlips A Painted Sweetlips at a depth of 30 m, Maewo Island, Asanvari Bay, Vanuatu, July 2003. Photo: E. Schlögl. View larger image.

Adult Painted Sweetlips are blue-grey with yellow to golden spots on the head, body and fins. The spots on the head often form lines.

It grows to about 1 m in length, but is common to 45 cm.

The species occurs in tropical waters of the Indo-West and Central Pacific. It is found in coastal and sandy reef areas in depths to 80 m.

It is not known from Australian waters.

The Painted Sweetlips feeds on bottom-dwelling invertebrates and small fishes.

The species is related to the Slate Sweetlips (D. labiosum). Another species with yellowish spots is the Gold-spotted Sweetlips. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pawyilee (talk • contribs) 16:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

map

It would be better if the map only highlighted countries with mostly European-descended citizens. Right now it looks like most farang come from China, but a Chinese person would never be thought of as a farang. 68.160.11.155 (talk) 16:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki

Here's a copy of a discussion from my talk page. --hdamm (talk) 17:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

---

Hello,

I don't understand why you want to change the th interwiki for Farang.th:ชาวตะวันตก refers to The Westerner, not Farang

--Hercule (talk) 14:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

And what is the difference between "Westerner" and "Farang"? BTW: did you check th:ฝรั่ง? This page has nothing to do with those Farang from our article, its just a disambiguation, and deals with Guave, French and France. So why should we link to it? --hdamm (talk) 15:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

th:Farang is linked with all other wikis Farang named articles. Since there is no specific article for the expression, ฝรั่ง is the best interwiki. It's the page to the name, and show what other acceptations of the word.

The Westerner is something else, and the page refers to films, series and newspaper ...

--Hercule (talk) 15:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you should read the linked Thai article then? In the first paragraph "ทำไมถึงเรียกว่าตะวันตก" ("Why it is called West") it is written: ... เรา เรียก ชาวตะวันตก ต่อเมื่อ เขา เป็น คน ฝรั่ง เช่น ชาวยุโรป ชาวอเมริกัน ชาว ออสเตรเลีย ล้วน เรียก ว่า ชาวตะวันตก ("we call westeners Farang, for example Europeans, Americans, Australians - all are called westeners"). Thats in short the contents of Farang, not? BTW, it is also linked in th:ฝรั่ง (in the last line). --hdamm (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, now I know what you mean: the Interwiki link from th:ชาวตะวันตก went to The Westerner. Well, as this Thai article has nothing to do with "The Westerner" but goes about "Inhabitants of the Western World", I changed the Interwiki link accordingly. Sorry for me being so dumb. --hdamm (talk) 15:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

If you change the th interwiki here, change it also in interwikis of th:ฝรั่ง (de:Farang, en:Farang, fr:Farang,nl:Farang,ru:Фаранг and wuu:法朗 (泰语))), and move th:ฝรั่ง interwikis to th:ชาวตะวันตก ;) (I don't speak thaï.

Regards --Hercule (talk) 16:04, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Heading: 'Farangs in Thailand'

Sounds biased, emotional, prejudicial and racist. "Many farangs...marry...ugly women". I'm a white American and I can understand your rage, and thanks for proving whites are not the only people capable of racism--and opposing mixed-raced marriages is racism. In any case this article is for the meaning and origin of the term, not personal viewpoints. I hope this gets fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.119.207.171 (talk) 05:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

farang khi nok

"Farang khi nok" (Thai: ฝรั่งขี้นก) literally means bird droppings only to illiterate foreigners. For a Royal Institute reference to a native Thai putting on foreign airs, as well as for the fruit and the fish — the two being disambiguated with prefixes meaning tree and water-animal, respectively — see Thai-Language.Com ฝรั่งขี้นก. This links to ขี้ (khee [Falling tone]) definition 2. Khee is a generic term for waste of any kind, including waste of time and wasteful habits. English has such a shitty attitude toward shit and shat that neither terms are in my collegiate dictionary, and that biases definitions of khee. For instance, ขี้ใหม่หมาหอม (khee[F] mai[L] maa[R] haawm[R]) derives from a dog's sensible habit of sniffing fresh waste to assess the animal that dropped it, but in humans means to dog fashion (not "A new broom sweeps clean.") --Pawyilee (talk) 16:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

per Eteymology and related words

Reading the Etymology section on the "Lingua franca" article of wikipedia, I couldnt help but notice there is research pointing to different words in Arabic and Greek. The Etymology sub-section follows:

The original Lingua Franca was a mixed language composed mostly (80%) of Italian with a broad vocabulary drawn from Turkish, French, Spanish, Greek and Arabic. It was in use throughout the eastern Mediterranean as the language of commerce and diplomacy in and around the Renaissance era. At that time, Italian speakers dominated seaborne commerce in the port cities of the Ottoman empire. Franca was the Italian word for Frankish. Its usage in the term lingua franca originated from its meaning in Arabic and Greek, dating from before the Crusades and during the Middle Ages, whereby all Western Europeans were called "Franks" or FARANJI in ARABIC and PHRANKOI in GREEK during the times of the late Eastern Roman Empire.[3] The term lingua franca is first recorded in English in 1678.[4]

Maybe someone would like to add, edit, to make the Farang article more complete ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizziiusa (talk • contribs) 15:11, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

There is no such thing as Indo-Persian only Farsi which was the official language of the cour under Mughals, Turks and Afghans. Thus the word Farangi is a Farsi word which was used for the British among Muslims, particularly Afghans inpresent Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan. Non-Muslims along with some Indian Muslims are still using the old woprd for a white person i.e. Gora. Muslims also used the term Britanvi i.e. British and this label is nowadays used in Urdu for UK citizen.Moarrikh (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

pfirangi is not Sanskrit

clearly, pfirangi is not Sanskrit. maybe some errors --223.204.34.195 (talk) 01:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Mostly nonsense

I can't speak for the portions that deal with Indian and Maldivian language, but everything about the origins of "farang" in Thai is nonsense. The real reason the word farang is used to describe white skinned foreigners is because the flesh of a guava (farang) is very blindingly white. Also this is categorized under "ethnic slurs" but the word is rarely used as a slur and this catgegorization has a lot of foreigners quite upset for no reason, because they believe it is a slur, when in fact light skin is revered in Thailand and light skinned foreigners are usually looked up to, except in those areas where a lot of badly behaved foreigners tend to congregate and sour the opinions of locals toward them (and unfortunately innocent people who do no wrong, guilt by association). However this is mostly restricted to tourist zones and the Issan region. It's completely false to think that you are regarded as being inferior in any way due to having light colored skin. There is a slur for foreign people, but it's never used for people that have light skin, just as "farang" should not be used for those with dark skin, because the word does not mean "foreigner". หมีขั้วโลก (talk) 16:08, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi หมีขั้วโลก. My understanding is that it's not those who coin or use a racial / ethnic epithet who determine whether it's disparaging. Rather, it's the people the epithet is used to describe who decide this. Other epithets not intended to be disparaging were "negro", "Chinaman", and "eskimo". Mon grain de sel (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification and feedback. I guess you are right about that part, but the article is still having some bias or misinformation on the basis that it attempts to explain the origins of the term from a foreign perspective, and I am guessing the sources mainly based their conclusions on speculation rather than actually consulting the local people about why they used this term (today, probably many local people would not know, and except in places heavily saturated with tourists, would not intentionally use the term in a disparaging way... although they might if a "farang" upset them sufficiently, but even then it would be more the other words accompanying like "stupid" or "crazy" that would be the disparaging part, not the "farang" portion). Japanese people are much more aware of the nature of the term "gaijin", but even they mostly don't intend to insult when using it, and foreigners don't seem to generally be offended by it, even publishing their own magazine called "Gaijin" and referring to themselves as such, even though the term means "foreign devil". So it is interesting if people are offended by "farang" but not "gaijin", when the latter was always intended clearly as an insult, while the former was just intended as a means of reference, because in Thai the word "foreigner" wasn't specific enough. I still do not view "negro" as a slur unless it is intended to be one, and it should be reasonable to use it in appropriate ways (also banning the word would cause a lot of problems in the Spanish language). Also funny is that Nestle openly uses the word Eskimo as an ice cream brand in Thailand, and I don't think in Thailand there is general awareness that it could potentially be considered a slur. หมีขั้วโลก (talk) 09:06, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Farang. 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/20090303000030/http://rirs3.royin.go.th/dictionary.asp to http://rirs3.royin.go.th/dictionary.asp
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6YpQxWRbF?url=http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2015/05/black_in_thailand_we_re_treated_better_than_africans_and_boy_do_we_hate.html to http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2015/05/black_in_thailand_we_re_treated_better_than_africans_and_boy_do_we_hate.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2015/05/black_in_thailand_we_re_treated_better_than_africans_and_boy_do_we_hate/2/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

This article should be re-written.

Hello,

This article is simply horrible. There are many useless repetitions, the grammar is not always correct. Thanks. Cdrk (talk) 22:41, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Do it yourself Vallee01 (talk) 03:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I did it myself, feel free to improve my edits if you would like to, the second section of the Lead article grammar is still broken but I will fix that later or maybe you could. Thanks. Vallee01 (talk) 05:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I will finish later.

After a couple of hours of research on google scholar and going to obscure academic site I have found a large amount of information. This article has some pretty big issues, I hope we can fix with more time in common cooperation, there has been fantastic input from different peoples, but its obvious when reading this that large parts of the article has broken grammar. Try to use as extremely direct phrases as possible. "The kingdoms fought" instead "The kingdoms engaged in hostilities".

"Frankish and Muslim relations were broad and diverse, the relationship was somewhat uneasy with many Muslim states waging a counter-crusade or "Jihad" (Holy war in Arabic), against the Crusaders. A large portion of this was not based on religion but instead was based on general territorial disputes. Muslim realms fought wars against each other just as the crusaders.

However there was a general hatred and distrust towards the Crusaders, not due to religious differences, but instead the crusaders had committed a large amount of massacres, and forced conversions against the general population. Even before the Crusader invasion the territories of Syria, Lebanon and Historical Palestine were all majority Christian, with the majority of the Christians belonging to the most common Syriac orthodox church, Armenian church, or the Eastern Orthodox Church, in contrast the Crusaders practiced almost exclusively Catholicism and therefor relations even with Christians was largely unstable."

Vallee01 (talk) 05:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

First and foremost the scope of the article needs to be agreed upon. It was originally exclusively about the Thai use of the word, but was later edited to add stuff about historical uses in several languages, resulting in the current jumbled mess. I suggest it should be reverted back to the original scope, since the term's notability stems from its uses in Thai society. The etymology can be condensed into a single section. If the Persian or other-language words need to be discussed in-depth, they belong in a separate article. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:17, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Should this article exist

I have posted a remark about medieval usage of the term Frank here, which mentions this article. It is a strange article. Why does it focus on Persian when the term Frank for western Europeans is used in most languages (including English) when referring to crusaders, and had a lasting effect not only on Persian but also for example on Arabic and Greek. Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Reverting 2018 hijacking

As mentioned two sections above, this article was originally about the Thai term, until it was hijacked by an IP editor in 2018. Unless someone objects, I'm going to revert to the version before that edit. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:24, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

But I think that raises the question of why WP should have an article about a Thai word.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Please do not revert without establishing consensus. The section titled "Southeast Asia" has the pre 2018-content as far as I can tell. The lead could make it more clear that "farang" as a Persian word is not in use, but its descendants are. It would also be useful to have more sub-sections. Rather then just "South Asia" and "Southeast Asia", break it down by country or cultural region or simply by language. Wiktionary lists its decedents and each could be more prominently mentioned in the lead. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 20:10, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

In reply to Andrew Lancaster, the answer would be that the term in the Thai context is a well established one, with a significant cultural aspect to it, and is covered in numerous publications. As for Richard-of-Earth's concerns, achieving consensus is what I'm hoping for with this discussion. The Thai term is the primary topic, by a large margin, for any use of the word farang, and the connection to the Persian term and its other derivatives is weak and poorly established. The persian word would be much better covered as a separate topic, if at all. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Generally speaking, Wikipedia would not normally have separate articles for specific word etymologies, no matter how we established. (That would be for wiktionary.) I also don't see any "significant cultural aspect" which goes much further than the etymological one? And the etymological story only seems a tiny bit notable if it is connected to words in other languages? In short, I still don't really see any justification for this article's existence. --Andrew Lancaster (talk) 07:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I would agree that the Thai word should be the primary subject. The Persian word is archaic and Thai word is not. I simply feel that reverting to the 2018 version would be deleting sourced content just because you do not like it. You are welcome to rewrite the lead, making it shorter, presenting it as a Thai word but should include that the word derives from the archaic Persian word and that it has doublets in other languages. The section currently titled "Name" should be "Etymology" and then a section about its use in Thai culture followed by sections about its doublets and their use in other cultures. I understand that might seem like a bunch of work, but if your not willing to do it, then it should stay as it is. As for deleting the article, I would be neutral. I have never understood what makes a word significant enough to warrant an article. Per WP:WORDISSUBJECT, apparently you just need citations and a little more than what would be found in a dictionary. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 08:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I'll consider a more substantial clean-up effort if/when I have time. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:47, 3 July 2023 (UTC)