Proposal:Move mailing list from "required" to "recommended" for new proposals

Move mailing list from "required" to "recommended" for new proposals
Proposal status:	Approved (active)
Proposed by:	GA Kevin
Draft started:	2025-07-16
RFC start:	2025-07-16
Vote start:	2025-07-30
Vote end:	2025-08-13

Proposal

Edit the proposal process wiki page with the following changes:

In the "Does it already exist?" section

REMOVE Line 5 It might also be a good idea to send an email to the tagging mailing list, describe the feature you want to tag and see if there are tags in use but hard to find or not yet documented.
REASON Line 4 details communication channel options, including mailing lists already.

In the "Due diligence" section

REPLACE by searching the mailing lists or other forums
WITH by searching the contact channels
REASON Alerts a potential proposal writer of the many ways to get into contact with other contributors.

In the "Creating a proposal" section

REPLACE If you have technical trouble with creating a proposal page, feel free to ask for help by sending a message to the tagging mailing list, you can ask for technical help also elsewhere.
WITH Please feel free to reach out with any technical or proposal writing questions to the relevant contact channels.
REASON Some questions may be better answered in different contact channels, allowing the proposal writer to choose the one that works best for them.

REMOVE Optionally let people know of your new proposal by subscribing to tagging mailing list and sending a mail.
REASON This is detailed in the contact channels page as well as clarifies this is not the point where you are requesting comment on a proposal.

In the "Mandatory announcements" section

REPLACE

You have to announce your proposal as RFC on the Tagging mailing list and the Community forum (sending on behalf of you is allowed, see below). To send emails to the mailing list, subscribe to the Tagging mailing list first.

Message content:
Forum location: https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/general/tagging/70
Tagging mailing list email: [email protected] Send (mailto link)
Title: [RFC] Feature Proposal – <PROPOSAL NAME>
Body: <DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL> <LINK TO PROPOSAL ON WIKI> Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
Assign the tags (for the forum): wiki-proposal, rfc
If you are not subscribed to the mailing list, add the following text to the topic body:

Please, cross post this announcement on the tagging mailing list on my behalf by sending an email to: [email protected]
If you are not active on the forum, add the following text to the email body:

Please, cross post this announcement on the community forum on my behalf by posting a message in: https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/general/tagging/70. Also add the tags "wiki-proposal" and "rfc".
Note that it is always the responsibility of the proposal author to make sure it gets cross-posted. If it didn't happen within a few days, they should ask again.

WITH

You must announce your proposal as RFC on the community forum. Please use the template below to ensure the right audience is reached.

Forum Template:
Forum location: https://c.osm.org/tags/c/general/tagging/70/wiki-proposal
Title: [RFC] Feature Proposal – <PROPOSAL NAME>
Body: <DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL> <LINK TO PROPOSAL ON WIKI> Please discuss this proposal on its wiki talk page.
Assign the tags: wiki-proposal, rfc

In the Additional announcements section

REMOVE (not everyone subscribes to the tagging mailing list or is active at the forum)

In the Notify section

REPLACE

You have to announce the vote on the Tagging mailing list and the Community forum (sending on behalf of you is allowed, see below). To send emails to the mailing list,subscribe to the Tagging mailing list first.

Message content:
Forum location: https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/general/tagging/70
Tagging mailing list email: [email protected] Send (mailto link)
Title: [Voting] Feature Proposal – <PROPOSAL NAME>
Body: Voting has started for <PROPOSAL NAME>. <LINK TO PROPOSAL ON WIKI>
Assign the tags (for the forum): wiki-proposal, vote
If you are not subscribed to the mailing list, add the following text to the topic body:

Please, cross post this announcement on the tagging mailing list on my behalf by sending an email to: [email protected]
If you are not active on the forum, add the following text to the email body:

Please, cross post this announcement on the community forum on my behalf by posting a message in: https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/general/tagging/70. Also add the tags "wiki-proposal" and "vote".
Note that it is always the responsibility of the proposal author to make sure it gets cross-posed. If it didn't happen within a few days, they should ask again.

Consider sending your vote announcement to some additional contact channels.

WITH

You must announce the vote on the community forum. If you engaged with another contact channel in the RFC stage, it is highly recommended you announce there as well.

Forum Template:
Forum location: https://c.osm.org/tags/c/general/tagging/70/wiki-proposal
Title: [Voting] Feature Proposal – <PROPOSAL NAME>
Body: Voting has started for <PROPOSAL NAME>. <LINK TO PROPOSAL ON WIKI>
Assign the tags: wiki-proposal, vote

In the Voting section

REMOVE

You still have to be subscribed to the Tagging mailing list for these steps.

In the Post-vote section

REPLACE

It is a good idea to notify people about the result by sending an update to the tagging mailing list and the community forum.

Tagging mailing list
Email address:[email protected]
<Subject:> "Feature Proposal – Approved – (Feature Name)"
<Subject:> "Feature Proposal – Rejected – (Feature Name)"
On the Community forum it's a good idea to update the voting proposal thread:
Update the body of the thread or add a comment stating if its approved or rejected.

WITH

It is highly recommended to notify the community forum and other contact channels used in the proposal with the results of the vote, regardless of acceptance or rejection. This can be done by the same thread as the vote announcement or other platform-specific ways to link the vote.

In the Approved section

REPLACE it may be worthwhile to send out a new vote request to the mailing list or make a new topic on the Community forum alongside the mailing list.
WITH it may be worthwhile to reach out to former and new contact channels to engage the community for additional votes.

Rationale

This has been proposed before with the major concern at the time being too quick and the community forum being untested long-term. The community forum since has become one of the strongest hubs for OSM community members, especially worldwide. With features such as mailing list mode, notifications, and OAuth with an existing OSM account it makes the use of Discourse easier than when the initial proposal was made. As such, I am again proposing that we edit the proposal process wiki page to reflect this changing dynamic. You will notice mailing lists and other contact channels are highlighted and strongly encouraged to be used, while only the community forum being the required channel.

Features/Pages affected

Proposal Process on the OSM Wiki

External discussions

• Request for comments on the forum
• Tagging mailing list announcement
• OSM US Slack announcement
• OSM World Discord announcement

Comments

Please comment on the discussion page.

Voting

Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was approved with 75 votes for, 13 votes against and 4 abstentions.

85% Support

• I approve this proposal. As the proposal author, I vote YES on this proposal. --GA Kevin (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I remain unconvinced that we should discard a long-standing requirement with minimal overhead. --Kbroderick (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

  Hi Kbroderick! To be clear, this proposal is not to eliminate the mailing list(s), simply removing the requirement to announce on them. They remain a valid (and useful!) way to get the word out and such details are on the contact channels page on this wiki. Hope to flip your vote! --GA Kevin (talk) 00:09, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. Sadly no comment that we should save the templates, though that's not a reason to abstain. The proposal itself is fine. The call to vote in support of this proposal - not so much. If you are proposing to change the proposal process, you provide an example and should use neutral language. Thus, I shall remain neutral on this. --Jofban (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

  Hi Jofban! I agreed with you on July 16th (see here) and cannot update the contact channels page unless this is approved. Until then, the proposal process page is the correct page for hosting of the templates. I do not see an issue with advocating for a proposal I worked on, I do indeed want people to vote for it. I'd encourage people to read and vote based off the proposal not my suggestion of support. Hope to flip your vote! --GA Kevin (talk) 00:04, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  I do have to agree with the sentiment above. Proposal votes are supposed to be a way of documenting a consensus which already exists through past discussion. Whipping the vote is a bit of a faux pas. We should be encouraging as many people as possible to vote based on their own views and conscience. --ZeLonewolf (talk) 01:32, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  I, for the most part, agree with the proposal itself, but still don't like your message on Slack "Please vote in SUPPORT of this proposal!" (https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C029HV955/p1753918097537629). I know others mentioned this in that thread, but I really wish you would edit that message to be more inviting of meaningful discussion. Pwbriggs (talk) 08:07, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --Supsup (talk) 00:10, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. For some background context, we migrated the Python community mailing lists from Mailman to Discourse many years ago in a gradual, organic process, including removing the requirement that PEPs be posted to the lists as well as the wiki for discussion (similar to the one here). While there was some initial skepticism, people ended up appreciating the change overall as it avoided discussion fragmentation and over time the mailing lists mostly dried up naturally with folks moving over to Discourse, and few tears were shed over their passing when the time came to permanently archive them for lack of use. For what its worth, though, a number of those features you mention making Discourse usable as a mailing list were borne out of or improved based on our feedback during the migration, so I expect one nowadays to be even smoother. (To note, we were also using the modern Mailman 3 even at the time, not the legacy v2 which has the archaic Pipermail web interface making browsing old threads a painful experience.) --CAM-Gerlach (talk) 01:42, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. Email works when websites don't. I'd be in favor of moving voting on proposals from the wiki to email however. Baloo Uriza (talk)

  Hi Baloo Uriza! As I stated above, this is not removing the mailing list, and I am sure the admins have a disaster recovery plan. Mailman 2 however, will not be around forever so that is at a higher risk of being inaccessible than Discourse or this wiki. As another data point, on this and all my proposals I have sent to the mailing list and got zero response/feedback/engagement. On this proposal, most was in the talk page, but on most proposals the forum is by far the most active and engaged. --GA Kevin (talk) 02:18, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. I fully support this! Requiring engaging with a mailing list is just silly. This proposal would reduce the barriers to participation in the proposal process (which I believe is overall a good process, and is improved by this), so I wholeheartedly approve. --Lumikeiju (talk) 03:21, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Fizzie41 (talk) 04:32, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. The nice thing about the mailing list is that it's a push-based notification: subscribe, and you automatically get notified of all future proposals. If there's a way to do that on the forums, I haven't found it. --Carnildo (talk) 05:01, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  There is a way, Carnildo I have it set up that way. Go to https://community.openstreetmap.org/u/carnildo/preferences/tracking and put "wiki-proposal" to "Watchin First Post". You will get exactly one e-mail per each draft and per each voting. Supsup (talk) 07:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  • Thank you for this tip. One issue with wiki proposals is to know them. One issue with community is to find information. You solved both :) --Pyrog (talk)

• I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. per Jofban --Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 05:48, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Makes the proposal process a lot easier. --Pavvv (talk) 06:22, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. About time. --Rayleigh1 (talk) 06:36, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Mashin (talk) 06:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. This should have been done 10 years ago... --Lega4 (talk) 08:59, 31 July 2025 (UTC+2)
• I approve this proposal. --Lonvia (talk) 07:18, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Starsep (talk) 07:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Finally! --Nadjita (talk) 08:04, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Lostmonkey (talk) 08:07, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Map HeRo (talk) 08:19, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Mailing lists are a thing from the last century --chris66 (talk) 08:24, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. It's 2025 --Ivanbranco (talk) 08:29, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. The Mailing list is an outdated system, with many restrictions. I spent many days trying to set it up, only to find that the domain name for my email address was not supported by the mailing list. I now get constant emails without the ability to interact or cancel. The mailing list also doesn't allow privacy for people, making their contact details public, where a forum you can restrict what public data is visible. Having to create a 2nd email address just for the mailing list is a secondary security risk for users. -- O0235 (talk) 09:00, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Robot8A (talk) 09:08, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. — Koreller (talk) 09:08, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Cquest (talk) 09:36, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Tordanik 10:54, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Tallcoleman (talk) 11:24, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I don't care as I read both, but generally, the mailing list seems more solid than the community forum, and more reliable (email will just display what you wrote, and not omit what it thinks can be ommitted). And email allows to easier filter what you are interested, the community forum takes a lot of effort if you want to selectively follow topics, and it's so called mailing list mode is not on par with either the forum nor a real mailing list. --Dieterdreist (talk) 11:35, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  This issue comes up in all proposals related to the mailing list, and I'm wondering if you could get more specific - what part of mailing list mode is deficient. Last time this issue was raised, the only thing I heard from people was that you couldn't receive copies of your own posts, but Discourse can do that, so I'm not 100% sure of the concern. Do you have specific deficiencies in mind that mean the mailing lists should be used? --Nicksantos (talk) 17:13, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. It's time. --ArcticRocinante (talk) 12:10, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. The rationale of this proposal is sadly lacking and basically just says "discourse good", without giving any reason why that allegedly implies post to mailing list should be deprecated. (in addition, it proceeds to talk about "mailing list"-alike features of Discourse, which I can only assume OP haven't actually tried to use, as they suck). And, even link posted to tagging ML is broken so people from there are unable to vote. --mnalis (talk) 14:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  Well, that's kind of ironic since some people are saying the mailing list doesn't edit things - it added a character at the end of the link, which broke it, I suspect when it attempted to strip out anything not purely text, thanks for pointing that out, I will resend it with the link and page title so if it happens again people can search here. It does indeed work when I click it from my sent folder or even the pure link on a response just not on the archive there. --GA Kevin (talk) 16:25, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  Can you elaborate on why the mailing list features in Discourse "suck"? I think it would improve the discussion to know what is left behind or what becomes a challenge if people are required to use the community forum for this. --Nicksantos (talk) 17:17, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. The mailing list works better for proposals which have deadline --Elgaard (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. As others have said, we should not be required to use an obsolete and insecure system. --Andrewth1 (talk) 16:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Cartographer10 (talk) 16:29, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. An email list is so much easier to search with tools like grep. So I strongly oppose this idea. Logging in to a forum is a faff and has security implications. --Messpert (talk) 16:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  @Messpert: If you have a specific concern about our forum's security or login process, please start a discussion with the Operations Working Group. Thank you for your attention. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 17:13, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  In addition to what Minh said, I'd argue that email has far more security implications, but that's another discussion. Just to say that I don't think that arguing against forum security is compelling. --Nicksantos (talk) 17:19, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

  In fact, it's the existing mailing lists that could soon face unfixable security vulnerabilities, now that the software they run on is no longer supported. [1] It's important not to throw around "security" as a scarecrow, because that can lead us to unfortunate outcomes. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 20:33, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --Ceirios ???????????????????????????? (sgwrs) 16:47, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Eisa01 (talk) 16:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Given list traffic, I think this is good progress. I'd like to see the language encouraging people to also post to the mailing list be a bit stronger, noting that a significant element of the community does still prefer it (I don't, but know some do), but I think joining and understanding the mailing list is unnecessary now. --Nicksantos (talk) 17:08, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. My main concern with the mailing list method is that it is unfamiliar to newer audiences, since other communication methods have gained traction compared to mailing lists within the past couple of decades. I feel that at present, the wiki pages for the mailing lists simply presents the existence of the lists without giving these audiences a good grasp about what those lists even are, how to use them effectively, or how to effectively contribute with them. If more explanation and resources can be given to this effect, then I would feel like it would feel that it is acceptable to keep mailing lists as required. But I do not feel like I have enough of a grasp on what that change would involve to go all the way towards opposing this proposal, so I will abstain. --Malle Yeno (talk) 17:15, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. let's move on from legacy mailing lists!! --julcnx (talk) 17:47, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Wolfy1339 (talk) 19:54, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Emvee (talk) 20:07, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I oppose this proposal. There are zero reasons to move away from mailing lists, and I am not an active user of the forum. In fact, I have been linked to this proposal from a mail message in the mailing list. Miklcct (talk) 13:53, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. About time! --Riiga (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --OSMRogerWilco (talk) 18:34, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --JeroenvanderGun (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. I joined OSM in 2008 and already at that time considered the mailing list to be clunky and outdated. At that time, the only alternative would have been the (also clunky) forum but we've had Discourse, a much friendlier option, for years now. Let's cut the useless bureaucracy, please. (Note: in the future please keep voting announcements neutral. Begging people to "vote in SUPPORT" of your pet proposal is unprofessional and you're only shooting yourself in the foot with it.) --Willem1 (talk) 20:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. The mailing lists should be removed entirely, because they take up valuable staff time to maintain. --ZeLonewolf (talk) 01:16, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --darkonus (talk) 05:49, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --501ghost (talk) 08:55, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Every platform has users who are not present on any other communication platform, therefore every such argument for mailing list could be turned into many more arguments against using mailing list, unless there's reliably two-way sync between pair of those. My main concern with (OSM's) mailing lists is lack of support for formatted messages. --Fghj753 (talk) 14:32, 2 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Timmy_Tesseract (talk) 05:10, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. I support this. I also do not understand why some are upset about the poster writing "Please vote in SUPPORT of this proposal!" when announcing this. We are not idiots and therefore we all know that someone who has put the time and effort in to creating a proposal will themselves support it. A polite message to ask you to do the same is absolutely fine in my opinion. Same way that politicians ask for our vote. If you disagree with the proposal then just vote "no". --RobJN (talk) 12:23, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Kjon (talk) 14:01, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Supaplex030 (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Renecha (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Robybully (talk) 19:43, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Ravlop (talk) 20:35, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. SimonPoole (talk) 13:28, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Shaun das Schaf (talk) 12:15, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Rrucsrrub (talk) 12:15, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --DwarfNebula (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Hedaja (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --ManuelB701 (talk) 18:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --CommanderStorm (talk) 22:06, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --BartLouwers (talk) 22:48, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Jacobwhall (talk) 00:06, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. I am active on several OSM communication channels, but I’ve never accessed the email list. It is an outdated mode of communication. --Mycota (talk) 00:29, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Jmarchon (talk) 03:21, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Tguen (talk) 05:24, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --FreeExec (talk) 16:59, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --TrickyFoxy (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal.It sounds like retiring mailing lists would make things easier for Grant and the operations team, so I support it. --Bhousel (talk) 20:06, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Duja (talk) 11:25, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Reducing the fragmentation of discussions is definitely a big plus. My experience is that the polite request in the template message to "Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page" is consistently ignored, with discussion occurring on the mailing list, even when the message is posted by someone else on behalf of an author who is not on the mailing list. --Danny252 (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Danysan (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Pogregoire (talk) 15:54, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. Fora require regular polling and are clumsy and time consuming. email is so much easier and leaner with powerful tools available for searching and more. I would not know about this but for email. --Messpert (talk) 16:00, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

  You already cast your vote on July 31, 16:40 (UTC), so I've crossed this one out. --Supaplex030 (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

• I oppose this proposal. It's easy enough to miss the start of a vote as it is without reducing the visibility further.--InsertUser (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. For the same reason as InsertUser. --Dafadllyn (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Watmildon (talk) 21:21, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. I remain unconvinced that we should discard a long-standing requirement with minimal overhead. --James Derrick (talk) 23:50, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. Removing mailing lists from all processes except formal ones is long overdue. Keeping them as a requirement comes across as a way of keeping power levers among a small group of long time contributors --StC (talk) 06:40, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I oppose this proposal. --Snusmumriken (talk) 10:29, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Gendy54 (talk) 10:43, 8 August 2025 (UTC) thank you for this proposal. Finally, a breath of fresh air in all this bureaucracy.
• I approve this proposal. --Nakaner (talk) 11:31, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Pyrog (talk) 11:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Fanfouer (talk) 13:02, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --AdrienHegy (talk) 13:09, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Lejun (talk) 14:31, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Osmuser63783 (talk) 22:19, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

• I approve this proposal. --Westnordost (talk) 13:26, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
• I approve this proposal. --Ezekielf (talk) 13:42, 10 August 2025 (UTC)