Knowledge (XXG)

User talk:Drgao

Source 📝

594:
myself on this issue. As a matter of interest, my discussion on the talk page itself was not strictly medical, but was about the scientific definition of the terms "associated with" and "caused by", although in this case admittedly the terms were used in medical articles. Even if you do not lift the ban, you might want to unblock the IP address, as my ISP (Plusnet) uses dynamic IP addresses which change all the time, so the IP you blocked is not me. Incidentally, I am also going to appeal regarding my ANI ban on editing medical articles, as I cannot see any real basis for this ban. At one stage, when it seemed that many editors were all disagreeing with every point I suggested, I did unfortunately make a series of angry personal remarks; however, on request from the said editors, I promised to stop making such personal remarks, and had kept to this (though they in turn did not stop disagreeing with every point or suggestion I made — and it seems unlikely that I should be wrong on every point). Thus I am not sure of the reason for the ANI, which came out of the blue on some pretext, and I want to clarify precisely why the ANI was raised, and if it there was a legitimate basis to it. However, I appreciate that appealing against the ANI is a separate issue here.
1090:. A few editors can tell you they think it's not a violation but you opened the ANI discussion and failed to wait on any consensus there before jumping back in, in particular for an administrator to make a decision on it. When you made your first comments there, it may have been considered a small oversight but you responded at ANI acknowledging that you would need to request a complete removal of the ban and yet you went back to the AFD again. Rather than a block for the entire duration of the AFD, it's a short block so that you can return to the ANI discussion if need be or go somewhere else. Otherwise, you've made your points and, unless the ANI discussion results in the elimination of your ban, I'd suggest you watch the AFD from afar and move on. -- 1048: 1133:...but that is okay. Listen I don't want to see your article deleted and it looks like you are unable to participate in the editing that it might need to meet the requirements of keeping it 'live'. I intend to copy it to my user page or off line to fix it up at a more leisurely pace. If I return here periodically in the next few days, do you think you can give me some better references that I put in the article that will help it meet MEDRs? 340: 895: 513: 720: 425: 104:
means nothing here on WP, and appealing to it will only backfire. WP is not the place to "do science". If that's what you want to do, publish in high-impact, reputable scientific journals so that other independent researchers can replicate and confirm your results, and so that they can deserve wide and substantial coverage in independent secondary sources.
657:(though I do suffer from chronic fatigue syndrome and ADHD, which makes reading documents difficult sometimes). For bans of a finite duration, it appears that flouting them will lead to the ban duration being increased; but as for indefinite bans like mine, I could not find in the said document what the consequences of flouting them might be. 1087: 918: 666:
I started on the definition of the terms "associated with" and "caused by". Presumably if any such email discussion take place between us, being offsite, it would not violate the topic ban (but please let me know if I am wrong here, and I will desist). Note this was just out of courtesy, as it was me
647:
Answer (1): No pages at all. I am not allowed to edit any article pages, talk pages, category pages or portal pages on Knowledge (XXG) that are medical, and I am not allowed to talk about or contribute to any medical subjects whatsoever on any part of Knowledge (XXG), including on people's personal
998:
Your behavior at the AfD - jumping in instead of waiting for consensus that you can participate, is probably the most damaging thing you could have done to your appeal to have the topic ban lifted. It is clear that you are unwilling to restrain yourself and to actually listen to the community. I
593:
I did not realize that I was also banned from discussing medical topics on user talk pages; I assumed it would only apply to articles and their talk pages. I also assumed that I would be physically prevented from editing medical pages by software block; ie, I did not realize it was up to me police
616:
Thank you, my two questions weren't meant to trick you - I really wanted to know if you now understood what the ban means, and it seems you do. The answer to the second question (consequences of flouting ban) is that an indefinite block would follow, but hopefully that will not become necessary.
362:
I don't suppose I could persuade you to take a step back, take a little time to think or maybe have a good night's sleep, and come back to WP later? You've made your response on ANI now and it seems like this continued flurry of responses to people could reflect very negatively on you in the ANI
153:
There are no secrets here on WP. All of your edits are clearly visible to all other editors here on WP, and all editors are free to respond to them anywhere on WP as long as they are not accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks or other disruptive behavior. The word for what Zad68 did is
103:
A word of advice: if your personal research is connected with this topic, it would be wise to ignore it altogether. For my part, I've never even looked at a single WP article related to microbiology or any other field related to my own research. I don't need an ulcer. Furthermore, your expertise
1174:. If you want to argue to userify the page then request it at the AFD but don't start some sort of copyright violation by copying and pasting it for your own editing without the full history. If it's deleted, it can be advocated for and restored at a later time if there's consensus to do so. -- 126:
If not stalking, do you call it when all the editors of the Morgellons article are invited by Zad68 to view my activities elsewhere on Knowledge (XXG) — activities that have nothing to do with Morgellons. Is there a word for that? And what is your opinion on the acceptability of that behavior?
475:
which explains the situation. Specifically in your case you are banned from discussions or suggestions about medicine-related topics anywhere on Knowledge (XXG), exactly as that section says (and as I spelled out above.) You are not only banned from articles and article talk pages, but from
303:
Fair enough. Given that, I apologize for my stalking comments. I only mentioned the Morgellons article because at the top of the RSN page it tells you to specify the article in which the source is being used, and you cannot just get an answer from RSN on the general reliability of a source.
1213:
That's another issue but that's not the point to me. If you think the article is worth keeping, discuss it at the AFD. If you can convince people it's salvageable, it can made into a draft but otherwise it's Drgao's topic banning that's caused Drgao problems and no one else. --
25:
which is currently open. Today DRN has undergone a big move resulting in individual cases on subpages as opposed to all the content on one page. This is to inform you that your case is now back on the DRN board and you will be able to 'watch' the subpage it's located on. Thanks,
805:
This ban on the Wiki Medical area has been in place for two years. I would very much like it if I could be considered for unbanning. The reason I am asking is because I would like to partake in an AfD discussion on a Wiki Medical page that I originally created, namely the page
476:
discussing any medical topic anywhere on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to have my block (which is indefinite but not permanent) removed, please appeal it following the instructions above and let me know that you now understand your ban conditions. I will then unblock you.
632:
I will unblock you if you can answer the following two questions to my satisfaction. (1) On what page/s in Knowledge (XXG) does your topic ban permit you to post on medical topics? (2) What will be the outcome if you post again on a page where you are NOT permitted to do so?
1021:
I was just astounded that you did not seem to know what the technical term "associated" means, which fundamental in understanding the purpose and significance of that article, so I felt I could not let it go. I have not voted though, you may have noticed.
697:
a more precise use of the terms "associated with" and "caused by". However, I think it might be better if I did not engage in any such email conversations, just to ensure I do not inadvertently break the ban. So I will not send any further email from now.
921:
until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
648:
user talk pages (though I am apparently allowed revert vandalism on medical articles, without flouting the ban). This is a shame, because these days nearly all of interests are medical, so this is rather a severe ban for me.
925:
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
470:
and associated edits broke the community-imposed topic ban mentioned above. I'll assume that this was because you were unsure of exactly what a topic ban means, and if you're uncertain you need to have a look
902: 886: 807: 1192:. I will comply with your instructions. I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that a topic ban did not extend to a user's talk page. Now I know better. Best Regards, 344: 945:
I wasn't aware of this history at the time of the AfD nomination, but in response to your question there: the best place to ask about this is to start a new thread at the
94:. Together with your disruptive and tendentious editing, as well as forum shopping, Scray's suspicion that you may soon get blocked or banned is well supported. 877:
template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.
907: 1171: 184:
You are probably right, on refection. Zad probably thought my inquiry was Morgellons page related, so invited the editors there, which is fair enough.
72:
As explained, it is not a personal attack if I my remarks refer to the comments made. It is only a personal attack if my remarks attack the person.
57:
to heart. This is completely unacceptable, and I won't surprised if you get blocked, considering your repeated transgressions of this policy. --
1149:
Bfpage, the user is topic banned from discussing anything medical in WP. Their post on your talk page was also a violation of their topic ban.
1068: 862: 460: 402:, judging the clear consensus to be that you should be banned indefinitely (not necessarily permanently) from editing within areas covered by 364: 760: 693:
another editor to change an article does constitute flouting the ban. But all I said to Ruslik0 in my email was that he might like to
548: 440: 381:
OK, I am taking your advice, 198.199.134.100, and will stop making comments there, unless something really needs my response.
33: 1064: 976:
on the Administrators' noticeboard, asking for a review of my ban on editing medical Knowledge (XXG) articles, and informed
444: 304:
Nevertheless, I have to say I did not find the arrival of the Morgellons editor entourage on the RSN page a welcome sight.
1055: 911: 733: 432: 755: 543: 727: 520: 245: 919:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of human diseases associated with infectious pathogens (2nd nomination)
958: 931: 732:
Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the
1088:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of human diseases associated with infectious pathogens (2nd nomination)
653:
Answer (2): I could not find what the consequences were of breaking this ban (which I don't intent to do) on the
368: 159: 109: 1060: 639: 623: 482: 416: 662:
Please note that I did, out of courtesy, give user Ruslik0 my personal email in case he wanted to finish the
1059:
temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to
969: 954: 927: 667:
that started the discussion; I do not plan to conduct any further offsite email discussions like this.
403: 1219: 1179: 1143: 1095: 490: 155: 105: 977: 950: 774: 634: 618: 562: 477: 411: 352: 973: 253: 832: 498: 239:
Yes I came away with the impression your inquiry was related to the Morgellons page after you
472: 1202: 1154: 1139: 1118: 1074: 1004: 871: 848: 450: 836: 407: 332: 91: 54: 22: 1215: 1189: 1175: 1091: 1047: 266: 62: 946: 840: 1086:
I've instituted a 72-hour block for your violations of the topic ban with your edits at
348: 406:. This includes talkpages, project pages and the like as well as articles. Please see 28: 494: 489:
I regret that you are blocked, but we can use for our discussions my talk page on
244:
I would like to know whether three studies from the peer-reviewed medical journal
1198: 1165: 1150: 1135: 1114: 1000: 844: 1023: 981: 810: 738: 699: 668: 595: 526: 410:
for more information on what a ban means, how it can be overturned and so on.
382: 305: 259: 206: 128: 73: 58: 443:. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may 1105:
Note, there was a further violation of the topic ban in the section above,
1063:. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may 424: 21:
Hi there, you're getting this message as you are involved in a case at the
347:
regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
949:. You should also notify the admin who closed the original discussion, 1172:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators'_noticeboard#Considered_for_unbanning
953:, though it looks like he's been only sporadically active recently. 839:
so this is the wrong venue. Please request a review of your ban at
205:
PS. I am not a researcher, not on Morgellons or in any other area.
1223: 1206: 1183: 1158: 1122: 1099: 1031: 1008: 989: 962: 935: 852: 818: 707: 676: 641: 625: 603: 503: 484: 418: 390: 372: 356: 313: 274: 214: 163: 136: 113: 81: 66: 39: 686: 654: 90:
Making false accusations of "stalking" is also a violation of
999:
tried to stop you - but you are driving right off the cliff.
1046: 718: 511: 423: 249: 903:
List of human diseases associated with infectious pathogens
887:
List of human diseases associated with infectious pathogens
808:
List of human diseases associated with infectious pathogens
906:
is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to
859:
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please
879:
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
1110: 1106: 900:
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article
788: 784: 778: 769: 765: 751: 747: 743: 663: 576: 572: 566: 557: 553: 539: 535: 531: 467: 399: 240: 50: 345:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
1071:, then adding the following text below this notice: 726:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
519:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an
689:under a ban, and it would seem that using email to 246:Clinical, Cosmetic And Investigational Dermatology 1128: 447:by adding the following text below this notice: 466:I have blocked you for the time being because 252:can be used in the Knowledge (XXG) article on 248:(Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol) published by 8: 1109:, as well as on another editor's talk page 685:Actually, I have just read the section on 343:Hello. There is currently a discussion at 908:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 1129:Don't understand what is going on here 243: 7: 398:This is to let you know that I have 14: 917:The article will be discussed at 1188:Thank you for the clarification 893: 338: 459:. However, you should read the 655:Knowledge (XXG) banning policy 23:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard 1: 1042:Block for violation topic ban 53:indicate you have not taken 947:administrator's noticeboard 730:, who declined the request. 523:, who accepted the request. 441:abuse of editing privileges 1244: 708:15:32, 3 August 2013 (UTC) 677:22:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC) 642:21:39, 2 August 2013 (UTC) 626:17:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC) 604:17:16, 2 August 2013 (UTC) 504:06:19, 2 August 2013 (UTC) 1224:00:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC) 1207:00:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC) 1184:23:49, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 1159:23:07, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 1144:23:05, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 1123:23:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 1100:22:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 1069:guide to appealing blocks 1061:make useful contributions 1032:21:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 1009:21:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 990:15:43, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 963:07:08, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 936:04:03, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 863:guide to appealing blocks 853:05:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 819:05:18, 20 July 2015 (UTC) 491:Commons:User_talk:Ruslik0 485:08:07, 31 July 2013 (UTC) 461:guide to appealing blocks 419:11:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC) 391:13:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC) 373:05:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC) 357:13:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC) 314:22:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 275:21:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 215:20:48, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 164:20:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 137:19:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 114:19:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC) 82:15:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC) 67:15:35, 24 July 2013 (UTC) 40:13:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 1027: 985: 910:or whether it should be 814: 703: 672: 599: 386: 309: 210: 154:"perfectly acceptable". 132: 77: 45:The edit, not the editor 1051: 831:You are not currently 723: 516: 428: 1079:Your reason here ~~~~ 1067:by first reading the 1050: 941:FYI: topic ban appeal 775:change block settings 722: 563:change block settings 515: 455:Your reason here ~~~~ 427: 400:closed the discussion 17:A minor change to DRN 1052: 980:as you suggested. 724: 517: 429: 254:Morgellons disease 250:Dove Medical Press 1065:appeal this block 445:appeal this block 439:from editing for 1235: 1205: 1169: 1142: 1082: 972:, I have raised 970:Opabinia regalis 955:Opabinia regalis 928:Opabinia regalis 897: 896: 876: 870: 794: 792: 781: 763: 761:deleted contribs 721: 637: 621: 582: 580: 569: 551: 549:deleted contribs 514: 501: 480: 458: 414: 342: 341: 273: 271: 264: 38: 36: 31: 1243: 1242: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1203:leave a message 1197: 1163: 1140:leave a message 1134: 1131: 1084: 1072: 1044: 943: 898: 894: 891: 882: 874: 868: 867:, then use the 856: 822: 782: 772: 758: 741: 734:blocking policy 719: 635: 630: 629: 619: 607: 570: 560: 546: 529: 512: 499: 478: 464: 448: 412: 365:198.199.134.100 339: 336: 267: 260: 258: 156:Dominus Vobisdu 106:Dominus Vobisdu 47: 34: 29: 27: 19: 12: 11: 5: 1241: 1239: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1170:Please review 1161: 1130: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1053:You have been 1045: 1043: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 993: 992: 978:Kim Dent-Brown 974:this new topic 951:Kim Dent-Brown 942: 939: 892: 890: 885:Nomination of 883: 857: 829: 825:Decline reason 803: 799:Request reason 796: 717: 715: 713: 712: 711: 710: 680: 679: 659: 658: 650: 649: 636:Kim Dent-Brown 620:Kim Dent-Brown 614: 591: 587:Request reason 584: 510: 508: 479:Kim Dent-Brown 430:You have been 422: 413:Kim Dent-Brown 396: 395: 394: 393: 376: 375: 335: 330: 329: 328: 327: 326: 325: 324: 323: 322: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 288: 287: 286: 285: 284: 283: 282: 281: 280: 279: 278: 277: 226: 225: 224: 223: 222: 221: 220: 219: 218: 217: 194: 193: 192: 191: 190: 189: 188: 187: 186: 185: 173: 172: 171: 170: 169: 168: 167: 166: 144: 143: 142: 141: 140: 139: 119: 118: 117: 116: 98: 97: 96: 95: 85: 84: 46: 43: 18: 15: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1240: 1225: 1221: 1217: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1191: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1167: 1162: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1080: 1076: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1058: 1057: 1049: 1041: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1010: 1006: 1002: 997: 996: 995: 994: 991: 987: 983: 979: 975: 971: 967: 966: 965: 964: 960: 956: 952: 948: 940: 938: 937: 933: 929: 923: 920: 915: 913: 909: 905: 904: 888: 884: 881: 880: 873: 866: 864: 855: 854: 850: 846: 842: 838: 834: 828: 826: 821: 820: 816: 812: 809: 802: 800: 795: 790: 786: 780: 776: 771: 767: 762: 757: 753: 752:global blocks 749: 748:active blocks 745: 740: 735: 731: 729: 728:administrator 716: 709: 705: 701: 696: 692: 688: 684: 683: 682: 681: 678: 674: 670: 665: 661: 660: 656: 652: 651: 646: 645: 644: 643: 640: 638: 628: 627: 624: 622: 613: 611: 610:Accept reason 606: 605: 601: 597: 590: 588: 583: 578: 574: 568: 564: 559: 555: 550: 545: 541: 540:global blocks 537: 536:active blocks 533: 528: 524: 522: 521:administrator 509: 506: 505: 502: 496: 492: 487: 486: 483: 481: 474: 469: 462: 456: 452: 446: 442: 438: 435: 434: 426: 421: 420: 417: 415: 409: 405: 401: 392: 388: 384: 380: 379: 378: 377: 374: 370: 366: 361: 360: 359: 358: 354: 350: 346: 334: 331: 315: 311: 307: 302: 301: 300: 299: 298: 297: 296: 295: 294: 293: 292: 291: 290: 289: 276: 272: 270: 265: 263: 256: 255: 251: 247: 242: 238: 237: 236: 235: 234: 233: 232: 231: 230: 229: 228: 227: 216: 212: 208: 204: 203: 202: 201: 200: 199: 198: 197: 196: 195: 183: 182: 181: 180: 179: 178: 177: 176: 175: 174: 165: 161: 157: 152: 151: 150: 149: 148: 147: 146: 145: 138: 134: 130: 125: 124: 123: 122: 121: 120: 115: 111: 107: 102: 101: 100: 99: 93: 89: 88: 87: 86: 83: 79: 75: 71: 70: 69: 68: 64: 60: 56: 52: 44: 42: 41: 37: 32: 24: 16: 1132: 1085: 1078: 1054: 944: 924: 916: 901: 899: 889:for deletion 878: 860: 858: 830: 824: 823: 804: 798: 797: 770:creation log 737: 725: 714: 694: 690: 631: 615: 609: 608: 592: 586: 585: 558:creation log 525: 518: 507: 488: 465: 454: 437:indefinitely 436: 431: 397: 337: 268: 261: 48: 20: 845:Max Semenik 404:WP:MEDICINE 1216:Ricky81682 1190:Ricky81682 1176:Ricky81682 1092:Ricky81682 968:Thank you 766:filter log 664:discussion 554:filter log 51:your edits 861:read the 785:checkuser 744:block log 573:checkuser 532:block log 408:this page 363:process. 349:Dbrodbeck 1077:|reason= 756:contribs 695:consider 687:proxying 544:contribs 453:|reason= 1075:unblock 1056:blocked 912:deleted 872:unblock 833:blocked 779:unblock 567:unblock 463:first. 451:unblock 433:blocked 49:Again, 1199:Bfpage 1166:Bfpage 1151:Jytdog 1136:Bfpage 1115:Jytdog 1001:Jytdog 837:banned 835:, not 691:direct 495:Ruslik 333:WP:ANI 92:WP:NPA 55:WP:NPA 1024:Drgao 982:Drgao 865:first 841:WP:AN 811:Drgao 739:Drgao 700:Drgao 669:Drgao 596:Drgao 527:Drgao 383:Drgao 306:Drgao 241:wrote 207:Drgao 129:Drgao 74:Drgao 59:Scray 1220:talk 1180:talk 1155:talk 1119:talk 1111:here 1107:here 1096:talk 1028:talk 1005:talk 986:talk 959:talk 932:talk 849:talk 815:talk 704:talk 673:talk 600:talk 500:Zero 473:here 468:this 387:talk 369:talk 353:talk 310:talk 211:talk 160:talk 133:talk 110:talk 78:talk 63:talk 35:6403 30:Cabe 789:log 736:). 577:log 262:Zad 257:. 1222:) 1182:) 1157:) 1121:) 1113:. 1098:) 1083:. 1081:}} 1073:{{ 1030:) 1007:) 988:) 961:) 934:) 914:. 875:}} 869:{{ 851:) 843:. 827:: 817:) 801:: 783:• 777:• 773:• 768:• 764:• 759:• 754:• 750:• 746:• 706:) 675:) 612:: 602:) 589:: 571:• 565:• 561:• 556:• 552:• 547:• 542:• 538:• 534:• 493:. 457:}} 449:{{ 389:) 371:) 355:) 312:) 269:68 213:) 162:) 135:) 112:) 80:) 65:) 1218:( 1201:| 1178:( 1168:: 1164:@ 1153:( 1138:| 1117:( 1094:( 1026:( 1003:( 984:( 957:( 930:( 847:( 813:( 793:) 791:) 787:( 742:( 702:( 671:( 598:( 581:) 579:) 575:( 530:( 497:_ 385:( 367:( 351:( 308:( 209:( 158:( 131:( 108:( 76:( 61:(

Index

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard
Cabe
6403
13:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
your edits
WP:NPA
Scray
talk
15:35, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Drgao
talk
15:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
WP:NPA
Dominus Vobisdu
talk
19:47, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Drgao
talk
19:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Dominus Vobisdu
talk
20:36, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Drgao
talk
20:48, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
wrote
Clinical, Cosmetic And Investigational Dermatology
Dove Medical Press
Morgellons disease
Zad

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.