Jump to content

Talk:American Horror Story: Roanoke

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Plot Summary Does Not Summarize Plot

[edit]

I have never watched the series, so I have no idea what it is about based on the plot summary. "Return to Roanoke places the reenactors and their real life counterparts in the Roanoke house for three days during the Blood Moon, putting the lives of the cast and crew in danger as they face the true horrors within the Roanoke house."

Well, what are the true horrors? All I know is there were "paranormal occurrences." Hmm, the blood moon. Sounds bad, but how the hell would I know?

Go ahead and spoil it for me- this is not IMDB.

Guest Stars?

[edit]

I hate to start another section on this page again but here we are... Do we really need to put every Tom Dick and Harry ever appeared in the episodes in the guest star section? I think we can just put relevant guest stars or people who appeared more than once or something? Let's have a meaningful discussion please and stop yelling at each other again. Thanks. Johnny0929 (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, every single one and preferably with old photos. — Wyliepedia 01:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The other seasons have a long list of "guest stars" so if we followed previous seasons then yeah. If they're not highly notable, you can always just include the person's name in the episode summary after you mention their character for when they first appear. Also articles for the particular episodes will most likely be created later on too and the guest stars should be featured on the individual article in which they appear. Personally I think that would suffice. I think it makes sense to only feature the main on the article, and possibly recurring, and feature everyone else on List of American Horror Story: Roanoke characters. Kelege (talk) 02:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kathy Bates' Character Name

[edit]

We need to quit changing the name of Kathy Bates' character. If we look historically, the wife of John White's maiden name was spelled Tomasyn Cooper. I have checked encyclopedias. Not Thomisin or Thomasin. When readers of the AHS: Roanoke Wikipedia page scroll down to the cast and characters list they should see Kathy Bates as Tomasyn "The Butcher" White. Her "purified" name is The Butcher and that is what she is being referred to by all the main cast members. Therefore, for clarity's sake, quit putting a forward or back slash when writing Ms. Bates' character name (i.e. Tomasyn White/ The Butcher.) Utilizing the forward slash suggests to readers that Bates could be portraying more than one character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickenbrook2012 (talkcontribs) 18:39, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "/" is used for "also known as" characters or alternative names. For example Captain America / Steve Rogers. But I agree people need to stop. Brocicle (talk) 02:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The reason Kathy Bates's character is being changed to Thomasin is because that's how her name is spelled not only by Closed Captioning, which is based off of the written scripts, but also how her name has been spelt in promotional material. Shes only based off of a historical person, she's not portraying the actual Tomasyn. Ambrose White wasn't a real person, hence the difference between the two. Additionally, we used the slash to refer to The Countess also as Elizabeth Johnson. Thomasin after selling her soul, now is referred to as The Butcher so, I think we should keep the slash in as well. Fanfiction2010 (talk) 02:10, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence to suggest that Dandy Mott is a returning character

[edit]

Yes, Finn Wittrock is returning and yes, Ryan Murphy said we are "getting the origins of the Mott family", but that does not mean Dandy will return. Can people please stop adding Dandy Mott to the character list? If he returns, then you can add him, for now it's speculation, nothing is confirmed. Thanks Guys YellowingMellowing (talk) 08:37, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As well as Frances Conroy as Gloria Mott. Adding them, especially Conroy, with the character's names requires citation otherwise it's just speculation @JoannaPaula98. Kelege (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I am not sure if I should write this here, but tvmaze.com wrote that Finn's character is named Jaether Polk.[1] Lausaurine (talk) 19:30, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

Yet another Cast conundrum

[edit]

Given the next episode ("Chapter 6") substantial shift in narrative and storytelling, we need to start thinking about how we're going to reflect the actors names (i.e. the actors Paulson, Gooding Jr., etc. play) when they're revealed. The current set-up of cast will no longer work (denoting Rabe, Holland, and Porter). We're going to have to draw distinction from the "actors" to "who the actors play", to the "real-life counterparts". I've been racking my brain and I, for the life of me, can not come up with a system that isn't entirely contrived and redundant. We're going to need to put our heads together for this one boys and girls. Please, let me hear from you. LLArrow (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LLArrow Yay, we get to have another chat together! Anyway, are you talking about having to denote the "actor's" "real names"? If so why can't we just leave this how it is and just add "real name /" to the front of their character? Otherwise, please further explain what you are trying to do. Chase (talk) 01:14, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Because then denoting Rabe, Holland, and Porter becomes quite confusing. As is we already have so much character exposition in the Cast section, adding yet another note is going to make said section practically unintelligible. Perhaps we should start linking the characters to their own articles, allowing us to only have to worry about name placement on this page. A further argument against your ""real name" first" proposal is it won't go over well with other editors. They hated when there was a mere "(reenactor)" note. The same problem will arise with your suggestion. LLArrow (talk) 02:55, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am suggesting:
This would be consistent with how we did Kathy Bates character.
Just have "actors name/characters name" then keep the note to prevent the confusion on the repetitive names. As stated the "/" represents two characters, and that's what they're playing- two characters. All wee have to add is the new characters name. Kelege (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But it isn't as simple as "they're playing two characters", it's that they are playing a character that portrays other characters (that are also real-people that are played by separate actors), within a fictional documentary. People are going to want to know this. The only way we can get that information across to them is by linking to a character page where the detailed specifics are hammered out, or make a hell-of-a long note. LLArrow (talk) 03:20, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah there's complexity in the two characters they're playing but it's still two characters. The basics should be on this page because there's a page for all the characters on Roanoke and it should be further explained there. You can link their characters to the pages or sections pertaining to that character, but it's still two characters whether it's a character in a character. I just think keep it simple and as you said, create the ability to allow further explanation another page dedicated specifically to the characters. Kelege (talk) 05:06, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I advise all editors that contribute to this article to weigh in on this subject. It is crucial. LLArrow (talk) 05:31, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We could put, for example, say Paulson's character's name is Sarah Smith and have Sarah Paulson as Sarah Smith portraying Shelby Miller. Or something along those lines? Brocicle (talk) 09:52, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
While grateful for the suggestion, that delivery is quite clunky. As I said above, people started an uproar over "(reenactor)" being placed after characters, I hardly see your suggestion being met with welcome eyes. We also must keep in mind that we could very well be looking at every cast member that played a "reenactor" in My Roanoke Nightmare making an appearance as their acting counterparts. That's a lot of article acreage. LLArrow (talk) 20:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What about a separate section specific to the cast of the My Roanoke Nightmare documentary? Brocicle (talk) 10:51, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Now that could be an idea I could get behind. I'd love to see a mock-up if your up to it. LLArrow (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for example on Gossip Girl (season 2) they have a separate cast section for one episode that was dedicated to a spin off of the show. We could do the something along the same lines such as

Cast of My Roanoke Nightmare

I'd like to see the idea expanded a bit, but I definitely think this is along the lines of a great solution. How about the rest of you editors, what do you think of Brocicle's welcome, suggested solution? LLArrow (talk) 05:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think adding a separate section is redundant. It worked for Gossip Girl because it was entirely different actors playing the same characters, it would work here if the "actors" weren't playing their assumed actor counterparts and just the fictional versions of those being interviewed. I still stand behind keeping it simple:
  • Kathy Bates as Tomasyn "the Butcher" White / "actors real life name"
  • Sarah Paulson as Shelby Miller / "actors real life name"
We're aware the story-line is going to change but to what degree and how much information we receive we're still unsure of. As I've previously said, I think it's best to simplify on this article and develop more information and details of the actual article for the Roanoke characters. Kelege (talk) 11:04, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Having the "/" next to a characters name usually implies that's an alternative name for the same character. For example Steve Rogers / Captain America. Shelby Miller is not the same person as whomever Paulson's chatacter is portraying. Perhaps we could have:

with a footnote attached like it is currently stating they're re-enactors or whatever it says, can't remember off the top of my head. Brocicle (talk) 00:14, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair a lot of people use IMDb as a source of information on media, and IMDB uses "/" for separating the different characters played. A lot of people understand what "/" implies. Might be a culture thing as I'm from Australia but I've never seen "/" used to imply another name such as a nickname, for me it has always been putting it in the middle of the name such as: "Tomasyn "The Butcher" White". If the Butcher wasn't a nickname and an entirely new persona/character it'd then receive the "/". Kelege (talk) 01:52, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But this is Wikipedia, not IMDb. The "/" has been used to denote the portrayal of two or more characters on IMDb but the cast members like Sarah Paulson is not portraying two characters in this season. Instead, she is portraying Audrey, who is portraying Shelby. Therefore, the "/" makes no sense under your objection either. Johnny0929 (talk) 14:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Really this is Wikipedia and not IMDb?!? Wow I would have never guessed!! Really though my point was to what is commonly used and what is commonly understood. Her character is playing another character yes, but the actress herself portrayed two charterers- one as an actress and one as a counter-part of a person in a re-enactment that the other character played. It's still two characters the actress played. I don't get why everyone is making such a huge, complex issue out of it. Kelege (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What is commonly understood from the Wikipedia perspective is that the "/" doesn't work for this particular case as stated by myself and Johnny0929. Brocicle (talk) 17:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then do what was done in Hotel and just have "[name] and [name] ". Kelege (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That was one of the suggestions but a different suggestion is being favoured over that. Brocicle (talk) 18:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so what we have right now is confusing as heck. The footnote thing no longer works since Cheyenne is playing Sydney in universe instead of in MRN. My suggestion is this:

  • Sarah Paulson as Audrey, portraying Shelby in My Roanoke Nightmare.

Any other suggestions? Johnny0929 (talk) 14:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I previously made two different suggestions described earlier in the thread. Keen to hear your thought on those as well. We'll have to come to an agreement on what to do soon because as you said, it's very confusing. Brocicle (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, the one where it says "Sarah Paulson as Shelby Miller and Audrey" makes no sense because she is not playing two characters. She is playing one character who is an actress so a separate section would make more sense in my opinion. Johnny0929 (talk) 15:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If LLArrow is still interested in the idea of a separate section also, then that makes three towards reaching a consensus about the issue so far. I like your idea Johnny0929 but I don't believe it will be accepted by other users as it might clutter the cast section if you understand what I mean?Brocicle (talk) 16:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Like a couple people have stated and me, we prefer the way it is now. These characters should be treated no different than a regular character because they simiply are a regular character. There is no need to make things more conplicated than they have to be for the reader. Chase (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just a thought but are we able to get an Admin's opinion on this matter at all? Brocicle (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

^1 Italics are used to differentiate the characters that the actors portrayed in the My Roanoke Nightmare re-enactment. Personally, I think the above is the most efficient, least confusing, and most effective way of ordering the cast and characters of this season. Fanfiction2010 (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Least confusing? Surely you meant "most". Completely against this idea and suggestion. Still on board with Brocicle's original. LLArrow (talk) 22:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am definitely not for the above suggestion. Totally against it. But can get behind the current cast layout or Brocicle's idea as well. I'm partial to either decision. I'd prefer the former, because less clunky. endalecomplex (contributions) • (talk) 02:17, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just a comment about my suggestion. The only potential issue I'd like to put forward is that we'd possibly have to decide whether to structure it as:
  • Kathy Bates as Thomasyn White / The Butcher
  • Sarash Paulson as Shelby Miller
Or:
  • Agnes Mary Winstead as Thomasyn White / The Butcher

I've thought of another idea for what could be the end to this lengthy discussion. I have not seen this brought up at this point, but I have seen similar cast sections like I'm about to present on other television and film castings. Something along the lines of:

  • John Doe as "character name"
    • John A. Doe as "Young character name"

So what I am proposing is this:

Thoughts on this? endalecomplex (contributions) • (talk) 05:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm beginning to hate myself for starting this. I now withdraw all past positions and say we should keep the page exactly as is now. No one is complaining, it's simple and to the point. If we have widespread confusion or dislike in the future, then we look at change, until then, stay, I say. LLArrow (talk) 06:31, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
EnDaLeCoMpLeX I very much like your idea! My vote is for your suggestion.Brocicle (talk) 12:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Slashes shouldn't be used because they play different characters. Slashes are for different names for the same character. DantODB (talk) 21:24, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


As of now, we should start a second section with that goes something like this:

MRN Cast

[edit]
  • Audrey as Shelby
  • Rory as Mott

etc etc This will not clutter the cast section and this will also help it to be less confusing. The slashes are very confusing as well as having the headnotes only on Shelby, Matt and Lee's names. As of Chapter 6, most of the characters are now "real life counterparts" instead of MRN reenactments. If this has a consensus then I will make the edit. Johnny0929 (talk) 22:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm up for anything that doesn't involve slashes or an overuse of headnotes. Whatever option is the most desired I will happily support as long as the forementioned isn't prominent. Brocicle (talk) 23:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Slashes and the used of "and" are a heck of a lot less inavasive then these suggestions. I repeat- I think it's best to keep it simple on this article and flesh out the details of people playing other people who are real people on the actual Roanoke charterers article. Kelege (talk) 02:11, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More than one editor has advised you as to why that won't work. I find it very confusing and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Brocicle (talk) 06:33, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the same formula is used on Hotel for when two characters were portrayed by the same persons, I'm not sure how it's so confusing? It's simply stating the actor played two characters in that particular season. Then flesh it out further in the article dedicated to Roanoke characters. Considering the article mentions the plot, summaries etc I don't see how it could be all that confusing to have two character names after the actors. What's more confusing is adding an overload of unnecessary information on the article when it doesn't need it and can be developed elsewhere. Kelege (talk) 07:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
They're separate characters though, not Sarah Paulson as Billie Dean Howard as Sally in a re-enactment. I don't see how many more ways it has to be explained to you for you to understand why that format does not work for the style this season. Brocicle (talk) 09:43, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't matter, the actress is still playing two characters whether they're separate or not- it's two characters. One is an actress and the other character is the one the actress plays. You're making it waaayyyyy too complex of an issue. Kelege (talk) 11:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It does matter, myself and other editors have explained to you why it won't work. I don't understand how you aren't getting it. I'm done with this conversation, all I'm doing is repeating myself to someone who is being pig headed.
I'd rather be someone who is pig headed than be someone who gets confused by two names and the use of "and". Kelege (talk) 13:07, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about being confused, it's about what works and doesn't work for the article and it doesn't in this case for the 100th time. Have a sook about it elsewhere. Brocicle (talk) 13:29, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the issue I fully support anything other than slashes and headnotes. Any other logical option is fine with me. Brocicle (talk) 11:59, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose the separate section when it's really not necessary on this article and only clutters it. I would be open to supporting it for the article pertaining to the characters however. Kelege (talk) 13:07, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment on above discussed cast section issue

[edit]

Request for comment on the format of the cast section. This season sees a different style to previous season, as an example Sarah Paulson played Shelby Miller as a re-enactment on the documentary My Roanoke Nightmare, in episode six it was revealed that the real name of Paulson's chatacter was Audrey Tindall. Discussion was opened in an attempt to solve the issue on how to structure the cast section after this revelation. While suggestions have been posed and discussed a consensus seems far from reach, woulf much appreciate a comment so we can reach a decision and implement it. Brocicle (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What if we left it at "Sarah Paulson as Audrey Tindall", "Evan Peters as Rory Monahan" etc? Leaving out MRN characters. Since Audrey and the rest are all actresses/actors, we are simply watching them at work in the first few episodes. This seems the only way to keep the article uncluttered. However, this might not work with Wes Bentley, Denis O'Hare, Lady Gaga and Frances Conroy, and it might seem inconsistent. It's a really tough situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YellowingMellowing (talkcontribs) 08:38, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I support this. Johnny0929 (talk) 14:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with this. Characters that only appear in the re-enactment can get a special footnote. Also, slashes shouldn't be used because they are for different aliases of the same character. DantODB (talk) 13:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In the same gist, I don't think "and" should be used since they are not playing two different characters a la Sarah in Freak Show. She played Bette and Dot in Season 4 but she is playing Audrey playing Shelby here, so "and" should not be used. I again would like to just change the characters they play in real life instead of the reenactment characters. I also agree with the footnote for people who showed up in reenactments only. Johnny0929 (talk) 14:49, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to Johnny0929 and Brocicle: Changing the section without consensus or after the discussion has ended is not acceptable. Especially if the change is that major, which is why I added "and", it is not a drastic change and a good alternative to the slash. Chase (talk) 17:18, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
At least four editor's if not more are against the use of slashes. While we may not have reached a consensus on how to structure the cast section, we've reached one on the use of slashes through comment. Brocicle (talk) 01:36, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to DantODB: Again, it is unacceptable to change anything until this discussion is done. Otherwise, what is the point of having this? Restore it back to the original and let this discussion take its course, otherwise let's take this to a higher authority. Chase (talk) 00:01, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please do take this to a higher authority. You are just bullying people who have a different opinion than yours without actually providing solutions. How is there no consensus when there is obviously consensus on NO SLASHES and USING THE REAL ACTORS NAMES as mentioned above? Take this to the higher authority or you can leave. Stop acting so high and mighty as an editor. 68.100.254.133 (talk) 04:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gory details

[edit]

Chapter 7, Wiki states Agnes is stabbed in the face by the real butcher. As I can not edit this page for protective content. May inform, it was the butchers blade slicing down the centre of her skull buried in her head, leaving only the handle in view as it sticks out of her face. JonLeePaul (talk) 22:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Various spellings of Thomasin in article

[edit]

I'm seeing the name of Kathy Bate's (reenactment) character spelled a few different ways throughout the article--which is the correct spelling? - Melodies1917 (talk) 19:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HEY! :) The correct spelling is Thomasin and that should no longer be an issue but please go back and check through to make sure if you feel so inclined! If you are going to check make sure to do the short and long summaries please! Thank you for bringing this forward! TedEskey (talk) 19:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great, thanks! -Melodies1917 (talk) 16:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

American Horror Story Universe vs. My Roanoke Nightmare Universe

[edit]

I think it is confusing to put a footnote next to the characters that are the real-life counterparts of the My Roanoke Nightmare characters. The reason for this is that it would indicate that character without footnotes are characters in My Roanoke Nightmare as opposed to simply existing in the AHS universe. Recurring characters like Guinness and Diana Cross are listed the same way, despite existing in different capacities/universes of the shows. I propose to put footnotes next to My Roanoke Nightmare characters instead of the real-life counterparts to avoid confusion regarding which character name is part of what universe. This way, AHS characters are listed normally and My Roanoke Nightmare characters whose real names are unknown all have footnotes. DantODB 21:35, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Chapter 8

[edit]
Resolved

The description says "Monet is being hunted down in the woods by the Polk's" -- that should just be "Polks." Because it is a plural, there should not be an apostrophe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8807:C188:4500:D1BA:6DA6:CB00:303B (talk) 05:31, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this has been corrected. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final Resolution of the Cast section

[edit]

Do we have a consensus on the cast section now? I would propose that we just use their names outside of MRN's reenactment besides those whose actors have no names (like Lady Gaga or Frances Conroy) and use the asterisk or footnote thing. The additional characters they play in MRN can be explained in the characters page. Johnny0929 (talk) 15:05, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does it make sense to have it as: Real name as actor name, reenactment actor of character name? I also think it would be helpful to expand the Plot section of the article to clarify. Melodies1917 (talk) 17:10, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Expand Plot section

[edit]

The Plot section of the article is a bit short compared to that of other AHS seasons. I think a longer plot would also be helpful to readers in clarifying the cast and who they portrayed in both MRN and RTR. Melodies1917 (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think it's fine while the other articles are too long. Plot is expanded in the episode summaries and the episodes have their own pages with further detail. Brocicle (talk) 09:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would say the contrary to lessen the episode summaries and expand the main plot. The episodes all have individual plot summaries in their respective articles anyways. —IB [ Poke ] 11:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I like both of those suggestions, but maybe we can settle on at least explaining how the show turns into Return to Roanoke with the reenactment actors and such halfway throughout the season. Melodies1917 (talk) 15:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to whoever took care of this. -Melodies1917 (talk) 20:54, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It was expanded a little bit but some one reverted it. —IB [ Poke ] 05:30, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:07, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adina Porter

[edit]

Adina Porter is credited in the main cast on this page, despite the fact that she isn’t actually part of it in the season. -DJordan18 (talk) 0:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism?

[edit]

Is that vandalism, or at least trolling, the over-linking in the episodes' descriptions? Words like "knife", "pig" and "homosexual" are linked. And yes, those choices are very suspicious. Other common words next to them are not linked. For instance, the article's editors thought readers might need help understanding the word "knife" but not the words "torch" and "totem"; or they thought "car" and "homosexual" were more in need of a link than "blood moon". Kumagoro-42 (talk) 05:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of the links were added by an IP quite some time ago; I've removed the most common of them per WP:OVERLINK. Feel free to remove any others as you see fit.-- Ponyobons mots 17:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]