« first day (1989 days earlier)      last day (1829 days later) » 

2:02 AM
@DVK-in-Florida Writers is one of those SEs I keep meaning to join but haven't got round to yet.
I think Lit is going to be taking up too much of my time in the next while for me to even think about joining yet another site :-)
@Randal'Thor Joining a site takes about 5 seconds, what with unified logins :) The trick is to exert enough willpower to "fire and forget": join, ask your ontopic question, and disengage - don't participate in meta, chat, comments, or even browse other Q&As.
@NapoleonWilson When it comes to reading order, my main concern isn't whether there are/aren't bullets, but that the bullets (or non-bulleted text) have MEAT on them (like Terminator). Specifically, a meaningful explanation of WHY one thing goes after another in that specific order.
If I'm ever in a trollish mood, I'll ask a question about the lyrics to Louie, Louie. Which will either get me banned, or song lyrics questions banned.
@DVK-in-Florida Of course. That's what I'm talking about too. But a symptom of lack of meat is a bullet list where you can actually clearly see the bullets because they're all single lines.
@DVK-in-Florida I think that's what Napoleon was saying too: he wasn't criticising my answer for having bullets, but noting that there was meat on the bullets.
this site is so fun
@NapoleonWilson Ah, with that caveat, I wholeheartedly agree with you.
2:10 AM
I've done pretty much nothing else then research/answer questions for the last hour
If I would be in a trollish mood, the first thing I'd do would be spamming ID questions. ;-P
well, and eat
wait did we decide IDs are on-topic or that they are until further consensus?
@NapoleonWilson I considered doing that on SFF to make a point, but decided that my life (or my site stature) wasn't worth useless battles, and simply put ID tag on "ignore" forever.
@DVK-in-Florida That's how the bad guys win, though! ;-)
@NapoleonWilson I consider it detente, not a win :)
2:12 AM
2 hours ago, by Rand al'Thor
@bleh Meta discussion is here. Top answer essentially says "They might be OK, as long as there aren't too many of them"; second answer essentially says "They're really good, let's give them a try".
@Randal'Thor you chose not to capitalize your "the"s in your reading order answer?
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ I'm not American; I don't put capital letters after colons.
ah, afaik that's not an american thing
I just thought it looked nicer
Yeah, someone told me the other day that that's not an Americanism but just bad punctuation.
<shrug> fine with me
2:13 AM
I dunno. Either way, I don't do it.
@Randal'Thor oh... well... erm.... ok then
Gheez. I have a bazillion pings from this room ;)
lol welcome back!
@steelersquirrel \o/
2:15 AM
Hey @steeler!
@steelersquirrel EXCITEMENT is up!
@steelersquirrel I'm working on a book question!
@NapoleonWilson Yay!
OMG!!! How exciting!!!
Heh, everyone starts speaking with exclamation marks when Steeler turns up :-P
Hehehe! I tend to have that effect on people ;)
2:17 AM
"In other news today, exclamation mark prices skyrocketed after demand rapidly increased when steelersquirrel entered the chat room. Economists are not sure what the long-term effects will be on Literature Stack Exchange's economy."
Wait a minute. Hold the phone. Shog's favorite author is Poe? That explains a lot :P
@HDE226868 We'll have to invest in more flippant and less classical literature, with more exclamation marks.
@Randal'Thor Exclamation marks are a waning natural resource. I fear that we'll have to revert to using malformed question marks.
Or, heaven forbid, interrobangs.
@steelersquirrel I might have asked a question before you did! ;-P
2:22 AM
@NapoleonWilson Yeah. I suck. I have zero clue what to even ask :(
@steelersquirrel the top bar of my browser
Dammit, @EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ, stop answering everything! :-P
@Randal'Thor ‮Interrobangs are just fine :/
Mith left and I've answered 2 or 3 before he left
@TrojanByAccident #justdvorakproblems
2:23 AM
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ Accidentally entered a unicode right-to-left
@NapoleonWilson I can't find your question!
o_O how did that happen
@steelersquirrel Hmpf, I'm still researching. It's about stuff I read ages ago.
@steelersquirrel yeah, the flood of new questions has mostly stopped. You can probably self-answer some more Qs from the beta page though
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ how did what happen?
2:26 AM
@NapoleonWilson Well, you're all rolling up in here saying that you asked one before me...I just assumed that you already did ;)
3 mins ago, by TrojanByAccident
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ Accidentally entered a unicode right-to-left
@steelersquirrel No, he said he might.
Okay. I'm protesting the whole chatroom name. The Library is supposed to be quiet, people!! ;)
It's never quiet where @steeler is!
2:28 AM
can't argue with that
@Randal'Thor Argh! I wish that didn't have to run off or I would put something together. I just don't want to throw crap up in here just to get a question posted.
@steelersquirrel I said I might have, provided you don't in the meantime.
@steelersquirrel Awww, you have to go already? :'(
\o/ passed 500 rep!
@NapoleonWilson Let's see if you pass the "test" that you were dreading when I spoke to you last night...;)
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ Congrats!
2:33 AM
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ Wow! You get your intelligence from my side of the family...just sayin' ;)
I forget - what are the 500 rep powers on beta sites?
thanks to both of you!
@Randal'Thor insta-edits
and only on private beta, it's 1k on public betas
if I repcap every day until the public, I think I'll retain them though ;p
@steelersquirrel Ah, birthday party for your colleague at the Portland City Grill, which is really good but also expensive, even for the salad you just want to eat.
Was that correct?
@NapoleonWilson Not for a colleague...but, close enough ;)
2:35 AM
@steelersquirrel Wut? Awww, I thought it was a colleague.
hey somebody un-downvoted my post
what caused that
@NapoleonWilson No. I even told you who the party was for...
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ I just upvoted 2 of your posts...I will do more tomorrow :)
@steelersquirrel I thought it was the Steelers doctor.
no serial voting though
but that's a bit hard because I think I've answered a lot
2:37 AM
Hmpf, seems I failed the test. :'(
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ That's why I only did 2 today ;)
well thansk?
@NapoleonWilson JFC!!! You totally failed!!! You are so busted!! ;)
I'm sorry. :'(
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ I only like to give the same user 2-3 upvotes a day...just so that I won't be accused of serial upvoting. I only upvoted the stuff that I am familiar with. I don't want to show favoritism just because you're my son ;)
2:40 AM
ah, okay
I just asked 3 questions based off the beta, and I'm outta here for the night!
see y'all!
@NapoleonWilson I knew it!! I told you that you weren't listening!! ;)
@EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ Night!
Also, I don't mean to spam the site with answers/questions. This is just really fun to participate, and I'm asking the best questions I see on the A51 list.
@steelersquirrel night! gl with whatever!
Don't worry, silly!
Okay. I gotta go get ready for my date with the Steelers Doctor my friend, RICK'S BIRTHDAY PARTY! Dammit, Napoleon!!! ;)
@steelersquirrel Oh, but...but...I know who Rick is!
Yeah. That's where I am going...I mentioned it twice last night ;-(
2:45 AM
Night @EᴀsᴛᴇʀʟʏIʀᴋ! Good job on all those answers!
@steelersquirrel I'm sorry, have fun still. <groveling emoticon>
@steeler Did you get Nevermore over here yet?
resists urge to superping @Nevermore
There was an interesting Macbeth question recently.
@Randal'Thor I haven't had a chance to talk to her. I will tell her about it tomorrow. She has the rest of theweek off work. Can I tell her to ping you if she has any questions?
@steelersquirrel Sure. I'm probably less nervous of her than Napoleon is ;-)
2:50 AM
@Randal'Thor Hehehe! Well, I just thought that you were involved in getting this site off and you have been promoting it and stuff and you're super helpful with everything I have questions about, so, I just thought that you would be better to help her :)
@NapoleonWilson Don't worry. I'm just messing with you! I just want it to be known that you weren't listening... ;)
@steelersquirrel Sure! I'm happy to help anyone who's interested in participating in this site.
@steelersquirrel Yeah, yeah, I admit.
Okay. Squirrel is out! See you guys!! :)
Have fun!
2:53 AM
Does anyone here know French?
@NapoleonWilson See. I frigging knew it. I could tell. I'm not completely stupid ;)
@HDE226868 I know a bit, why?
@HDE226868 I know how to say one sentence and it probably wouldn't help you ;)
@Hamlet I wanted to know if the English translation I used for The Little Prince is accurate enough. I'd assume it is, but I don't have a good way of checking besides looking at different texts.
Question: what are people's thoughts on editing questions/answers to remove spoiler blockquotes? The consensus on meta seems to be that spoiler blockquotes should be avoided
2:56 AM
@HDE226868 Try Gilles when he's around.
@HDE226868 let me look
Anyone actually in France is probably asleep by now, of course.
@Randal'Thor That was my first thought.
@HDE226868 the translation (at least of that passage) is accurate (it's basically word-for-word)
@Hamlet I wouldn't, but that might be worth either a new answer to be voted on in that meta discussion or an entirely separate one.
2:57 AM
@Hamlet Thank you.
@Randal'Thor OK I'll ask on meta. It's just annoying to have to click on the spoiler blockquotes to read an answer
@DVK-in-Florida Hehehe! Awwwww! Thanks, buddy :)
@Hamlet If it's excessive, totally edit them out.
@Randal'Thor Like the people in Britain are?
@NapoleonWilson And the people in Germany.
@NapoleonWilson Or the people in Germany should be... ;-(
3:03 AM
By the way, I'm not sure if anyone's done this yet, but many thanks and congratulations to @Hamlet for proposing that Literature get another shot.
@steelersquirrel I'm unemployed and single, I can do what I want!
Q: Is it acceptable to remove spoiler blockquotes from questions and answers?

HamletWe recently discussed spoilers on this site, and the consensus was that while spoilers in titles should be avoided, spoilers in the body of questions/answers were acceptable, and therefore that spoiler blockquotes should be avoided. If someone posts an answer that contains spoiler blockquotes, i...

@HDE226868 thanks!
@HDE226868 Yes! Sorry @Hamlet, I'd forgotten you were the original (re)proposer.
@NapoleonWilson You're single now? :-o
@Randal'Thor Well, according to other people you can call yourself single when the other person still lives 8000 km away. ;-P
@NapoleonWilson Aww :-(
3:12 AM
@HDE226868 I attempted with my sparse knowledge of French to translate it.
So what was the deal with author tags again?
Are they encouraged or rather not?
Q: When should I use an author tag?

fi12If I my question is about a certain book by an author, should I use the tag for both the book and the author? Or just the book? What's the purpose of these author tags in the first place and when can I use them?

No consensus.
No answers yet.
Okay, personal preference then.
3:19 AM
Which is a pain when I'm about to start creating tag wikis for some author tags.
3:47 AM
@HDE226868 @Randal'Thor @NapoleonWilson I've answered that question - I'd be curious what your thoughts are on it.
@Emrakul Darn, I've almost finished typing up an answer - ninja'd again!
@Randal'Thor We keep doing that!
Sounds reasonable. That's how I would do it too (and how I am doing it on other sites).
Posted my answer. Now reading yours ...
And that's also why I refrained from creating author tags for my question, even if a tag for Goethe couldn't hurt to shake up that English place a little. ;-)
3:51 AM
I need to go back and edit my questions... didn't follow my own line of thought...
Heh, the first half of your answer follows just the same train of thought as mine :-)
@Randal'Thor Aren't you supposed to be asleep or something?
I disagree with the first of your second set of bullet points though.
We want Shakespeare buffs to be able to easily search for all questions, rather than look through the tags for each of the 37/39 plays in turn.
@Catija Talk to Napoleon about that before me :-P
@Randal'Thor Hmm... I see what you're saying. But the questions wouldn't really be about , so maybe in that case specifically and/or ones like it, a general tag would be appropriate.
@Randal'Thor He's always up late... you... not so much.
Once again, the real need is a hierarchical tag system...
3:55 AM
Meh, I don't care what SE says really, searchability second, question classification first! Fo Life!
@Emrakul So we'd have a tag AND a tag? An tag AND a tag? A tag AND an tag?
That seems way more redundant than just tagging questions with both author and work tags.
I'm starting to think that I'm not going to fulfill my commitment... I haven't even heard of half of the books the questions are about and asking questions is not my forte...
@Randal'Thor You're right, that doesn't make much sense. But on the other hand, we definitely shouldn't use tags to mean something they're not.
Which is exactly why I didn't commit in the first place.
You ask questions, though...
3:56 AM
I'm a little conflicted, and I see where you're coming from, but I think preserving "tag means what it says" is a higher priority, to me.
Tags describe the question, not the work the question is about.
Searchability is a noble and pragmatic goal, but pragmatic considerations come after considerations for clarity and proper question classification for me.
How do you define "proper question classification" though?
@NapoleonWilson Yes. The problem is that SFF has consistently ignored that and, if we adopt this method, Literature will do it, too... M&TV's much cleaner... title tags plus a tag that frames the question. Author tags should be for questions about that author.
What makes categorising questions by work more "proper" than categorising them by author?
... which leads to the question... "Are questions about the author that bear no relevance to their works on topic?
3:59 AM
I think a lot of this is quite subjective, whereas searchability is a practical consideration which is much easier to make objective.
On the other hand, it's ridiculously late here, so I may not be thinking straight.
@Catija Exactly.
@Randal'Thor Because that is what your question is about. You don't ask about Shakespeare, you ask about Hamlet. If you really ask about Shakespeare, then tag it as such.
And there the devil shall appear.
@NapoleonWilson I think this is correct. The Shakespeare tag is for asking about Shakespeare; the Hamlet tag is for asking about Hamlet.
@NapoleonWilson If that's the rule, it's easy for anyone to circumvent by simply changing "Why did Hamlet do XYZ?" to "Why did Shakespeare write Hamlet to do XYZ?" and saying hey, look, I'm asking about Shakespeare.
(Though it's actually funny that we're both in the negative, @Randal'Thor. I'd be curious to know if there's another option.)
@Randal'Thor Well, when they do that, good luck for them. But until people start actively rephrasing their questions I'd not bother about that.
4:04 AM
@Randal'Thor Except no one can answer that question... well, except Shakespeare.
@Randal'Thor Those two are actually different questions. One asks about why Hamlet did something in-universe; the other asks about why Shakespeare decided to write Hamlet in that particular way.
For crying out loud, what is wrong with tagging stories by title and author
@Hamlet Because that's not how tags are supposed to work on SE.
@Hamlet Exactly what we are currently discussing here. No need to cry.
@Hamlet See, Hamlet agrees with me - now I just need Shakespeare to agree too!
4:06 AM
FYI someone asked a story-id question, it got downvoted, and they deleted the question
Success story? That's unfortunate, I guess?
Can we talk about why we're making songs on topic here...? Are jingles next? Ad slogans? Puns? Where are we going to draw the line between a "work" and "words"?
@Catija The most important question about tagging should be: are tags useful? Author tags undeniably are useful. Title tags are undeniably useful. Seems like it's in everyone's best interest to use both.
@Catija Well, as I said, when songs are poems, movies are plays.
4:10 AM
@Hamlet I guess I don't see how an author tag is useful... but I'm clearly also one of the only people on the entire SE who doesn't follow tags or use tags to find questions to answer. If it's not on the recently active page, it doesn't exist for me.
Like I say, I can see the argument for using authorial tags as well as titular tags. I actually did that intuitively in my first couple questions - though admittedly, partially because I wanted to make some of the appropriate tags.
But I'm wary of treating it like a good approach long-term.
@Catija i use/will use author tags
@Emrakul it seems like a good long-term approach to me
@Emrakul Thanks for your waste land answer by the way
@Hamlet You're welcome! I hope it helps!
@Emrakul I'm in the middle of leaving some comments on it
4:16 AM
I'd be happy to help as much as I can. I'm reading the poem more thoroughly now; it's been a while since I've seen it.
Also, have you seen my question/answer here on the phrase "hot gammon": literature.stackexchange.com/a/177/111
@Hamlet I hadn't!
But I think it makes sense. If a poet goes so far as to mention a specific food, there's usually a good reason they picked that one.
@Emrakul it was pretty impressive how many puns he was able to get out of those two words
@Emrakul OK, I left my comments. I'm probably never going to accept an answer to that question because, as you note, there are many possible meanings.
@Hamlet That's fine, no worries! I've gotta think a bit before I edit my answer, anyway. I may end up having to revise my interpretation, too.
4:24 AM
@Emrakul Looking forward to it!
4:38 AM
eyyy another rep cap
well there goes all my rep until tomorrow
congrats on 500 @Randal'Thor also
5:25 AM
[amused] If we embrace non-Googlers but don't accept "I carefully studied the book" as sufficient effort for a question, what effort is sufficient?
6:19 AM
I think quite a few questions on here could actually be subjective to opinion. @BESW
I'm not sure what you're responding to.
7:02 AM
The Humble Bundle is selling a MASSIVE amount of Image Comics. Several of them I can personally vouch for, others I've heard Good Things about.
@BESW I guess it would be a nice policy to close questions that can be answered by the material in the book
The answerer user base of the site can decide that well most of the times.
@M.A.R. That's not a very clear-cut criterion though.
It is, if we propose that stuff that can be inferred from the book is not off-topic, but stuff explicitly mentioned, so you can even quote the book itself as an answer, is.
It's also useful to remember that it never gets 100 percent objective
And even when it does, it would mean that it might not work
7:19 AM
A lot of analysis is discussion purely on stuff that can be inferred from the book. People ask questions about it because inferring stuff from text is hard.
Yeah, assuming any given level of reading comprehension is going to shut out users.
@Emrakul true
@Emrakul Hmm, so in your opinion, closing stuff that can be inferred from the book will cause the site to lose traffic?
Good afternoon
I think it'd cripple the site completely, making lit.se a haven only for academics to argue about stuff they already know.
@AnkitSharma Hi!
7:30 AM
@AnkitSharma Well, it's still 11 a.m. here
@M.A.R. timezones sucks
Like a vacuum
ooopsss I missed "s"
And now you should drop an ''s''
No bot yet to post main site question or at-least meta
7:37 AM
So discouraging questions that could be answered by reading it... would be silly.
I think we should probably have a similar level of acceptance.
Q: Should we embrace non-Googlers?

BESWCommon Stack Network policy is to embrace non-Googlers. The Stack Exchange wants to be a place Google sends folks, not a place that sends folks to Google. Unfortunately, many sites and some of our users feel the downvote reason "does not show any research effort" is synonymous with "did not try ...

@M.A.R. To be honest, traffic isn't my goal in it. My goal is largely to encourage informative, detailed answers. Simple questions (note: these aren't bad questions) can have great answers.
@Emrakul +star for the word of wisdom
@BESW I guess time will tell
Almost every site has its share of questions that are marginally on-topic but tend to get so annoying that you set policies to close them
@Emrakul Quality will bring quantity. And quantity will cause a decrease in relative quality
So the best case scenario here is that the user base creates a high quality set of starting questions and answers,
which drives traffic,
which will inevitably lead to a decrease in quality
And you'll end up having people go to meta and say ''Why don't I see good questions anymore?''
While the truth is that good questions have increased, but they look few among bad questions
@M.A.R. That's not a good reason to artificially lower quality from the outset, though. But on top of that, I'm not sure a prediction of an inevitable failure to keep up quality standards is a healthy way to start out a beta site.
I think you're right that it's important to be aware of, but I don't think it's inevitable. There's a lot we can do, and it starts in the formative period of the site.
7:46 AM
@Emrakul I'm saying that there will be an inevitable fall in quality once the site hopefully gets popular
@M.A.R. Possibly, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it. As long as we keep prioritizing quality over growth, we're a long ways off from that point. And SE has a lot of tools to help alleviate that problem once it starts to happen.
@Emrakul And it slows it down, yes. If you slow it down well enough, you'll build a core group of users that will prevent the site's failure.
Heh, wait a minute
Did I seem to be on the perservationist side?
Well, let's not call it that
I'm a big advocate of quality control myself
1 hour later…
9:14 AM
Anyone alive here?
Chemicals are hardly considered alive.
But they are
Raises eyebrows
Oh, just remembered. I gotta change my avatar.
I just usually do
Changing avatars is fun
Now I'm trying to think which chemical to change to
9:21 AM
@Mithrandir I still count myself alive
That's good
If you are not secretly a zombie
@M.A.R. I can understand that. That remind me I have to change my avatar now
Hello, there.
hello mick
\o Mick
9:23 AM
@M.A.R. waves
So, which chemical to choose? SAM?
@Mithrandir That I will never going to clear
Oh, gotcha
I know what my next chemical will be
I am confused between Cassidy(preacher) or Diego Luna for my next avatar
Not into chemicals
I should get rid of my current avatar which was for winterbash only
So. I've had my head stuck in science fiction books for the past 50 years. My knowledge of the English classics is very limited, and I don't quite know where to start. I read Far from the Madding Crowd when I was at school and enjoyed it, but Northanger Abbey bored the pants off me. I find Dickens far too descriptive. Whre to begin? And is this a reasonable question for the main site?
9:30 AM
I need another Bookcase
You could make one out of all the books that you no longer read. All that you need is a staple gun.
I need to have them available for this site :P
@Mick I use older books as tiers to stack newer books multiple layers deep but still see their spines.
@Mick I think that's gonna far too opinion-based for the main site unless you can more narrowly and objectively define "English classics" and describe what your goal is in reading them.
But you're welcome to make a meta post about it and see what the gestalt mind says.
Wheee 444 rep...
@BESW That's a good idea.
9:35 AM
@Mithrandir Maybe a rearrangement
I picked up everything from the floor and stuck it on the bookcase to take that picture
Just changed the avatar.
Changes will take effect in a few minutes
Q: When and why did the Brothers Grimm start collecting fairy tales?

Easterly IrkJacob and Wilhelm Grimm are well known for authoring multiple collections of traditional folk tales in the late 18th/early 19th century. Their first major collection of stories was published in 1812. But when did they start collecting them and what prompted their interest in German folklore?

any reason you wrote ''Brothers Grimm'' instead of ''Grimm Brothers''? Am I missing something?
9:49 AM
The Brothers Grimm (die Brüder Grimm or die Gebrüder Grimm), Jacob (1785–1863) and Wilhelm Grimm (1786–1859), were German academics, philologists, cultural researchers, lexicographers and authors who together specialized in collecting and publishing folklore during the 19th century. They were among the best-known storytellers of folk tales, and popularized stories such as "Cinderella" ("Aschenputtel"), "The Frog Prince" ("Der Froschkönig"), "The Goose-Girl" ("Die Gänsemagd"), "Hansel and Gretel" ("Hänsel und Gretel"), "Rapunzel", "Rumpelstiltskin" ("Rumpelstilzchen"),"Sleeping Beauty" ("Dornröschen...
Double ahh
'tis weird though
@Mithrandir That's a bit messy
Arguably messier than mine
Downvoted idea of the day
Q: Why is there only one vote button?

ZirWhy doesn't an answer have two vote buttons, one for the effort and one for the accuracy? You know some people spend some time to answer questions and probably they answer the wrong way. So, why give them only down votes?

10:07 AM
@M.A.R. -1, and and one DV button was enough for me
Q: Method to get answers accepted if OP is unregistered

owlswipeOn many of the Stack Exchange sites, a significant proportion of questions are asked by unregistered users who are then unable to accept an answer to their question as correct. This is a massive disincentive to answering questions from unregistered users, given that the probability of reputation ...

10:46 AM
Morning all.
@Randal'Thor Morning evening.
@Mick I think that's covered by this meta post (short answer: no, it would be too opinion-based).
@Mithrandir Wow, you certainly do!
Huh, that's odd. I earned the Citizen Patrol badge on meta, but I still have 0 helpful flags.
@Randal'Thor And you didn't raise any flags?
@M.A.R. I did, but they're still pending.
That seems ... silly.
Oh, wait, does Citizen Patrol really mean first flagged post and not first helpfully flagged post?
10:56 AM
@Randal'Thor I think it's first case.
I got this badge on many sites right after flagging the post.
Not when my flag was declared helpful.
Though my first flag was never declined.
So anybody could earn it by just flagging a post and writing "bingle bongle dingle dangle yikkety-doo yikkety-dah ping pong lippy tuppy too tah" in the custom flag description box?
2 mins ago, by Rand al'Thor
That seems ... silly.
(bonus points for anyone who gets that reference)
@Randal'Thor Doctor Who?
@AJ +1

« first day (1989 days earlier)      last day (1829 days later) »