User talk:Beanie Bo: Difference between revisions

(10 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 33:

:https://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1816&context=shlr [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 22:05, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

::During the COVID crisis, manufacturers like General Electric, Dräger, Steris, locked down the supply of spare parts, software and repair manuals behind expensive certifications for technicians, [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 22:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

:::Thats the thing, you can’t. I’m choosing to click the subscribe button to this without unsubscribing! Also, if you want to learn source editing at all, never use citations there. Wikipedia has an actual toolbar for source that makes it 100x better that doesn’t appear in the CRW at all. It makes citations 100x easier. And also to make a citation *sigh* you need to do <nowiki> <ref> {{Cite web|first=|last=|URL=|title=}} </ref> </nowiki> and i FORGOT all the other parameters. WHAT IS THIS SYSTEM AND HOW IS IT GOOD. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|AnotherConsumerRightsPerson]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 05:40, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

:::Thats the thing, you can’t. I’m choosing to click the subscribe button to this without unsubscribing! [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|AnotherConsumerRightsPerson]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 05:40, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

::::~~Hang on why did I start talking about the citation system in~~ source?? [[User:~~AnotherConsumerRightsPerson~~|~~AnotherConsumerRightsPerson~~]] ([[User talk:~~AnotherConsumerRightsPerson~~|talk]]) 05:40, ~~27 September~~ 2025 (UTC)

:Medtronic's failure to deliver:

:::::~~WAIT SAME TIME~~ [[~~User~~:~~AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i~~>~~AnotherConsumerRightsPerson<~~/~~b><~~/i>]] ([[User talk:~~AnotherConsumerRightsPerson~~|talk]]) 05:40, ~~27 September~~ 2025 (UTC)

:https://robertleeread.medium.com/medtronic-open-source-ventilator-does-not-meet-uks-rapidly-manufactured-ventilator-systems-81947c72a7ac

:[https://news.medtronic.com/2020-04-08-Medtronic-Provides-Ventilator-Progress-Update?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://news.medtronic.com/2020-04-08-Medtronic-Provides-Ventilator-Progress-Update]

~~==Contextual advertising theme article==~~

:[https://hackaday.com/2020/03/30/professional-ventilator-design-open-sourced-today-by-medtronic/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://hackaday.com/2020/03/30/professional-ventilator-design-open-sourced-today-by-medtronic]

:https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/03/30/medtronic-makes-plans-for-a-ventilator-open-source.aspx?utm_source=chatgpt.com

~~Serving ads that are related~~ to the content ~~you're viewing~~ rather than ~~tracking your behaviors and personality across the entire web~~. ~~Who would~~'~~ve thought something so obvious could be so revolutionary? Anyway, it~~'~~s making a comeback since GDPR~~.

:Pubmed article related to open-sourcing med equipment:

:[https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895] [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 20:54, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

::Chatgpt dump

https://~~www~~.~~forbes~~.~~com~~/~~councils~~/~~forbesagencycouncil/2021/07/22~~/the-new-~~rise~~-of-~~contextual~~-~~advertising~~/ [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 11:31, ~~22 September~~ 2025 (UTC)

::Yes — there are several other documented instances from the COVID‑19 pandemic where ventilator manufacturers or contract suppliers promised large scale production, open designs/manuals, or rapid delivery — and later failed to deliver in full, or placed proprietary/restrictive conditions. Here are some of the more notable ones:

::----

::Notable examples

::'''1. Medtronic / Covidien / Newport Medical Instruments'''

::*A U.S. government-funded project by Newport aimed to build a low-cost ventilator for pandemics, but after Newport was acquired by Covidien, the project stalled and no ventilators were delivered. ([https://www.mdpi.com/2504-4494/4/2/49?utm_source=chatgpt.com MDPI])

::*The review of open-source ventilator designs notes that many manufacturers claimed “open” but had restrictive licenses (e.g., for pandemic only, or time-limited) so they were '''not''' true open-source hardware. ([https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895/?utm_source=chatgpt.com PMC])

::*Also, some manufacturers (including Medtronic) did '''not''' make repair manuals freely available or permitted third-party servicing. ([https://prospect.org/coronavirus/covid-consequences-restricted-repair-ventilators/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Prospect])

::'''2. Repair/access issues across ventilator manufacturers'''

::*Technical repair freedom: Several sources highlight that many ventilator makers imposed “software locks” or refused to release service manuals, making it hard for hospitals or third-party technicians to repair machines during the crisis. ([https://www.vice.com/en/article/ventilator-makers-are-restricting-access-to-repair-manuals-in-a-pure-profit-play/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Vice])

::*From one piece: > “Major manufacturers… hoarding parts and service manuals.” ([https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/a32144222/hospitals-ventilators-right-repair-covid-19/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Popular Mechanics])

::'''3. Ford Motor Company / General Electric manufacturing promise'''

::*Ford (in partnership with GE) committed to making 50,000 ventilators by mid-July, but hit global parts-supply delays and delivered fewer than half by the initial deadline. ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/18/ventilators-coronavirus-stockpile/?utm_source=chatgpt.com The Washington Post])

::*The Washington Post article noted: “the push … has also run into hiccups: … the company … had made fewer than half the devices by its initial deadline.” ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/18/ventilators-coronavirus-stockpile/?utm_source=chatgpt.com The Washington Post])

::----

::What patterns emerge

::*'''Promises vs reality timing''': Many big-scale pledges (tens of thousands of ventilators) were made under pandemic urgency, but supply chain, regulatory, design and manufacturing complexity delayed or reduced output.

::*'''“Open source” vs restricted access''': Some companies claimed to open manuals/designs, but in practice the license was limited (pandemic only), or key details/components remained proprietary, meaning third-party manufacturing or wide replication was difficult. (See open source review) ([https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895/?utm_source=chatgpt.com PMC])

::*'''Right to repair / servicing barriers''': While the crisis emphasised the need for rapid servicing of ventilators in use, many manufacturers kept tight control on parts, manuals, and repair rights — limiting flexibility for hospitals/biomedical engineers.

::*'''Mergers, acquisition & strategic decisions''': Some delays trace back to corporate strategy — e.g., the Newport/Covidien acquisition and subsequent shelving of a low-cost design. ([https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/04/06/vent-a06.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com World Socialist Web Site])

::----

::[[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 20:55, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

:::----

:::3. Licensing / Design Restrictions of Existing Manufactures (EU / UK Context)

:::*According to an expert report for the UK’s UK COVID‑19 Public Inquiry, existing ventilator manufacturers refused to grant licences of their approved designs to allow scale-up by third parties (for reasons including component shortages, liability concerns). ([https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/04181843/INQ000539153.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com UK Covid-19 Inquiry])

:::*In effect, rather than sharing open designs or allowing mass third-party manufacture, many health-system actors found little scope to replicate validated ventilators rapidly. '''Key takeaway:''' The promise/hope of open access or broad manufacturing collaboration met resistance from proprietary design holders — limiting scale-up.

:::----

:::4. Design & Manual / Consumables Shortcomings (Imported Devices)

:::*As part of the UK inquiry: one supplier’s devices were delivered “with just two days of consumables necessary to use such ventilators and no information about future consumable supply” — meaning they were functionally unusable for extended patient care. ([https://ukcovid19inquiry.dracos.co.uk/module-5/2025-03-17/?utm_source=chatgpt.com UK Covid-19 Inquiry Transcripts]) '''Key takeaway:''' Technical and logistical details (manuals, consumables, servicing) often failed to match the headline promise of “ready to use”.

:::----

:::[[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 21:00, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

::: ----

:::🔒 3. Ventilator Right-to-Repair Failures (Philips, Dräger, Hamilton, etc.)

:::'''The claim:''' Manufacturers pledged to “do everything possible” to keep ventilators running during the crisis.

:::'''Reality:'''

:::* Many refused to share repair manuals or software keys with hospitals.

:::* Philips and Dräger in particular restricted access to firmware updates, citing “liability and security.”

:::* Hospitals were forced to cannibalize parts or rely on gray-market servicing. '''Why it’s comparable:''' These companies didn’t frame it as open source, but they ''publicly signaled cooperation'' while continuing to enforce proprietary repair barriers — effectively undermining pandemic response. → Vice and Popular Mechanics ran exposés accusing them of “hoarding repair data during a global emergency.”

::: ----

:::🧠 4. Dyson (CoVent Project)

:::'''The claim:''' Build 10,000 new ventilators “within weeks” for the UK NHS.

:::'''Reality:'''

:::* No units were ever delivered to hospitals; the design never gained regulatory approval.

:::* Dyson claimed “we are ready,” but later internal documents (UK COVID Inquiry, 2025) showed there were known compatibility and safety concerns. '''Why it’s comparable:''' The company ''over-promised technological readiness'' to the public and government, despite the project being unproven. → This was more about '''engineering hubris''' than IP restriction, but the PR mismatch was just as stark.

::: ----

:::⚖️ 5. Newport / Covidien (Pre-Pandemic Project That Might Have Saved Lives)

:::'''The claim (pre-2012):''' Newport Medical Instruments was developing a $3,000 ventilator under a U.S. pandemic preparedness contract.

:::'''Reality:'''

:::* Covidien (Medtronic’s parent company later) bought Newport in 2012 and canceled the project, citing “profitability concerns.”

:::* The U.S. government had to restart the program from scratch in 2014 — it was unfinished when COVID-19 hit. '''Why it’s comparable:''' Not a “pandemic promise broken,” but a '''strategic decision that crippled later emergency readiness''', closely tied to corporate consolidation and IP control.

::: ----

:::[[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 21:03, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

==Requesting fix on medical ventilators article - newline after stubnotice==

Line 56:

Line 106:

:Yeah, I don't know why that happens, but I went ahead and added a new space in there. I wasn't aware that the first paragraph couldn't be edited. Not sure if that's a bug or not, but thanks for letting me know! [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 02:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

::Pretty sure it is a bug, as discussed [[Consumer Rights Wiki:Bugs#How do you edit beginning of an article with StubNotice?|here]]. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|AnotherConsumerRightsPerson]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 14:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

==Question regarding merge==

Hello! Regarding the merge for [[License euthanasia]], was it merged with [[Retroactively amended purchase]] or [[Post-purchase EULA modification]]? It seems there is a double merge request, so I just wanted to double check with you. [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 23:09, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

:This was the first I've actually used the merge request, so my mistake if I used it wrong! I added it to [[Post-purchase EULA modification]], so we're good. The other article "Retroactively..." appears to be AI generated and not worth saving in my opinion. [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 01:52, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

::Ah no worries, thanks for letting me know! [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 13:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 :https://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1816&context=shlr [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 22:05, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
 ::During the COVID crisis, manufacturers like General Electric, Dräger, Steris, locked down the supply of spare parts, software and repair manuals behind expensive certifications for technicians, [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 22:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
-:::Thats the thing, you can’t. I’m choosing to click the subscribe button to this without unsubscribing! Also, if you want to learn source editing at all, never use citations there. Wikipedia has an actual toolbar for source that makes it 100x better that doesn’t appear in the CRW at all. It makes citations 100x easier. And also to make a citation *sigh* you need to do <nowiki> <ref> {{Cite web|first=|last=|URL=|title=}} </ref> </nowiki> and i FORGOT all the other parameters. WHAT IS THIS SYSTEM AND HOW IS IT GOOD. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 05:40, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
+:::Thats the thing, you can’t. I’m choosing to click the subscribe button to this without unsubscribing! [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 05:40, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
-::::Hang on why did I start talking about the citation system in source?? [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 05:40, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
+:Medtronic's failure to deliver:
-:::::WAIT SAME TIME [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 05:40, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
+:https://robertleeread.medium.com/medtronic-open-source-ventilator-does-not-meet-uks-rapidly-manufactured-ventilator-systems-81947c72a7ac
+:[https://news.medtronic.com/2020-04-08-Medtronic-Provides-Ventilator-Progress-Update?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://news.medtronic.com/2020-04-08-Medtronic-Provides-Ventilator-Progress-Update]
-==Contextual advertising theme article==
+:[https://hackaday.com/2020/03/30/professional-ventilator-design-open-sourced-today-by-medtronic/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://hackaday.com/2020/03/30/professional-ventilator-design-open-sourced-today-by-medtronic]
+:https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/03/30/medtronic-makes-plans-for-a-ventilator-open-source.aspx?utm_source=chatgpt.com
-Serving ads that are related to the content you're viewing rather than tracking your behaviors and personality across the entire web. Who would've thought something so obvious could be so revolutionary? Anyway, it's making a comeback since GDPR.
+:Pubmed article related to open-sourcing med equipment:
+:[https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895] [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 20:54, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
+::Chatgpt dump
-https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesagencycouncil/2021/07/22/the-new-rise-of-contextual-advertising/ [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 11:31, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
+::Yes — there are several other documented instances from the COVID‑19 pandemic where ventilator manufacturers or contract suppliers promised large scale production, open designs/manuals, or rapid delivery — and later failed to deliver in full, or placed proprietary/restrictive conditions. Here are some of the more notable ones:
+::----
+::Notable examples
+::'''1. Medtronic / Covidien / Newport Medical Instruments'''
+::*A U.S. government-funded project by Newport aimed to build a low-cost ventilator for pandemics, but after Newport was acquired by Covidien, the project stalled and no ventilators were delivered. ([https://www.mdpi.com/2504-4494/4/2/49?utm_source=chatgpt.com MDPI])
+::*The review of open-source ventilator designs notes that many manufacturers claimed “open” but had restrictive licenses (e.g., for pandemic only, or time-limited) so they were '''not''' true open-source hardware. ([https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895/?utm_source=chatgpt.com PMC])
+::*Also, some manufacturers (including Medtronic) did '''not''' make repair manuals freely available or permitted third-party servicing. ([https://prospect.org/coronavirus/covid-consequences-restricted-repair-ventilators/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Prospect])
+::'''2. Repair/access issues across ventilator manufacturers'''
+::*Technical repair freedom: Several sources highlight that many ventilator makers imposed “software locks” or refused to release service manuals, making it hard for hospitals or third-party technicians to repair machines during the crisis. ([https://www.vice.com/en/article/ventilator-makers-are-restricting-access-to-repair-manuals-in-a-pure-profit-play/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Vice])
+::*From one piece: > “Major manufacturers… hoarding parts and service manuals.” ([https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/a32144222/hospitals-ventilators-right-repair-covid-19/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Popular Mechanics])
+::'''3. Ford Motor Company / General Electric manufacturing promise'''
+::*Ford (in partnership with GE) committed to making 50,000 ventilators by mid-July, but hit global parts-supply delays and delivered fewer than half by the initial deadline. ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/18/ventilators-coronavirus-stockpile/?utm_source=chatgpt.com The Washington Post])
+::*The Washington Post article noted: “the push … has also run into hiccups: … the company … had made fewer than half the devices by its initial deadline.” ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/18/ventilators-coronavirus-stockpile/?utm_source=chatgpt.com The Washington Post])
+::----
+::What patterns emerge
+::*'''Promises vs reality timing''': Many big-scale pledges (tens of thousands of ventilators) were made under pandemic urgency, but supply chain, regulatory, design and manufacturing complexity delayed or reduced output.
+::*'''“Open source” vs restricted access''': Some companies claimed to open manuals/designs, but in practice the license was limited (pandemic only), or key details/components remained proprietary, meaning third-party manufacturing or wide replication was difficult. (See open source review) ([https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7195895/?utm_source=chatgpt.com PMC])
+::*'''Right to repair / servicing barriers''': While the crisis emphasised the need for rapid servicing of ventilators in use, many manufacturers kept tight control on parts, manuals, and repair rights — limiting flexibility for hospitals/biomedical engineers.
+::*'''Mergers, acquisition & strategic decisions''': Some delays trace back to corporate strategy — e.g., the Newport/Covidien acquisition and subsequent shelving of a low-cost design. ([https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/04/06/vent-a06.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com World Socialist Web Site])
+::----
+::[[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 20:55, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
+:::----
+:::3. Licensing / Design Restrictions of Existing Manufactures (EU / UK Context)
+:::*According to an expert report for the UK’s UK COVID‑19 Public Inquiry, existing ventilator manufacturers refused to grant licences of their approved designs to allow scale-up by third parties (for reasons including component shortages, liability concerns). ([https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/04181843/INQ000539153.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com UK Covid-19 Inquiry])
+:::*In effect, rather than sharing open designs or allowing mass third-party manufacture, many health-system actors found little scope to replicate validated ventilators rapidly.  '''Key takeaway:''' The promise/hope of open access or broad manufacturing collaboration met resistance from proprietary design holders — limiting scale-up.
+:::----
+:::4. Design & Manual / Consumables Shortcomings (Imported Devices)
+:::*As part of the UK inquiry: one supplier’s devices were delivered “with just two days of consumables necessary to use such ventilators and no information about future consumable supply” — meaning they were functionally unusable for extended patient care. ([https://ukcovid19inquiry.dracos.co.uk/module-5/2025-03-17/?utm_source=chatgpt.com UK Covid-19 Inquiry Transcripts])  '''Key takeaway:''' Technical and logistical details (manuals, consumables, servicing) often failed to match the headline promise of “ready to use”.
+:::----
+:::[[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 21:00, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
+::: ----
+:::🔒 3. Ventilator Right-to-Repair Failures (Philips, Dräger, Hamilton, etc.)
+:::'''The claim:''' Manufacturers pledged to “do everything possible” to keep ventilators running during the crisis.
+:::'''Reality:'''
+:::* Many refused to share repair manuals or software keys with hospitals.
+:::* Philips and Dräger in particular restricted access to firmware updates, citing “liability and security.”
+:::* Hospitals were forced to cannibalize parts or rely on gray-market servicing.  '''Why it’s comparable:''' These companies didn’t frame it as open source, but they ''publicly signaled cooperation'' while continuing to enforce proprietary repair barriers — effectively undermining pandemic response.  → Vice and Popular Mechanics ran exposés accusing them of “hoarding repair data during a global emergency.”
+::: ----
+:::🧠 4. Dyson (CoVent Project)
+:::'''The claim:''' Build 10,000 new ventilators “within weeks” for the UK NHS.
+:::'''Reality:'''
+:::* No units were ever delivered to hospitals; the design never gained regulatory approval.
+:::* Dyson claimed “we are ready,” but later internal documents (UK COVID Inquiry, 2025) showed there were known compatibility and safety concerns.  '''Why it’s comparable:''' The company ''over-promised technological readiness'' to the public and government, despite the project being unproven.  → This was more about '''engineering hubris''' than IP restriction, but the PR mismatch was just as stark.
+::: ----
+:::⚖️ 5. Newport / Covidien (Pre-Pandemic Project That Might Have Saved Lives)
+:::'''The claim (pre-2012):''' Newport Medical Instruments was developing a $3,000 ventilator under a U.S. pandemic preparedness contract.
+:::'''Reality:'''
+:::* Covidien (Medtronic’s parent company later) bought Newport in 2012 and canceled the project, citing “profitability concerns.”
+:::* The U.S. government had to restart the program from scratch in 2014 — it was unfinished when COVID-19 hit.  '''Why it’s comparable:''' Not a “pandemic promise broken,” but a '''strategic decision that crippled later emergency readiness''', closely tied to corporate consolidation and IP control.
+::: ----
+:::[[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 21:03, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
 ==Requesting fix on medical ventilators article - newline after stubnotice==
@@ Line 56: / Line 106: @@
 :Yeah, I don't know why that happens, but I went ahead and added a new space in there. I wasn't aware that the first paragraph couldn't be edited. Not sure if that's a bug or not, but thanks for letting me know! [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 02:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
 ::Pretty sure it is a bug, as discussed [[Consumer Rights Wiki:Bugs#How do you edit beginning of an article with StubNotice?|here]]. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 14:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
+==Question regarding merge==
+Hello! Regarding the merge for [[License euthanasia]], was it merged with [[Retroactively amended purchase]] or [[Post-purchase EULA modification]]? It seems there is a double merge request, so I just wanted to double check with you. [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 23:09, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
+:This was the first I've actually used the merge request, so my mistake if I used it wrong! I added it to [[Post-purchase EULA modification]], so we're good. The other article "Retroactively..." appears to be AI generated and not worth saving in my opinion. [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 01:52, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
+::Ah no worries, thanks for letting me know! [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 13:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)