User talk:Knowledgekid87

Archives

/Archive1, /Archive2, /Archive3 /Archive4 /Archive5 /Archive6 /Archive7

Hi Knowledgekid87, I wanted to notify you of some planned page moves, since you seem to be one of the few watching the animanga portal subpages. If you don't object, I will move the remaining "Selected series" subpages ([1]) to "Selected articles", so I can more explicitly expand the scope to include featured character articles on the portal page, like Naruto Uzumaki and Allen Walker. The primary subpage (here) was already moved several years ago, and indeed there are already non-series entries there, such as manga magazines. — Goszei (talk) 06:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind these moves here as they will make them uniformed, thanks for asking though! =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:34, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Deprecate_linking_to_Wikipedia_books_in_templates_and_articles--Moxy- 14:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at this sandbox revision of mine, and help me evaluate this info for potential merging with the article? ([2])

Basically, I started from scratch using the ICMEC megareport, and filled in the "real child pornography" and "possession" columns based off those. Any country with a check in the first column has "specific laws that proscribe and/or penalize CSAM offenses", so we should be able to definitely say that real pornography is "Illegal" there. The "Simple Possession" column seems like another easy copy-and-paste across the board.

Just from doing that, a huge number of inconsistencies became apparent with the tables at the article. I then filled in "Unclear" in the "virtual" column if ICMEC says there was no definition, and then I tried to fill in the rest of "no data" cells (where evidently ICMEC determined there IS a clear legal definition, but annoyingly neglected to state it) in the column using ECPAT reports ([3]) and their limited database ([4]). This source was very helpful for the Latin America states because it explicitly states the status of virtual material in each country.

I noticed that the US State Department info was wildly divergent from ICMEC and ECPAT in many places, so that should be examined. — Goszei (talk) 19:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Goszei: I will combine some of your findings with information already present to see if its the most up to date. I don't think its a good idea to use sources in a blanketed format from 2016 and 2018. The other sources I found include ones done by the Department of State and Labor which can't be discounted as some date to 2019. I also used penal codes from different countries which state the status of a given situation. Like you said... the laws are complicated in some of the given countries and can't just be lumped into one category or another. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Goszei: Sorry if I am a bit more strict on sourcing, it would be nice to see why the box is checked or not is all with a supporting source. Some of the check marks or X's have footnotes next to them showing exactly where and why the box is a yes or no. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize, I mostly intended to compile the ICMEC stuff as a sanity check/data reconcilition (more detailed refs are always better, to be sure). I am realizing now (like you said) that my assumption of "laws specific to CSAM: checked" necessarily means "real CP: illegal" is flawed. — Goszei (talk) 04:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I am not that IP over on the talk page (lol). — Goszei (talk) 22:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think you were, no worries. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You said you suggest the live action adaptation section should be split. Just to let you know, there is already a draft for it at Draft:Powerpuff (upcoming TV series) Anthony hello123 (talk) 19:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source provided on the page, which is a shorter snippet of this: https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Wizard_of_Oz_FAQ/HNCGDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=jackie+gerlich+1925&pg=PT153&printsec=frontcover actually does give weight to a 1925 birth. Are we really to distrust the claims of his brother over independent researchers when there is a lacking of official records to support 1917? Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 16:59, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jkaharper: Thanks for letting me know, I hope the 'disputed" notion I added works for everyone as we can't prove one way or another which year is correct. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Knowledgekid87: Works for me! I've added Porter with the Cox source. There are now 121 dwarf actors listed. Given that most sources say there were 122 or 124, safe to assume the table is still missing either 1 or 3 names. But who? Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 17:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Knowledgekid87:, I've also restored Rosen. I have Cox's book in front of me and he's listed. If you go on to Google books and search Jimmie Rosen Wizard of Oz, the Cox book appears as evidence. No idea who he played – Cox doesn't say, though he does give birth and death years. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 18:00, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jkaharper: Oh very nice! Yes I have used Cox for as many sources as I could find as he is definitely reliable in terms of the research and interviews he has done. Thanks for your help. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:00, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Knowledgekid87:, I've managed to pinpoint the original source used for the list. It was on Donna Stewart Hardaway's old "Kansas of Oz" website. The domain name and the site were sadly lost following her death in 2008. The source was annoyingly scrubbed from Wiki afterwards, rather than archived properly using the Wayback Machine. Donna was, as well as a munchkin actress, an authority on this topic. She organised reunions and toured the country attending events, and as her website says, she even collaborated with Cox. I have no doubt in my mind her information is accurate. Here is an archived copy of the masterlist of munchkins on her site. It includes child actress Patsy May, as well as Eleanor Keaton (which Donna notes was an adult of small stature). Patsy makes 12, which surely completes the set of child actresses as we're told from existing sources that there were "about a dozen". Keaton would require her own section as she was neither a dwarf actress nor a child. If you're satisfied, I'll restore both those names (Keaton in a sub-section of her own) and use the Wayback Machine version of Donna's site as a source? This post tends to confirm it was Buster Keaton's wife. The first comment, by someone who interviewed her, confirms she also played a munchkin. Sadly we can't use Facebook as a source, even if it's from a reputably group such as this, but I will link her name to the Eleanor Keaton page if you're satisfied with the evidence. Thanks again --Jkaharper (talk) 16:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

The AfroCine Project core team is happy to inform you that the Months of African Cinema Contest is happening again this year in October and November. We invite Wikipedians all over the world to join in improving content related to African cinema on Wikipedia!

Please list your username under the participants’ section of the contest page to indicate your interest in participating in this contest. The term "African" in the context of this contest, includes people of African descent from all over the world, which includes the diaspora and the Caribbean.

The following prizes would be recognized at the end of the contest:

• Overall winner
  • 1st - $500
  • 2nd - $200
  • 3rd - $100
• Diversity winner - $100
• Gender-gap fillers - $100
• Language Winners - up to $100*

Also look out for local prizes from affiliates in your countries or communities! For further information about the contest, the prizes and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. We look forward to your participation.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 23:20, 30th September 2021 (UTC)

Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Should most if not all dependent or overseas territories have their own Lists of something in Foo for any lists on any specific topics or subjects? Discussion has been kick-started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lighthouses#Dependent/overseas territories. 219.76.24.210 (talk) 11:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[5] [6][7] Which Christmas Island should have their own list? The Kiribati one or Australian one? 219.76.24.200 (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May I know if there is any rule on how dependent territories should be presented in tables? For instance the section for Hong Kong was first made a subsection in the article on the legality of child pornography,[8] and then when the sections were converted into tables the territory don't even get to have its own row (or its own sub-row, with indent, below the respective sovereign state).[9] 219.76.24.210 (talk) 13:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Samsung SGH-A167. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 6#Samsung SGH-A167 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 03:28, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

It is already past the middle of the contest and we are really excited about the Months of African Contest 2021 achievements so far! We want to extend our sincere gratitude for the time and energy you have invested. If you have not yet participated in the contest, it is not too late to do it. Please list your username as a participant on the contest’s main page.

Please remember to list the articles you have improved or created on the article achievements' section of the contest page so they can be tracked. In order to win prizes, be sure to also list your article in the users by articles. Please note that your articles must be present in both the article achievement section on the main contest page, as well as on the Users By Articles page for you to qualify for a prize.

We would be awarding prizes to different categories of winners:

• Overall winner
  • 1st - $500
  • 2nd - $200
  • 3rd - $100
• Diversity winner - $100
• Gender-gap filler - $100
• Language Winners - up to $100*

Thank you once again for your valued participation! --Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

What episode was it where he was playing neo from the matrix? 2604:2D80:D118:1D00:94F5:B81E:2976:D251 (talk) 04:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the three edits were in any way controversial and I sincerely believe they help improve the article. Use of the word 'service' is unnecessary, third daughter to 'niece' is more accurate and the Meiji era is alluded to in the following section. Not sure what I did wrong... Sincerely, MattSucci (talk) 00:54, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MattSucci: It was a mistake on my part so my apologies again... - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:14, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, apology accepted. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 18:44, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy hello. Make sure you provide attribution in the edit summary when you copy/split content out of a page :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you added "a year after Lucile was born". I was thinking it should say "a year after they were born". What do you think? MattSucci (talk) 12:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, as long as its clear what the reference is. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave to you, if you think it worth it. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 14:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user is still around, though they are using ips and not making new accounts. Check out Shueisha for some of their newest edits. I have taken the liberty of setting them back as active on their long-term abuse page.$chnauzer 14:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. That so called laundry list in the infobox, has been there for 'years', as a result of an RFC. GoodDay (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GoodDay: I'm honestly not sure why as the link to Commonwealth realm has all of the given information. It would be for the same reason why we aren't including here full royal titles in the box which also should be linked. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:16, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's been that way for years, with consensus backing it up. The collapse version, saves us the ridicules appearance of having a bunch of countries crowded together in a little area of the infobox. GoodDay (talk) 14:27, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why do we need the countries in the info box? George VI was Emperor of India and countries within the British Empire, following this logic wouldn't we also have to include all of the countries he was King/Emperor of until x date? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We need them, because some of the realms were created 'during' her reign & some of the other realms became republics. GoodDay (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for helping me with the userbox! Senor0001 (talk) 14:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Senor0001: You are very welcome =). I have had things that went up for deletion too, it looks like your userbox will be kept as editors don't see it as an issue. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay. Just wondering how do I block users? I think I’m going to block that guy who proposed the deletion. Ain’t salty, but he’s just a general pain Senor0001 (talk) 15:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Senor0001: You can't block users on Wikipedia, but you can request an WP:IBAN at WP:AN if you feel that you are being harassed. You are better off just ignoring them, but if you do go there make sure you have a solid case for doing so. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Grave of the Fireflies § Plot summary format. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 11:09, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your edit of June 2019 because it was plain wrong: Ships preserved in museums is of ships inside museums, list of museum ships is of intact ships, usually afloat, where visitors can go aboard. There may be a grey area around museums of ships, where an intact, outdoors, ship is part of a large maritime museum, but apart from that they are quite different. I visited the Dover bronze age boat recently, then looked at its article, found that Category:Ships preserved in museums had "The main article for this category is Ships preserved in museums." which at that point was a redirect to an article which explicitly didn't cover the topic ... and found your mistake. Easily done, they sound as if they might be the same thing, but they aren't. PamD 11:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: I think the larger issue is that grey area you mentioned along with too broad of a topic. Where do you see this list going? There are for example... two replica museum ships at the open air museum for the Boston Tea Party. [10]. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's certainly muddled in the overlap. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships#Preserved_ships_and_museum_ships, where I try to find a ship enthusiast to sort it out. PamD 18:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but you say "replica museum ships", and I think the article excludes replicas for a start. More confusion. PamD 18:36, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you, and you can feel free to not jump in on it, but I added you to a dispute resolution form about the Chivalry of a Failed Knight page. You were impartial and third partying it, so I felt it relevant to add you, but you're not part of the arguing party so you don't need to try to participate in it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:DRN-noticeDraco Safarius (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Knowledgekid87,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 16:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 16:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Moops: Thanks, you too! =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute we had you in never reached any consensus, so it had to go to RFC as a continuation. Since you were participating with an open mind in both the actual discussion on the talk page and in the dispute, at least at first, it'd be nice if we could have your participation and feedback. Draco Safarius (talk) 06:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You added a new system of organizing the list of nazi doctors in List of Nazi doctors. The original had a total of two names clearly listed for the "A" category. Now you have in order by the first name and have multiple "A" listings. You have also removed the DOCTOR title designation, a point of the article, the power of doctors. The doctors birth day is of no relevance to this page, but would go to identifying them correctly on their main web page. Nationality is also no relevance. Reference is unneeded as they all have WIKIPEDIA articles. I would revert if I could.

Can you organize the list by the last name? No.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 14:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark v1.0: I can reorganize the names by last name yes. I will also remove the "nationality" column as you are right that it has no relevance. As for the "power of doctors"? What does this even mean? Every name listed on the page is going to be a doctor per the title's name "list of Nazi DOCTORS". - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is still messed up.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 18:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark v1.0: Yes, I am getting to the "HUman Experimentation" list, you can help too if you want. Wikipedia is a work in progress right? Lets give this "list of Nazi doctors" a scope. Right now since its about Nazi doctors in the broadest sense, I have gone with basic bio info (birth/death) and what they were most known for. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:09, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote " You can help too"

To suggest I fix your mistakes is ridiculous. I am not your mommy to clean up after you when you play. Mark v1.0 (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The major problem I see is clearly stated in my first sentence ( I took a screen shot of before and after to illustrate the problem) , the list is organized by the first name and not by the last name, and you acknowledge it by writing "I can reorganize the names by last name yes".

This is the work I refuse to do because you caused the problem in the first place.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 18:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark v1.0: "the list is organized by the first name and not by the last name", this was the problem correct? The names are no longer sorted by their first name. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the lists order by the last name. My only question now is what is a "Gutachter" ? An appraiser?--Mark v1.0 (talk) 00:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure, T4-Gutachter at this point is a duplicated article of the "Euthanasia" section at List of Nazi doctors. T4-Gutachter should probably be merged and redirected to the latter to provide context. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:55, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Knowledgekid87. Thank you for your work on Kurt Albrecht (physician). User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for creating the article! Hopefully you will write more, have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:46, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SunDawn: Thanks! =) I actually translated the article from the German Wikipedia, some of the references used might need further explanation. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Knowledgekid87! You might be interested in endorsing an essay in which creation I participated – WP:NOCONFED. Of course, this is just a suggestion, nothing more. Cheers! — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 21:09, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sundostund: I opposed endorsement as there are more arguments to the opposing side. I would feel better if some of their concerns were met is all and believe you made the essay with the best intentions. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:39, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply! I fully understand and respect your opinion, while I obviously may disagree with it. — Sundostund mppria ^{(talk / contribs)} 02:18, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good day, Knowledgekid87! I hope you're well. I have seen that you have changed my recent contributions and additions to Preservation section of the Ocean liner page, describing them as "fan fluff" and "Not helpful, this reads more like a fan blog". May I please ask, what you specifically found so unfitting about the additional information I provided, that you felt the need to revert the section to your original version? And in what ways we could collaborate to improve said section? Thank you. Firebobby (talk) 06:46, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, kind of an odd question but figured I'd ask. I'm currently working on improving the article Devils Island Light from start class to c-class (hopefully higher!) and want to get my hands on one source, the January 1999 edition of Lighthouse Magazine. Now it looks like the magazine sells reissues at a reasonable price, but before I bought that I thought I'd reach out to a few fellow Wikiproject Lighthouse members to see if anyone already had a copy of this magazine. Thanks! Patr2016 (talk) 02:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

contribs] 16:58, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On what platform could we have a talk about one of your edits? Memez01923 (talk) 02:11, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Memez01923: is this regarding Crew of the Titanic? I would start a discussion at Talk:Crew of the Titanic for more editor opinion. I undid your version as you deleted things that were sourced. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

... and you neglected to explain your reversal. please, do better. 24.17.106.158 (talk) 03:51, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC on the "Airlines and destinations" tables in airport articles. I saw that you participated in a discussion on a similar topic. Sunnya343 (talk) 18:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Knowledgekid87. Thank you for your work on Princess Sotoorihime. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 22:35, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Knowledgekid87. Thank you for your work on 10 yen note. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 01:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox person § Education and alma mater parameters. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec19b}} to your friends' talk pages.

Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:02, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Michele Knotz § Photo. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:33, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Knowledgekid87. Thank you for your work on Momme (unit). Moriwen, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Looks good! Pleased to see work on units and currencies, it's an area where I notice a lot of gaps.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Moriwen}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

— Moriwen (talk) 17:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Inactive anime conventions has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 3rd millennium, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bicentennial.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Knowledgekid87. Thank you for your work on Shu (silver coin). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is somewhat problematic, and not helped by the general paucity of data on tonnages for vessels like Great Western that were not classed by Lloyd's Register, and consequently are not included in the published registers. Also, that mid-19th century when there were several changes in the definitions of tonnage, some of which existed in parallel or were adopted over periods.

• Hunt's Merchants Magazine 1844 cannot be referring to GRT as such, that was only developed in UK in 1849 by Moorsom, and phased in between then and 1854 - and not adopted in the US until 1864
• The Old Measurement system seems to have been used in all the official registrations for GW, though they varied over time, no doubt partly changes made to the ship, and changes to the application of the rules.
• Shipowners typically used the lowest official tonnage figure in dealing with authorities (eg for port dues), while using the highest available in their advertisements. But Hunt's 1700t is very much higher than any of the official figures.
• Although GRT/NRT was yet to some, there had been deductions allowed for steamships to exclude the engine/boiler spaces snce about 1836, but the terminology "gross/net" was not used. Registration documents of that era show the resulting tonnage as "registered tonnage", with a separate figure for the engine room - they can of course be summed to produce a "proto gross tonnage". From published sources I do have total tonnage in 1837 (1320t) and both for 1849 (1154t, 1776 total), and from primary sources a full set of figues for registrations in 1837, 1847, 1848 and 1849, plus plus the official remeasurement for GRT/NRT in 1855
  

I have a couple of books on order which may help. Meanwhile I'll hold off adding anything on this, but would welcome your thoughts. - Davidships (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidships: Hmmm... if what you said is true about GRT then this would impact several ships on the Timeline of largest passenger ships. SS Royal William, SS Great Western, SS British Queen, SS President, and SS Great Britain all have GRT values that wouldn't have applied in their record breaking lifetimes. Was the old measurement system converted to GRT after the fact by historians? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Mumonginsen. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. C F A 💬 23:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have moved the above article back to mainspace as the draftification was largely abusive, however I noticed a little too late that the article was named Mumonginsen (1 word), whereas the intro said Mumon Ginsen (2 words). I am not that much of a Japanese speaker, but do you know which one is most appropriate in that case? Thanks! Superboilles (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Superboilles: I don't like to get involved in wiki-drama or WP:ANI discussions but calling a standard move "abusive" is definitely a WP:AGF/WP:CIVIL violation. You didn't even courtesy-ping me. The article, at the time of draftification, had no sources which is a standard, non-controversial WP:DRAFTIFY reason so the creator can add references in draft space and move it back. C F A 💬 21:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Superboilles: @Clearfrienda: If either of you are interested in helping , I have been translating the Ja:wiki article which has sources into English for the article. [11]. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, and thank you for your patience. I can't speak Japanese so I wouldn't be of much help. If it's still eligible when you're done, I suggest nominating it for WP:DYK because it seems to be a fairly interesting topic. C F A 💬 14:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Like my previous problem with your edits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Knowledgekid87#Table_in_Nazi_Doctors, you have recreated the problem. You organise the names by the first name instead of the last name, where most everyone uses the last name to find someone because first names are so common. Could you kindly fix this again?--Mark v1.0 (talk) 15:36, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark v1.0: I'm not sure how it got undone, but I will fix the list later today. I have no objections to a last name first through sorting if you want to fix it in the meantime. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have the knowledge/skill to fix the sorting order, if I did , I could consider possibly fixing it. So guess how I feel? Mark v1.0 (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will fix it later when I get home. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:01, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mark v1.0: I just looked at the page, and the names are in order by their last names. I will get around to it for sorting purposes. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 11:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions to Royal Canadian Mint bullion coins. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]