User talk:Knowledgekid87

My stress level

Powerpuff girls original/2016 reboot anxiety

Overnight, I saw the new images of the 2016 Powerpuff Girls reboot and read about the new voice actors. Months ago, I signed a petition by a man named Matthew Coleman on Change.org to bring the Powerpuff Girls' original voices back and at the time it was progressing, it was shared by a former Cartoon Network representative. However although it made progress it didn't get through- but I don't know for sure! Anyway while the new pictures depict the new versions of Blossom Bubbles and Buttercup looking excatly like their original counterparts, but with two mediocre touches, I'm scared that once the new Powerpuff Girls series airs sometime next year it'll be just I'm imagining- Cartoon Network is gonna stop caring about the original Powerpuff Girls series that aired from 1998 to 2005, they and everyone else will take the original for granted, and pretend that it doesn't exist anymore- erase the original PPG series from Cartoon Network's history, as well as the original PPG website on cartoonnetwork.com because of the reboot. Remember the original 2003 Teen Titans series? Cartoon Network took that for granted after Teen Titans Go! premiered at they replaced it with Teen Titans Go!- even its website got replaced on cartoonnetwork.com! That's exactly what's gonna happen to the original Powerpuff Girls series once the new series comes next year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboogie604 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

If it happens it happens, there isn't much you or me can do about it sadly. I don't know why the original cast wasn't brought back, I do know though that the answer to almost everything is: Money. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

I hope the original doesn't disappear when it comes. It's just that what I'm trying to say from this is what if I'm not ready for the revamped PPG series, I'm too scared to let go of the original and everything associated with it. Zboogie604 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Then don't let go of it, nobody is saying you need to or anything. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Tenshinhan

Hello, I started a move discussion at Talk:Tien_Shinhan#Requested_move_14_June_2015 in regards to having the article use Viz Media's official spelling. Since it is the same case as Freeza, I thought you might be interested. Xfansd (talk) 15:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay thanks I will check it out. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration enforcement

By motion, the Arbitration Committee authorises the following injunction effective immediately:

1. The case is to be opened forthwith and entitled "Arbitration enforcement";
2. During the case, no user who has commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page, may take or initiate administrative action involving any of the named parties in this case.
3. Reports of alleged breaches of (2) are to be made only by email to the Arbitration Committee, via the main contact page.

You are receiving this message because you have commented about this matter on the AN page, the AE page or the Case Requests page and are therefore restricted as specified in (2). For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

A word of advice

I personally don't see this comment as overly serious, and I value civility as well, but it's a two way street. You can't expect civility but be uncivil, directly or indirectly (and as someone who is active in dispute resolution, I won't tolerate incivility of any description.). My advice is to really lay low. My experience with editors that have been previously sanctioned, or are under sanctions, is that some people may be waiting for them to slip up. Take my advice - just focus on your article work for a while. And, assume you don't have any (and we will not be having that conversation), but before you write a comment somewhere, try look at it from the point of view of your worst enemy - if they could find fault with it, ask me, or rethink it altogether. Just focus on your article work for a while, OK? (and please, don't archive this that soon). Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 14:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I will lay low as I really want to try to find another article to may a GA out of. What is civility though to you, and if you saw something that you thought was wrong would you just ignore it? As an admin you have to enforce civility as it is a core Wikipedia pillar so I would be interested in hearing your take. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I see you using the word insight repeatedly. Can you tell a bit more precisely what insight you received from looking at my talk archives as recommended? Just one comment - one insight perhaps? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I would be happy to at the end of July, I took a quick look though and saw that you do a great job at DYKs - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, repeating: the task was to look for the (not many) entries by Eric Corbett, formerly known as Malleus Fatuorum. Helping with quotations (all excerpts):

• (first entry) ... Have to warn you though that ... I scare away women, children and new editors. Allegedly. But I'll try and be gentle. 1 Nov 2012
• Ironically, now that the lead's been expanded, I much prefer the uncollapsed infobox. 17 Mar 2013
• ... if I were a betting man I'd say it's quite likely that you'll be admonished ... I know from personal experience how difficult it is to see yourself being discussed for weeks on end, often unfairly, without any effective redress, so keep your chin up. 2 Sep 2013
• To be perfectly honest Gerda I'm not sure I'd encourage anyone to remain here. (same)
• (in reply to WIKI OUTCAST) It's a big club, and one I'm proud to be a member of too. 11 Sep 2013

Admirable civility and precise language and evaluation of politics, imho. Your turn. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

...and have a group of editors pounce on me if I speak my mind no matter how civil I am? No thank you, not now anyways. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case

You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@L235: Could you please remove me from the list? I cant comment on the case even if I wanted to. Thanks - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 18:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

dead links

I don't have a clue why you restored dead links at List of The Qwaser of Stigmata manga volumes and List of Samurai Harem: Asu no Yoichi chapters. Every link that goes to Akita Shoten is dead and has been for atleast 4 years. Bgwhite (talk) 06:52, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: The website received an update is all, rather than retype the template for each instance I undid your edits and updated the links. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

You didn't redo the links. They are still are dead. Everyone I just tried were dead. Bgwhite (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I only did List of Samurai Harem: Asu no Yoichi chapters, the other I left the link in the form of a cleanup tag as it will take longer. The new links work for me on the former. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Next time, revert one article to your sandbox and work on it there. If I had a dollar for everytime somebody said they will work on it and never did, I'd be a millionaire. Bgwhite (talk) 06:54, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I jumped in and fixed the Japanese links. ;) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: Thanks! ^-^ - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Airdates again: It's time to standardize them once and for all

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#Airdates again: It's time to standardize them once and for all. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)Template:Z48

@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the heads up! I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter but will go along with whatever consensus comes out of it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:29, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Note

Wikiprojects are not entities which own pages or topics, they are not arms to exert peer pressure or power. If project members weren't so annoying every time I add a few hundred sources and fix dozens of problems the Wikiproject wouldn't have such an extensive list of "this need fixings now". Some of the problem comes from the fact that people who can't read or write the language feel compelled to insert their opinion on notability and such. I don't like people who find pleasure or take pride in dismantling good pages or sweeping problems under the rug by deleting/redirecting them. Problem is that is the natural tendency of too many people on the Wikiproject. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:12, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@ChrisGualtieri: In my view redirects aren't deletions, there are a whole lot of other articles that need the attention much more. I have also added a lot of sources as well as fixed my fair share, the list of articles that need attention has been dwindling to all time lows. [1] If you want to help out, notability is a major issue (400+ articles tagged) I am currently working on sourcing and dead links. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

To readers - blank and redirects are the same as deletions because the content is not visible or seen unless a person specifically finds the page, goes back to the unredirected page, clicks on the view history and finds the last version which had meaningful content. None of these actions are commonly known or employed by non-editors. Any anime series by a top-50 studio meets the GNG requirement - most top-500 idols/voice actors and such meet that as well. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:01, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Im wondering if there is a way there could be a category for redirects then so they aren't swept under and forgot about then. You are right when you say there is a breakdown to those who don't understand Japanese but if someone is passionate enough about a series I could see a GA article or two. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Look - I'd love to help this project and I had basically dozens of content pushes ready to go - I have more than 40 books on hand, but having someone who cannot read or write follow me around and revert changes to something as simple as removing a spurrious N tag from Tezuka's works is beyond irritating. Editors like TheFarix do not understand what Wikipedia is supposed to be and that's the same issue Ryulong had. TheFarix called me a racist for no reason and won't apologize, instead doubling down like Donald Trump on a field day. You know why I don't have good relationships with members of this Wikiproject - its all the nasty emails from members of this Wikiproject and the hounding. As long as this place continues to be self-run by people who cannot read or write, then I won't be a part of this project because avoiding the main area doesn't help when you are being stalked and harassed. That's why.

And you are not one of the problems, but you are sometimes careless - as you removed valid well-sourced content in that cited posting from before. Just cause someone didn't cite inline doesn't mean its vandalism. I'm not angry, but I do get annoyed when very basic and sourced info gets removed. The biggest issue is that this project is on the defensive and its expectations and demands go far beyond reason. It is not a positive atmosphere if you desire to improve content and create pages. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

• Further note, Farix's actions like this which is the problem. It is in the official credit list on the English version. Is 30 seconds before you go warning a well-meaning IP editor too much to ask? Ryulong did this a lot and its why so much good work went to waste and so many people dislike Wikipedia. There is nothing fostering a friendly atmosphere or goodwill - its WARNING DON'T DO THIS OR YOU GET BLOCKED. Shameful? I think so. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:56, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

• @ChrisGualtieri: I have been staying out of the whole airdates debate and apologize for putting you on the spot. I don't like to be talked about behind my back though, yes at one time I did remove good content, I am aware of that but really I focus on where I am at now. If I see a series I like or that interests me that is what I put all of my heart and effort into. I haven't really had any problems with people from the anime/manga wikiproject as it is a big place with lots to do. I ask that you try to keep cool, and don't criticize editors if they make mistakes you feel are plainly visible, everyone has their moments and a gentle reminder is always better than chewing their head off. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

• If editors from this project weren't threatening others and violating WP:BITE then perhaps I'd be more pleasant. Also, what irritates me is that someone who cannot read or write carrying themselves with authority on an encyclopedia - don't you see the problem with that? The fact that such persons are really unable to search, identify and carryout WP:BEFORE because they don't possess such skills is the largest problem of WP:ANIME. Members of this Wikiproject actually have held the belief that "English-language" notability is required to meet WP:N and that Japanese Wikipedia should cover everything that doesn't. Such statements are beyond foolish and shows not just ignorance, but outright incompetence. I'd like to show some of these said members the proverbial door because these members were behind the original blank and redirecting series like Dragon Ball Z. Ryulong in particular fought for months to prevent the recreation of a stand-alone page. Stuff like that made me so disgusted with this project that I decided to go to WP:NRHP. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Potential edit warring in When Marnie Was There

Hello, you're invited and express your views on Talk:When Marnie Was There#Edits reverted without adding summary. Jotamide (talk) 18:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for 2015 attack on Dallas police

Gatoclass (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Otakon, Guidebook, and primary sourcing (again...)

Since you spearheaded the Event history cleanup in Otakon, wanted to get your opinion on the latest set of edits that were added. Seems a large amount of history expansion was done using Otakon's Guidebook, a primary source that while not in dispute (most edits were location based), it still raises some issues similar to Event history. Esw01407 (talk) 13:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

@Esw01407: I will take a closer look at it later today. The main question we should ask is do we want the event history presented in table or prose format? You are right when you say the information duplicates the event history, but I wish there was some kind of GA article related to a convention to compare Otakon to. I could see Otakon rising up the ranks if it were a bit more organized. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

List of Digimon Fusion characters

Need your thoughts on List of Digimon Fusion characters. The current editor does not like my bold changes, but not sure what else can be done to structure the article better. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:49, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: The edits you made that are policy based (MOS) should definitely stay. As for the editor you placed your concerns on the talk-page but he/she may be in another time zone. I am semi busy myself, I will be more free about 5 hours from now or so, for now I would wait for a reply. If there is no reply in that time, I will revert the changes as I feel it is a case of WP:JDLI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Gangsta.

I started another RM. Make your decision. --George Ho (talk) 18:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Motivation of a hopeless new guy on an RfA page

In my mind, while making that edit I was voicing over a potential Administrator preferring to dodge adversarial editorial challenges over addressing them. I feel strongly about Administrators having the capacity to formulate and present arguments under duress; it is not an objection with any roots in personal or political qualities.

Obviously in reality I was making a real mess of things for more than a few people, looking like a clown, and it seems like I might not even get to help out with copyedit due to all this. So it goes.Jasphetamine (talk) 14:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

@Jasphetamine: Innocent until proven guilty is what I am leaning towards here. I do apologize if editors find you suspicious, sock accounts (People who abuse multiple accounts) are a real problem here on Wikipedia. Even if someone is socking and gets caught and blocked it doesn't mean forever. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

@Knowledgekid87: It means a lot to hear a slightly more gentle tone in response to this. When I realized what I did I expected the editor/admin response to be targeted at a severe faux-paux, and was unprepared for seeing a growing consensus that I am a sockpuppet and the severe treatment one editor gave me.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my little dilemma greatly; thank you very much. Jasphetamine (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

You are more than welcome =). If you want to ask questions I also recommend the WP:TEAHOUSE. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Montanabw RfA

I agree with you, and I'll not comment there again. Nice to hear from you! How've you been? RO^(talk) 15:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I have been okay here =), I got my T-ban lifted so it doesn't hang over my head anymore. Other than that, I have been mainly working on anime articles like before. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:17, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that, and I want to tell you how sorry I was to leave you hanging when that went down. There was so much pressure on me to keep my mouth shut at the time that I figured it wouldn't have done either of us any good if I added to the discussion. RO^(talk) 15:23, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Its okay no worries, I have distanced myself from leaping in though when it comes to WP:ANI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I haven't commented there in more than five months, and I don't miss it! RO^(talk) 15:26, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Same here lol, I don't know how admins can handle it sometimes. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Neither do I. Why would anyone want the responsibilities and frustrations? I guess we should be thankful for the good ones that are so badly needed. RO^(talk) 15:31, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I think you were totally right to suggest withdrawal, as it would have been much better for the candidate and the community. Continuing on well past any realistic chances for success put unnecessary stress on everybody. RO^(talk) 22:43, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

If it were me a withdrawal would be better than an unsuccessful run, at least then one could look back and say "I wasn't ready" rather than having someone point it out to you. I disagree with one of the people opposing, I think Montana is still very much into wanting the admin job. Anyways, it will be over soon and everyone will go about their way success or no success. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Atsushi Kamijo prod

I removed the prod on Atsushi Kamijo as I was able to find media arts DB detail on the author and a few more ANN articles. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Alright

I'll keep that in mind. 5.156.127.6 (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

RO

Knowledgekid, please stop commenting on the RO situation. As I recall you were under some kind of topic ban regarding this kind of thing. Perhaps it has lapsed, but it would nevertheless be better to stop commenting because it makes things worse. I hope you'll consider staying away from it completely. Sarah ^(talk) 19:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

My initial comments were addressed towards Montana, nobody else. It is up to her what she does with it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

See, KK87? Once they rally the usual troops via email there is nothing you can do but obey. It's a simple matter of numbers, and they almost always have superior numbers and the associated coordination needed to control almost every situation. I agree with, Sarah. It would be better for you to not get in trouble here, and there's nothing you can do to help really anyway. Don't worry about me. RO^(talk) 20:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

@Rationalobserver: I have said my peace, my last bit of advice would be for you to continue editing away from Montana, you had been doing a great job for months. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I know it, but she keeps attacking: ([2]); ([3]), and nobody wants to officially ask her to stop. In 13 months of editing, there are exactly 2 articles that I've edited that MBW edited before me. RO^(talk) 20:32, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

You'll notice the same group of editors are trained to rally to the cause in military-esque precision. You cannot win or even tie them. They know how to overwhelm their opponent, so I suggest you don't bother. Someday enough time will have passed that the cliques power will have faded, but until that time there's no sense getting involved with anything where you see one of them. RO^(talk) 15:47, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

@Rationalobserver: I have known this for awhile now, you cant have a discussion with some people here without a flood of other editors rushing in to defend this is how "dramah" starts. I was lucky this time, I was able to have a decent conversation with Eric about the IBAN before others rushed in. Yes the IBAN might have effected Montana's RfA but comments like "Watching and eating popcorn" on a discussion involving a possible solution to a problem isn't helping either in my view. I wonder if admin have IBANS in place with other editors? I mean there has to be a case out there where an editor, and an admin don't get along and worked out a solution. I wonder if there is another way of going forward other than letting fate and chance decide. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

We are out-numbered by an organized clique, so the only options are avoid them or leave. Someday, after a few of these people leave, balance will be restored, but in the meantime, they really cannot be stopped. I think their influence is already waning though, as their attempt to derail Liz's RfA failed miserably, and their attempt to push MBW through RfA failed just as spectacularly. RO^(talk) 16:04, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

At least one of them is pushing 70 years old, so I doubt they can maintain this level of indignant participation for too much longer. RO^(talk) 16:42, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

MOS:IDENTITY is being revisited: How should Wikipedia refer to transgender individuals before and after their transition?

You are being contacted because you contributed to a recent discussion of MOS:IDENTITY that closed with the recommendation that Wikipedia's policy on transgender individuals be revisited.

Two threads have been opened at the Village Pump:Policy. The first addresses how the Manual of Style should instruct editors to refer to transgender people in articles about themselves (which name, which pronoun, etc.). The second addresses how to instruct editors to refer to transgender people when they are mentioned in passing in other articles. Your participation is welcome. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:07, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thx for the help! Stay awesome! :3 I love love love anime/ manga too! My friend and I had a folder for it!

Glistensnow (talk) 03:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Aww, and thanks will do! =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Corbett saga

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Your various comments on the latest Eric Corbett saga suggest that you have learned nothing at all from your recent topic ban. Please back off: you add nothing useful and you piss people off. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Sitush, will you for once just let EC dig himself out of his own messes without trying to bully all of his detractors into silence? KK87 isn't the only one who always shows up at these drama parties, and he is the least of your problems. EC is a grown man, but you protect him like your underage child. Per Einstein, try a different strategy, because repeating this over and over is madness. RO^(talk) 20:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Eric had every right to defend himself but according to the blocking admin that isn't why he was blocked. Agreeing with others are what are considered opinions. You may not agree with them, but others do. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes. EC had every right to defend himself, but he went too far in denying the existence of the gender gap, which is exactly what he knows he isn't allowed to comment on. Here's proof he knew that ahead of time: ([4]) RO^(talk) 20:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I know, and wish Eric didn't take swipes at the gender gap task force. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

That's the thing though, EC does it with the intent to illicit a strong response. My guess is it's tied somehow to inadequate self-esteem, and he regularly needs reaffirmation that people like him and want him to stay. This is all an orchestrated drama of EC's making, and we are all pawns in his childish game. Really, what grown man acts like that on a regular basis? How embarrassing! RO^(talk) 21:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

My concerns are not about Eric, regarding whom I have said nothing in the last few hours. My comment relates to Kk's behaviour. As for you, Ro, well, you are another who should back off - your history is entirely one of opposition to Corbett, whereas mine is not one entirely of support for him. - Sitush (talk) 22:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Sitush, I have no personal grudge against EC, but I am concerned with his problematic behavioral patterns, special treatment, and the aggressive Fan Club that intimidates all detractors. I don't want EC to leave; I want him to stop being a dick. He isn't a messiah sent to lead us from Jimbo, he's just a high-maintenance drama queen. Stop treating him like an immature prima donna, and he might stop acting like one. RO^(talk) 23:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

What behavior is that, agreeing with an admin's block? It feels like you are taking my edits under a microscope at times, and making things into a huge deal when they aren't. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

It's a simple and effective strategy. They relentlessly bully all opposition until they outnumber or eliminate them. Most discussions on Wikipedia can be derailed or controlled by 4 or 5 people of the same mind, and that's all it takes to dominate everything. RO^(talk) 23:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

RO, you have a pronounced grudge and that will be your downfall here. Kk, you simply cannot stay away from drama, which will in due course be your downfall. Both of you, Wikipedia is a MMPORG and you are pissing off the wrong people. In the former case, that is actually very unfortunate because you have clearly demonstrated that you are a very useful contributor and that, if you step away from the grudge issue, you are also reasonably collaborative in my experience.

Kk, the next time you insert yourself into something like this and I spot it, you'll be back at ANI. Fortunately for you, I don't usually bother looking at your efforts because they're mostly useless anyway. - Sitush (talk) 00:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Back at ANI for what? Why are you inserting yourself here? You keep talking like you want to do something but aren't answering anything. @Sitush: I feel like bringing you to ANI for harassment, the last couple of times we have encountered each other you have done nothing but badger me. I ask that you not comment here again after this discussion is closed. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Corbett versus Jimbo

I admire your tenacity, but wonder if you aren't wasting your time. IMO, the crux of the rivalry has more to do with Jimbo's celebrity and Corbett's lack thereof than it has to do with an actual concrete issue that could be resolved. Do you really think they can come to an understanding? RO^(talk) 20:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK, JW can't be blocked or banned. GoodDay (talk) 20:56, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

That's interesting, but how does it relate to the feud? RO^(talk) 21:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It creates an uneven playing field. Nothing is more frustrating then being under topic bans and/or restrictions. Believe me, I know. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose so, but why would a grown man have such difficulty avoiding just one person and one topic, both of which he seems to despise? At some point the community will need to hold EC accountable for his actions like it does for everyone else. That's the only way this saga will ever end. Or, EC can decide to stop disrupting Wikipedia and go on with things he's good at, but he is consciously not doing that because of the reinforcement he gets when he acts out. If the enablers stopped their coddling, and EC just served his blocks like everybody else, we might be able to move past this. RO^(talk) 21:20, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Arbcom will have to decide for themselves, if an editor should remain or not. FWIW, EC never requested an unblock. GoodDay (talk) 21:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Right, he never requests an unblock, but he never needs to either, as so many of his supporters line up to do it for him. Has he ever asked any of the usual suspects to stop raising hell every single time he gets blocked? FWIW, I think he's a fine contributor who just isn't willing to play by the same rules as everyone else. Anybody else who behaved the way he does would be site-banned, so why shouldn't he? RO^(talk) 21:32, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, it'll be up to Arbcom. Personally, I don't support site-bans for editors, unless they're cronic vandalizers or sock puppeters. As for GGTF? I advised Arbcom not to ban anyone, but nobody listened to me :( GoodDay (talk) 21:38, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you, and I would rather not see Corbett banned, but isn't he forcing ArbCom's hand by refusing to abide by his sanctions? What choice is he leaving them? RO^(talk) 21:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

TBH, I don't know. It's EC's choice. GoodDay (talk) 21:46, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

The biggest change I want to see is for editors on both sides to stop the encouragement. You may think you are helping defend but you are only making things more complex, ignoring if you can I feel is a better strategy. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Truth. RO^(talk) 22:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Vested contributors retitled Arbitration enforcement 2

You may opt-out of future notifications related to this case at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Notification list. You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement 2/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 5, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. For this case, there will be no Workshop phase. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 13:18, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Please express your opinion on a different name for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (2015)

I have offered a new name: "2015 Palestinian unrest"
Explaination to this, regarding concerns brought up by other users is the the offer's section. Please express your opinion on this name.
There is no use answering me here, it's better to answer me here: talk:Israeli-Palestinian conflict (2015)#M. 2015 Palestinian unrest --Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Airdates after midnight, a complicated example

I was working on the schedule for Najica Blitz Tactics and it is quite crazy as an actual instance where the earliest airdates shifted across midnight. Can you take a look at the verbiage and see if it makes sense? Fortunately Media Arts DB has the right dates based on earliest broadcast. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:00, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look at it. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Sage advice.

You may want to heed Viridatis' advice, Kk87 & walk away from the ANI discussion concerning RO. GoodDay (talk) 01:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

@GoodDay: Im not topic banned anymore at this point this has been used time, and time again as a scare tactic. Notice that no other editor is bringing this up other than the one who wants to see RO banned the most. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:58, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Just my suggestion. You're free to ignore it. GoodDay (talk) 01:59, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

I know, and thanks for your help. =) Agreeing that a thread should be closed to me isn't trying to stir anything, I will refrain from commenting further though. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

• But you didn't, you kept on commenting for another 12 hours or so. How do you think your promise from June to avoid drama is working out? Are you still being mentored by User:Steven Zhang? --John (talk) 18:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  • I am sorry to restore this but I would like you to answer the questions. Could you, please? --John (talk) 22:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
    • No im not still mentored, the only ones bringing up my former topic ban are the ones who don't agree with what I have to say. I requested a closure of a thread, and stated an oppose opinion, now tell me what did I do there that nobody else has? Maybe you should be talking to those dropping the personal attacks rather than focusing on a months old issue. I will repeat, the ones causing the drama are the ones who blow something small into something huge. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
      • Do you think your involvement was helpful? --John (talk) 07:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
        • @John: If I were in there dropping profanities, and making jokes with titles such as "A terrifying scenario which must be faced unflinchingly"[5][6] I would say no. It wouldn't have mattered what I posted though, someone would still link but what about x when it comes to me. So to answer your question, yes I feel that because I provided a voice of opposition to the discussion in a civilized way it was constructive. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Lord Marksman and Vanadis

Hi. I'm thinking about possibly getting the Lord Marksman and Vanadis article up to B-Class or GA status. I've been thinking about expanding the reception section and finding some sources with regards to the production of the anime, light novels and characters. Do you have any thoughts about this? Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:28, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sjones23: It sounds like it would make a difference in favor of an article upgrade. I am also thinking that the plot needs to be looked at, and in addition the manga section seems short to me but that is just my opinion. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, the plot should be looked at and needs to be trimmed down considerably, considering the fact that volume 13 is about to be released soon. We may need to expand the manga section too. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I haven't been following the series, but if possible the manga section table should look something like what is here: Himegoto. As for the plot, yeah it needs trimming down to comply with the MOS. Okay, I will look for reviews and start work on the articles tomorrow after I get off from work. I would start now, but I don't have my full awake brain with me. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:43, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Constructive help

If you could help me find a better source for the article you reverted and help us construct a neutral and balanced Project, I and many others will appreciate it. :) I think the News section often gets overlooked by people's biases.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 22:41, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sigehelmus: Can you find me any other news agency that agrees with what the source is saying? It is a WP:BLP issue as well which is one of Wikipedia's main policies. If there were a dual source I would feel better, but you cant leave something in the news with just one side's view per WP:NPOV. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I am having trouble finding that, I did find another article, but it seems to be a copy. If you could also check the other articles or something like the ToI sources...whatever. This is my first time adding articles to the News.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 22:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

EDIT: Oh nevermind, some busybody seems to have removed it anyway and always have bad luck in reversions. Not like that many people read that section anyway. You know, I only spend so much time here recently out of looking to distract myself.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 22:54, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sigehelmus: Why not join the anime, and manga wikiproject and help out if you can? We are always looking for new members. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:55, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

I literally just remembered who you are hah. I added your userpage to my watchlist (months ago, can you see that?) and I meant to thank you for your great edits and awesome taste. Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 22:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks you have good taste as well, anyways the wikiproject link is here if you are interested ^-^ - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

You caught me totally off-guard, but sure. Er, do I need to sign up for a project or something or is it just a noticeboard or something? And um sorry for the weird tone earlier, I thought you were someone else at first I had a bad encounter with. I would be happy to help!--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 23:01, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

No worries, not really much just read Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga#Joining the project. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sigehelmus: It is a group of editors who work together to help improve anime/manga related articles. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I think I need this actually, I'll read over all the links there. Also, do you happen to have Steam? It would be a pleasure to add you if so.--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 23:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Can you be more detailed when you say Steam? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

You know, Steam account? The gaming service network thing? http://steamcommunity.com/ I'm guessing no :(--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 23:16, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh no sorry, but I will take a look at it later tonight. =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:16, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you'll enjoy it; even if your PC is only mediocre, there are many awesome free games you might like I can show you (and recently there was a Japanese indie game sale, for example a danmaku was only about $1). Thanks !--Sıgehelmus (Talk) |д=) 23:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Prod for Splay (Japanese band)

Regarding Splay, I looked up Oricon and found two singles that charted: [7] I'm not sure if that's worth keeping around. They are both related to Hitman Reborn, then the article could be redirected to Hitman. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:10, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: If you want to redirect the article then feel free. Seeing the article is fully un-sourced anyways per WP:TNT someone can also always work on it in user-space in the future. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:36, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Black Joke (manga)

I'm not exactly sure I understand your reasoning for redirecting this article to Young Champion. The only thing really wrong with it was... well it was a stub. But the way I see it, a stub with information, such as author and illustrator names, publication date, etc., are better than just a mention on another page with nothing other than the name of the series. Yeah the article needed some work, but turning it into a redirect seems like the exact opposite of the progress it needed. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 19:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

...... Hello? Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 00:18, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Schiffy: Try WP:USERFY or undo the redirect and add {{Template:New page}}. If you want to work on the article then work on the article if not then not having it in the main-space isn't hurting anything. The WP:BURDEN lies on you to provide at least some sources showing notability. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I've been very hard-pressed to find good sources for Black Joke, aside from scanlations, which aren't exactly a "source". It certainly needs more than the work of one person, so Userfying wouldn't, in my opinion, be the best course of action. Using {{Newpage}} seems like the better option, at the moment. Thank you for your time. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 02:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

City Hunter

I will be fixing the section when I have finished organising my sources. For example I have the 30th anniversary mook which has all the release/air dates.SephyTheThird (talk) 05:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Okay fair enough, it looks like repeat info though that can be covered in the anime section. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:18, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:AN

Your question was closed before I could answer, but I would say that existing policy already covers it. Ritchie was too quick to unblock, the community spoke and said so. Some also think Berean Hunter was too quick to block. Singular things are just that, singular. If it formed a pattern, then an admin can be taken to Arb. Once it has been discussed, it is best to just move on. Ritchie should clearly understand that the community has some issue with the quickness of the unblock. I don't think it is a hanging offense, but as I've said on his talk page, we need less posturing and more patience. Now, you just wait and see. In the end, nothing was broken by all these actions, so it is best to not get overly excited by them. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 17:27, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Dennis Brown: This is why I feel that nobody including me pushed for another section regarding Ritchie. One editor pointed to a pattern, but nothing was conclusive. I will reference the thread though if another "cowboy" style unblock comes along though. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:53, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	I don't think I've ever had an apology on my talk page! That was really kind of you. You make Wikipedia a better place. —МандичкаYO 😜 07:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

@Wikimandia: Thanks =). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:48, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Comment on evidence talkpage

Hi Knowledgekid87, just a friend note to advise that I have removed a comment of yours from the talk page, as we are having sectioned (not threaded) discussion on this case. There was no problem with the substance of your comment, and please feel free to create your own section there if you wish to contribute. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:47, 13 December 2015 (UTC).

@Lankiveil: Thanks, I had forgotten it was not threaded. I will not make my own thread though I just hope the discussion doesn't get too heated is all, but hey it is arbcom right? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:58, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Regrettably, I do think that heat and other nonsense are going to be the norm for this case. I do appreciate your understanding though! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:48, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Himari Noihara2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Himari Noihara2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:55, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga#RfC:_Anime_films_and_production_companies

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga#RfC:_Anime_films_and_production_companies. Thanks. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:17, 17 December 2015 (UTC)Template:Z48

RfA

Just FYI Esquivalience hatted SC591's vote while I removed the number, thus it has been struck as unconstructive. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:18, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if you're even allowed to do that. And now he's reverted your and Esq.'s edits, so is this gonna be a war now? (In an RfA?) Personally, I think it's better to try and engage SC591 on the talk page and see if you can get him to remove his vote and comment on his own. If not, then perhaps you can get an admin to remove it. (also, I'm not sure why the two oppose vote's order was reversed, but I corrected that.) - ^theWOLFchild 03:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

fyi - I'm pretty sure this is an improper close, but I've said what I wanted to say there so I'm moving on. Just, don't be surprised if someone else reverts you. (as for me, I have no gripe with you.) Nice job at ANI btw. Cheers. - ^theWOLFchild 04:11, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw your discussion going on but I wanted to hat the thread to minimize others jumping into the fray. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:15, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed

You are receiving this message because you are a party or offered a preliminary statement and/or evidence in the Arbitration enforcement 2 case. This is a one-time message.

The Arbitration enforcement 2 arbitration case (t) (ev / t) (w / t) (pd / t) has been closed, and the following remedies have been enacted:

1.1) The Arbitration Committee confirms the sanctions imposed on Eric Corbett as a result of the Interactions at GGTF case, but mandates that all enforcement requests relating to them be filed at arbitration enforcement and be kept open for at least 24 hours.

3) For his breaches of the standards of conduct expected of editors and administrators, Black Kite is admonished.

6) The community is reminded that discretionary sanctions have been authorised for any page relating to or any edit about: (i) the Gender Gap Task Force; (ii) the gender disparity among Wikipedians; and (iii) any process or discussion relating to these topics, all broadly construed.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 02:41, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Arbitration enforcement 2 case closed

Happy New Year, Knowledgekid87!

Happy New Year!

Knowledgekid87,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

@Yamaguchi先生: Thanks you too. =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Linkrot

Hey I noticed you've been going through dead links and trying to archive them. That kind of work is very underappreciated and of great value on Wikipedia. The process can be quite tedious since you have to check each link individually and hope that the Wayback machine caught it and a new domain owner didn't lock out the archives. (It also doesn't help that Japanese sites are atrocious at maintaining links) Keep it up! Opencooper (talk) 01:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

@Opencooper: Thanks! =) Yeah it is quite tedious but it opens up new anime/manga for me to browse upon while doing a helpful thing. I am also tagging sources which do not appear on Wayback, these will most likely have to be replaced by other sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:11, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed your comments. And ideally alternate sources will be able to be found for those for verifiability purposes. Opencooper (talk) 01:21, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Most of the dead links I am finding that I have noticed repeats of include TokyoPop, Amazon, Oricon, and eBOOK Japan. For TokyoPop, and Amazon hopefully ANN has release dates in their news section that would cover those. As for Oricon I know there is a way to fix the links I just don't remember how to. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

For release dates, other resellers might also be usable in lieu of the original retailers. And I remember reading someone explaining how to find titles on Oricon on the WP:A&M talk page so it might be worth searching the talk page archives. Regardless, do keep in mind that dead links are permissible as sources so don't stress it too much since I doubt release dates are controversial. Opencooper (talk) 02:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

AnimeCons.com and New England Anime Society

FYI: Although I was one of the founding members of the New England Anime Society and am the admin for AnimeCons.com, I do not currently hold any positions on the NEAS. I am indeed on staff with Anime Boston, but only as Game Shows Manager and not in any sort of "executive" or "director" role. As far as AnimeCons.com being a "primary source", this page says, "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." In stating the stats about Anime Boston, it's pretty easy for any person to verify since Anime Boston posts the same attendance numbers on social media every year. I put them on AnimeCons.com to make them much easier for people to find ...and there are really no other sources out there except Anime Boston itself and AnimeCons.com. It's not like someone is out there doing any sort of third-party auditing for attendance at anime cons. It's quite likely that any other article you'd find attendance numbers in would have pulled them from AnimeCons.com anyway. ...so the tag that "This article relies too much on references to primary sources." on the Anime Boston article is pretty unnecessary. It's not like anyone is saying the facts presented are not accurate. PatrickD (talk) 04:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

@PDelahanty: I have no problems with Animecons.com as a source, and would not encourage anyone to remove it from the article. The problem is that in general the article needs more third party sources. Okay per your discussion here I have removed my hidden comment there must be something though that was picked up by the globe or even by the Metro. On a different note I have been going to Anime Boston since 2007, and want to thank you for what you do. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Here are a few articles in major area newspapers if you'd like them... http://www.bostonmagazine.com/arts-entertainment/blog/2015/04/03/anime-boston-2015-guide/ https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/names/2015/04/03/anime-boston-draws-costumed-crowd-hynes/pLP3PPR7meuAQd8xYqfaRI/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/2015/04/02/animeprep/f0WtCjvsDvZQr9xwXvcSKN/story.html http://blog.thephoenix.com/BLOGS/laserorgy/archive/2010/04/05/anime-boston-10-improving-but-not-growing.aspx PatrickD (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Syrian Civil War

Do you have special powers bestowed, giving you special rights to close discussion sections, like you did here on Talk:Syrian Civil War yesterday? If people want to have a discussion somewhere, why forbid them to do so? If you suggest that the topic has been discussed before, you at least could have the politeness and helpfulness to tell us where and when that took place. --Corriebertus (talk) 14:11, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Uncivil?

Hello. In this edit, 6Jan2016, on my page, you accused me of being uncivil. Could you please tell me what you consider to have been uncivil of me, and why you judge that to have been uncivil? I’m not aware of having been uncivil recently on pages where I‘ve met you. --Corriebertus (talk) 14:50, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

@Corriebertus: I gave an answer over at WP:AN. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Accusing someone of incivility is the gravest of accusations in Wikipedia. On 6January2016,14:31, you accused me of having been uncivil, without specifying that accusation. So, I asked you here, to corroborate that accusation. For an answer, you said: ‘see my answer over at WP:AN’, which you posted 16Jan2016,21:48.

That answer reads: “I agreed with Legacypac that this edit was not civil: [30]”, pointing at my edit of 6Jan,14:23 at Talk SCW. But at the time of your accusing me (6Jan,14:31), Legacypac had not yet commented on my edit of 6Jan,14:23.

So: your answer(16Jan), that you just agreed(6Jan,14:31) with an (not-existing) opinion of Legacypac is nonsense, a lie.
So, I have to conclude, that you refuse to give any corroboration of your accusing me(6Jan2016,14:31) of having been uncivil. That refusal to corroborate that severe accusation I consider rude and uncivil of you. Furthermore, page Wikipedia:Civility, section 3, identifies lying, harassment, and ill-considered accusations of impropriety as forms of incivility, and you seem to have perpetrated at least one of them at 6Jan2016,14:31. I warn and advice you, to stop those forms of uncivil etc. behaviour. If I see you doing things like that again, on me or on anyone, I’ll have to take it up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. --Corriebertus (talk) 14:18, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 15#My anus is bleeding

It takes a great deal of maturity and courage to do as you did here. I sincerely applaud you!

I came across this only because I have User talk:SPUI watchlisted. SPUI's long gone, and I didn't really know him. I don't remember why I ever watchlisted his talk page in the first place. I think he was controversial in his time. That said, he did do a considerable amount of work for the project. Thus, my thought when I saw the notice of the RfD was that there must have been a reason why SPUI would have created such a redirect. That set me to clue finding. I did not see an immediate reason why such a title should be connected to Rejected. This should be corrected in the target article. This is obviously how you, Largoplazo and Lenticel all concluded it was a hoax/vandalism. Searching the web for this title, associated with Rejected, is what lead me to find the crucial information.

Just a mild suggestion; when placing something for deletion (whatever it is), have a look to see when it was created. I tend to do this with things that seem suspect to me. My thought is that if it has been around for years (as it has in this case; 2005), there's probably something to it that needs more looking into.

The Rejected shorts are to me a very base form of art. I really don't see any redeeming qualities to them. Perhaps it's a failing of mine that I can't see through to why these shorts have gained fame. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:43, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

@Hammersoft: Thanks, I had actually heard of the "My spoon is too big" clip via youtube I will do more digging next time. As for the fame yeah I tend to agree the films were okay but nothing that said Bill Plympton to me. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)