User talk:Knowledgekid87

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
My stress level



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) and New England Anime Society[edit]

FYI: Although I was one of the founding members of the New England Anime Society and am the admin for, 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 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 to make them much easier for people to find ...and there are really no other sources out there except Anime Boston itself and 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 anyway. 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 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... PatrickD (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Syrian Civil War[edit]

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)


The discussion has been closed at ANI, as I have said I have nothing more to say on the matter lets both move on okay? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

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.

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)

@Corriebertus: Section 3 #1 refers to rudeness, and belittling a fellow editor. Can we just say we were both in the wrong and put this behind us? At this point I don't really care (as you can see I have let the discussion at Syrian Civil War be), I have other areas on Wikipedia I would like to focus my time on. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I just filed a complaint on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Incivility of Knowledgekid87. --Corriebertus (talk) 10:15, 2 February 2016 (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.

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

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)

Thank you for supporting my RfA[edit]

Thank-you-word-cloud.jpg Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your support[edit]

Peace dove.svg Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:06, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Hillary Clinton[edit]

Hello! Would you be kind enough to answer the question I posted on Hillary Clinton talk section. I appreciate it! P.S.: I am fairly new at this so any advice is appreciated. TheAce11912 (talk) 23:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Mass undo edits[edit]

Hello. Please be careful of undoing several edits with one click, such as this one. The comment was still unsigned. Thank you. — Wyliepedia 09:05, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

@CAWylie: Thank you for letting me know, I did the rollback as the page went against WP:BLP in lieu of a death hoax. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

What is Considered an Anime Convention?[edit]

Regarding this template edit, what counts as an anime convention? If a convention has an element of video gaming, even if it is Japanese video gaming, does this disqualify it as an anime convention? Where does manga make things fall in this spectrum? What about other non-anime content?

All things considered, perhaps Anime Banzai shouldn't be listed in this template as it has large sections of its convention dedicated to card gaming and video gaming. Anime Expo should be removed as it has "table top gaming, competitions, an arcade, and concerts." So too should Nan Desu Kan which features a large arcade/console gaming area, furry panels, and a dedicated tabletop gaming area.

Nz17 (talk) 04:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

@Nz17: It depends on what the convention is labeling itself as. Most anime conventions have gaming, roleplaying, and such but are not advertised as a Gaming convention. @TheFarix: is the person to ask as well as he might have additional info/advice to offer. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:20, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
@Knowledgekid87: Thanks. I was just confused about the classification. I saw this over at Category:Multigenre conventions:
"Note to editors: Please use this category for conventions that focus on three or more genres. Conventions with just two genres, e.g. science fiction and fantasy, should instead be placed in the categories for both the relevant genres."
Nz17 (talk) 00:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
No problem. =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Michigan Poll[edit]

My poll now includes you as well. That's 2 for Sanders. 1 for Hillary. MEO 100%. I need you to come take a picture with us.

Hey im all for a good joke, your edit was pretty funny lol but this isn't the best place for it unless you want to get blocked from editing. You should try editing the Unencyclopedia. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:17, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

I think that's fair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:49, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


I see you've decided to switch the source from Green Papers to the New York Time. Waiting until the discussion was over would've been nice, but at least make sure to leave a source for every contest. Right now, the source you've given for Democrats Abroad and Northern Marianas link to "American Samoa", and that source doesn't provide the popular vote. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 07:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

@Abjiklam: In the event of a switchback I would be more than happy to take responsibility, and switch the numbers/sources back to the way they were. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Somewhat related, some of the edits (including yours) have been mentioned on Reddit Just a heads up in case some of your changes are undone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneBGoode (talkcontribs) 22:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
@Knowledgekid87: Thanks for the change from "American Samoa" to "Non-state results", but the problem remains that no source is given for the popular vote. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
There has to be a source out there somewhere, I will do some looking. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
TGP has it ;) Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 23:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Which source should we use for the delegate count? (Thank you)[edit]

I'm not sure who to thank, but I saw your post on the section so I would like to thank you for having settled on a source with other users. We will use the Green Papers until official results are announced. Just hope there wasn't too much of a fiasco, as I was the one who first asked the question! Nike4564 (talk) 20:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Salt request[edit]

Re your message: I thought about salting it, but then it would inevitably be written under a different name. Leaving it unsalted acts as a canary and the deletion history makes it easier for other admins to figure out who it belongs to. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Gogo Dodo: Okay fair enough. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
I took a look at the SPI archives. It moved as least once before from Criticism of Weekly Shōnen Jump. I salted it, so it will appear somewhere else now. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Well the good news is that there are only so many title combinations out there that can be used. In each case it will be picked up via new articles that need patrolling. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

i do know that[edit]

Trophy.png i do know that
i do know that but he is not understanding. i did the right thing and there was no wrong. IF I EDITED wrong i would say sorry but there is nothing with it. if you are so understanding pls tell him for me as i PERSONALLY FEEL HE LIKES TO ANNOY me. ALL MY EDITS i DO CAREFULLY.. i do not do trash edits AonoTsukune95 (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
@AonoTsukune95: Before making this kind of an edit, [1] please first have a discussion on the editor's talk-page. If you do not receive any communication (Wait 24 hours for a reply as time zones vary) then try bringing it up at WP:ANI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

well he just undo all i edited yesterday, so you tell me what is wrong?

as i said i do not do trash edit. everything i do i do my best. i correct sentece my own sentence/grammar. provide info without spoiling as much as possible. IF I DID do wrong i get it...the thing that is funny is that nothing is wrong. so i feel he just likes to annoy me. I CAN 100% ENSURE YOU that I WILL AND NEVER DO TRASH EDIT like many other editors. i have my own standards.

THIS CAN GO ON FOREVER IF he do not be more understanding and he call himself a senior editor/wiki editor. cannot even recognise good edits and shit edits AonoTsukune95 (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

forgot to mention this btw

and you said keep cool? i do try to be calm but when he keep reundo what i do it piss me off. funny thing like i said all edits i make is off good quality. i never make unecessary edits. EVERYTHING I DO is TO MAKE BETTER READING.

so it kind of annoys me if he wants to go on that way. i will try to cool it but no promises if he intends to keep reundo my good edits and when shit edits happen he does not reundo it.

JUST WOW....WOW.....WOW..... AonoTsukune95 (talk) 14:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

are you ok?

huh?? that info was provided by me. i can remove it. what gives you the right to do it when it was done by me?? i am undoing it for the last time. please understand that it was provided by me and i wish to retract it AonoTsukune95 (talk) 07:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC) |}

Death of Prince AFD[edit]

The Death of Prince AFD was improperly closed. For one thing, non-administrative closures are to be done only in non-controversial AFD's. This is far from it. The AFD was also improper because the Reactions of the Death of Prince was nearly simultaneous with the Death of Prince AFD. Since the Reactions of the Death of Prince was a redirect to Death of Prince, Death of Prince cannot be deleted or redirected. If that were the intent, then the Reactions to the Death of Prince, which was closed first, would be a direct redirect to Prince (musician). Furthermore, a DRV is ok if there is a significant change. I suspect there will be when Prince is declared to have an overdose in a few weeks. With all that, DRV would definitely be appropriate and a win for the article.

I fully realize that many people don't like that article. But that is displeasure at Wikipedia and Prince should not be punished for that. Those people should have a community wide discussion about Wikipedia. If they only want stodgy articles like that found in a book version of an encyclopedia, I would happily live with it.

In the interim, I am starting a bold test to see how much can be merged. I suspect Softlavender and his friends will remove it, being the contentious and aggressive bullies they are. I also plan to start a section on the talk page of Prince (musician) about possible new ideas and news articles about Prince's death. That way, we will have research materials in one place. That is a square wheeled way to edit and is like editing with the secret police standing behind you (inhibits boldness and reduces participation) but that will have to do. Whiskeymouth (talk) 03:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Castle Point Anime Convention[edit]

Want to get your opinion on some sources before I consider taking this to AFD, sadly even with the years since its deletion and recreation I don't think Castle Point Anime Convention has enough sources. This is what I could find:

  1. Thousands flock, in costume
  2. Stevens readies for Castle Point
  3. Artists' alley at Castle Point Anime Convention
  4. Castle Point Anime Convention in Hoboken continues
  5. Hoboken's Castle Point Anime Convention begins

The Stute (Castle Point Colleges Newspaper)

  1. CPAC shatters attendance record
  2. Castle Point Anime Convention Preview

The problems I'm coming up with, is while the articles are ok, and there are several, they are older. I don't think the college newspaper would survive an AFD debate. I've searched deep and couldn't find any other sources that would meet project standards at this point. Esw01407 (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

@Esw01407: per WP:NTEMP it doesn't matter how old the sources are, it would be nice though to get some more widespread coverage though. Yes AfD is an option, but there are convention articles that are in far worse shape so I would start with those. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:53, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Page Protection (List of Powerpuff Girls Characters)[edit]

A user kept putting Yasmin and Blossom on the list of Powerpuff Girls characters page. I don't know how to protect it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zboogie604 (talkcontribs) 14:35, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) - @Zboogie604: Unfortunately, only administrators are allowed to protect the article. You should make your request at WP:RPP. I hope that was helpful mate :) --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 03:53, 4 May 2016 (UTC)


Care to explain why you undid my revisons without giving reasons to why?

Nelson Richards (talk) 14:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Nelson Richards: I needed to fix the numbers, plus an IP had added in an error. I restored the edits you made, sorry for the trouble. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Understood. Thank you Nelson Richards (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

U.S. House elections, 2016[edit]

I've removed the map but have also posted in the discussions page. (S)he can restore it when deemed appropriate, but I feel it sets a dangerous precedent to keep it up currently when none of those races have actually been decided. In fact, all races are susceptible to Write-In races which can sprout up at any moment, regardless of how unlikely that is to happen. The map needs to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TenderBlur (talkcontribs) 17:18, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Atlantic hurricane season forecasts table[edit]

Hi there. I see that you changed the season forecasts table back to the original one. I will rv that to the next table again designed both by me and JR. We are planning to do the same to the other seasons as well for the Atlantic. The new table is a new version. Thank you. Typhoon2013 (talk) 23:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

@Typhoon2013: Hold on a second can we have a discussion on the matter? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:53, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
So far only 2 users have contributed (me and you). Have I done something wrong? I did reminded 3 users about it in the past hour. What happens if no one contributes in the next 24hrs? If this is the case, I would say it is currently a 50/50 on keeping the original and changing to the new format. I still cannot decide if only 2 people have contributed. :| Typhoon2013 (talk) 02:33, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
@Typhoon2013: You have to remember 1. It is a holiday weekend here in the United States, and 2. Not everyone is under the same time zone. Give it time, people will reply =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:48, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

  • Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Chibiusa#Requested move 29 May 2016[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Chibiusa#Requested move 29 May 2016. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Reverts on Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016[edit]

Hello Knowledgekid87, I'd hate to fall into an edit war with you because I appreciate your contributions to the topics where we have randomly been in touch. However I must point out that you just violated the 1-revert-per-day rule which is in place at Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016, so I would kindly ask you to self-revert your latest edits to this version and let other editors apply any changes they deem appropriate. As you rightly pointed out, the presumptive nominee debate will be settled in a few hours anyway but I believe we shouldn't have thrown out our painstakingly agreed consensus on sources just for the joy of being a few hours early; there has been all day a lot of debating among media professionals and Democrats over the AP announcement which may look designed to influence the election -- amazingly, people find convincing arguments for saying it would be positive or negative for either candidate! My opinion is that the announcement was simply sent out to boost media audience, with no conspiracy to help either side. For my part I have reverted you once and won't touch the page further tonight. Kind regards, — JFG talk 23:53, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

The reason...[edit]

...that that AN/I thread hasn't been reclosed is, in the words of Iridiscent, because "the fact of people posting after the thread has been closed is behavioural evidence in its own right"... in other words, let a certain party keep on embarassing itself Face-wink.svg Muffled Pocketed 13:34, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Yeah I expect it to eventually be archived, I can forsee a repeat of this kind of thing though if that party does not get the point. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:01, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

UK Exit[edit]

Fair enough. I was just putting everything together under one headline, as it looked a bit sloppy to me otherwise. But I take your point. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:43, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For fighting POV-pushing and disruptive edit attempts at Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016. Guy1890 (talk) 05:44, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
@Guy1890: Thanks! =) It has been a crazy election year so far. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:15, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:29, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Please don't[edit]

I'm sure there is a way to template the state lists into the main US lighthouse list rather than create them all over again. Couldn't you work on some of the lists that do not yet exist? Mangoe (talk) 02:30, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

{[re|User:Mangoe}} The list is a mess, and has not been touched upon seriously in years. I plan on separating the lighthouses by region with a navigable table. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:33, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Chibi Vampire[edit]

I'm not blocked anymore and I got episode info off of Anime News Network. Sage of the Six Paths (talk) 06:07, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sage of the Six Paths: My apologies then, as for the episode list the table really should be split off into a new article. If you want to do that feel free but experiment first using the WP:SANDBOX. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Madoka Magica[edit]

Are you referring to my previous edits of Madoka being one of the greatest series of the 21st century? Actually, what I said was true and I have the official source about the directors and reviewers of Japan and all but since many users on wiki disagreed I thought I should stop. :) Deidaramonroe (talk) 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice of discussions regarding updates to MOS:TV[edit]

This is just a notification to a series of discussions that are taking place regarding updates to MOS:TV, given you participated in the discussion and/or expressed interest in the discussion seen here. You can find more information about the initiative and the discussions, here. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Utah isn't a swing state[edit]

thanks for updating election articles, particularly polling. You've put Utah is a swing state on the 2016 presidential election article, but the statewide polling article, which you've edited more than anyone else, has Republicans leading in that state by 15 points? No site I know has it as a swing state. e.g. fivethirtyeight has it as one of the safest states: I recommend the Keepin' it 1600 podcast, kind regards Tom B (talk) 00:08, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

@Tpbradbury: Let me ask this, if Utah really is safe then why has no prediction source other than fivethirtyeight have it as such? We cant give undue weight to one prediction source. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
All the sources on Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2016#Utah which you've edited, has Utah as safe, Real Clear Politics, 270 to Win, [2]. The NY Times has Utah as the 4th safest republican state: [3], why do you say no source other than 538? Tom B (talk) 00:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
I am talking predictions not polls, we have The Cook Political Report, Sabato's Crystal Ball, Stuart Rothenberg, and RealClearPolitics. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:47, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
And which of those has Utah as a swing state? Tom B (talk) 02:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
All four of them, none are predicting it as "Safe", right now Indiana has the same ratings if you look at the table. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
No, none of the 4 are, I asked which are predicting it as swing state. I agree, Indiana isn't a swing state either, we should remove both, Tom B (talk) 02:38, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
I don't think any source is coming out to say "these are the swing states" I cant find it over at 538 other than maps and analysis which is also used over at the other prediction sources. So in short can you tell me where there is a source that in writing says "Yes these are the states"? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
I've already said The NY Times has Utah as the 4th safest republican state: [4]. that is not a poll that is a prediction. You've put in the article that Utah is a swing state. As I asked at the top of this section, please may you tell me/the reader, where there is a source in writing for that? I think we're going to have take this to the article talkpage if you're going to continue to insist that Utah, Indiana are swing states. They are not. Tom B (talk) 03:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
I think you are confused, NYT is predicting that Utah is the 4th safest state. This is a prediction, it is not saying "Utah is not a battleground/swing state". As I have pointed above though 4 other sources have also made their own predictions. All three (which we use btw) are pointing towards "Likely Republican" which is not "Safe Republican". - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
No, I'm not confused, Utah is not a key battleground state in this election. All 3 are pointing towards "Likely" not "Safe", no person has been arguing with you about what states are completely safe or not. The section is about the 10 or so key battleground states not for the 38 states that are "unsafe". Tom B (talk) 03:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
One innovative method might be to use the top 10 or so of the 'chance of tipping the election' list on 538 [5]? Tom B (talk) 03:35, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

My apology[edit]

I'm sorry of engaging an edit war, but I just want to leave my editing on those articles just the way they are. I never want to cause trouble, I want to prevent people from being misleading and that's why I changed them. I hope you understand the situation I have been through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony Duran (talkcontribs) 16:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

@Anthony Duran: You need to discuss your edits before you go ahead. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:09, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

I did. This is my first time doing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony Duran (talkcontribs) 16:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay, what I need you to do is respond over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga. Rather than blank the discussion which doesn't look good to those around you, respond with why you think you are right. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Editing a character article[edit]

Look, I don't care if I get blocked every single day. All I wanted to is let the readers know the true facts about this character, I know how a romantic comedy functions, I just want you guys to know that Tsukune and Moka are just friends and nothing else, I've watched the anime and read the manga. Nothing in the world is going to change between the relationship between two characters. Since it is an harem anime, the main male protagonist has more than one love interest and Moka is just one of those main female characters in the show despite being the title character. I could have a chat with the original manga artist, Akihisa Ikeda so I can settle this conversation once and for all. You guys can reach contact with him from Nichinan, Miyazaki, Japan from where I live the address, 3201 W 10th Avenue Pl Broomfield, CO 80020.

If you want this conflict to stop, just leave my editing alone or I'll continue to do this, until you stop. So go ahead, falsely accuse me of harassing some of your colleagues, block me for twenty-four hours, but I'll beat it and we'll start the whole thing all over again.

You have been warned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony Duran (talkcontribs) 17:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)


Let me sort this out later. You are completely right about the use of the images but I have another way of dealing with it.SephyTheThird (talk) 07:19, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@SephyTheThird: Okay, good luck. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
I've sent two of the images to XFD. We can go from there.SephyTheThird (talk) 18:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:VPP discussion about terrorism[edit]

There is a VPP discussion about distinguishing between terrorist attacks and non-terrorist attacks, if you would like to participate. Parsley Man (talk) 23:05, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I personally think we should not just narrowly define terrorism but seek to stamp out terrorism in ALL its forms. This is necessary to preserve Western culture. For example Japanese Yakuza organizations, like Shueisha, have been making children violent through hentai for DECADES without retribution! - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 11:50, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Demonizer Zilch[edit]

Just wanted to let you know the history behind the inconsistency you found: a few months ago (I think it may have been in June) Yen pushed back the release dates for a bunch of volumes by about a week (I know because I had to go around and update a bunch of articles). However, ANN's encyclopedia didn't get updated with the new dates. This happens fairly often, actually - it's not unusual to see a wrong release date in ANN's weekly schedule. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 19:24, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@G S Palmer: Oh okay thanks, guess I will just have to wait a bit longer to get my copy then. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:55, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, judging form some pictures I've seen, a few pre-order copies may be out early, but if you haven't ordered it yet, then probably... G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 04:21, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
@G S Palmer: I picked up my copy today, will still go with the official release date though. Im looking forward to expanding the article's plot. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)


Can you also talk to him? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I will try although I don't think it will do much good. Sadly WP:ANI may be the only way to go forward with this as this user has already rubbed more than one editor the wrong way. I see no indication that they are listening to anyone. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:01, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm rather annoyed that I let myself get worked up about this but it's getting beyond silly. Seeing as he's now repeating his bizarre reasonings on nihonjoe's talk page it's probably best if we both just leave them to it. I'm going to do my best not to get involved any more as it's starting to look bad on me and I wouldn't want you to get worn down by it as well.He clearly won't listen to us anyway.. SephyTheThird (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Opinion Polling for presidential election[edit]

You apparentely haven't read this either WP:BRD. My first edit should have stayed. You are the one who started the disruptive editing, by changing it. BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes. Don't invoke BRD as your reason for reverting someone else's work or for edit warring; instead, provide a reason that is based on policies, guidelines, or common sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllSportsfan16 (talkcontribs) 16:04, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted by another editor right then and there the bold changes which you made were undone. You need a new consensus to go forward with your proposed changes. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:20, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
I understand why you are trying to keep the map and table for this current election. However it makes absolutely no sense to keep the one on the 2012 page. That election was four years ago and a map that contains possible electoral votes related to poll results is not necessary or accurate and is silly to even show.AllSportsfan16 (talk) 00:58, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Also can you remove me from the administrator incident board. I apologized and I won't do it again. Also while I was off Wikipedia someone changed the page back to how it was before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllSportsfan16 (talkcontribs) 01:01, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Think about this for a second. If you have two polls, one that comes out Oct 22-26 and one that comes out 25-26 it makes way more sense to use the 20-26 one because it covers the same time period 25-26 plus it covers 20-24. Also it has a lower margin of error. It shouldn't matter what day the poll starts it matters what day it comes out. It makes more sense to use a longer time period than a shorter one. It's simple logic.AllSportsfan16 (talk) 16:09, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


Blocked this impersonation account:

Was using the old "uppercase I and lowercase L" trick. CIreland (talk) 12:37, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

It's Cow Cleaner, have SPI'ed him with two other socks.SephyTheThird (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for that. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Demonizer Zilch[edit]

Understand that these projects are for biblical/theological studies, for example, Supernatural (U.S. TV series) references biblical names, places etc. and visually does representations of actually occult sigils but is not taken is a series matter because the ideal of the show is just a show. Unless there is some sort of news worthy information that's making academics get excited and speculate on the particular manga/anime, the subject is irrelevant to the project. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 03:33, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

@JudeccaXIII: The entire series is about demons, deals with a fictional Christian organization, and drops references left and right. These things exist in fiction as well and expanding project coverage is a good thing not a bad one. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I also want to add that the main character Zilch is possessed by Alastor. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I referenced Supernatural (U.S. TV series) as an example why it isn't on either Wikiproject, but for more clarity, it's not educational. Constantine (film), Constantine (TV series), and Supernatural (U.S. TV series), all of these media content mention satan, angels, demons, demon possession, sigils etc. but there not on Wikiprojsects Occult on Christianity because it's not educational, it's just media entertainment. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 03:58, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I don't see any policy/guideline related arguments in your reasoning so this is nothing more than a WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT discussion. As for education, by whose definition are we going by? If someone sees a mention of Alastor wouldn't the person who is interested look up or want to look up this info? It isn't confined to anime or manga entertainment. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
If someone wanted to look up Alastor, he/she would simply click the BLUE LINK or go to the search bar. This is common sense. If you don't know what a Wikiproject is, see WP:PROJGUIDE. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I didn't read anything there regarding this situation, education in this case is subjective. If you want to start an RfC or amend a project's scope then feel free. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:26, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Its past midnight here so I am going to get some rest. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:32, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Orange Line[edit]

I'm not sure what you're attempting to do with the Orange Line article; one image for every several paragraphs is a normal amount, and the previous amount was neither causing substantial double-stacking or text squeezing. By putting images in a gallery, you're removing them from their textual context. The "Essex" sign at Chinatown means a lot more when it's next to a paragraph discussing name changes.

Galleries are generally depreciated at the article-scale level; they're really only useful at the section scale to present a time series, comparison, or other closely related group of images. See Littleton/Route 495 (MBTA station)#New station for an example of that. On the Orange Line article, it might be appropriate to have a gallery under the Rolling stock section to compare the original stock with the 01100s with the upcoming order, as that would use the images directly to support the text.

"A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the above paragraph or moved to Wikimedia Commons" is the relevant part of WP:GALLERY. "One rule of thumb to consider: if, due to its content, such a gallery would only lend itself to a title along the lines of "Gallery" or "Images of [insert article title]", as opposed to a more descriptive title, the gallery should either be revamped or moved to the Commons" is also of note.

If you're this worried about there being 9 images in a 2300-word article, then feel free to expand it into a more suitable length. Contrary to your claim on the talk page, the history section could use a rather substantial expansion. There are several important topics like the original plans for the elevated system, the post-1901 capacity expansion and platform lengthenings across the line, and the abandoned attempts to extend the line past its current temrinals that need covered. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

List of attendance figures at anime conventions[edit]

FYI: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of attendance figures at anime conventions (3rd nomination) is back up for AfD since it hasn't been touched in years. ...even after the creator said in the 2nd AfD "I promise I will keep up with it." (I knew they wouldn't.) "If I do not you can nominate it in the Afd process again as you stated" I did. --PatrickD (talk) 01:23, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Re: NTR: Netsuzou Trap[edit]

First, I want to thank Knowledgekid-kun create this article so I can translate it. Actually I don't think the Chinese edition can let you add some sources, because the the new source I added is Chinese([6]),I don't think it can help you alot...Finally, Thank you for your question! --미사카❀ζ무슨 일이죠✆ 13:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

@Jacklamf1d14: You are very welcome. =) Okay, thank you for taking a look and happy editing! - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)


ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Knowledgekid87. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


Sorry if my reply to you seemed strange. I was a bit tired and misread you comment directed at Parsley. I agree with you fully that the right place for that discussion is not ANI. Thanks again for you input. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

No worries it happens to the best of us, hope you get better rest and you are welcome again. =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:55, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Sadly it seems like Parsley has no interest in having a discussion about it, or keeping it civil [7]. I will simply move on, and get some much needed rest. :) --BabbaQ (talk) 23:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)


Sorry about that, but it seemed the easiest way to fix the issue. Feel free to renominate, hopefully it'll work this time. Mjroots (talk) 16:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Rozen Maiden straw vote[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your input at the AFD. If possible, could you drop by for a straw vote to determine if the article should be redirected (linked here? Thanks. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 08:14, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Gambian presidential election, 2016[edit]

Gnome globe current event.svg On 6 December 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Gambian presidential election, 2016, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)


No, definitely not. Edit conflict? Bishonen | talk 17:48, 8 December 2016 (UTC).

Yes, my apologies. [8] - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:55, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

A page you started (20 sen coin) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating 20 sen coin, Knowledgekid87!

Wikipedia editor Robvanvee just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:


To reply, leave a comment on Robvanvee's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Merry Christmas from me and my girlfriend[edit]

--EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:50, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
@EurovisionNim: Thanks! I hope you have a very Merry Christmas as well =). I had to hide the template not to be a scrooge but to have it so the discussion below this one can be read. I think there is something wrong with the template that needs fixing. Thanks again though!. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
My girlfriend would not be impressed with you. Anyway, in September; I wanted to go out with her to the movies, so she, her friend and myself went out for the morning. Anyway, not many people were at the cinemas that day, so I managed to nab my first kiss. It was totally romantic; I was sweating afterwards. Anyway, I took her to my school ball, which was a lot of fun. I was so delighted when I had her for the school dinner dance; a good friend introduced me to her and later I decided to go romantic with her. The school quiz night was a bonus as I managed to get my kiss in front of all my friends when we came 8th overall. It was so much fun!!! --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 03:11, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Brave Witches episodes#Episode summaries[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Brave Witches episodes#Episode summaries. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:03, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


I'd like to get your opinion on a source, AXS. They seem to be reporting on a series of fan events, but are also a major corporation. I'm having issues determining if they would be considered a reliable source, as several articles that lack sources could benefit from their coverage. Esw01407 (talk) 18:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

@Esw01407: In this case while the website may or may not be notable, the staff as individuals may not be. Like for the example you provided above, who is Christen Bejar? Is he a blogger or staff member that posts on the website, and if so is he vetted? If it were AXS as a whole for the author then maybe, but here it is a bit more tricky. I would ask for more opinions over at WP:RSN, my gut is leaning towards yes for AXS as a whole, but situational for the article authors. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Hijab merges[edit]

Well, that was mighty bold. Why did you do that? This was not at all the consensus in the long merge discussion. Eperoton (talk) 03:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

The info said the same things in both articles, it is no good having info all over the place. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:04, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
You should have participated in the merge discussion instead. Being bold is not the same as ignoring consensus. Now we'll need to undo these changes. Eperoton (talk) 03:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
@Eperoton: Why though? You have the ball rolling, as opposed to a dead discussion. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
It's not a dead discussion. We reached a consensus between us, but we were giving others a chance to participate, since this is a major reorganization. Eperoton (talk) 03:12, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
If you want to undo then feel free, I just merged one of the article's content. The discussion hadn't received any further discussion in over a week. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:15, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
@Eperoton: Done, best of luck, sorry for the trouble... - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! I haven't yet looked at all your changes, and perhaps some of them were in line with the discussion. Don't worry, I'll make sure this reorg gets somewhere. Let's just do it in a careful, consensual manner. Eperoton (talk) 03:23, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Chivalry of a Failed Knight and The Asterisk War[edit]

While the RfC for the template/categorization situation at WT:ANIME is still ongoing, do you mind if we should join forces on the Chivalry of a Failed Knight and The Asterisk War articles? They seem to have no reception (either sales or critical responses for the light novels, manga or anime) or production information in the articles, and Chivalry needs more references; we can get those up to at least C-Class or B-Class. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:19, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

They look like fun series, so sure! - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:49, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Further, I think we can use Sugoi Japan and the ANN references for sales figures for those series. Meanwhile, I'll go ask Xezbeth and DragonZero to see if they can help us out. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

FAC request[edit]

Hi. When you get the chance, could you take a look at my FAC linked above? If you can't, please reply. Thanks. MCMLXXXIX 14:03, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Glad to have helped out. =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2017 (UTC)


Further, if you intend on updating an article about a topic this fast-moving, I highly recommend you keep a live feed of news on in your house (or place of work even). The updated death toll had been on Sky News for over 5 minutes when you began reverting that off the page. Coffee // have a cup // beans // 16:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
@Coffee: Yes I was in the wrong here, I had good intent though as false death reports are not the best. Thank you for the advice on a live feed. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:56, 22 March 2017 (UTC)


This may merit brief mention [9], and I'm sure there are more sources. A number of major American artists painted in the area, but I don't know of any others who focused as Hartley did on Dogtown. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 13:55, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the source, yes people such as Henry David Thoreau wrote about Dogtown. I will include the info after completing the history section. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:12, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Pokémon: The Movie 2000#Name romanizations[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pokémon: The Movie 2000#Name romanizations. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:12, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Georgia's 6th congressional district special election, 2017[edit]

You added info that there would be a runoff election could you provide a source that says this? Thanks. Brian Everlasting (talk) 03:23, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Same again[edit]

You are doing it again as above with Corriebertus. This is an ongoing discussion, why close it? People are allowed to revisit this idea as new editors come along, ideas change, new refs are found. Im hoping this does not turn uncivil. Whats the problem if people take awhile to work through the issue? Wheres the harm in that? SaintAviator lets talk 06:09, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@SaintAviator: If you feel that consensus has changed then why not just start a new move request? Yes people have the right to revisit the same thing again, but this discussion has been open since October 5, 2016. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

List of (notable) people with dwarfism[edit]

Please see Talk:List of notable people with dwarfism#List title. Best,--Arxiloxos (talk) 21:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Cleanup tags[edit]

Hello Knowledgekid87. I saw your note.


Avoid "drive-by" tagging.

Tags should be accompanied by a comment on the article's talk page explaining the problem and beginning a discussion on how to fix it, or, for simpler problems, a remark using the reason parameter as shown below; tagging editors must be willing to follow-through with substantive discussion.

If the article needs work, please be specific in what work is needed.

Regards, Kablammo (talk) 19:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Do I think you made a mistake?[edit]

Hello. I presented my case in the talk page. I'd like for you to read it and determine again if my edits were "disruptive". Whatever you decide is what I'll accept.--Rob2k19 (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

@Rob2k19: I think you presented your reasoning well on the talk-page so no it is not disruptive, talk with the other editors and work together to a compromise. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2017 (UTC)