User talk:Knowledgekid87

My stress level

New message from Sjones23

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

I have sent you a note about a page you started

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

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

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

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

Category:Inactive anime conventions has been nominated for merging

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

Disambiguation link notification for April 10

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

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

I have sent you a note about a page you started

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

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

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

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

Great Western tonnage

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

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

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

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

Mumonginsen moved to draftspace

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

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

Mumonginsen

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

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

@Superboilles: @Clearfrienda: If either of you are interested in helping , I have been translating the Ja:wiki article which has sources into English for the article. [1]. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

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

Nazi Doctors

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

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

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

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

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

The name list is still broken. When you click on the button/arrow for ascending or descending order, the names are organized randomly? Looking for a specific name would be difficult as a result.--Mark v1.0 (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mark v1.0: Right now by default the names are organized by last name.. (ex: Ernst Baumhard (Ba) would be before Oskar Begusch (Be)) clicking the arrow once will sort them by first name first (ex: Adolf Wahlmann (Ad) would be before Albert Widmann (Al)). If you want them by last name first then don't use the sorting feature. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Royal Canadian Mint bullion coins moved to draftspace

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

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

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Failed attempt to add the citation needed template for a reliable source that mentions a March 25, 1986 release date for 1963's The Sword in the Stone

I had to add the citation need template to the full date of the fourth classic on VHS because I want Wikipedia to have a reliable source that mentions a March 25, 1986 release date for 1963's The Sword in the Stone due to the fact the magazine doesn't a day in the month and year that the film was released, but why did you restore that source? 2601:1C1:837F:EFE0:A1A3:DD4F:A094:1233 (talk) 22:10, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

We don't need a full date for everything though..... Yes it would be nice to have but the source saying a month and year at least gives some information. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

List of ocean liners

Bulk removal of content for being unsourced is not a constructive edit, when the material is so uncontentious and sourcing is so easily available, just not immediately there already in the linked article. MS Ancerville ran from France to Senegal – obviously an oceanic route. Nor is your (unsourced and OR) claim that cargo liners somehow stop being ocean liners. It would be much more helpful for you to look around for some additional sources. Thankyou. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: As one editor pointed out on Talk:Cargo liner, the two are not the same. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that was me: Talk:List_of_ocean_liners#New_list_proposal Andy Dingley (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)