explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1052: Every Major's Terrible

2025-06-01T19:48:37Z

141.101.76.58: Made a small change

The video link 404's - here is a working archive link: [https://web.archive.org/web/20190610190844/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhaEjgnmy3c https://web.archive.org/web/20190610190844/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhaEjgnmy3c] --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.82|172.68.174.82]] 17:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I think Iambic Octameter has a ''stressed-unstressed'' pattern, not the other way around as this explanation says. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.4|172.68.34.4]] 02:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
:No, the explanation is correct, I misread the Wikipedia article. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.4|172.68.34.4]] 13:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Panel 1's cueball is in the same pose as Rodin's "The Thinker"

Panel 4 background is the periodic table of elements.

Panel 5, Fowler's Toad emits a noxious secretion that irritates skin and mucous membranes (it was previously thought to cause warts)

Panel 6, Psychology = a serial killer with a chainsaw, Sociology = hobo; Social Psych = hobo serial killer with chainsaw.

Panel 15, LISP, Scheme, and other computer languages with an excess of parentheses.

Panel 16, biohazard symbol

Panel 19, bongos were played by Richard Feynman

Panel 27, fear of snakes, study of reptiles

Panel 28, a picture of a stomach, pun on "stomach" being slang for "tolerate"

Panel 30, words in all lowercase like e.e.cummings

-- [[Special:Contributions/75.103.23.206| 75.103.23.206 ]] 22:04, 7 December 2012‎
:Hobo serial killer with chainsaw? Social psych sounds awesome!
:[[Special:Contributions/24.2.217.188|24.2.217.188]] 22:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
----
In panel 22 (History), what's the theme connecting the years 1935, 1969, and 1991?
[[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 15:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
:1935 is certainly related to some event that lead to the WWII (a quick look at the Wikipedia page for 1935 show that was the year Hitler rearmed Germany), which paved the way to the Cold War. 1969 was Apollo 11, a high moment of the Cold War, as the USA essentially won the race to the Moon. And 1991 was the year that the USSR dissolved, officially ending the Cold War. [[User:Sir labreck|Sir labreck]] ([[User talk:Sir labreck|talk]]) 18:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
:1935, Harlem race riot; 1969, race riot in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 1991, Rodney King race riots... 2014-2016??? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.62|173.245.54.62]] 03:33, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
:Although the race riot dates match, I think war related is more likely. 1935 (WWII), 1969 (Vietnam), 1991 (Gulf War) I'm not sure what the common thread is, though, and 'war' is too broad [[Special:Contributions/172.69.250.4|172.69.250.4]] 20:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
::{{w|WWII}} began in '''1939'''. The {{w|Vietnam War}} was 1955-1975 and {{w|Gulf_War_(disambiguation)|Gulf War}} is ambiguous. Just sayin... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
:28 March 1935: Near Roswell, New Mexico, Robert H. Goddard successfully launched the first gyroscopically-stabilized liquid-fueled rocket. 1969, Apollo 11. 1991, ?. The only somewhat significant events I could find are the 5th Spacelab mission and the launch of the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory. Also, 1991 was the first year with ''less'' than 100 orbital launches since 1962. [[User:Chrullrich|Chrullrich]] ([[User talk:Chrullrich|talk]]) 11:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
----
This explanation is very small for that big comic. I am starting to add the transcript and after that I will do more investigations to that opera. This should be the key to explain all the panels.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

:The answer won't lie in the song, trust me. Pirates of Penzance is probably my favorite comic opera out there. Plus Randall gives that the lie in saying you can use the tune from the elements song (a well-known parody) or even Marry Poppins (similar tune, but not exactly the same). I think each panel is just a reference to the words, I don't think that Randall is actually involving The Pirates of Penzance in any way other than the tune. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.211|173.245.52.211]] 20:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
----
Feynman was also known for being a ladies' man, so the two girls in panel 19 are significant IMHO.
--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.117|141.101.80.117]] 13:51, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
----
Needs explanation what does it mean to '''choose a major''', and what '''major''' is in this context. Note every reader is from U.S.A.; different countries have different higher education systems. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
:True that. 'Graduation' in Brazil means 'Undergraduation' in the US. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105|108.162.254.105]] 03:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
----
"Math's just physics unconstrained by precepts of reality" - that isn't a binary tree, its a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifurcation_diagram bifurcation diagram] from chaos theory. And, sorry, it has nothing to do with the Banach–Tarski paradox - that's just mindless name-dropping.
[[User:Davidbak|Davidbak]] ([[User talk:Davidbak|talk]]) 20:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
:Are you sure it is not just an illustration of Banach-Tarski, arguably the most famous example where mathematical reality and (physical) intuition diverge? Why would the verse be illustrated by a bifurcation diagram (which I think, and I might be a bit ignorant here, is a concept pretty much only found in the "applied side" of mathematics, which ''is'' constrained by precepts of reality)? And even if it were a bifurcation diagram, why would the mass of the balls change? (again, I am perhaps showcasing my ignorance; if so, please be gentle) Finally, i would deem the bifurcation explanation a bit too obscure to be the real deal - a panel which is only understood by somewhat specialized mathematicians seems strange to me, especially given that all other frames contain understandable references. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.183|108.162.229.183]] 13:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRexBMPeRTo[[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 18:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
:That is distinctly a bifurcation diagram. Banach Tarski doesn't factor into this at all. Disagree-P 15:39, 20 Nov, 2020

Panel 30: possibly iambic septameter[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.154|141.101.104.154]]

---
I think that the reason for not getting hugs in panel 16 is more to do with the fact that as a virus researcher you would be aware of how easy it is to get a virus/disease and so you would keep away from people and be worried about hugs because of that. (Sorry if I've done something wrong this is my first comment!) [[User:Yxquillio|Yxquillio]] ([[User talk:Yxquillio|talk]]) 08:24, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Another song I guess could provide a good match is "Can You Stop the Calvary?" by Jona Lewie (or "Where's the Modding API" if you're a YOGSCAST fan like me. :)) --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 11:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

"End of the first verse where Cueball tells his academic advisor that he is undecided as every major's terrible. He even throws away his study guide." Are you sure it's not a course catalog? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 10:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I think I should add that Pratchett used that quote to prove that geography was not a boring science, as it is physics, which is exciting, with some trees on it. Just a thought.[[User:MrBookBoy|MrBookBoy]] ([[User talk:MrBookBoy|talk]]) 01:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Hey, the cs parens are missing a close paren. Like literally. Lol. [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 15:00, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
----
It should be noted that in panel 35, they're referring to "Sophie's Choice." A movie in which the protagonist has to decide which of her two children to save, and which one to kill.
--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.245|108.162.245.245]] 16:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Is "Undecided" related to the alignment chart? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.228|172.71.154.228]] 22:58, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Panel 31. While epidemiology may well involve the study of causes and trends and whatnot, so does history. Epidemiology is the study of diseases.

The thing for panel 14 is wrong. You can't use that argument to argue for the existence of a greatest possible vacuum cleaner or greatest possible pizza because those things imply limitations like limited size, limited age, able to be broken (for the pizza), etc. If it didn't have these or any limitations it wouldn't be a vacuum cleaner/pizza; it would just be God. "basically, if your pizza gets infinitely great it will turn into God" - [https://www.youtube.com/@redeemedzoomer6053 Redeemed Zoomer] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.130|172.70.211.130]] 03:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

:I agree. Someone attempted to succinctly describe Guanilo's "On Behalf of the Fool" but I don't think it's possible to make it short enough for this page. I'm just going to edit it down to 'Anselm's argument doesn't work' and let anyone curious click the link.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.118|172.68.35.118]] 05:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Also, wild thing I learned recently: There's a Sullivan Appreciation Society, and there's a Gilbert and Sullivan Appreciation Society, and they have beef with each other.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.118|172.68.35.118]] 05:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

----

“Economists often claim that economics is a science like any other; however, as the predictive powers of all economic theories are exceedingly weak compared to those of any science, this is disputed by those outside the field at times.”

That is accidentally hilariously ignorant even to a layman with only a passing interest in economics, like me. Have you ever compared ‘the predictive powers of all economic theories’ with those of psychology and sociology?
Moreover, within a few minutes I can find plenty of examples of economic theories whose ‘predictive powers’ are very clearly NOT ‘exceedingly weak’: from demand curves nearly always slope downwards, through the relation between interest rates and inflation†, to the gravity model of trade.

†Well except for Erdogan, it was not very clear to him. At first he had remained unconvinced that it is a terrible idea to combat inflation by lowering nominal interest rates instead of raising them; this had the expected results.

It is as if I were to claim that meteorology is not a science because meteorologists cannot predict the weather a few months ahead.

Note, I am not writing this to defend economics or something; I am perfectly willing to admit that the field of economics has some problems like it being too easy to get away with poor data and bad methodologies† or a vulnerability to fads. However, that is also the case for the other social sciences; but for some reason, unlike with economics, the internet is not filled with people attacking them with arguments so awful they only prove their ignorance†† about the subject.

†Something of which you can even find many economist complaining about.

††I had even once encountered somebody attacking ‘economists’ who was under the mistaken belief that ‘economists’ in general were Lafferists. However, as real professional economists virtually unanimously agree that Laffers claim that ‘tax cuts pay for themselves (under current US tax rates)’ is complete nonsense (to provide but one example among many: https://kentclarkcenter.org/surveys/tax-reform-2/); that would be as I were to state that ‘NASA believes in geocentrism, look how bad mainstream astronomy is’.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.58|141.101.76.58]] 19:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Talk:1052: Every Major's Terrible

2025-06-01T19:47:04Z

141.101.76.58: Adding a complaint of the article misrepresenting economics.

The video link 404's - here is a working archive link: [https://web.archive.org/web/20190610190844/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhaEjgnmy3c https://web.archive.org/web/20190610190844/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhaEjgnmy3c] --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.82|172.68.174.82]] 17:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I think Iambic Octameter has a ''stressed-unstressed'' pattern, not the other way around as this explanation says. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.4|172.68.34.4]] 02:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
:No, the explanation is correct, I misread the Wikipedia article. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.4|172.68.34.4]] 13:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Panel 1's cueball is in the same pose as Rodin's "The Thinker"

Panel 4 background is the periodic table of elements.

Panel 5, Fowler's Toad emits a noxious secretion that irritates skin and mucous membranes (it was previously thought to cause warts)

Panel 6, Psychology = a serial killer with a chainsaw, Sociology = hobo; Social Psych = hobo serial killer with chainsaw.

Panel 15, LISP, Scheme, and other computer languages with an excess of parentheses.

Panel 16, biohazard symbol

Panel 19, bongos were played by Richard Feynman

Panel 27, fear of snakes, study of reptiles

Panel 28, a picture of a stomach, pun on "stomach" being slang for "tolerate"

Panel 30, words in all lowercase like e.e.cummings

-- [[Special:Contributions/75.103.23.206| 75.103.23.206 ]] 22:04, 7 December 2012‎
:Hobo serial killer with chainsaw? Social psych sounds awesome!
:[[Special:Contributions/24.2.217.188|24.2.217.188]] 22:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
----
In panel 22 (History), what's the theme connecting the years 1935, 1969, and 1991?
[[User:Wwoods|Wwoods]] ([[User talk:Wwoods|talk]]) 15:40, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
:1935 is certainly related to some event that lead to the WWII (a quick look at the Wikipedia page for 1935 show that was the year Hitler rearmed Germany), which paved the way to the Cold War. 1969 was Apollo 11, a high moment of the Cold War, as the USA essentially won the race to the Moon. And 1991 was the year that the USSR dissolved, officially ending the Cold War. [[User:Sir labreck|Sir labreck]] ([[User talk:Sir labreck|talk]]) 18:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
:1935, Harlem race riot; 1969, race riot in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; 1991, Rodney King race riots... 2014-2016??? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.62|173.245.54.62]] 03:33, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
:Although the race riot dates match, I think war related is more likely. 1935 (WWII), 1969 (Vietnam), 1991 (Gulf War) I'm not sure what the common thread is, though, and 'war' is too broad [[Special:Contributions/172.69.250.4|172.69.250.4]] 20:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
::{{w|WWII}} began in '''1939'''. The {{w|Vietnam War}} was 1955-1975 and {{w|Gulf_War_(disambiguation)|Gulf War}} is ambiguous. Just sayin... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:34, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
:28 March 1935: Near Roswell, New Mexico, Robert H. Goddard successfully launched the first gyroscopically-stabilized liquid-fueled rocket. 1969, Apollo 11. 1991, ?. The only somewhat significant events I could find are the 5th Spacelab mission and the launch of the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory. Also, 1991 was the first year with ''less'' than 100 orbital launches since 1962. [[User:Chrullrich|Chrullrich]] ([[User talk:Chrullrich|talk]]) 11:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
----
This explanation is very small for that big comic. I am starting to add the transcript and after that I will do more investigations to that opera. This should be the key to explain all the panels.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

:The answer won't lie in the song, trust me. Pirates of Penzance is probably my favorite comic opera out there. Plus Randall gives that the lie in saying you can use the tune from the elements song (a well-known parody) or even Marry Poppins (similar tune, but not exactly the same). I think each panel is just a reference to the words, I don't think that Randall is actually involving The Pirates of Penzance in any way other than the tune. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.211|173.245.52.211]] 20:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
----
Feynman was also known for being a ladies' man, so the two girls in panel 19 are significant IMHO.
--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.80.117|141.101.80.117]] 13:51, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
----
Needs explanation what does it mean to '''choose a major''', and what '''major''' is in this context. Note every reader is from U.S.A.; different countries have different higher education systems. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 10:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
:True that. 'Graduation' in Brazil means 'Undergraduation' in the US. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105|108.162.254.105]] 03:51, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
----
"Math's just physics unconstrained by precepts of reality" - that isn't a binary tree, its a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifurcation_diagram bifurcation diagram] from chaos theory. And, sorry, it has nothing to do with the Banach–Tarski paradox - that's just mindless name-dropping.
[[User:Davidbak|Davidbak]] ([[User talk:Davidbak|talk]]) 20:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
:Are you sure it is not just an illustration of Banach-Tarski, arguably the most famous example where mathematical reality and (physical) intuition diverge? Why would the verse be illustrated by a bifurcation diagram (which I think, and I might be a bit ignorant here, is a concept pretty much only found in the "applied side" of mathematics, which ''is'' constrained by precepts of reality)? And even if it were a bifurcation diagram, why would the mass of the balls change? (again, I am perhaps showcasing my ignorance; if so, please be gentle) Finally, i would deem the bifurcation explanation a bit too obscure to be the real deal - a panel which is only understood by somewhat specialized mathematicians seems strange to me, especially given that all other frames contain understandable references. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.183|108.162.229.183]] 13:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRexBMPeRTo[[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 18:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
:That is distinctly a bifurcation diagram. Banach Tarski doesn't factor into this at all. Disagree-P 15:39, 20 Nov, 2020

Panel 30: possibly iambic septameter[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.154|141.101.104.154]]

---
I think that the reason for not getting hugs in panel 16 is more to do with the fact that as a virus researcher you would be aware of how easy it is to get a virus/disease and so you would keep away from people and be worried about hugs because of that. (Sorry if I've done something wrong this is my first comment!) [[User:Yxquillio|Yxquillio]] ([[User talk:Yxquillio|talk]]) 08:24, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Another song I guess could provide a good match is "Can You Stop the Calvary?" by Jona Lewie (or "Where's the Modding API" if you're a YOGSCAST fan like me. :)) --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 11:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

"End of the first verse where Cueball tells his academic advisor that he is undecided as every major's terrible. He even throws away his study guide." Are you sure it's not a course catalog? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.59|108.162.212.59]] 10:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I think I should add that Pratchett used that quote to prove that geography was not a boring science, as it is physics, which is exciting, with some trees on it. Just a thought.[[User:MrBookBoy|MrBookBoy]] ([[User talk:MrBookBoy|talk]]) 01:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Hey, the cs parens are missing a close paren. Like literally. Lol. [[User:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)]] ([[User talk:Sarah the Pie(yes, the food)|talk]]) 15:00, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
----
It should be noted that in panel 35, they're referring to "Sophie's Choice." A movie in which the protagonist has to decide which of her two children to save, and which one to kill.
--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.245|108.162.245.245]] 16:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Is "Undecided" related to the alignment chart? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.228|172.71.154.228]] 22:58, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Panel 31. While epidemiology may well involve the study of causes and trends and whatnot, so does history. Epidemiology is the study of diseases.

The thing for panel 14 is wrong. You can't use that argument to argue for the existence of a greatest possible vacuum cleaner or greatest possible pizza because those things imply limitations like limited size, limited age, able to be broken (for the pizza), etc. If it didn't have these or any limitations it wouldn't be a vacuum cleaner/pizza; it would just be God. "basically, if your pizza gets infinitely great it will turn into God" - [https://www.youtube.com/@redeemedzoomer6053 Redeemed Zoomer] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.130|172.70.211.130]] 03:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

:I agree. Someone attempted to succinctly describe Guanilo's "On Behalf of the Fool" but I don't think it's possible to make it short enough for this page. I'm just going to edit it down to 'Anselm's argument doesn't work' and let anyone curious click the link.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.118|172.68.35.118]] 05:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Also, wild thing I learned recently: There's a Sullivan Appreciation Society, and there's a Gilbert and Sullivan Appreciation Society, and they have beef with each other.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.118|172.68.35.118]] 05:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

----

“Economists often claim that economics is a science like any other; however, as the predictive powers of all economic theories are exceedingly weak compared to those of any science, this is disputed by those outside the field at times.”

That is accidentally hilariously ignorant even to a layman with only a passing interest in economics, like me. Have you ever compared ‘the predictive powers of all economic theories’ with those of psychology and sociology?
Moreover, within a few minutes I can find plenty of examples of economic theories whose ‘predictive powers’ are very clearly NOT ‘exceedingly weak’: from demand curves nearly always slope downwards, through the relation between interest rates and inflation†, to the gravity model of trade.

†Well except for Erdogan, it was not very clear to him. At first he had remained unconvinced that it is a terrible idea to combat inflation by lowering nominal interest rates instead of raising them; this had the expected results.

It is as if I were to claim that meteorology is not a science because meteorologists cannot predict the weather a few months ahead.

Note, I am not writing this to defend economics or something; I am perfectly willing to admit that the field of economics has some problems like it being too easy to get away with poor data and bad methodologies† or a vulnerability to fads. However, that is also the case for the other social sciences; but for some reason, unlike with economics, the internet is not filled with people attacking them with arguments so awful they only prove their ignorance†† about the subject.

†Something of which you can even find many economist complaining about.

††I had even once encountered somebody attacking ‘economists’ who was under the mistaken belief that ‘economists’ in general were Lafferists. However, as real professional economists virtually unanimously agree that Laffers claim that ‘tax cuts pay for themselves (under current US tax rates)’ is complete nonsense (https://kentclarkcenter.org/surveys/tax-reform-2/); that would be as I were to state that ‘NASA believes in geocentrism, look how bad mainstream astronomy is’.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.58|141.101.76.58]] 19:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

2159: Comments

2019-06-06T21:22:15Z

141.101.76.58: Removed incomplete tag (info listed as missing has been added).

{{comic
| number = 2159
| date = June 5, 2019
| title = Comments
| image = comments.png
| titletext = NPR encourages you to add comments to their stories using the page inspector in your browser's developer tools. Note: Your comments are visible only to you, and will be lost when you refresh the page.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic represents a news article that shows how easy it is to dominate the comment section of an article by creating shill comments to support any desired narrative of the community's opinion. The joke here is that this is precisely what has occurred for this article. The top five comments are assorted ways of affirming the article's text. However, the final commenter reveals that the article itself is cherry picking from a handful of random comments to support its arbitrary narrative of internet outrage.

The link in one of the comments is to [[1019: First Post]], which also refers to manipulating comments to change public opinion of a topic. It specifically mentions «creating an impression of peer consensus», a line which is near-quoted in the first comment included in this comic.

Another comment references an "NPR" decision to remove comments in 2016. This refers to a decision by [https://www.npr.org/sections/publiceditor/2016/08/17/489516952/npr-website-to-get-rid-of-comments?t=1559838474662 National Public Radio].

The last of the comments may be from the user "Mary" who in the NPR article was explicitly cited to have said that the comments have been too violent. But it is unclear how this is possible given that this article claims to have been published after the comments having been turned off.

The title text refers to the ability to change webpages using in-browser tools, like "Inspect Element," to change the HTML of a page, and thus the contents of it. However, because all of the changes to the HTML are temporary and only on the machine they were made on, anyone else loading the page will not see them, and refreshing the page causes the changes to be replaced with the real content. This would mean that no other users would be able to see the comments, and news sources could not use them to influence public opinion.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
:[Single panel comic depicting a screenshot of an Internet article, showing the article title, lines of wavy characters representing the article text, and several comments from readers of the article with their profile pictures.]

:Backlash: Internet users are ''outraged'' over news stories using a handful of random comments to support arbitrary narratives!

:[Close-up of Megan:]
::I can't believe how easy it is to create an impression of peer consensus.

:[Close-up of Hairy:]
::This dynamic is so easily manipulated and it freaks me out. <u>xkcd.com/1019</u>

:[Full picture of Hairbun:]
::Everytime I share something and a friend responds "Haha, did you see the top comments..." it just reminds me how influential these things are in shaping the impressions of even relatively internet-savvy readers.

:[Close-up of Cueball on a black background:]
::NPR got rid of comments in 2016 when they realized they all came from a handful of visitors posting hundreds of times a month.

:[Full picture of two guys, Cueball and Hairy:]
::Eventually social norms will adapt to this stuff, but it needs to hurry up.

:[Close-up of Ponytail:]
::I have nine followers and created my account last month; how am I being quoted in this news article??

==Trivia==
One of the comments to the article references an earlier xkcd comic [[1019:_First_Post|1019: First Post]], which compares the cost of buying election ads on news sites versus paying college student to wait for news articles and submit the first comments to every news article.

{{comic discussion}}

2159: Comments

2019-06-05T16:48:56Z

141.101.76.58:

658: Orbitals

2018-10-24T18:07:21Z

141.101.76.58: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 658
| date = November 4, 2009
| title = Orbitals
| image = orbitals.png
| titletext = Except the people filtering in late are the partiers, so you end up with drunken makeouts in the living room and the next roommate to return home has to sleep in the hall lounge orbital.
}}

==Explanation==
When determining where to place electrons in an atoms, three rules are generally used: the {{w|Pauli exclusion principle}}, the {{w|Aufbau principle}}, and {{w|Hund's rule}}. The Pauli exclusion principle, from which the pun is derived, states that no two electrons (or indeed any {{w|fermion}}) can occupy the same atomic state. Therefore, any electron orbital is limited to two electrons: one with a ½ spin, and the other with a −½ spin. The Aufbau principle states that lower energy orbitals are occupied previous to high energy orbitals. Hund's rule states that electrons will try to fill orbitals individually, and only pair up when every orbital has a lone electron in it.

In the comic, electrons are being equated to people, and rooms (or couches) are equated to orbitals. The reverse of Hund's rule is then followed: people will try to pair up in a room first, and only when all the couples have done so will rooms be allocated to single people. The Pauli exclusion principle here means that only two people can occupy a room at a time (should those people be romantically involved). The Aufbau principle therefore means that more restful rooms are filled previous to less restful rooms.

The title text jokes about drunken party-goers, who ignore the Pauli principle perhaps out of inebriation. They then end up partying and sleeping together with many people in the living room, leaving the roommate stuck in the third desirable location, the hall lounge.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is holding up a pointer in front of a diagram of a dorm apartment. On the diagram, there are two connected pairs of dots in each bedroom, and one dot on the couch.]
:Cueball: Thus, once all the dorm bedrooms are occupied by romantic pairs, additional roommates are forced into less restful "living room couch" orbitals.
:The Pauli Sexclusion Principle

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Logic]]
[[Category:Sex]]
[[Category:Puns]]

Talk:521: 2008 Christmas Special

2018-10-15T11:13:31Z

141.101.76.58:

Santa actually really is Muslim. Saint Nicholas was from Turkey, although his remains have been somewhere in Italy for the past millennium.{{unsigned ip|121.222.232.156}}
: Yeah, right. Living in what was later to be Turkey makes him a muslim. Islam was not even invented yet. [[User:Undee|Undee]] ([[User talk:Undee|talk]]) 11:44, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
:: Oh snap! xD --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 17:03, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
::: Yeah, right. How could anyone doubt that St. Nicholas and Santa Clause are in fact the same person? I mean, they have similar names, outfits and skin colours. Furthermore both aggressively promote annual shopping frenzies in the richest countries and have advertising partnerships with Coca Cola(r).
Of course you have to explain how St Nick who died in 343 CE could have been following a religion whose founder was born in 570 CE. But you knew that. I also think we can do somewhat better than "somewhere in Italy". His tomb is at Basilica di San Nicola in Bari, Italy. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.11}}

And also, equating Santa with St Nicholas is problematic at best. Santa came about as an amalgamation of many different figures from folklore, so even if St Nick were Muslim, at best you could call Santa part-Muslim.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.171|108.162.216.171]] 18:31, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Since in muslim view Islam was not 'invented' but reintroduced, Adam and Eve were muslims, as are all newborns. They only stop being by accepting (a.k.a. growing up in)
another faith. So yes, Santa might be a muslim (we don't see him running around with crucifixes as we'd expect from St. Nicholas). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.212|162.158.90.212]]

I always thought Black Hat was talking to Danish. The hair's longer and it makes a modicum more sense that way (at least to me) Anonymous 03:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC) {{unsigned ip|173.245.54.91}}
:I see what you are saying (although I couldn't comment on whether the hair is longer) but the question sounds like something Megan would ask. Danish would have built the laser chainsaw. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.223|108.162.219.223]] 19:20, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
::True... Anonymous 20:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
:I don't see Black Hat in any of the panels... [[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.83|173.245.55.83]] 14:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
::He is at the bottom line, first panel from left. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:48, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Just checked this image for any data in the black frames (like in [[SOPA]]). There is nothing; all pixels read #000000. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.53|108.162.216.53]] 20:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm don't think "sublimate" means vaporize... And neither would vaporize fit with the rest the story... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.208|141.101.89.208]] 14:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Sublimation is a specific type of vaporization. I don't think the exact nature of the board's destruction is important to the comic.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.171|108.162.216.171]] 18:31, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Of all the black panels, i'm most curious about the contents of number 32. It would have made more sense if panel 31 read something like "From all of us to all of you, we wish you..."[[User:Mumiemonstret|Mumiemonstret]] ([[User talk:Mumiemonstret|talk]]) 09:37, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Clones (cloned raptors) vs droids (cyborgs), and then victorious clones turning against their masters... Well, this raptors seem to be more independent then altered clones of Jango Fett but may be lightsabers aren't the only SW quote here.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.92.202|141.101.92.202]] 16:53, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I changed "self-conscious" in the explanations for panel 13 and the title text to "self-aware". The former is generally understood to mean something along the lines of "nervous, especially in social situations" which doesn't describe the behavior of computers trying to wipe out humanity. {{unsigned ip|108.162.214.77}}

I feel like there should be some sort of way to view them probably via Easter egg [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.154|141.101.104.154]]

"Import skynet" may be a reference to Lorenz (or referenced in Lorenz), where the computer automatically types it.
[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.108|199.27.128.108]] 14:06, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Is "we apologize for the inconvenience" really trying to reference to Hitchhiker's Guide? The quote certainly appears in it, but it's a pretty common statement. [[User:RamenChef|RamenChef]] ([[User talk:RamenChef|talk]]) 18:08, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
:There are many guesses like this here but it says "possibly a reference". Nevertheless I'm sure it's easy to find hundreds of other possibilities...--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:13, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

1526: Placebo Blocker

2018-10-11T09:49:59Z

141.101.76.58: /* Explanation */ Removed the punchline from opening paragraph to improve the flow of text. The same information is repeated - and expanded upon - later on anyway.

{{comic
| number = 1526
| date = May 18, 2015
| title = Placebo Blocker
| image = placebo blocker.png
| titletext = They work even better if you take them with our experimental placebo booster, which I keep in the same bottle.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a joke about the difficulty of testing a drug that is supposed to block the placebo effect.

A placebo experiment is used for testing a drug candidate. It has two groups: one that gets a real drug candidate, and one that gets a fake. The placebo effect describes the observation that the group that gets the fake often show signs of having received a working drug - though commonly weaker than in the group that gets an effective real drug.

[[Cueball]] states to [[Hairbun]], with a citation from the real world, that his team created a Placebo Blocker, a drug designed to prevent the placebo effect. Cueball begins to design a test for this new drug. Following typical experimental design, patients would be split into two groups: a control group, and the group that receives the treatment.

Cueball knows that the treatment given to the control group is supposed to be designed so that it is not influenced by the variable trying to be isolated. As the placebo effect ''is'' the effect under investigation, a placebo can not be used as a control treatment as a comparison with a placebo blocker. Cueball tries to design around this. In his test, both groups would receive a placebo as a treatment for an unspecified condition (the ''Treatment Placebo''); in addition the test group would receive the Placebo Blocker drug, while the control group would get a placebo pill instead (the ''Placebo-Blocker Placebo''). If this works as expected, the ''Treatment Placebo'' would be blocked by the ''Placebo Blocker'' in the test group, while in the control group, the ''Placebo-Blocker Placebo'' may have a placebo effect in blocking the placebo effect of the ''Treatment Placebo'', and the difference between these effects can be measured to test the effectiveness of the ''Placebo Blocker''.

Cueball and Hairbun think about this trial until they both develop headache from frustration. Cueball then kindly offers Hairbun a sugar pill. While this might have helped cure the headache via the placebo effect had he told her it was a headache treatment, by revealing the pill as merely a sugar pill, it may reduce the effect (though it has been shown that placebos tend to work even if the subject is aware that they are placebos).

In the title text, Cueball mentions that his sugar pills against headache works even better together with the new experimental placebo ''boosters''. Incidentally, he indicates that he keeps those in the same bottle with his sugar pills. Assuming someone believes placebo ''boosters'' are in the jar this would allow them to take the sugar pills and receive a greater placebo effect, as the placebo effect is based upon faith in the treatment, regardless of whether there are placebo ''boosters'' in the jar.

It is possible but unlikely that:
* Cueball's sugar pills are, in fact, the Placebo Blockers themselves and that, seeing Hairbun has a headache, Cueball is inspired to somehow use the opportunity as an experiment to test the Blockers
* Cueball is suggesting Hairbun take a "placebo booster" which is really a "placebo blocker", thus testing the blocker he mentioned earlier in the comic.

Questionable neuroscience research is also discussed in [[1453: fMRI]].

===Placebos===
The {{w|placebo}} effect refers to the phenomenon in which patients given an inactive treatment such as a sugar pill can still show improvement relative to an untreated patient. The placebo effect is thus very important to consider when testing new drugs, since even ineffective drugs can have a positive effect on the patients due to the placebo effect. Modern drug experiments are hence conducted as {{w|Blind experiment#Double-blind trials|double-blind trials}}, where the patients are randomly given either the treatment or a placebo without either they or the administering doctors knowing who receives the new drug and who received the placebo pill. (It is important that the doctor does not know, as if they did, it may affect the way they interact with the patient.)

Generally the patients need to believe that they are receiving an active treatment, but one [http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0015591 study] showed that the effect can occur even if the patients are told that they are receiving a placebo pill. The key factor seems to be that the patients must believe that a positive effect will occur. For example, (1) patients experience a greater effect if they believe that the treatment is expensive and (2) patients who know that they have not been given an active treatment will experience the effect if they are told that placebos can have a positive effect through the power of the mind. Furthermore, the placebo can increase the effectiveness of treatments which ''seem'' larger (this is why over-the-counter pain medication is often administered as two half-doses rather than just one full dose).

Several reasons for the placebo effect have been proposed, from study artifacts - such as under-reporting of negative outcomes by patients who think they are being treated, to neurological explanations for how mental state can translate into physical outcomes.

Placebo-blockers do actually already exist. A side-effect of the opiate antagonist {{w|Naloxone}} is that it [http://healthland.time.com/2009/08/26/a-neurological-explanation-for-the-placebo-effect/ blocks the placebo effect].

===Mechanisms of the placebo effect===
The placebo effect is one of the greatest mysteries in modern medicine. It is typically found that the placebo effect is an effective treatment in itself in addition to the effectiveness of drugs and other treatments, and it has been found to cause small improvements to cancer outcomes. In other cases such as pain relief, the placebo effect is claimed to be comparable with the effectiveness of the drug itself - but this is a misunderstanding: this is not evidence of placebo working, but of the drug *not working*.

The comic refers to the recent study by Kathryn T. Hall, Joseph Loscalzo, and Ted J. Kaptchuk. (2015) ''[https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.MOLMED.2015.02.009 Genetics and the placebo effect: the placebome.]'' Trends in Mol Medicine. Volume 21, Issue 5, May 2015, Pages 285–294 - however, bear in mind that one has to treat studies very carefully ''[https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ted-kaptchuk-versus-placebo-effects-again/ Kaptchuk vs Placebo]''

It is possible to test the placebo blocker using three groups: a test group who receive a placebo blocker, a control group who receive a placebo, and a second control group who receive no treatment whatsoever, as a lack of treatment is the variable that an actual placebo is designed to control for. Still it might be hard to determine if the pills are having a negative effect or blocking the placebo effect, so multiple trials with multiple illnesses may have to be carried out.

==Transcript==
:[Hairbun is standing in front of Cueball who does all the talking. Below them is a footnote.]
:Cueball: Some researchers* are starting to figure out the mechanism behind the placebo effect.
:Cueball: We've used their work to create a new drug: A ''placebo effect blocker''.
:Footnote: * Hall et al, DOI: 10.1016/J.MOLMED.2015.02.009

:[Zoom in on Cueball who now holds his arms out.]
:Cueball: Now we just need to run a trial! We'll get two groups, give them both placebos, then give one the ''real'' placebo blocker, and the other a...
:Cueball: ...wait.

:[Hairbun holds her chin, while Cueball just stand there for a beat panel.]

:[Hairbun looks again at Cueball who begins to take the lid off of a medicine bottle.]
:Hairbun: ...My head hurts.
:Cueball: Mine too.
:Cueball: Here, want a sugar pill?

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Science]]

Talk:2056: Horror Movies

2018-10-09T10:47:48Z

141.101.76.58: https://testtubegames.com/velocityraptor.html

Horror is about my least favorite genre of film. Westerns rank around the same. I find both pretty boring, though there are some suspense films, when done right, that I do like. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 17:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
:I agree about horror but the Western {{w|A Fistful of Dollars}} and some more by {{w|Sergio Leone}} are on my personal top movie list. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
::Actually, I can enjoy almost any genre if its a humorous spoof of the genre. I love Blazing Saddles, for example. And there are rare examples in genres that can appeal to outsiders. I may have to give Sergio Leone's movies a try. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 18:13, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
:::Oh, from the {{w|Dollars Trilogy}} you should start with the third, running three hours and still the best. And for comedy horror this is a widely unknown great one: {{w|Little Shop of Horrors (film)}}. Check the cast. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:00, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Early XKCD issues frequently referenced Randall's fear of velociraptors. There hasn't been a reference to this fear in many years though. Did Randall forget this trope? Is he no longer scared of dinosaurs? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.112|108.162.216.112]] 19:55, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
: It could be he hasn't encountered a velociraptor recently and has therefore lost his fear. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 21:04, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
: It could also be he has encountered a velociraptor recently but she was friendly and assured him humans are not among her prey list and she just eats evil T-rex professors who screw around with the speed of light. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.58|141.101.76.58]] 10:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I understand the idea: I don't care about horrors, but I like fantasy and sci-fi movies and was never stopped by someone classifying some fantasy/sci-fi movie as horror ... like in case of Dracula, Frankenstein, The Exorcist ... or Underworld, Constantine, Alien ... wait, is Alien classified as horror or not? -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:34, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

:Alien is quite surely a horror movie, I would say. Aliens (=the second movie) sets a different tone and includes elements of an action movie. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.34|172.68.110.34]] 06:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

If we take it as reverse analogy, the title text hints he didn't liked/watched the part where Jeff tried to convince the executives to build the park in the original movie, as it was observed as a Horror part for him. --[[User:Nachuo|Nachuo]] ([[User talk:Nachuo|talk]]) 06:41, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk:2046: Trum-

2018-09-15T05:46:11Z

141.101.76.58:

This is not that weird. If names were random then it would be a 1 in 26^4 = 456976 chance of a particular president matching another for the first 4, but this is a "Birthday Problem" with 44 presidents, so the probability of any two presidents sharing the first 4 characters is 1-(456976!/(456976^44 (456976 - 44)!)), which wolfram alpha is giving as 0.206% {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.185}}
:Yes, but we already "fulfilled our obligation" after the sixth president :) [[User:Zachweix|Zachweix]] ([[User talk:Zachweix|talk]]) 15:59, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
:That would be the lower boundary, because you assume all letters are equally likely to occur. Some n-grams will have a higher probability than others. E.g. it is far less likely for the second letter to be a Q than to be a U,so a better estimate would involve Markov chains including the probability of all letters on a certain position, given the previous letters etc.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.58|141.101.76.58]] 05:46, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
::Q doesn't work because he's related to his father John Adams. The criteria that they be totally unrelated is to restore it to the realm of pure chance. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 17:24, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
An approximation to the correct probability would be to do 44^2/(2 x 26^4) which would give about 0.2% chance of this happening. So fairly weird, but as the comic suggests, many things about this presidency are weirder than 0.2%. {{unsigned ip|162.158.155.194}}
:I love that we are now having a mathematical discussion about how weird things are in the presidency. [[User:Zachweix|Zachweix]] ([[User talk:Zachweix|talk]]) 15:58, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Should we mention Andrew Johnson and LBJ, perhaps in a "Trivia" section? Obviously Johnson is a very common surname, but they're still unrelated presidents that share the first (and only) 7 characters of their last name. (Are there other pairs of presidents that share at least the 3 first letters of their surnames besides AJ/LBJ and HST/DJT?)
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.62.160|172.69.62.160]] 16:25, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
:They ARE related, distantly. https://www.geni.com/path/Lyndon-B-Johnson-36th-President-of-the-United-States+is+related+to+Andrew-Johnson-17th-President-of-the-USA?from=6000000002045454764&to=361204095530004567 [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 19:18, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
::I think 28 degrees of separation is distant enough to consider them unrelated. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 20:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

...And, upon reflection, I just realized Harding shares the first 3 letters with the Presidents Harrison, so that's one(?) more example. {{unsigned ip|162.158.186.246}}

So we discount Presidents Adams, Bush, Cleveland, Harrison and Rosevelt as being related, or being the same person.
We have the following common starts: Bu (3 names), Cl, Ha (3 names), Ta, Har, Trum and Johnson. Also A, B, C, F, G, H, J, M, P, R, T and W. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.241|162.158.154.241]] 16:49, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

If you count Buren as opposed to Van Buren then you have 4 starting Bu and 2 starting Bur [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.146|162.158.155.146]] 16:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Tyler and Taylor is weirdly close, in a "look elsewhere effect" kind of way. Although the fact that you elected a president whose name means "fart" in British English has got to be weirder. {{unsigned ip|162.158.155.158}}

'''Shouting about Trump'''

I'm really with you... But an explanation has to be done politely. This Wiki focuses on explaining the comic, any personal opinions should be considered carefully. And I admit that I also cannot easily withstand. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:25, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Only 39 unique names for 45 presidencies (44 presidents).
Over a third (14/39) of the names end with the letter N. [[User:Patmiller|Patmiller]] ([[User talk:Patmiller|talk]]) 20:36, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Five-Minute Comics: Part 4

2017-11-11T14:03:42Z

141.101.76.58:

How is this unpublished? Although only through an app, this comic has still been issued for distribution to the public, therefore, by definition, published. {{User:17jiangz1/signature|14:41, 29 December 2015}}
:Thanks for the great explanation (also by but not just by Forrest). I found the link to it from the explanation for [[940]], and though we really lacked this page. As I did not know all the info I just called it unpublished. And then I actually hoped that someone would explain this comic, and you all did, and it is a great work. Especially finding out why it is here etc. Thanks :-) And great that it was saved because some of them are really funny --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 21:06, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I just wanted to add that the [http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=74111 forum post about this comic] notes that this comic was accidentally posted by the site admins for xkcd, then later replaced with the current version of the comic, i.e. [[940: Oversight]]. The direct image URL for this comic now points to [https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/five_minute_comics_part_4.png this image]. Thus, the comic was not published through the unofficial xkcd app or anything like that; the more likely scenario is that the app downloaded the comic when it became available and cached it, so when the comic was replaced with [[940: Oversight]], the app did not update it. 03:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Isn't the joke in the first comic that one of the players is holding a tennis racquet and the other a baseball bat? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.66.227|141.101.66.227]] 08:07, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Concerning the Muezzin calling for "submission" instead of prayer - has anyone noticed yet that the arabic word for "submission" is "Islam"? Seems more deliberate than accidental to me.
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.58|141.101.76.58]] 14:03, 11 November 2017 (UTC)