trivia last time see this edit in which who edits little else besides this article this section claims that there is consensus on this talk page for this horrible selection of trivia the trivia here is nothing but insignificant mentions and some other tripe including an originally researched claim that it's close to some location in a th century novel just to indicate the level of encyclopedic discourse and what can only be described as a combination of trivia and spam in the link to the scp foundation web site whatever it is i mean i've seen some trivia in my time but this beats almost all of them i'll let it stand so you can see how trivial it is even though it totally rubs me the wrong way so here's what i propose we take care of this once and for all in the above linked diff kothog claims consensuswell there isn't there's a bit of discussion but nothing like consensus so i invite every interested party including previous participants to settle it names i see on this talk page who have discussed this matter include proposal in agreement with wikipedia practice common sense with wp trivia with wp v and with wikipedia in popular culture content i propose that the trivia section or whatever it's to be called will contain only entries that are rigorously verified with reliable secondary sources as to correctness and relevance just that it is mentioned isn't enough it needs to be established that it matters