User talk:Just Step Sideways/Archive 1

191:, more than just a screenshot is needed for these kinds of statements. You'd need to cite an actual, published (as in, in a newspaper) review or article about the film in which someone makes this observation, or you'd need a quote from Bakshi himself saying that the character either was meant to be based on Sharpton, or that he didn't realize that the character resembled Sharpton when he was making the film but that he found some similarity later on, etc. These are just the rules. It's better to keep things accurate. Our own observations don't mean anything. I wanted to write something about the Miss America character being used as a metaphor for the way blacks have been treated in the United States, but I didn't have any official sources to back it up. It's true, but I can't prove it. ( 1323:- she's still learning the ropes (so am I for that matter, and I've been here over 2 years!). The article needs work, but it is a good start - it gives us a base to work with. I'm sure she plans on working on it some more. I couldn't find the ownership issue being discussed above, but it doesn't appear that Janay meant to claim ownership of the article, she just didn't know that the procedure she used ran counter to our style guidelines. No harm done, I'm sure it won't happen again. By the way, I hope the Princess goes for many more barnstars that I've offered. I look forward to awarding as many of them as she earns. 915:. Sometimes my gut is wrong, of course, and I don't claim to have read every word of the billion different "guidlines" of Knowledge. Perhaps I have occasionally been overzealous, in light of the links you have provided, but note also that this rule is meant to be treated with common sense. Check out. This thing was painful to even look at before. And, as I mentioned, I have done lots of this and you are the very first person to object in any way, so, perhaps a "guidline" supports your view, but I'm not so sure 1790: 31: 96: 561: 409:

established policies regarding notability, point of view, and original research. I would once again ask you to assume good faith and to familiarize yourself with the policies I have mentioned. I know there it seems like there are a million things you need to know to get around here, but these particular policies are the most essential to understand if you want Knowledge to be a positive experience for you. Please remember also that

726:... and I should add: I've restored the red link. I've also deleted the "technical" template you added. It's hard to see how it could be too technical when the article doesn't give any details or specifics at all. I'd like to see those "technical" things added. I've added the "expert" template to call attention to the need for that. 1398:

good faith here. I think we can agree that Princess Janay needs some friendly coaching. I wish I had someone like you to take an interest in my Wiki-wellbeing when I started. She is lucky she ran into you, as there are many who would not be as sympathetic. I'm confident, that between us, we can point her in the right direction.

1314:

If trying to earn barnstars is the motivation for a user to create pages, improve pages, etc., then I'm all for it. Different people are motivated in different ways. Some go for awards, some just let them happen. Sure, barnstars aren't Pulitzers or Nobel prizes, but they're symbols of appreciation

987:

The end of your previous message reads :" If it's not, it needs to get more widely explained for the benefit of those who don't know about it (if such persons really exist)." I have been explaining to you that I really had never heard of this before, but you keep insinuating that I'm not telling the

835:

I'm really surprised to find someone unaware of this; it's so much a part of the whole spirit of Knowledge. It is absolutely wrong to say that that "requested article" page is the only place to request an article. It is likely not to be seen by experts who could create the article. Such an expert

685:

I'm sorry bad use of the language here. By "presentation" I meant the fact someone I realise now was not you put the information in the article as if it was a discussion page (using a username etc...). So I, thinking he just was not aware of the way wikipedia works, placed it in the discussion area.

1219:

Trying to earn a barnstar is a very good reason to write an article. Yes, I am looking into becoming an admin, and I will become one if I decide to, which I did.I did not need to leave an edit summary, because I wrote the article, which is plain to see WITHOUT an edit summary. Check the history, if

1202:

Trying to earn a barnstar? That is not a reason to create an article. The article was a dictionary definition type article on a subject already covered by another page here and at Wiktionary, so I redirected it to the relevant page. I noted all that in my edit summary, which is something you should

1397:

everything I had contributed to the discussion. :0 And I got reamed over it. :( Hopefully, we can instruct Janay on Wikiquette before she gets herself into a similar situation. Covering the details as you did above isn't rambling, so don't worry about it - it's easy to see we're all acting in

250:

I added a bunch of extra resources. The object was in fact seen from few residents from Homer. Many Kodiak residents did see the object and there was in fact a government response involved. It was a real UFO sighting, there were newspaper articles written about it. Since it was a proven experience

636:

As it turns out, it is my problem. My wireless antenna is going down in flames and not everything I send is being recieved, should be fixed by the weekend, but I don't think I can use Twinkle till then cuz it's been nothiong but trouble this past week. Anyway, Thanks for the help and good luck at

408:

As I have tried to explain, looking at someone's edit history and noticing that they have added material that does not meet Knowledge policy for inclusion does not constitute stalking. Every one of the edits I have made to the pages you mention, including the deletions, were in line with the well

860:

If a red link is within the context of the article, and it is a topic with the potential to eventually be a neutral, verifiable encyclopedia article, then the link should be kept as an invitation for an editor to begin the appropriate article with this title. Such links do not have an expiration

386:

Hello, there. It seems as though you are following me consistently around Knowledge, undoing all my edits, no matter how valid they may be. Perpetual Wake was not originally on YouTube and was present at a film festival. The Kodiak UFO really did happen, the statistics for the Union for the game

934:

The practice of regarding judiciously chosen red links as valuable seems to have been such a fundamental part of Knowledge culture since Knowledge began early in 2001 that I'm surprised by the suggestion that it's not common consensus. If it's not, it needs to get more widely explained for the

1572:

It's your talk page, do whatever you like, but I was much more concerned that you take what I have said to heart when voting at AfD or any other editing here. All the rapid editing you are doing may make your edit count go up fast, but ask yourself, is that more important than the good of the

1252:

I don't agree that one should try to earn barnstars; that's just something that happens. However, the redirect was to a somewhat long disambiguation page that doesn't have any link to an article about cures in the medical sense, and the article was not just a dictionary definition.

1047:

I'm about done going around in circles about this, but I'll just say putting a link back just because I removed it is exactly the type of behavior you have been trying to call me out on, as well as reflecting an assumption of bad faith, that is that any red link de-linked by me

1184:

to find it. I signed up to write that article for an Award, and I wanted him to see that it was written. Also, why did you delete it?????? I am trying to earn a barnstar, and you do not realize how hard it was to write that one! P.S I am not new. I know Knowledge's

251:

with references, it cannot be deleted for notability. I have researched it and found it in recent UFO textbooks for sightings. If you want, sure I can clean up the article but deleting it because the local newspaper reported it is out of the question.

387:

G-Nome are valid, although they could use some work. I am requesting that you cease following me around Knowledge and requesting that all my articles and edits be undone. Should you continue harassing me, I will report it to the administrators for

1006:. This woman did nothing notable outside being on a couple of albums with this band. You can see that I just gone done merging in two other articles related to this band that did not have notability on their own. You need to calm down with this. 1144:

Thanks for reverting that attack, i very much appreciate it. I guess with all the reverting i have been doing it was bound to happen but like thats going to stop me. Keep up the great work and dont let the vandals bring you down. Thanks again

1530:

I don't think you did anything wrong, I was just suggesting that rapid-fire editing and voting should often be followed up with a second look at a later time, especially at AfD, where circumstances often change in the course of debate.

1373:

biting situations. I was bitten, but good too, when I was pretty fresh here, so I know how much it sucks. Constructive criticism, such as I have tried to give, is exactly what new users need, provided it is done in a civil manner.

1758:. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to 1220:

you REALLY want to know what other people have been doing, which frankly I don't. You can talk to The Transhumanist, and ask HIM what happened with the article. By the way, I was talking about one type of cure, medical.--

1319:, and offered to award a barnstar to anyone who did an excellent job creating it, and Princess Janay stepped up to accept that challenge. She's fairly new at this Knowledge thing (having started in January), so please 1025:

I never thought you were not telling the truth. What I was suggesting is that there may or may not be others who were, and still are, unaware that red links are valued when they link to articles that ought to exists.

214:

Thanks, that is what I am looking for, to protect me and my works vs. Filipino editors who vandalize, using in the name of Wiki, selected or tailor made parts of rules for their vengeance or ulterior motives. Regards.

1100:

Your "whatever" link links to a page titled "complete bollocks". That would seem to imply I'm being dishonest. Is there some reason for that? Should I take it you don't agree with the "assume good faith" policy?

836:

may be reading an article on a related topic and see the red link that he would never see on the "requested article" page. At any rate, I'm shocked to see your attitude that is so opposed to Knowledge conventions.

524: 527:. However, based on your nomination I don't see a compelling reason to delete rather than merge to one of the obvious target pages, if you feel that the current organization of this content is not ideal. 660:

Hey man I did not remove your info about the scandal. I just put it in the discussion as your presentation made me think you wanted to do so yourself. Im sorry if I caused any inconvenience. Take care.

770:

That is directly contrary to Knowledge policies, if I understand correctly. If there ought to be an article, the link should be there as an invitation to click on it and create the article.

499:

Hey, I think you're right, they are the same person. Well, one down one to go. If you want to make it easy for the admins, you could review the prod and add the prod2 template if you agree.

752:. As for the technical tag, Knowledge is written for a general audience, and I didn't think an average reader would be able to understand the article, the expert tag works fine for me too. 303:

Also, the new links you have added are from blogs and ufo websites, which may be of interest to people reading the article, but are not accepted as reliable secondary sources on Knowledge.

575:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " 1412: 1392:

bold type for emphasis in an MfD once, not knowing it was considered screaming at the top of your lungs. :) If I remember right, I think I even increased the size of the font. : -->

1388:

There's no call for insults, however subtle (like "princess"). It takes some Wikipedians time to realize how important edit summaries are (it did for me). By the way, I used caps

1335:

Well, there's also her utter refusal to do the simple common courtesy of leaving an edit summary, the YELLING IN ALL CAPS WITH LOTS OF UNEEDED PUNCTUATION!!!!!, and general lack of

582:

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

1494:

Hello. Recently, I found you left a message on my talk page. Might I ask you what on earth you are talking about? I don't think I did anything wrong. Maybe I am mistaken. Thanks.

413:

they are not your pages, and anyone is free to edit them. You may report my behavior whenever you like to whomever you like, as I have acted in good faith to improve the project.

1429: 1573:

project? I don't mean to assign motivations to you without really knowing, but I hope you are not just boosting your edit count to look good for the Awards center or

630: 1229: 1559: 1527: 1506: 1292: 1262: 549: 455:

I see you have noticed thee pages. At first I thought they were sisters, but it seems they are the same person. I'm not sure what's going on here. Any ideas? --

1404: 1360: 796:

of redlinks, it's kind of a hobby, and you are the first person who has seen a reason to object. I believe if you want to invite someone to create an article,

1212: 1203:

be doing as well. I see you are already looking in to coaching as an administrator, you will never get there by grade grubbing and not using edit summaries.

646: 1567: 1306: 1276: 1169: 1131: 1092: 1076: 997: 982: 944: 809: 779: 761: 1464: 1448: 1146: 361: 1586: 1540: 583: 422: 298: 239: 1674: 1383: 1015: 695: 508: 493: 479: 436: 312: 1549: 1496: 606: 104: 1720: 1852: 427:

I might add that it is somewhat ironic that you added your comment right under the discussion of the article you keep re-creating against consensus.

1033:

As for the link to the musician, I restored that only because it looked as if the red link may have been deleted merely because it was a red link.

611: 329: 1615: 1598: 1237:

Oh, yes. And, I do remember providing a space for complaining on my talk page, and you didn't put your comment there... please do. Thank you.--

200: 1755: 555: 1659: 1727: 1154: 445: 1160:

Getting a vandal on your userpage is pretty much the equivalent of the anti-vandal barnstar, means you're doing a good job. Keep it up!

1110: 1042: 829:

Good red links help Knowledge — they encourage new contributors in useful directions, and remind us that Knowledge is far from finished.

792:

If you could direct me to a page stating that policy, I would love to see it, although I would also be horrified because I have removed

464: 449: 1484: 745:

because it's a red link. It doesn't do anything, it just sits there being red. When there is an article about it, then its time for a

270: 1523: 1417:

Fair enough - I guess that one of the speedy delete requirements is engaged here. So I didn't need to list it for deletion as I did!

1003: 224: 1744: 1061: 967: 928: 1780: 1329: 617: 1622:

is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-

893: 874: 845: 735: 721: 534: 141: 1246: 1194: 680: 1860: 1838: 1830: 1825: 134: 79: 71: 66: 1315:(artwork to spruce up thank you notes), and they're something you can be proud of. I challenged anyone to create the article 277:

I'm not saying it didn't happen, the Daily Mirror article establishes the verifiability, but it may not meet the standards of

1514: 381: 1704: 401: 341: 1283:

Nonetheless, this page is where this discussion was happening. I noticed it because this page is still on my watchlist.

391:. Now, I will not ask you again to stop this, so I recommend that you forget about me and simply leave my edits alone. - 1774: 289:. The edits I have made to this article were to bring it into line with these two well established Knowledge policies. 851: 347:

Hi Beeblbrox. If an article has been deleted once, and the old content has simply been restored, you can tag it for

1618:, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. 266: 1647: 1633: 1347:

new to Knowledge and already knows all the rules. I agree with you, that she does not, any more than you or I or

282: 108: 1180:

Hello, Beeblbrox. I know that the article "Cure" did not belong to me, but I wrote that down, because I wanted

286: 188: 179: 1700: 1596: 1343:

would be a good idea for the "princess". By the way, if you read the above discussion, she says that she's

1806: 531: 120: 47: 17: 1619: 1399: 1324: 898: 1797: 572: 444: 220: 150: 38: 115: 1851:

i answered your message in my talk page, sorry i don't have twinkle so i can't use Easy talkback --

1739: 1480: 1242: 1225: 1190: 281:

for inclusion into Knowledge. More importantly though, Knowledge is supposed to be written from a

1425: 1288: 1258: 1150: 1139: 1106: 1072: 1038: 978: 940: 889: 870: 841: 775: 731: 717: 709: 597:

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.

528: 245: 1475:

No problem. It just ticked me off when you said the stuff about my wanting to be an Admin. :-)--

1439:

is actually marking it as minor. I'll have to do something about that, Thanks for the heads up!

1067:

I haven't been trying to call you out on anything. I was trying to err on the side of caution.

111:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 1769: 1759: 1181: 540:

I kinda screwed up there, I must be getting too used to Twinkle thinking of everything for me.

376: 356: 148:); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, you can ask me on 1547:

Very well. But if its alright with you, I'm going to remove the warning (It looks bad on me).

903:

You are adding new remarks so fast I can't get a word in on my own talk page. Firstly, please

1716: 1670: 1582: 1536: 1460: 1444: 1379: 1356: 1302: 1272: 1208: 1165: 1127: 1088: 1057: 1011: 993: 963: 951: 924: 805: 757: 691: 676: 642: 545: 504: 475: 432: 418: 337: 308: 294: 216: 196: 593:

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

1856: 1688: 1119: 397: 278: 262: 254: 124: 671:

I'm so confused by that I don't know what to say. I don't recall making any presentation.

367:

In the future, if there was a consensus issue, add "(2nd nomination)" to the heading, eg.

8: 1735: 1655: 1476: 1470: 1238: 1221: 1186: 665: 621: 568: 489: 460: 155: 919:

does. You make an interesting point, however, and I will keep it in mind in the future.

1749: 1421: 1284: 1254: 1102: 1068: 1034: 974: 936: 885: 866: 837: 820: 771: 727: 713: 655: 1455:

I think I fixed it, I just have to find another article that qualifies as a speedy...

1764: 1726: 1696: 372: 352: 1846: 1680: 701: 209: 192: 1336: 1081: 602: 392: 332:

and it seems there has already been an AfD and it was deleted, what do I do now?

258: 181: 1805:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

1712: 1666: 1651: 1578: 1532: 1456: 1440: 1375: 1366: 1352: 1320: 1298: 1268: 1204: 1161: 1123: 1084: 1053: 1007: 989: 959: 920: 801: 753: 687: 672: 662: 638: 541: 500: 485: 471: 456: 428: 414: 333: 304: 290: 163: 1640: 1626: 1608: 1574: 1489: 1175: 955: 916: 912: 904: 594: 587: 576: 388: 235: 172: 129: 1692: 797: 348: 320: 1636:. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the 1369:. I left a level 1 notice on her talk page, which is specifically used to 1632:

ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on

1348: 1340: 935:

benefit of those who don't know about it (if such persons really exist).

518: 95: 560: 598: 1711:

uh no, I'm just a guy who sometimes hits the "random article" button.

87: 1365:

I don't mean to ramble on and on here, but it really isn't a case of

742: 702: 231: 167: 89: 1436: 470:

Well, the idea I'm going with right now is that they be deleted.

1420:

One thing - don't add as minor edits, as some people hide them.

571:, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for 369:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Perpetual Wake (2nd nomination)

1118:

It means I'm tired of having this pointless argument with you

907:. I am not "opposed to Knowledge conventions" although I am a 523:

If you want to create a new AFD discussion, it needs to be at

1733:

Since you restored the article, I added useful tags to it. -

1316: 793: 749: 746: 1646:

template back to the article, but feel free to list it at

1413:

Human rights in the People's Republic of China/Temporary

230:

Ahaha what? sorry Beebl, I don't think it worked. --

584:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Beyond the Red Line

1339:, i.e. the title of this section. A quick read of 1267:I don't remember asking you to adopt me Michael. 1002:OK now your just being silly. deserves to be 525:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Cabot House 2 884:because they are red links is destructive. 1477:Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. 1239:Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. 1222:Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. 1187:Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. 620:for you, since apparently Twinkle choked. 1524:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Tigerstar 162:on this page and ask your question here. 1122:what it means all right.. Good day sir. 861:date, beyond which they must be "fixed". 612:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Zatopeks 94: 708:Why did you get rid of the red link in 14: 1803:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1526:. I think the rest is explained in my 616:Just letting you know that I finished 484:Sure. I hope they don't go to afd. -- 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 556:AfD nomination of Beyond the Red Line 285:and not include unverified claims or 1784: 25: 328:Just started my first AfD nom, for 23: 1528:original remark on your talk page. 1297:Eh, you have a point, never mind. 559: 24: 1871: 852:Knowledge:Manual of Style (links) 144:on talk pages using four tildes ( 1788: 1522:I was referring to your vote at 29: 1754:Thank you for your comments on 1648:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 1634:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 880:In short: removal of red links 686:Anyway everything is fine now. 175:) • 00:40, August 3, 2007 (UTC) 13: 1: 437:23:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC) 423:23:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC) 402:19:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC) 382:23:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC) 362:22:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC) 342:22:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC) 313:02:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC) 299:02:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC) 271:01:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC) 240:14:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC) 225:06:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC) 201:02:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC) 1861:01:01, 17 January 2017 (UTC) 18:User talk:Just Step Sideways 7: 590:with four tildes (~~~~). 135:New contributors' help page 10: 1876: 1781:19:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC) 1745:17:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC) 1721:19:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC) 681:17:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC) 647:18:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC) 631:04:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC) 607:14:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC) 550:02:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC) 535:02:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC) 509:20:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC) 494:04:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC) 480:19:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC) 465:09:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC) 1705:22:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC) 1675:05:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC) 1660:23:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 1587:22:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 1568:19:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 1541:04:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 1515:22:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC) 1485:21:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 1465:18:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 1449:18:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 1430:17:58, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 1405:14:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 1384:21:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1361:20:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1330:19:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1307:19:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1293:19:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1277:19:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1263:18:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1247:18:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1230:18:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1213:18:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1195:18:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1170:21:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1155:02:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1132:22:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC) 1111:20:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC) 1093:17:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC) 1077:17:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC) 1062:01:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC) 1043:01:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC) 1016:23:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 998:22:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 983:17:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 968:05:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 945:05:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 929:04:47, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 894:04:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 875:04:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 846:04:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 810:04:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 780:04:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 762:03:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC) 736:14:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC) 722:14:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC) 696:11:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC) 973:Why would you say that? 567:An editor has nominated 1393::) Then I striked out 1182:User: The Transhumanist 800:is the place to do it. 710:imputation (statistics) 954:just don't believe in 586:and please be sure to 564: 125:an editing cheat sheet 103:Hello, Beeblbrox, and 100: 1801:of past discussions. 595:articles for deletion 577:What Knowledge is not 563: 411:no one owns Knowledge 283:neutral point of view 105:welcome to Knowledge! 98: 42:of past discussions. 1604:I have removed the 823:. Here's a quote: 569:Beyond the Red Line 156:Knowledge:Questions 821:Knowledge:Red link 588:sign your comments 565: 529:Christopher Parham 121:How to edit a page 109:your contributions 101: 1844: 1843: 1813: 1812: 1807:current talk page 1707: 1691:comment added by 1620:Proposed deletion 1401:The Transhumanist 1326:The Transhumanist 913:going with my gut 905:assume good faith 628: 404: 379: 359: 287:original research 273: 257:comment added by 176: 85: 84: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 1867: 1822: 1815: 1814: 1792: 1791: 1785: 1777: 1772: 1767: 1743: 1686: 1685:r u a croomie? 1645: 1639: 1631: 1625: 1613: 1607: 1577:or something... 1566: 1564: 1554: 1513: 1511: 1501: 1341:the five pillars 917:common consensus 626: 624: 623:Ten Pound Hammer 395: 377: 370: 357: 327: 252: 217:Florentino floro 170: 161: 153: 147: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 1875: 1874: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1849: 1818: 1789: 1775: 1770: 1765: 1752: 1742: 1736:CobaltBlueTony™ 1734: 1731: 1683: 1643: 1637: 1629: 1623: 1611: 1605: 1602: 1560: 1550: 1548: 1507: 1497: 1495: 1492: 1473: 1415: 1178: 1142: 1140:Thanks for that 901: 706: 658: 622: 614: 558: 521: 453: 368: 349:speedy deletion 325: 323: 248: 246:Kodiak UFO Talk 212: 185: 159: 149: 145: 116:Manual of Style 93: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1873: 1848: 1845: 1842: 1841: 1836: 1833: 1828: 1823: 1811: 1810: 1793: 1760:drop me a line 1751: 1748: 1738: 1730: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1682: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1601: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1544: 1543: 1491: 1488: 1472: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1452: 1451: 1414: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1386: 1351:himself does. 1312: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1216: 1215: 1177: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1141: 1138: 1137: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1052:be a mistake. 1031: 1030: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 950:Well, I guess 948: 947: 900: 899:Hold the phone 897: 878: 877: 864: 863: 862: 833: 832: 830: 827: 817: 816: 815: 814: 813: 812: 785: 784: 783: 782: 765: 764: 741:I removed the 705: 700: 699: 698: 683: 657: 654: 652: 650: 649: 627:and his otters 613: 610: 557: 554: 553: 552: 520: 517: 516: 515: 514: 513: 512: 511: 452: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 365: 364: 330:Perpetual Wake 322: 319: 318: 317: 316: 315: 247: 244: 243: 242: 211: 208: 206: 184: 178: 142:sign your name 138: 137: 132: 127: 118: 107:Thank you for 92: 86: 83: 82: 77: 74: 69: 64: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1872: 1863: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1840: 1837: 1834: 1832: 1829: 1827: 1824: 1821: 1817: 1816: 1808: 1804: 1800: 1799: 1794: 1787: 1786: 1783: 1782: 1779: 1778: 1773: 1768: 1761: 1757: 1747: 1746: 1741: 1737: 1729: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1642: 1635: 1628: 1621: 1617: 1616:Party service 1610: 1600: 1599:Party service 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1565: 1563: 1558: 1555: 1553: 1546: 1545: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1512: 1510: 1505: 1502: 1500: 1487: 1486: 1482: 1478: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1453: 1450: 1446: 1442: 1438: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1418: 1406: 1403: 1402: 1396: 1391: 1387: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1358: 1354: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1328: 1327: 1322: 1318: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1285:Michael Hardy 1282: 1278: 1274: 1270: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1255:Michael Hardy 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1244: 1240: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1218: 1217: 1214: 1210: 1206: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1196: 1192: 1188: 1183: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1147:Roadrunnerz45 1133: 1129: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1103:Michael Hardy 1094: 1090: 1086: 1083: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1069:Michael Hardy 1066: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1045: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1035:Michael Hardy 1029: 1028: 1027: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1001: 1000: 999: 995: 991: 986: 985: 984: 980: 976: 975:Michael Hardy 972: 971: 970: 969: 965: 961: 957: 953: 946: 942: 938: 937:Michael Hardy 933: 932: 931: 930: 926: 922: 918: 914: 910: 906: 896: 895: 891: 887: 886:Michael Hardy 883: 876: 872: 868: 867:Michael Hardy 865: 859: 858: 857: 856: 855: 853: 848: 847: 843: 839: 838:Michael Hardy 831: 828: 826: 825: 824: 822: 811: 807: 803: 799: 795: 791: 790: 789: 788: 787: 786: 781: 777: 773: 772:Michael Hardy 769: 768: 767: 766: 763: 759: 755: 751: 748: 744: 740: 739: 738: 737: 733: 729: 728:Michael Hardy 724: 723: 719: 715: 714:Michael Hardy 711: 704: 697: 693: 689: 684: 682: 678: 674: 670: 669: 668: 667: 664: 653: 648: 644: 640: 635: 634: 633: 632: 625: 619: 609: 608: 604: 600: 596: 591: 589: 585: 580: 578: 574: 570: 562: 551: 547: 543: 539: 538: 537: 536: 533: 530: 526: 510: 506: 502: 498: 497: 495: 491: 487: 483: 482: 481: 477: 473: 469: 468: 467: 466: 462: 458: 451: 447: 438: 434: 430: 426: 425: 424: 420: 416: 412: 407: 406: 405: 403: 400:was added at 399: 394: 390: 389:cyberstalking 384: 383: 380: 374: 363: 360: 354: 350: 346: 345: 344: 343: 339: 335: 331: 314: 310: 306: 302: 301: 300: 296: 292: 288: 284: 280: 276: 275: 274: 272: 268: 264: 260: 256: 241: 237: 233: 229: 228: 227: 226: 222: 218: 207: 204: 202: 198: 194: 190: 183: 182:Simple Savior 177: 174: 169: 165: 164:Happy editing 157: 152: 143: 136: 131: 130:Help contents 128: 126: 122: 119: 117: 114: 113: 112: 110: 106: 97: 91: 81: 78: 75: 73: 70: 68: 65: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 1850: 1819: 1802: 1796: 1763: 1753: 1732: 1684: 1650:. Thanks! 1603: 1561: 1556: 1551: 1508: 1503: 1498: 1493: 1474: 1422:John Smith's 1419: 1416: 1400: 1394: 1389: 1370: 1344: 1325: 1313: 1236: 1179: 1143: 1099: 1049: 1046: 1032: 1024: 949: 911:believer in 908: 902: 881: 879: 854:. I quote: 849: 834: 818: 725: 707: 659: 651: 615: 592: 581: 566: 522: 454: 410: 385: 373:PeterSymonds 366: 353:PeterSymonds 324: 249: 213: 205: 186: 154:, check out 151:my talk page 139: 102: 60: 43: 37: 1795:This is an 1687:—Preceding 1552:archanamiya 1499:archanamiya 1471:No Prob :-) 396:—Preceding 253:—Preceding 193:Ibaranoff24 158:, or place 88:Hello from 36:This is an 1853:DashyGames 1750:RFA Thanks 1321:be patient 656:Charles S. 637:that RfA! 393:DarthBotto 351:. Thanks, 326:{{helpme}} 279:notability 259:DarthBotto 160:{{helpme}} 1839:Archive 5 1831:Archive 3 1826:Archive 2 1820:Archive 1 1728:Dean Karr 1713:Beeblbrox 1667:Beeblbrox 1652:Redfarmer 1614:tag from 1579:Beeblbrox 1533:Beeblbrox 1457:Beeblbrox 1441:Beeblbrox 1395:like this 1376:Beeblbrox 1353:Beeblbrox 1299:Beeblbrox 1269:Beeblbrox 1205:Beeblbrox 1162:Beeblbrox 1124:Beeblbrox 1085:Beeblbrox 1054:Beeblbrox 1008:Beeblbrox 990:Beeblbrox 960:Beeblbrox 921:Beeblbrox 909:very firm 850:Also see 802:Beeblbrox 798:this page 754:Beeblbrox 688:Parisinos 673:Beeblbrox 663:Parisinos 639:Beeblbrox 542:Beeblbrox 501:Beeblbrox 486:Kleinzach 472:Beeblbrox 457:Kleinzach 446:Pin Young 429:Beeblbrox 415:Beeblbrox 334:Beeblbrox 305:Beeblbrox 291:Beeblbrox 189:Knowledge 180:Sharpton/ 80:Archive 5 72:Archive 3 67:Archive 2 61:Archive 1 1847:talkback 1701:contribs 1689:unsigned 1681:croomie? 1597:PROD on 1337:civility 1185:rules.-- 1082:whatever 743:red link 703:Red link 618:this AfD 573:deletion 450:Pin Chen 371:) Best, 267:contribs 255:unsigned 210:Adoption 99:Welcome! 1798:archive 1693:Dlo2012 1437:Twinkle 988:truth. 398:comment 140:Please 39:archive 1756:my RFA 1435:hmmm, 1367:biting 1120:that's 956:WP:AGF 882:merely 579:"). 532:(talk) 1766:Shark 1665:oops 1371:avoid 1349:Jimbo 1176:DUH!! 599:BJBot 16:< 1857:talk 1771:face 1762:. -- 1740:talk 1717:talk 1697:talk 1671:talk 1656:talk 1641:prod 1627:prod 1609:prod 1583:talk 1562:talk 1537:talk 1509:talk 1481:talk 1461:talk 1445:talk 1426:talk 1380:talk 1357:talk 1317:cure 1303:talk 1289:talk 1273:talk 1259:talk 1243:talk 1226:talk 1209:talk 1191:talk 1166:talk 1151:talk 1128:talk 1107:talk 1089:talk 1073:talk 1058:talk 1050:must 1039:talk 1012:talk 994:talk 979:talk 964:talk 941:talk 925:talk 890:talk 871:talk 842:talk 819:See 806:talk 794:tons 776:talk 758:talk 750:link 747:blue 732:talk 718:talk 692:talk 677:talk 666:talk 643:talk 603:talk 546:talk 505:talk 490:talk 476:talk 461:talk 433:talk 419:talk 378:talk 358:talk 338:talk 321:Help 309:talk 295:talk 263:talk 236:talk 232:Migs 221:talk 197:talk 187:Per 173:talk 166:! — 146:~~~~ 1776:217 1575:RfA 1490:Afd 1390:and 1345:not 1004:red 952:you 629:• 519:AFD 496::: 171:• ( 168:Bob 90:Bob 1859:) 1835:→ 1719:) 1703:) 1699:• 1673:) 1658:) 1644:}} 1638:{{ 1630:}} 1624:{{ 1612:}} 1606:{{ 1585:) 1557:· 1539:) 1504:· 1483:) 1463:) 1447:) 1428:) 1382:) 1359:) 1305:) 1291:) 1275:) 1261:) 1245:) 1228:) 1211:) 1193:) 1168:) 1153:) 1130:) 1109:) 1091:) 1075:) 1060:) 1041:) 1014:) 996:) 981:) 966:) 958:. 943:) 927:) 892:) 873:) 844:) 808:) 778:) 760:) 734:) 720:) 712:? 694:) 679:) 645:) 605:) 548:) 507:) 492:) 478:) 463:) 435:) 421:) 375:| 355:| 340:) 311:) 297:) 269:) 265:• 238:) 223:) 215:-- 203:) 199:) 133:→ 123:/ 76:→ 1855:( 1809:. 1715:( 1695:( 1669:( 1654:( 1581:( 1535:( 1479:( 1459:( 1443:( 1424:( 1378:( 1355:( 1301:( 1287:( 1271:( 1257:( 1241:( 1224:( 1207:( 1189:( 1164:( 1149:( 1126:( 1105:( 1087:( 1071:( 1056:( 1037:( 1010:( 992:( 977:( 962:( 939:( 923:( 888:( 869:( 840:( 804:( 774:( 756:( 730:( 716:( 690:( 675:( 641:( 601:( 544:( 503:( 488:( 474:( 459:( 448:/ 431:( 417:( 336:( 307:( 293:( 261:( 234:( 219:( 195:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index