2376:, but not only is this not a strong source for a very distinctive position no other source has, but also far too much has been read in to Matzke's casual remarks. Anyway, this subject does of course keep coming up and is potentially an opening for dialogue; but what we need to do if we want to establish a better situation on this article is make sure people will not see us as playing minor word games. But I do think the question is relevant to what could make the article more stable and less controversial. As I believe I have asked you before: yes the intelligent design movement somehow changed the way the term "intelligent design" is used, but what is the best way to describe that change, and how why is this not allowed to be mentioned or at least admitted in the lead? My understanding is:
2081:
in practice, and I think (though I can not source this) the reason is likely that it would be confusing given that the term is so strongly associated with the intelligent design theory of the intelligent design movement. To make it clear I am not opposed to us having our article also focused upon the intelligent design theory of the intelligent design movement, based on the type of reasoning I just mentioned (avoiding ambiguity). But we should avoid ambiguity in other ways too, and it remains true that our sources frequently and not rarely do refer to one historical concept which is also the core concept of the movement. And to make it clear, we also have no sources, of course, which say that the modern followers of
Aquinas have
2599:
based on skin color, hair color and form, and facial traits, reflect superficial differences that are not confirmed by deeper analysis with more reliable genetic traits and whose origin dates from recent evolution mostly under the effect of climate and perhaps sexual selection. By means of painstaking multivariate analysis, we can identify "clusters" of populations and order them in a hierarchy that we believe represents the history of fissions in the expansion to the whole world of anatomically modem humans. At no level can clusters be identified with races, since every level of clustering would determine a different partition and there is no biological reason to prefer a particular one.
4129:. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011) also seem to believe similarly. In Celtic Studies by W.K. Sullivan, he elaborates extensively on the glossarial affinities between the Lito-Slavonian, Celtic, and the Teutonic languages. Please do some research before outright omitting an inclusion with academic substantiation; check the publisher as well. If this was from Joe's Books or some other unknown book publisher, I can understand contesting it. However, when upper-tier scholars make such claims in widely respected publications, it merits more attention than your passing dismissal and editorial omission. Thanks. --
2429:
all times. I guess you want to point also to the fact that the words are being used in a more literal sense here, right? So literally they are referring to evidence for a design and an intelligence. I believe this is still a common meaning, or in fact it is becoming more common. It is also not a very simple meaning to disconnect from the usages connected to the movement. It is obviously related (not accidental). So it can confuse readers if we say "intelligent design always means a scam pretending to be science" (which is what our talk pages confirm to be the intended effect of the present lead).
2730:, and so fine by me. I am not interested in that kind of thing myself, and for core content problems we have specialized noticeboards where the larger community can help make sure such questions are not ignored. It is hard to interpret your intentions in any positive way though. Why would removing the tags be so important to you unless you intend to continue avoiding responding to valid points in a condescending way ("condescending" being the word you yourself have used to describe your recent editing approach on the talk pages to me)? --
2166:"Another option is to take the job away from science and to hand it over to God. This is the gambit played by physicist-theologian Robert John Russell (2008). He wants to put God's direction in down at the quantum level. Apparently all we can see are the averages, but God can decide just when and where the right mutations will occur and as a result the appearance of human is no chance. In a way, of course, this is a version of Intelligent Design Theory, and as such open to the same problems."
719:
362:
318:
31:
2726:, generally this type of tag would be left in while discussion takes place (and in your case this seems particularly appropriate because you have already refused to answer about some of them, explaining on your talk page that I deserved your condescension because of lack of competence). Your first edit summary showed no understanding of this Knowledge norm, as explained in my edit summary. I can see with your edit warring that you really did realize this, and you really did want to be
3303:
1643:, was granted a nineteen-year lease of the Bishoprics of Argyll and the Isles. Sometime before 1648, James Livingston seems to have stayed at Achanduin Castle on Lismore, and it is thought that around this time that the surname Livingstone would have been adopted by MacLeas on the islands". (I have checked the official website of the Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs and found that the chief of Clan MacLea is indeed named Livingstone, so that is all in order).
3643:: My comments should be taken at face valueāabove I mentioned your view that "apparently there is no reason" for certain footnoting, and I gave two links showing that reasons had been given. There is no suggestion of dishonestyāmy concern is that discussions seldom make progress when there is little engagement with what has occurred. If two reasons for footnotes have been offered, those reasons can be disputed, but it is dismissive to say that there is
3855:(Note: the words "of defending a Catholic theocracy" were added to that sentence in the anonymous edit immediately preceding your own. I don't want to make any changes myself, partly because I'm trying to stay away from editing Knowledge, and partly because, following a long and exhausting row over the section's last two paragraphs (which I perhaps foolishly helped to create), I no longer trust my own judgment in this particular area).
1949:
2775:"The term is now used chiefly with reference to a modified form of creation science which promotes teleological explanations while minimizing the use of religious terminology. Its proponents typically claim that many biological systems are too complex to have evolved incrementally by undirected mutation and natural selection, or show evidence of patterns which cannot be adequately explained by the action of natural processes."
3402:). While there is no obligation to answer a request, your reply raised the issue of whether I was working in good faithāmy request is reasonable given that WP:V and WP:NOR were mentioned in a manner suggesting that those core policies were being violated. Please make a statement on the article talk saying that you do not believe that there is a WP:V or WP:NOR problem, or justify the assertion that there is such a problem.
2372:
course, like monkeys writing
Shakespeare, but that there is in fact a tradition of using those exact words to express a particular concept. I was in fact writing with Matzke's blog remarks in mind, as well as the claims of people like Thaxton who say that the movement got the name from science or engineering, which I believe is not credible. So I am aware of Matzke's position on blogs and I believe/know
2959:
1729:
1666:
478:
541:
2436:. Intelligent design movement has its own article, but the theory redirects to intelligent design. During my busy period I asked several times if we should use the more clear term and the answers and rationales were not clear in my opinion. I understand between the lines that the main concern is once again having anything which raises any doubts at all about intelligent design being a "scam".--
3762:
3852:"It seems unlikely that modern Catholics, Protestants, and others could ever easily agree on how many eventually died in Britain, Ireland, and elsewhere as an arguable result of the English Reformation that More was unsuccessfully trying to prevent, and whether or not this cost could be justified by arguable offsetting benefits of defending a Catholic theocracy."
2885:
mostly transitory, and I was mainly trying to poke around for references on specific populations when I noticed the issue in the first place. I don't have the time, patience, or technical expertise to really do much about it now; the cleanup templates were mostly added as a general alert in the faint hope that someone else would be willing to deal with it. ~~
3135:. Therefore I'd simply reiterate that Strauss's bio. is currently deficient. I should like someone authoritative to do stuff, in one neat go. From my reading of the Talk items, especially between Mikerussell and Clossius in Talk_4, I'd not want to try my hand at it for fear of my making a stuff-up. So, all I can say is - 'av a go ya mugĀ ! CheerioĀ !
1256:, and have brought up some good points, but despite requests by others to make clear simple proposals and format your posts so that it's more feasible for others to reply, you keep on adding large chunks of text, while throwing in allegations about other editors. Offtopic talk of "culture war" really doesn't help. Please slow down and take more care,
2076:! The quick answer is yes. Any reading of the literature makes it clear that the term is not being used by accident. Also within literature about the intelligent design movement, the comment is made over and over that ID is an old religious concept (argument from design), not a new one. I think you are also asking whether there are
3936:, it suffers from fact that I deleted the more general discussion containing persuasive arguments in favor of your usage guideline proposal. I didn't mean to imply they are useless, only that you might wish to collect, organize, and condense them under a "discussion" section, below the codified proposal. Fine by me!
3490:). I posted it a second time, then manually edited to replace the first notice with the second, and add this comment (it has to be done that way for reasons I don't fully understand). Also, I find split conversations hard so in my second edit I have added the section that you posted on my talk, and am responding below.
1639:
descended from historically. Surely if they are from the
Lowland Livingstones then information relating to the family of the Lowlands should be included in the article. I am curious because the article currently says that: "In the mid seventeenth century James Livingston of Skirling, who was of a branch of these
4343:
After reviewing your website, it appears you've conducted some thorough and admirable research into genealogy. My wife and I also dabble in this but not to the extent you've obviously taken it. Are you also a linguist as I see that you have some proficiency in several languages --- perhaps related to
4075:
There is no evidence whatsoever of the language spoken by the Suevi (later Suabi). The section deals with etymology and Grimm was one of the foremost etymologists of the period. The reference to Adam of Bremen was obviously not etymological in nature - perhaps better served then in ethnic character
3683:
Thank you for writing in a more polite tone but please forgive me for stepping back and remembering that you are the same guy who has been posting on that talk page telling people not to respond to me right? And now you are saying "all that trouble, why not give up?" You see how that could be seen as
3654:
is woeful, however I am interested in the topic and in supporting the good editors who maintain that and related pages. Discussions based on very generic objections tend to be endless, and that can be very disruptive for the editors who want to be engaged yet who cannot devote several hours each week
3409:, for needing footnotes in our leads which contain large numbers of sources?". The link (SYNTH) is to WP:NOR so (1) tells me that you believe there is a WP:NOR problem, but you have declined to identify an example, and you have provided no explanation of how the unidentified text is a WP:NOR problem.
2632:
I have not looked where it is being used, but I can kind of imagine the type of discussions. I think it is unavoidable that serious studies of human genetic variation are covered on
Knowledge, (although we tend to have difficulty with it), but I think an argument can be made that the "-oid" terms are
2598:
From a scientific point of view, the concept of race has failed to obtain any consensus; none is likely, given the gradual variation in existence. It may be objected that the racial stereotypes have a consistency that allows even the layman to classify individuals. However, the major stereotypes, all
2080:
for example people who look back to Thomas
Aquinas or William Paley and call themselves, or are called by others, proponents of "intelligent design"? There are certainly still people like that who look to Aquinas and Paley. But it seems to me that the term intelligent design is rarely applied to them
3687:
Back to more interesting things, I find your attempt to criticize my work very confused still, so not really very helpful in any practical way. As we agree, you are not following it closely. I have said to you before, and it remains true, that if you had time to REALLY spend I would be interested in
3631:
I am blunt but I'm not angry. I repeated my request for specific text to be identified due to the claim in the section's opening paragraph that the footnotes violated WP:SYNTHāany SYNTH in the article must be rectified, and that claim seems the most important point. Further, if there is an assertion
3581:
you are trying to say that I was somehow being dishonest because my question about the footnotes was really a sneaky way to specifically question the new opening sentence? But I do not see how that accusation works. I have noted also in the past that the poor footnote style, which makes verification
2428:
I think it is clear that in the first example sentence you gave, the term "intelligent design" is being referred to in a way which implies it is something which can be a characteristic of "the universe", for example evidence of an intelligence which caused the universe, and/or which influences it at
2332:
I think it is only mildly interesting trace the conjunction of the two words āintelligent designā through history. Itās not really a ātermā for most of its history, itās just people talking about the Design
Argument, and in such discussions they occasionally put together the words āintelligentā and
2048:
as the ID that sprung up since the 1980s and promoted by the DI, or are they fundamentally different in some way? Are those discussions of the ID concept in relation to the pre-19th century figures talking about conceptions of ID that have persisted in time through to today and are current ID ideas
3627:
My request "if there is some text in the article that contravenes those policies (V and NOR), please identify it" was not intended as a deflection. On the contrary, I hoped that discussing specifics would be far more profitable than generic discussions such as whether a detailed footnote might be a
3562:
While I have said the clusters of footnotes definitely look like OR, I also said that the style of the footnotes is hard to track and verify and discuss. I pointed out several times that difficultly in verification is itself a bad thing, and that in itself should be fixed even if there proves to be
3205:
It is not a description of edits to refer to an editor as "your human bot edit warrior", to say that another edit is "plain dumb" and that the editor is guilty of "poor editing". Nor to accuse an editor by saying that their "edits are all kneejerk edits", and their "posts never show any interest or
2251:
What would it mean from a phrase to be used "accidentally"? I would guess that if a synonymous phrase could be introduced with little change in meaning or nuance, then the use of one phrase over another could be termed accidental. I'll choose the phrase "particular creation" as my synonym. Let's
2085:
belief in intelligent design, because at least by one common definition they do. There is no source telling us that the term has different meanings in different periods for example. My main concern is therefore that there is a tradition on this article that the wording in the lead is forbidden from
1191:
Saying that I am "clearly trying to give an impression" is another insult to add to the many you have made to me on the Talk page. I have asked you to stop doing this. Why can't you just be polite for once? I am pointing to the problem at hand and giving a citation that supports my view. You gave 7
3869:
And while I'm at it, I assume, perhaps mistakenly, that the third last paragraph of that section is incorrect to speak of "John
Tewkesbury, a London leather-seller found guilty by More" since I would have thought he was found guilty by a court or jury or judge or magistrate rather than by the Lord
3695:
Actually, I believe that as the article as evolved over time, the habits of the past, presumably developed in reaction to pseudoscience apologists (which is what your scary link was about), have started to ossify and worsen the article. I believe that such ossification will become a major priority
3593:
Trying to discuss the format and style of the lead is an effort to fix one cause of repeated circular discussions. My reason for asking people for rationales is that I am trying to "work collaboratively to reach consensus" like you mention. This is absolutely normal, and others should do the same.
3432:
to the effect that editors have been topic banned for certain unhelpful approaches to talk pages is correct. Consider the situationāKnowledge is the primary source of information for people on the
Internet, and anyone can edit and comment. It is obvious that a wide range of unhelpful behavior will
1383:
Hi, are you the author of: Y Haplogroups, Archaeological
Cultures and Language Families: A Review of the Possibility of Multidisciplinary Comparisons Using the Case of Haplogroup E-M35? If so there are some things in it that aren't consistent with the archaeological record even in 2009. I also see
3471:
Wow, that's more than 3 edits per day. I have responded at length on your user page. But in short, there is no clear accusation, and the above has no clear correspondence to reality. I know that vague accusations, strange expressions of concern, and veiled threats about un-named people who got in
3190:
Descriptions of sequences of editing events are not personal attacks in the sense intended by the NPA policy. And the editing events described can not be covered up by posting these types of "concerned" messages. It only makes them look even worse. I have addressed it on the relevant article talk
2371:
for your continued willingness to discuss this tricky subject. Your questioning of this one remark of mine touches an issue I think is interesting. I have to say that there is a chance I understand you wrong. I was using the word accidental not just to mean that words were not chosen at random of
3602:
Johnuniq, do you think any neutral observer would look at your activity on this article and describe it as "working collaboratively to reach consensus"? To me that sounds more like what I am doing. You closed your threat post to me by summarizing my editing record on the article and asking "What
2884:
that added the information in the first place. With the others I've seen, it's mostly an annoying mechanical glitch where clicking on it does nothing and you have to scroll down and fish for the ref, but the J page is actually missing numerous full citations outright. My interest in this area is
2386:
There is the whole thing about putting the words in glossaries and so on, which I think came from Matzke. Do we have a short word that describes that? Maybe we could say that they used it more as a "standard term" (but in that case, what does the glossary define it as?). And is it important as a
1638:
article with your reason being that the information related to the
Lowland Livingstone family. Ok, well I have a question: Which family do the current chiefs, who have the actual surname Livingstone, come fromĀ ? There is nothing in the article to say who the current chiefs named Livingstone are
2126:
expressing an opinion about people outside the intelligent design movement as such, with all its politics and specific textbook issues, but still proponents of something which is essentially an intelligent design argument. I think it is reasonable, but of course I do not propose we use it as a
2108:, and that there are only two alternatives: either we MUST move/merge/delete the whole article, or else the lead MUST NOT mention alternative meanings and potential confusions for the article name. This is for example the position MisterDub is taking relatively openly in recent posts.--
3660:
I have said about all that I think can be said here. The "veiled threats about un-named people" cannot really be explained because it is not appropriate to point to individual cases. However, rather than making a veiled threat, I am actually trying to avoid the tedium of engaging in a
665:
Could you fix the vandalism in the first paragraph of the article on "Republic" (deletion of the words "panda bear" and general revision to the text to revert that paragraph to the language of August 22)? I do not edit well and I see that you have previously curated that article.
3569:
Despite what you say about me refusing to make concrete proposals (which I would be very much within my rights to do) I have in fact started a new section, starting with the sourcing of the first sentence, and trying to work as best as possible. So that accusation is objectively
2320:
gives three broad categories of arguments from design along with three modern variations (one of which is Intelligent Desgin). Given the citation lists from each of these sources, it looks like there has been significant research in this area in the peer-reviewed literature.
2337:
Wilkins, who also has a bit of a reputation as a philosopher of biology (but no wikipedia article yet), responded: "I agree that the mere phrase is not significant, but it does help to isolate some shared (or interestingly not-shared) ideas in the use of design arguments."
551:
regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is
3359:. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
2146:
Andrew asked me to chime in here concerning people who advocate intelligent design (and there are reliable sources which say this in just such words), but who are nonetheless not part of the "intelligent design movement", at least not as that term is defined at
2035:
Hi Andrew, I've been reviewing the discussion on ID and I'm trying to evaluate consensus. I have a question for you, regarding your particular view, so I'm bringing it to your User Talk page: Are you saying the conceptions of ID as mentioned by, for example,
2127:
source. I just offer it as a vision of how a lot of people see definitions, and the reasons for using words in ways not quite like the definitions. Again: it is all about avoiding ambiguity, not definitions, and we should also want to avoid ambiguity.--
2015:
As much as I agree with you, it might be better if you let the Rothbard sideshow drop: you are dealing with someone who shows all the tendencies of being able to start a fight in an empty room. My bet is that they'll not be around for much longer. -
2983:
1753:
1690:
502:
2155:. Russell is just an idiosyncratic natural theologian, he even argued that intelligent design should not be taught in science classrooms: that would seem to oppose the intelligent design movement. For a source concerning Russell, see
3969:
I have no problem with you changing things around to aid clarity and while doing so moving, changing or removing altogether, any comments I made during our discussions. Kind of you to ask. I am paying attention to discussions too.
3924:
from either of us, buried as they are far below the generalized section heading, and if they do, odds are they might not realize we're talking about two entirely different proposals. (I didn't figure that out until this morning.)
3420:. Please take make more care in framing a responseāyour text clearly asserts that no reason was provided when perhaps you meant that you rejected the two explanations; if so, some reasons for that rejection would be desirable.
4055:
I'd greatly appreciate your feedback on the Ashkenazi Jews talk page regarding the genetics. Since you're the only one who has an understanding of their genetics, I was hoping to hear your stance on the issue. Kind regards,
3691:
Whatever your intentions, I honestly do think that your gate-keeper/enforcer approach in this article is badly executed and badly conceived. ID, like other subjects, is a difficult subject. So what? Why must we give up on
2309:
You then go on to state: "There is no source telling us that the term has different meanings in different periods for example." Eliot Sober (who may be the best philosopher of biology working right now) describes in his
3423:
If you follow the links in the alert box at the top of this section you will find it difficult to see any clear statement defining what is reasonable on an article talk page. Nevertheless, please be aware that the advice
3220:
Facts are facts, and some facts are unfortunate. You can run away from bullies or you can say the truth. When the bullies finally take over Knowledge I am sure they'll make a ceremony of kicking me out, but until then...
2283:
Pepper, along with lawyers from the ACLU of Pennsylvania and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, successfully represented in federal court eight families who challenged the Dover policy that included
2521:
Sorry, I meant to look this up last night but never got around to it, and I am now not near a copy. My feeling is that Cavalli-Sforza would have been careful about such terminology even if he used them. What is more
3273:, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the
3928:
Do you think my reorganization and section headings might better garner input from others? If so, please restore my demo edit, or give me permission to do so, or if you have a better way please show me a demo.
4304:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
4249:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
4172:
1306:
Just a note to say thanks for working together to find agreements on a direction for improving the article, I think we're making useful clarifications and appreciate the additional sources that you've found. .
879:
I am writing here to object formally to the way you have been addressing me on WP. I hope that after reading this your conduct will improve and that you will be polite towards me, and others, in the future.
3563:
no OR. Even if the cluster footnotes are just sloppy accretions, not OR, it is odd that you are so aggressively opposed to this aim and notable that you are clearly angry about me asking you to explain why.
2379:
Most obviously, they publicized the term enormously. I have no secondary source for it, but I would say this is clearly the reason authors today use the term in other contexts, for historical argument from
1292:
Seen it before? Then you should appreciate that such discussion is the first stage in dispute resolution, which I very much hope won't be needed. Please try to keep on topic and work in a collegiate way, .
1260:. It may be frustrating for you when other editors don't keep up with your flow of ideas, but time is needed to research and respond to your comments, and more patience will allow fruitful discussions. . .
852:. Please add any comments you wish, but refrain from refactoring mine. I am obviously not devoting as much time and energy to the issue as some editors, so I concede that I may be mistaken (although I was
3543:
Your suggestion that my work on the article has led to no changes or useful discussions is contradicted (in my opinion) by the facts. In your favor, I understand that you are not really interested in the
3452:, and 36 of those edits have been in the last 11 days. What progress has resulted from those posts and the subsequent discussions? There must be some resolution that does not involve arguing indefinitelyā
4124:
Not only did a Columbia University professor make the claim that Teutons may have spoken a Celtic language, but several Cambridge University professors in (Keane, A.H., Hingston Quiggon, and A.C Haddon.
3556:
My questions were clearly intended to set ground for more detailed discussion if possible, by getting rationales on record as a starting point. This is a normal mode of moderating a difficult discussion.
3130:
Leo Strauss's bio. awaits (I hope, your) improvement - the links to his inventing 'Reductio ad Hitlerum' have been tracked in that R-a-H Article. Mutual cross-references already exist between R-a-H and
2265:
The marks of these perfections are so numerous, so clear, and so striking to every attentive observer, that it is just matter of wonder, that any who call themselves Philosophers, should exclude active,
2752:
There is currently a RFC discussion about the content with the sources that the user AmericanDad86 has been adding, and you have been requested to make a comment about this, since you have responded to
2232:
2530:(ie, implied ancestral groups without names but just numbers, now a common concept) rather than actual races etc. This has now become the more usual way for scientists to discuss racial ancestry.--
3445:
where discussions continue indefinitelyāeditors should work collaboratively to reach consensus. Any editors who are found at WP:AE to be persisting in an unreasonable fashion may be sanctioned.
3206:
knowledge" (twice), and that all they do on WP is"try to muscle people around". They are personal attacks, just like the ones against me last year. You really must stop this Andrew Lancaster.
2333:ādesignā, usually more rarely than a variety of other combinations ā āintelligent causeā, ābeneficient designā, ācreative designā, ādesigning mindā, or, mostly, just ādesignā or āDesign.ā
3727:
3624:
I was not suggesting that your work has led to no changes or useful discussionsāmy suggestion is that the benefits are not commensurate with the time that other editors have to spend.
2298:
The difference in the usage is a simple and fundamental as description versus naming. Before the Discovery Institute, "intelligent design" was one phrase among many used to describe
3405:
Your reply was that I should (1) read the opening lines and (2) read the most recent @Mister Dub response. The first issue in the opening lines is "What excuse do we have apart from
535:
498:
1749:
1686:
3621:
The term "uninvolved" in the alert notice is nothing to do with the person placing the alertāit is standard practice for an involved party in a dispute to notify another party.
3566:
Note: I was also transparent about wanting to use a working assumption that there MIGHT be a reason that the apparent OR is a misunderstanding. There is nothing bad about that?
3433:
result from that situation, and there must be mechanisms that prevent talk pages from being used in a fashion that consensus finds unhelpful. The mechanism for topics such as
2979:
2717:
2678:
1403:
Andrew, Hi. I just wanted to let you know that I replied to your comment on my talk page, if you had not already ascertained that. Thanks for your post and assistance. Steve.
291:, if you want to take a peek. The most important one (in my opinion) is to keep wikilinks as sparse as possible (to avoid confusion). Thanks for creating it, though! Cheers,
2359:
2104:. I hesitate to mention this or any other example on the talkpage lest we get a swarm of editors rushing over to ruin that article! Their long term argument is that this is
562:
2861:
I would be glad to help but I've fractured my wrist and one hand typing is slow. I like your version much better than Lonjers' version, which seems both showy and vague.
3140:
2552:
1885:
2578:
2432:
In the second example, the sentence is obviously referring to what I find most careful sources tend to call "intelligent design theory", which is the doctrine of the
4333:
2473:
1417:
1325:
3960:
2462:
Just wanted this cleared up by someone in the know, did Cavalli-Sforze use the terms Negroid, Caucasoid or Mongoloid when explaining races in the human variation?
2445:
2136:
2117:
1881:
4278:
3879:
3864:
2899:
2789:
2496:
1465:
1385:
1373:
790:
4113:
2947:
2837:
2739:
2582:
2416:
838:
4398:
4358:
3840:
3835:
3795:
3559:
My concerns about apparent original research, and everything about my mode of discussion, had all been clearly stated and explained. I try to work transparently.
3313:
3120:
3072:
3067:
3019:
2642:
1937:
1853:
1848:
1800:
1624:
1576:
1571:
1523:
3979:
1518:
655:
4045:
3274:
2383:
Also very obviously, they connected the term to their movement, and the acts and theories of their movement, including of course their anti-evolutionary focus.
1470:
567:
466:
275:
3849:, for which I've just thanked you. I wonder could you perhaps have a go at trying to fix (or if necessary delete) the following sentence in the same section:
3200:
2894:
2100:
Concerning the question of policies for wording in leads, an example of I think many editors have been proposing on ID is something like the opening lines of
1909:
1301:
1287:
4005:
2665:
policy. I strongly recommend that you strike these remarks, and in future comment on proposals to improve the article without commenting on other editors. .
2627:
732:
418:
379:
335:
99:
3709:
3674:
3499:
3481:
2917:
1268:
706:
3394:), with the implication that the article conflicted with those policies. I asked three times that text contravening those policies be identified. After my
553:
3230:
3215:
2568:
2539:
1905:
1393:
3945:
2095:
2913:
1315:
894:
I have collected all the insults and impolite language you have used to me over the past few days. Please reflect upon these and change your behaviour.
2784:
3612:
3540:
You are not an un-involved editor, such as described in your warning. You are passionately involved, going back before I came to look at this article.
2754:
2516:
2392:
Anyway, let me come back to basic stuff. It does not actually matter very much (with respect to the concerns that keep hitting this article) what the
4000:
2198:"the Cardinal's conclusion is that the presence of a finished productāa fully-evolved eye for instanceāis evidence of an intelligent-design process."
3325:
3260:
3412:
Re (2): Your response was that you asked whether there is a reason for the highly special footnoting, and that apparently there is no reason. Yet
2275:
I don't see that my synonym has materially affected the sense of the passage, and so the use of "intelligent design" here may well be accidental.
689:
4353:
1247:
677:
4203:
2673:
1594:
627:
2477:
2123:
413:
3902:
3529:
3290:
2500:
1488:
1435:
1343:
808:
599:
436:
4104:
You appear to be using two Knowledge IDs with similar names? A bit confusing. We should discuss on the article talk page, not my talk page.--
3688:
your opinion. But how interesting is it to hear someone criticize you who has only a vague impression of what you have been saying and doing?
2227:
2005:
4157:
3890:
3251:
talk page. We seem to have the chance of an edit-conflict-free zone there for once, and your expertise would be deeply appreciated. Regards
3037:
2807:
2633:
not really in fashion in recent years, and that we should follow that trend. Can someone show me an article where this is really relevant?--
2244:
You may have intended this as a rhetorical flourish, but even so this shows how far your opinion diverges from most of the other editors at
1590:
1274:
LOL. You've written this as a reaction to me posting on your talk page. Seen all this type of set-up before. Indeed it is not a battlefield
623:
3987:
1484:
1431:
1339:
804:
725:
718:
595:
432:
167:
131:
3731:
3174:
is policy which you must abide by, and I strongly recommend that you strike these attacks. Do not repeat your battlefield behaviour. . .
2880:
I've gone through the history on the haplogroup J(-P209) page, but the problem there is actually less with RT's formatting than with the
2765:
2041:
1412:
1242:
3182:
3033:
2803:
2253:
2206:. Maybe Collins was at one point part of the intelligent design movement, but not any more. Collins is a fringe, "forbidden" science,
2066:
757:
Hey, this is about the ID thing. Wasn't sure what the protocol is for replying. I replied on my own talk page. Do I have to reply here?
247:
195:
3507:
2770:
2553:
http://books.google.be/books?id=FrwNcwKaUKoC&pg=PA187&dq=caucasoid#v=onepage&q=caucasoid%20negroid%20mongoloid&f=false
1654:
766:
163:
127:
4378:
4138:
4025:
3815:
3738:
since you fall under "Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)." Thanks.--
3348:
3144:
3100:
3047:
2927:
2817:
1869:
1828:
1604:
1551:
1498:
1445:
1353:
818:
583:
446:
115:
4223:
4096:
3590:
version of the lead difficult, including this new opening sentence. Again, I try to make my thinking are as transparent as possible.
3553:
Your questions were in answer to questions from me, and simply an attempt by you to deflect from the topic I raised in that section.
3090:
243:
223:
191:
4283:
2270:
from the universe, and ascribe the whole material world, with its various and astonishing phenomena, to blind chance and necessity.
1215:
548:
4065:
3242:
3014:
2483:
1858:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to
1795:
1722:
785:
660:
572:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to
394:
104:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to
3465:
3373:
3086:
1818:
1541:
530:
219:
4228:
3907:
3331:
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means
2875:
1378:
1160:
747:
375:
350:
3093:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
3040:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
2920:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
2810:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1821:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1597:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1544:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1491:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1438:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1346:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
811:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
439:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
4374:
4371:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
4021:
4018:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
3811:
3808:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
3700:
in the past (you should actually read those links), are increasingly going to be defined as the problem, not the solution. --
3136:
3096:
3043:
2923:
2870:
2856:
2813:
1865:
1862:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
1824:
1600:
1547:
1494:
1441:
1349:
814:
579:
576:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
442:
331:
306:
111:
108:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.
4148:
Thank you for your information concerning Medlands. It is clear further dialogue with Victar would be a waste of my time. --
3747:
1814:
1537:
4338:
4329:
4274:
4092:
3486:
I'm sorry to be a nuisance but I have had to post the officious alert again due to a technical problem (some background is
2710:
2574:
2352:
1998:
91:
86:
81:
69:
64:
59:
2559:
So he did use the terms in older publications, but Maunus sounds right to me. What is the background to these questions?--
4184:
3340:
2650:
2469:
869:
3787:
2659:
2656:
4316:
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
4261:
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
2492:
399:
3996:
article. I fixed this already, but I thought I would give you a bump to preview your edits for this kind of thing. ā
3277:. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --
3163:
3155:
3889:
At Talk:DSwhatever, we've started talking about a different idea than the thread heading suggests. Please break out
3398:, you again declined, and directed attention to other places on the talk page which are not relevant to the request (
2025:
3159:
2222:
2030:
298:
2881:
2690:
is under discretionary sanctions, and that edit-warring can occur without reaching the three reverts mentioned in
4325:
4270:
3913:
3352:
2890:
2457:
2178:. I'm sure one could find many more current catholic theologians like Schƶnborn. For Schƶnborn, see chapter 8 of
1238:
3550:
You say I refused to answer your demand for a specific example of a problem, but surely you know very well that:
2484:
https://en.wikipedia.org/File:The_history_and_geography_of_human_genes_Luigi_Luca_Cavalli-Sforza_map_genetic.png
4143:
2191:
685:
1959:
4363:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
4010:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
3800:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
3286:
3171:
3077:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
3024:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
2904:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
2794:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
2510:
1805:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
1581:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
1528:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
1475:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
1422:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
1330:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
1220:
795:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
423:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
2982:
again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
1752:
again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
1689:
again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
501:
again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
4109:
3705:
3477:
3226:
3196:
2735:
2638:
2564:
2535:
2509:
More recent work by Cavalli-Sforza has taken a much more nuanced stance on race and genes. Here is a small
2441:
2412:
2132:
2113:
2091:
1942:
1283:
702:
2425:
I wrote that quickly and missed a key point needed to link to your question, ie looking at your examples:
2194:(ed.), "Intelligent Thought: Science versus the Intelligent Design Movement" (Random House, 2007), p. 39:
4321:
4266:
4209:
3884:
3632:
of a SYNTH problem, it is not satisfactory for the goal posts to be shifted when specifics are requested.
3382:
suggest that assistance may be required to restore normal conditions to that talk page. You posted that "
3265:
3149:
2680:
2433:
2148:
1389:
3472:
trouble in the past, are normal for anyway who tries to work on Intelligent Design, going years back. --
3956:
3941:
3898:
3608:
3547:
Honestly, your recitation of recent talk page discussions is distorted beyond recognition. For example:
3344:
3282:
2886:
1650:
874:
752:
514:
in this period of Aristotle and scholasticism, but not classical learning in its entirety.</ref: -->
47:
38:
17:
3361:
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
3845:
On November 17th 2014, you made an excellent edit to the Campaign against the Reformation section of
3356:
2745:
1967:
1877:
1226:
3951:
PS, the only other ed whose comments would be affected are Roxy, whom I have asked to join us here.
771:
4119:
4088:
2706:
2348:
1994:
1957:
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can
1859:
1408:
1398:
573:
105:
4175:, it seems acceptable, particularly if you use it as a secondary source. Thanks for your time. --
3696:
problem on Knowledge as it gets older. Some of the old approaches which might have been accepted
3449:
3379:
2758:
2623:
1253:
849:
4191:
4050:
3975:
3636:
3425:
3417:
3413:
3399:
3395:
3391:
3336:
2866:
2852:
1045:
I am just going to edit. I see no dispute as such, and neither will any third party. There is
3335:
administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the
2171:
971:
After me requesting a Third Opinion and AL producing a detailed list of the edits in question:
4364:
4168:
4153:
4105:
4011:
3952:
3937:
3894:
3701:
3604:
3473:
3295:
3278:
3222:
3192:
2731:
2634:
2560:
2531:
2437:
2408:
2302:
of the teleological argument. After the DI was formed, the term took on a second meaning: a
2237:
2128:
2109:
2087:
1776:. This is, he reports, in turn north of the Askiburgium mountains (probably the Riesengebirge
1646:
1279:
1257:
1176:
Myrvin, a reason for using this noticeboard is to isolate out specific questions related to
1061:
I am quite confident that any reasonable third opinion is going to start by pointing out to
926:
made the article worse or better. Please try to explain in terms of what is good or bad for
698:
2547:
2317:
2299:
1766:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Tac.%20Ger.%2028&lang=original Tac. Ger. 28
1703:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Tac.%20Ger.%2028&lang=original Tac. Ger. 28
1079:
mention of his criticism of another philosopher basically tells me that instead of looking
1051:
bother trying to understand the other editor's positions, or read the sources he cites. By
983:
what I will eventually do. You do not own this article and stop me from editing it without
4349:
4312:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
4257:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
4134:
4080:
3735:
3487:
3179:
3010:
2952:
2780:
2670:
2488:
2465:
2218:
2037:
1901:
1791:
1718:
1659:
1312:
1298:
1265:
1014:
I am not sure if you are looking for a third opinion actively or just hoping someone will
912:
which has not been agreed by those involved. This is not on! I am reverting your edits. I
743:
673:
526:
409:
390:
368:
361:
346:
324:
317:
303:
1020:
intend to start editing again. I am quite confident that any reasonable third opinion is
949:
incorporate your ideas. So to say I have not been interested in them is just not true. I
946:
You know that I have altered a good deal of my original stab at this section in order to
929:
the article. Amicable is a nice word, and I do indeed think I have been, but please keep
8:
4317:
4262:
4084:
4070:
4061:
3875:
3860:
3256:
3125:
2905:
2723:
2702:
2686:
You've been here long enough that you shouldn't need a template. I will remind you that
2422:
2368:
2344:
2290:
2242:
Any reading of the literature makes it clear that the term is not being used by accident.
2152:
1990:
1629:
1404:
1234:
1140:
said you were not sure about the sourcing and the correctness, but that is not really a
1113:
Your approach is impractical. It can not be that every time I post something and give a
1082:
at the Phaedo you looked at what I'd cited previously about the Phaedo, because that is
980:
If you simply refuse to give reasons not to ignore your desires, then obviously that is
932:
in mind that telling me not to edit (not even to post drafts) is not amicable from your
923:"My"? This is not your article and in the end the "important" thing is whether my edits
906:
These have completely destroyed my carefully cited entries in the new section, which we
762:
471:
1179:
sourcing, one at a time. You have swamped this with a whole bunch of points that would
1116:
source, that you can delete it and call in a third party, instead of just checking the
1089:
you just ignored my explanations and claim to have done another search which, for some
1064:
you that you should try responding to reasonable questions and proposals in a rational
935:
side, and you are certainly not being amicable. I did attempt to explain concerns here
3743:
3670:
3651:
3525:
3516:
3495:
3461:
3442:
3429:
3369:
3332:
2687:
2619:
2404:, and it is clear enough that the term exists now and is used in more than one way now.
2245:
1203:
Myrvin you are highjacking this thread! If you want to raise other questions for this
1182:
need extensive discussion. Can't you stick to the one above? I feel compelled to give
1137:
I have made a proposal above, and you have not explained what was wrong with it. (You
1037:
nothing happens in a day or two, I'll raise a Dispute - or you can do it if you like.
1034:
Another insult. I have contacted 2 possible 3O people - I don't know who they are. If
1017:
turn up, but in any case I believe there is no reason for me to stop editing and I do
865:
781:
712:
681:
355:
146:
2295:
Here, my substitution is nonsensical, and thus the use of the term is not accidental.
1054:
the way, I doubt making obvious false accusations is going to help you. (There is no
1048:
just one editor who wants to try to stop another one from editing, without having to
4394:
4385:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
4293:
4284:
4238:
4229:
4041:
4032:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
3971:
3831:
3822:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
3783:
3721:
3116:
3107:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
3063:
3054:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
3001:
the modern ] region, to the north of Tongeren. They wanted peace but spoke "as if the
2943:
2934:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
2862:
2848:
2833:
2824:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
2746:
2086:
mentioning any other meaning or confusion concerning the term "intelligent design".--
1933:
1924:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1844:
1835:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1620:
1611:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1567:
1558:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1514:
1505:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1461:
1452:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
1369:
1360:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
834:
825:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
651:
642:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
462:
453:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
271:
262:
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these
3684:
a striking pattern? I could go on with more analysis of the pattern, if called upon.
1023:
going to start by pointing out to you that you should try responding to reasonable
909:
have been discussing quite amicably, and replaced them with something of your own,
4313:
4297:
4258:
4242:
4219:
4199:
4180:
4162:
4149:
3728:
Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 115#Medieval Lands by Charles Cawley
3434:
3270:
3211:
2513:
2207:
2179:
2021:
1211:
1122:
according to my understanding of WP norms, and if you are calling for third party
1119:
sources or making a real concern clear? This way of working is not really allowed
1104:
Once again, I am "not very diligent" and "I haven't looked at" the book, and only
990:
So without checking any facts, you are going to assume I am telling a lie with my
634:
311:
280:
2316:
how the design argument changed after the development of probability theory. The
1096:
You are quite demanding to me, but your own efforts seem not to be very diligent.
960:
You have no right to insist that other editors accept your work as un-improvable.
4345:
4130:
3801:
3640:
3406:
3175:
3006:
2963:
2776:
2727:
2666:
2212:
2058:
2049:
competing alongside the DI's ID, or are those conceptions historical? Thanks...
1787:
1733:
1714:
1670:
1308:
1294:
1275:
1261:
1076:
And of course your remark implying that you looked in the Phaedo and only found
899:
After a large piece of my edits were deleted by you saying they were OR, I wrote:
739:
522:
482:
405:
386:
342:
293:
4214:
Hi there. I hope you are good and kicking. I have mentioned your name in Bests
2407:
Hope this makes sense, and that I am answering the point you intended to make!--
2312:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
4309:
4301:
4254:
4246:
4057:
3871:
3856:
3805:
3752:
3598:
achieve this, and you and the others who keep demanding this should stop, IMHO.
3321:
3252:
3248:
2842:
2187:
1230:
843:
758:
557:
2605:
2324:
I'll close by highlighting a couple of comments left at Wilkins's blog post.
4305:
4250:
3739:
3666:
3521:
3491:
3457:
3387:
3365:
3317:
3162:
you raised serious unfounded attacks against myself, which you reiterated in
2695:
2691:
2662:
2203:
2159:'s "Natural Theology: The Biological Sciences" in Re Manning, Russell (ed.),
1582:
884:
861:
857:
777:
619:
4390:
4386:
4037:
4033:
3827:
3823:
3779:
3662:
3453:
3438:
3112:
3108:
3059:
3055:
2939:
2935:
2829:
2825:
2156:
1977:
1929:
1925:
1840:
1836:
1616:
1612:
1563:
1559:
1510:
1506:
1476:
1457:
1453:
1423:
1365:
1361:
1331:
830:
826:
796:
647:
643:
591:
490:
458:
454:
428:
424:
267:
263:
1644:
1057:
insult in the above post, or in any other where you claimed to see them.)
966:
Anyone's work can be improved. I disagree with your reason for the change
4215:
4195:
4176:
4015:
3997:
3993:
3912:
Andrew, I seek your permission to truncate and reorganize our discussion
3846:
3383:
3207:
3167:
3025:
2795:
2325:
2017:
2010:
1741:
1678:
1635:
1634:
I have seen that you have removed some of the information I put into the
1335:
1207:
610:
3893:, from just after your initial support, or give me permission to do so.
3302:
3573:
I am not sure what accusation you are trying to make by linking to the
2184:
Evolution and Christian Faith: Reflections of an Evolutionary Biologist
2073:
2051:
1169:
After I gave a source and quotation in support of the doubted citation:
1092:
reason, avoids looking at either the dialogue, or the sources I named.
517:]. In this he went further than his predecessors concerning the ancient
159:
123:
1006:
I await the third opinion. Myrvin (talk) 12:04, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
2655:
Andrew, you should appreciate that "what a fraudulent remark to make"
2101:
1892:
239:
187:
3603:
progress has resulted?" May I ask the same of your editing record?--
915:
suggest strongly that we ask for a 3rd opinion or go to a dispute.
4368:
2971:
2847:
Thanks for the invitation but you all seem to be doing a good job.
1954:
Hello, Andrew Lancaster. Please check your email; you've got mail!
1586:
1427:
606:
281:
206:
138:
3574:
2967:
2190:'s "The Hoax of Intelligent Design and How it was Perpetrated" in
1737:
1674:
1185:
some comment because you are clearly trying to give an impression
547:
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the
486:
4300:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge
4245:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge
3078:
2698:, not even when you've mentioned your concern on the talk page.
2175:
952:
never said you could not post drafts. Where does that come from?
938:
and in my edit summaries but you have not been very interested.
288:
215:
174:
2306:
for that particular formulation of the teleological argument.
3082:
2975:
2909:
2799:
2615:
2387:
distinct matter that does not come under the above two bullets?
2122:
Back to the first question, I just did some googling and found
1916:
1810:
1745:
1682:
1480:
887:
says, "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack
494:
287:
Yellow there! I did some reformatting; there are guidelines at
3774:
For Protecting and Improving Environment through Your Article
776:
Hi, I've just emailed you a hard-to-read copy of that review.
4344:
your study of Haplogroups and language families I presume? --
3324:, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is
3029:
2252:
start with the first of the historical instances provided by
2161:
The Oxford Handbook of Natural Theology" (OUP, 2013), p. 415:
1806:
1533:
1529:
800:
150:
3761:
1782:) and the ], which are in turn north of the source of the [[
1252:
Andrew, you've put a lot of effort into making proposals at
1125:
opinions maybe you should ask whether I am right about that
1026:
questions and proposals in a rational way on the talk page.
735:
at any timeĀ by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
540:
382:
at any timeĀ by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
338:
at any timeĀ by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
3932:
Also, if you think my way is a reasonable statement of the
3870:
Chancellor. If so, somebody might usefully re-phrase that.
3247:
have a captain's, or chuck a shufti or take a dekko at the
142:
3665:
requestāthey can be pretty ugly and a huge waste of time.
2548:
http://books.google.be/books?id=8j5T1nsv43kC&pg=PA331
1107:"claim" to have done a search. Please stop attacking me.
860:), but moving stuff around needs stronger justification.
254:
230:
202:
178:
4171:'s talk page about citing MedLands? From what I read on
3170:. You're not a mind reader, and your attacks are false.
3132:
2400:
is. The key problem as far as I see it is what it means
2374:
it was highly influential in the history of this article
556:". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
536:
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
4367:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
4014:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
3804:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
3081:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
3028:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
2908:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
2798:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1809:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1585:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1532:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1479:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1426:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
1384:
these same mistakes in other very recent articles too.
1334:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
799:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
427:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page
2995:] met a delegation of ] who had recently settled in ]
3448:
You have performed 995 edits since 20 August 2013 at
2978:
by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
731:
Message added 16:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC). You can
2233:
A small aside that I'll tuck away in its own section
1206:
noticeboard or others, please post them separately!
3726:Hello, you were involve a past similiar discussion
3536:As a formality, please note my reply to your post:
2256:. I'll render the 1766 review of H. S. Reimarus's
1748:by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just
1685:by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just
724:Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at
497:by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just
367:Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at
323:Hello, Andrew Lancaster. You have new messages at
697:Oops, missed it. Fixed now. Thanks for the note.--
4292:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
4237:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
3594:Forcing all discussions towards straw polls does
1418:Disambiguation link notification for September 27
1326:Disambiguation link notification for September 20
3732:Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Kekoolani
2990:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
2900:Disambiguation link notification for December 19
2790:Disambiguation link notification for December 12
1760:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
1697:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
791:Disambiguation link notification for September 5
509:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
4359:Disambiguation link notification for December 4
4167:Sorry to trouble you, but could you comment on
3841:Can you improve another sentence re Thomas More
3796:Disambiguation link notification for October 28
3416:provided an explanation, with more information
3073:Disambiguation link notification for January 25
3020:Disambiguation link notification for January 16
1854:Disambiguation link notification for November 9
1801:Disambiguation link notification for November 1
1577:Disambiguation link notification for October 25
1524:Disambiguation link notification for October 18
4173:Template_talk:Medieval_Lands_by_Charles_Cawley
3914:like this demo (which I already self reverted)
3347:. Administrators may impose sanctions such as
1471:Disambiguation link notification for October 4
568:Disambiguation link notification for August 22
4006:Disambiguation link notification for March 28
419:Disambiguation link notification for August 1
100:Disambiguation link notification for March 31
889:regardless of the manner in which it is done
1196:After my response to another editor's view:
2240:, you've made a curious statement above:
3390:are core content policies on Knowledge" (
3312:The Arbitration Committee has authorised
2658:and "Never ever a straight answer Dave?"
2606:The history and geography of human genes
549:Knowledge:Dispute resolution noticeboard
3992:A recent edit of yours lost a [ in the
3309:Please carefully read this information:
1248:Intelligent design is not a battlefield
14:
3133:http://en.wikipedia.org/Godwin%27s_law
2604:Cavalli-Sforza & Menozzi. (1994),
1161:Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
2966:. I have automatically detected that
1736:. I have automatically detected that
1673:. I have automatically detected that
1225:Andrew, I replied to your comment on
485:. I have automatically detected that
3988:Dropped [ in the Leo Strauss article
2618:. The actual science is ignored. ā
2151:. I think a clear example would be
2040:citing Socrates, and in the book by
1958:
25:
2526:, for example, is his reference to
2318:Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
997:That really is a hopeless response
903:Recent changes by Andrew Lancaster
848:I have undone your recent edits at
23:
2771:From the OED on Intelligent Design
2694:. Adding tags is not exempt from
2661:are personal attacks contravening
2593:He did use those terms, however...
2170:Another example would be Cardinal
1947:
717:
539:
360:
316:
24:
4409:
4318:review the candidates' statements
4263:review the candidates' statements
2202:I think another example would be
1192:sources above to support yours.
4190:Sorry, I could use your help on
3760:
3734:? I don't think it will violate
3301:
2957:
1727:
1664:
1130:After me suggesting a quotation:
1085:exactly a bit I had extracted.
476:
29:
3916:. No one is going to actually
3316:to be used for pages regarding
3299:
3243:Could you possibly find time to
1258:Knowledge is not a battleground
404:He restored the copyvio again.
4324:. For the Election committee,
4294:Arbitration Committee election
4285:ArbCom elections are now open!
4269:. For the Election committee,
4239:Arbitration Committee election
4230:ArbCom elections are now open!
4185:22:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
4158:17:12, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
3908:Help untangling knot requested
2876:Re: harv links and haplogroups
2300:multiple distinct formulations
1466:11:45, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
1413:17:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
1394:21:01, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
1379:Article on E-M35 and Languages
1374:11:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
1316:21:30, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
1302:18:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
1288:18:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
1269:17:14, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
1243:20:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
13:
1:
4354:02:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
4334:13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
4279:13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
3730:, can you give an opinion on
3172:Knowledge:No personal attacks
2948:09:02, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
2895:10:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
2871:19:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
2857:14:08, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
2838:08:59, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
2740:16:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
2718:15:41, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
2674:22:01, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
2643:08:40, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
2628:04:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
2583:03:04, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
2569:08:24, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
2540:08:19, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
2517:00:12, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
2501:21:19, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
2478:08:11, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
2446:13:46, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2417:11:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2360:11:15, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2228:22:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2137:10:28, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2118:09:15, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2096:07:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2067:04:45, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
2026:20:51, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
1216:17:11, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
870:11:19, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
839:11:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
786:16:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
767:23:32, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
748:16:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
4399:09:37, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
4339:Impressive genealogical work
3880:00:24, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
3865:23:21, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
3836:11:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
3145:13:39, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
3121:08:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
3068:13:00, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
3015:11:39, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
2785:16:43, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
2766:15:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
2757:that had happened recently.
2614:The map is a favorite among
2278:Contrast with this passage:
2006:21:33, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
1963:at any time by removing the
1938:09:06, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
1849:19:50, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
1796:16:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
1723:15:20, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
1655:16:31, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
1625:11:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
1572:15:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
1072:After my response to the 3O:
993:explanation on the talkpage
7:
4320:and submit your choices on
4265:and submit your choices on
4224:08:19, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
4204:16:19, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
4139:18:34, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
3508:Your threat on my talk page
2681:Talk:Intelligent design/FAQ
2679:Warning on edit-warring at
2651:No personal attacks, please
2514:User:Maunus Ā·ŹaunusĀ·snunÉwĀ·
2434:intelligent design movement
2149:intelligent design movement
1519:12:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
707:18:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
690:17:39, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
656:11:03, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
563:23:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
10:
4414:
4326:MediaWiki message delivery
4271:MediaWiki message delivery
4046:09:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
4001:01:35, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
3231:20:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
3216:20:25, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
3201:19:28, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
3183:08:18, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
3166:while adding an attack on
2186:(Island Press, 2007), and
726:Talk:Teleological argument
531:11:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
467:10:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
400:Valention2013 taken to ANI
276:19:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
18:User talk:Andrew Lancaster
4114:11:51, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
4097:20:23, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
3980:16:12, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
3961:12:45, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
3946:13:45, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
3903:12:25, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
3788:08:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
3759:
3748:10:46, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
2544:Just using google books:
1915:added a link pointing to
1891:added a link pointing to
1878:Hoge Kempen National Park
1152:please stop insulting me
633:added a link pointing to
307:15:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
253:added a link pointing to
229:added a link pointing to
4066:01:57, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
3710:11:23, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
3675:11:06, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
3613:13:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
3530:11:06, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
3500:11:06, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
3482:14:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
3466:11:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
3378:The current comments at
3374:11:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
2573:Just that image I linked
2031:Question about your view
1143:constructive opinion.)
605:added links pointing to
414:16:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
395:14:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
376:14:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
351:11:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
332:11:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
201:added links pointing to
173:added links pointing to
137:added links pointing to
3450:Talk:Intelligent design
3380:Talk:Intelligent design
3314:discretionary sanctions
3291:22:49, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
3261:13:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
2984:my operator's talk page
2458:Cavalli-Sforza and race
1754:my operator's talk page
1691:my operator's talk page
1254:Talk:intelligent design
850:Talk:Intelligent design
554:Talk:Intelligent design
503:my operator's talk page
4192:Talk:John_the_Fearless
4144:Charles Cawley, et.al.
3582:difficult, also makes
3456:provides suggestions.
2611:
2335:
2313:Evidence and Evolution
2293:
2273:
2200:
2168:
2044:, are essentially the
1952:
1067:way on the talk page.
722:
544:
369:Dougweller's talk page
365:
325:Dougweller's talk page
321:
4365:History of Lancashire
4298:Arbitration Committee
4243:Arbitration Committee
4169:User_talk:Kansas_Bear
4127:Man: Past and Present
4012:Teleological argument
3650:My editing record at
3618:My responses follow.
3341:standards of behavior
2887:Lothar von Richthofen
2596:
2330:
2280:
2262:
2196:
2174:. He's an old-timey
2164:
1951:
1221:Appreciation returned
721:
661:Article on "Republic"
543:
364:
320:
42:of past discussions.
4387:opt-out instructions
4034:opt-out instructions
3824:opt-out instructions
3736:Knowledge:Canvassing
3515:Comment copied from
3349:editing restrictions
3337:purpose of Knowledge
3109:opt-out instructions
3056:opt-out instructions
2974:may have broken the
2936:opt-out instructions
2826:opt-out instructions
2528:ancestral components
2258:The Principle Truths
1943:I dropped you a line
1926:opt-out instructions
1902:Revolt of the Batavi
1860:disambiguation pages
1837:opt-out instructions
1744:may have broken the
1681:may have broken the
1613:opt-out instructions
1560:opt-out instructions
1507:opt-out instructions
1454:opt-out instructions
1362:opt-out instructions
827:opt-out instructions
644:opt-out instructions
574:disambiguation pages
493:may have broken the
455:opt-out instructions
264:opt-out instructions
106:disambiguation pages
4302:arbitration process
4247:arbitration process
4210:Mentioned your name
3885:Permission to move?
3266:Your help requested
3150:No personal attacks
3091:fix with Dab solver
3038:fix with Dab solver
2918:fix with Dab solver
2906:Aristotelian ethics
2808:fix with Dab solver
2724:User:Garamond Lethe
2423:User:Garamond Lethe
2369:User:Garamond Lethe
2286:particular creation
2268:particular creation
2172:Christoph Schƶnborn
2153:Robert John Russell
1910:fix with Dab solver
1886:fix with Dab solver
1819:fix with Dab solver
1641:Lowland Livingstons
1595:fix with Dab solver
1542:fix with Dab solver
1489:fix with Dab solver
1436:fix with Dab solver
1344:fix with Dab solver
956:AL's comment to me:
809:fix with Dab solver
628:fix with Dab solver
600:fix with Dab solver
437:fix with Dab solver
248:fix with Dab solver
224:fix with Dab solver
196:fix with Dab solver
168:fix with Dab solver
132:fix with Dab solver
4377:ā¢ Join us at the
4314:arbitration policy
4259:arbitration policy
4024:ā¢ Join us at the
3814:ā¢ Join us at the
3655:for one talk page.
3652:Intelligent design
3517:User talk:Johnuniq
3099:ā¢ Join us at the
3046:ā¢ Join us at the
2926:ā¢ Join us at the
2816:ā¢ Join us at the
2688:Intelligent design
2288:in the curriculum.
2246:Intelligent Design
2042:Barbara Ann Naddeo
1960:remove this notice
1953:
1868:ā¢ Join us at the
1827:ā¢ Join us at the
1603:ā¢ Join us at the
1550:ā¢ Join us at the
1497:ā¢ Join us at the
1444:ā¢ Join us at the
1352:ā¢ Join us at the
875:Impolite behaviour
817:ā¢ Join us at the
753:Intelligent Design
733:remove this notice
723:
582:ā¢ Join us at the
545:
445:ā¢ Join us at the
380:remove this notice
366:
336:remove this notice
322:
147:Historia Naturalis
114:ā¢ Join us at the
4382:
4100:
4083:comment added by
4029:
3819:
3793:
3792:
3577:of Dave souza. I
3532:
3426:recently provided
3275:reassessment page
3156:this edit summary
3104:
3051:
2931:
2821:
2747:Talk:The Simpsons
2716:
2491:comment added by
2468:comment added by
2367:Thanks once more
2358:
2004:
1873:
1832:
1608:
1555:
1502:
1449:
1386:Aikavol3265381519
1357:
822:
693:
676:comment added by
587:
450:
119:
97:
96:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
4405:
4372:
4120:Germanic Peoples
4106:Andrew Lancaster
4099:
4077:
4019:
3953:NewsAndEventsGuy
3938:NewsAndEventsGuy
3895:NewsAndEventsGuy
3809:
3764:
3757:
3756:
3702:Andrew Lancaster
3605:Andrew Lancaster
3513:
3474:Andrew Lancaster
3305:
3279:WeijiBaikeBianji
3271:Haplogroup E-V38
3223:Andrew Lancaster
3193:Andrew Lancaster
3094:
3087:check to confirm
3041:
3034:check to confirm
3000:
2961:
2960:
2921:
2914:check to confirm
2811:
2804:check to confirm
2763:
2732:Andrew Lancaster
2715:
2713:
2699:
2635:Andrew Lancaster
2609:
2561:Andrew Lancaster
2532:Andrew Lancaster
2503:
2480:
2438:Andrew Lancaster
2409:Andrew Lancaster
2357:
2355:
2341:
2226:
2215:
2208:Rupert Sheldrake
2180:Joan Roughgarden
2129:Andrew Lancaster
2110:Andrew Lancaster
2088:Andrew Lancaster
2065:
2063:
2056:
2038:Sara Ahbel-Rappe
2003:
2001:
1987:
1984:
1982:
1976:
1972:
1966:
1962:
1950:
1906:check to confirm
1882:check to confirm
1863:
1822:
1815:check to confirm
1781:
1771:
1731:
1730:
1708:
1668:
1667:
1647:QuintusPetillius
1598:
1591:check to confirm
1545:
1538:check to confirm
1492:
1485:check to confirm
1439:
1432:check to confirm
1399:Re: Common Sense
1347:
1340:check to confirm
1280:Andrew Lancaster
812:
805:check to confirm
736:
699:Andrew Lancaster
692:
670:
635:United Provinces
624:check to confirm
596:check to confirm
577:
560:
480:
479:
440:
433:check to confirm
383:
339:
296:
244:check to confirm
220:check to confirm
192:check to confirm
164:check to confirm
128:check to confirm
109:
78:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
4413:
4412:
4408:
4407:
4406:
4404:
4403:
4402:
4379:DPL WikiProject
4361:
4341:
4322:the voting page
4288:
4267:the voting page
4233:
4212:
4165:
4146:
4122:
4078:
4073:
4053:
4026:DPL WikiProject
4008:
3990:
3923:
3910:
3887:
3843:
3816:DPL WikiProject
3802:Natural science
3798:
3768:The Green Award
3755:
3724:
3647:special reason.
3510:
3363:
3362:
3306:
3298:
3268:
3245:
3152:
3137:121.127.210.125
3128:
3101:DPL WikiProject
3075:
3048:DPL WikiProject
3022:
2996:
2958:
2955:
2928:DPL WikiProject
2902:
2882:series of edits
2878:
2845:
2818:DPL WikiProject
2792:
2773:
2759:
2755:this discussion
2750:
2705:
2700:
2684:
2653:
2610:
2603:
2486:
2463:
2460:
2347:
2342:
2235:
2216:
2211:
2059:
2052:
2050:
2033:
2013:
1993:
1988:
1985:
1980:
1974:
1970:
1968:You've got mail
1964:
1956:
1948:
1945:
1870:DPL WikiProject
1856:
1829:DPL WikiProject
1803:
1777:
1767:
1728:
1704:
1665:
1662:
1632:
1605:DPL WikiProject
1579:
1552:DPL WikiProject
1526:
1499:DPL WikiProject
1473:
1446:DPL WikiProject
1420:
1401:
1381:
1354:DPL WikiProject
1328:
1276:User:Dave souza
1250:
1229:. Thanks! --
1223:
986:giving reasons
877:
846:
819:DPL WikiProject
793:
774:
755:
737:
730:
715:
671:
663:
584:DPL WikiProject
570:
558:
538:
515:
477:
474:
447:DPL WikiProject
421:
402:
384:
373:
358:
340:
329:
314:
294:
285:
116:DPL WikiProject
102:
74:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
4411:
4360:
4357:
4340:
4337:
4291:
4287:
4282:
4236:
4232:
4227:
4211:
4208:
4207:
4206:
4164:
4161:
4145:
4142:
4121:
4118:
4117:
4116:
4085:Corneliotacito
4072:
4069:
4052:
4051:Ashkenazi Jews
4049:
4007:
4004:
3989:
3986:
3985:
3984:
3983:
3982:
3964:
3963:
3921:
3909:
3906:
3886:
3883:
3842:
3839:
3806:Laws of nature
3797:
3794:
3791:
3790:
3771:
3770:
3765:
3754:
3751:
3723:
3720:
3719:
3718:
3717:
3716:
3715:
3714:
3713:
3712:
3693:
3689:
3685:
3658:
3657:
3656:
3648:
3635:Re my linking
3633:
3629:
3628:NOR violation.
3625:
3622:
3600:
3599:
3591:
3586:discussion of
3571:
3567:
3564:
3560:
3557:
3554:
3551:
3548:
3545:
3541:
3534:
3533:
3509:
3506:
3505:
3504:
3503:
3502:
3443:is not a forum
3343:, or relevant
3322:fringe science
3307:
3300:
3297:
3294:
3267:
3264:
3249:Ashkenazi Jews
3244:
3241:
3240:
3239:
3238:
3237:
3236:
3235:
3234:
3233:
3151:
3148:
3127:
3124:
3074:
3071:
3021:
3018:
3003:
3002:
2992:
2991:
2954:
2951:
2901:
2898:
2877:
2874:
2844:
2841:
2791:
2788:
2772:
2769:
2749:
2744:
2743:
2742:
2714:
2709:
2703:Garamond Lethe
2683:
2677:
2652:
2649:
2648:
2647:
2646:
2645:
2601:
2595:
2594:
2591:
2590:
2589:
2588:
2587:
2586:
2585:
2575:174.95.168.226
2557:
2556:
2555:
2550:
2542:
2459:
2456:
2455:
2454:
2453:
2452:
2451:
2450:
2449:
2448:
2430:
2405:
2390:
2389:
2388:
2384:
2381:
2356:
2351:
2345:Garamond Lethe
2234:
2231:
2192:Brockman, John
2188:Daniel Dennett
2144:
2143:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2139:
2032:
2029:
2012:
2009:
2002:
1997:
1991:Garamond Lethe
1955:
1946:
1944:
1941:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1919:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1895:
1855:
1852:
1802:
1799:
1784:
1783:
1773:
1762:
1761:
1711:
1710:
1699:
1698:
1661:
1658:
1631:
1628:
1578:
1575:
1525:
1522:
1472:
1469:
1419:
1416:
1405:Stevenmitchell
1400:
1397:
1380:
1377:
1327:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1249:
1246:
1222:
1219:
1167:
1163:started by AL:
1155:
1146:
1128:
1095:
1088:
1070:
1060:
1000:
996:
989:
969:
897:
876:
873:
845:
842:
792:
789:
773:
772:Ayala's review
770:
754:
751:
729:
716:
714:
711:
710:
709:
662:
659:
640:
639:
638:
637:
616:
615:
614:
613:
569:
566:
537:
534:
519:
518:
511:
510:
473:
470:
420:
417:
401:
398:
374:Message added
372:
359:
357:
354:
330:Message added
328:
315:
313:
310:
284:
279:
260:
259:
258:
257:
236:
235:
234:
233:
212:
211:
210:
209:
184:
183:
182:
181:
156:
155:
154:
153:
101:
98:
95:
94:
89:
84:
79:
72:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4410:
4401:
4400:
4396:
4392:
4388:
4383:
4380:
4376:
4370:
4366:
4356:
4355:
4351:
4347:
4336:
4335:
4331:
4327:
4323:
4319:
4315:
4311:
4307:
4303:
4299:
4295:
4286:
4281:
4280:
4276:
4272:
4268:
4264:
4260:
4256:
4252:
4248:
4244:
4240:
4231:
4226:
4225:
4221:
4217:
4205:
4201:
4197:
4193:
4189:
4188:
4187:
4186:
4182:
4178:
4174:
4170:
4160:
4159:
4155:
4151:
4141:
4140:
4136:
4132:
4128:
4115:
4111:
4107:
4103:
4102:
4101:
4098:
4094:
4090:
4086:
4082:
4068:
4067:
4063:
4059:
4048:
4047:
4043:
4039:
4035:
4030:
4027:
4023:
4017:
4013:
4003:
4002:
3999:
3995:
3981:
3977:
3973:
3972:Roxy the dogā¢
3968:
3967:
3966:
3965:
3962:
3958:
3954:
3950:
3949:
3948:
3947:
3943:
3939:
3935:
3930:
3926:
3919:
3915:
3905:
3904:
3900:
3896:
3892:
3882:
3881:
3877:
3873:
3867:
3866:
3862:
3858:
3853:
3850:
3848:
3838:
3837:
3833:
3829:
3825:
3820:
3817:
3813:
3807:
3803:
3789:
3785:
3781:
3777:
3773:
3772:
3769:
3766:
3763:
3758:
3750:
3749:
3745:
3741:
3737:
3733:
3729:
3711:
3707:
3703:
3699:
3694:
3690:
3686:
3682:
3681:
3680:
3679:
3678:
3677:
3676:
3672:
3668:
3664:
3659:
3653:
3649:
3646:
3642:
3638:
3634:
3630:
3626:
3623:
3620:
3619:
3617:
3616:
3615:
3614:
3610:
3606:
3597:
3592:
3589:
3585:
3580:
3576:
3572:
3568:
3565:
3561:
3558:
3555:
3552:
3549:
3546:
3542:
3539:
3538:
3537:
3531:
3527:
3523:
3519:
3518:
3512:
3511:
3501:
3497:
3493:
3489:
3485:
3484:
3483:
3479:
3475:
3470:
3469:
3468:
3467:
3463:
3459:
3455:
3451:
3446:
3444:
3440:
3436:
3431:
3427:
3421:
3419:
3415:
3410:
3408:
3403:
3401:
3397:
3396:third request
3393:
3389:
3385:
3381:
3376:
3375:
3371:
3367:
3360:
3358:
3354:
3350:
3346:
3342:
3338:
3334:
3329:
3327:
3323:
3319:
3318:pseudoscience
3315:
3310:
3304:
3296:Pseudoscience
3293:
3292:
3288:
3284:
3280:
3276:
3272:
3263:
3262:
3258:
3254:
3250:
3232:
3228:
3224:
3219:
3218:
3217:
3213:
3209:
3204:
3203:
3202:
3198:
3194:
3189:
3188:
3187:
3186:
3185:
3184:
3181:
3177:
3173:
3169:
3165:
3161:
3157:
3147:
3146:
3142:
3138:
3134:
3123:
3122:
3118:
3114:
3110:
3105:
3102:
3098:
3092:
3088:
3084:
3080:
3070:
3069:
3065:
3061:
3057:
3052:
3049:
3045:
3039:
3035:
3031:
3027:
3017:
3016:
3012:
3008:
2999:
2994:
2993:
2989:
2988:
2987:
2985:
2981:
2980:edit the page
2977:
2973:
2969:
2965:
2950:
2949:
2945:
2941:
2937:
2932:
2929:
2925:
2919:
2915:
2911:
2907:
2897:
2896:
2892:
2888:
2883:
2873:
2872:
2868:
2864:
2859:
2858:
2854:
2850:
2840:
2839:
2835:
2831:
2827:
2822:
2819:
2815:
2809:
2805:
2801:
2797:
2787:
2786:
2782:
2778:
2768:
2767:
2764:
2762:
2761:Blurred Lines
2756:
2748:
2741:
2737:
2733:
2729:
2725:
2722:
2721:
2720:
2719:
2712:
2708:
2704:
2701:
2697:
2693:
2689:
2682:
2676:
2675:
2672:
2668:
2664:
2660:
2657:
2644:
2640:
2636:
2631:
2630:
2629:
2625:
2621:
2620:ArtifexMayhem
2617:
2616:race realists
2613:
2612:
2607:
2600:
2592:
2584:
2580:
2576:
2572:
2571:
2570:
2566:
2562:
2558:
2554:
2551:
2549:
2546:
2545:
2543:
2541:
2537:
2533:
2529:
2525:
2520:
2519:
2518:
2515:
2512:
2508:
2507:
2506:
2505:
2504:
2502:
2498:
2494:
2490:
2485:
2481:
2479:
2475:
2471:
2470:174.88.32.194
2467:
2447:
2443:
2439:
2435:
2431:
2427:
2426:
2424:
2420:
2419:
2418:
2414:
2410:
2406:
2403:
2399:
2395:
2391:
2385:
2382:
2378:
2377:
2375:
2370:
2366:
2365:
2364:
2363:
2362:
2361:
2354:
2350:
2346:
2343:
2339:
2334:
2329:
2327:
2322:
2319:
2315:
2314:
2307:
2305:
2301:
2296:
2292:
2291:
2289:
2287:
2279:
2276:
2272:
2271:
2269:
2261:
2259:
2255:
2249:
2247:
2243:
2239:
2230:
2229:
2224:
2223:Contributions
2220:
2214:
2209:
2205:
2204:Robin Collins
2199:
2195:
2193:
2189:
2185:
2181:
2177:
2173:
2167:
2163:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2150:
2138:
2134:
2130:
2125:
2121:
2120:
2119:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2098:
2097:
2093:
2089:
2084:
2079:
2075:
2071:
2070:
2069:
2068:
2064:
2062:
2057:
2055:
2047:
2043:
2039:
2028:
2027:
2023:
2019:
2008:
2007:
2000:
1996:
1992:
1989:
1979:
1969:
1961:
1940:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1927:
1918:
1914:
1913:
1911:
1907:
1903:
1900:
1899:
1894:
1890:
1889:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1871:
1867:
1861:
1851:
1850:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1833:
1830:
1826:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1798:
1797:
1793:
1789:
1780:
1775:</ref: -->
1774:
1772:</ref: -->
1770:
1765:"<ref: -->
1764:
1763:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1755:
1751:
1750:edit the page
1747:
1743:
1739:
1735:
1725:
1724:
1720:
1716:
1709:</ref: -->
1707:
1702:"<ref: -->
1701:
1700:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1692:
1688:
1687:edit the page
1684:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1657:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1645:
1642:
1637:
1627:
1626:
1622:
1618:
1614:
1609:
1606:
1602:
1596:
1592:
1588:
1584:
1583:Low Countries
1574:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1556:
1553:
1549:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1521:
1520:
1516:
1512:
1508:
1503:
1500:
1496:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1450:
1447:
1443:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1415:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1396:
1395:
1391:
1387:
1376:
1375:
1371:
1367:
1363:
1358:
1355:
1351:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1317:
1314:
1310:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1300:
1296:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1285:
1281:
1277:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1218:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1204:
1202:
1198:
1197:
1193:
1190:
1186:
1183:
1180:
1177:
1175:
1171:
1170:
1165:
1164:
1162:
1156:
1153:
1150:
1149:
1144:
1141:
1138:
1136:
1132:
1131:
1126:
1123:
1120:
1117:
1114:
1112:
1108:
1105:
1102:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1090:
1086:
1083:
1080:
1077:
1074:
1073:
1068:
1065:
1062:
1058:
1055:
1052:
1049:
1046:
1043:
1042:
1038:
1035:
1032:
1031:
1027:
1024:
1021:
1018:
1015:
1012:
1011:
1007:
1004:
1003:
998:
994:
991:
987:
984:
981:
978:
977:
973:
972:
967:
965:
961:
958:
957:
953:
950:
947:
944:
943:
939:
936:
933:
930:
927:
924:
921:
920:
916:
913:
910:
907:
904:
901:
900:
895:
892:
890:
886:
881:
872:
871:
867:
863:
859:
856:referring to
855:
851:
841:
840:
836:
832:
828:
823:
820:
816:
810:
806:
802:
798:
788:
787:
783:
779:
769:
768:
764:
760:
750:
749:
745:
741:
734:
727:
720:
708:
704:
700:
696:
695:
694:
691:
687:
683:
679:
675:
667:
658:
657:
653:
649:
645:
636:
632:
631:
629:
625:
621:
620:Low Countries
618:
617:
612:
608:
604:
603:
601:
597:
593:
590:
589:
588:
585:
581:
575:
565:
564:
561:
555:
550:
542:
533:
532:
528:
524:
513:
512:
508:
507:
506:
504:
500:
499:edit the page
496:
492:
488:
484:
469:
468:
464:
460:
456:
451:
448:
444:
438:
434:
430:
426:
416:
415:
411:
407:
397:
396:
392:
388:
381:
377:
370:
363:
353:
352:
348:
344:
337:
333:
326:
319:
309:
308:
305:
301:
300:
297:
290:
283:
278:
277:
273:
269:
265:
256:
252:
251:
249:
245:
241:
238:
237:
232:
228:
227:
225:
221:
217:
214:
213:
208:
204:
200:
199:
197:
193:
189:
186:
185:
180:
176:
172:
171:
169:
165:
161:
158:
157:
152:
148:
144:
140:
136:
135:
133:
129:
125:
122:
121:
120:
117:
113:
107:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
77:
73:
71:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
4384:
4362:
4342:
4289:
4234:
4213:
4166:
4147:
4126:
4123:
4079:āĀ Preceding
4074:
4054:
4031:
4009:
3991:
3933:
3931:
3927:
3917:
3911:
3891:this segment
3888:
3868:
3854:
3851:
3844:
3821:
3799:
3775:
3767:
3725:
3697:
3644:
3601:
3595:
3587:
3583:
3578:
3535:
3514:
3447:
3441:. Knowledge
3422:
3411:
3404:
3377:
3364:
3330:
3311:
3308:
3269:
3246:
3164:this comment
3160:this comment
3153:
3129:
3106:
3076:
3053:
3023:
3004:
2997:
2956:
2953:January 2014
2933:
2903:
2879:
2863:Rick Norwood
2860:
2849:Rick Norwood
2846:
2823:
2793:
2774:
2760:
2751:
2685:
2654:
2597:
2527:
2523:
2493:70.49.46.240
2487:ā Preceding
2482:
2464:ā Preceding
2461:
2401:
2397:
2393:
2373:
2340:
2336:
2331:
2323:
2311:
2308:
2303:
2297:
2294:
2285:
2282:
2281:
2277:
2274:
2267:
2264:
2263:
2257:
2254:John Wilkins
2250:
2241:
2236:
2201:
2197:
2183:
2169:
2165:
2160:
2157:Michael Ruse
2145:
2105:
2082:
2077:
2060:
2053:
2045:
2034:
2014:
1986:
1923:
1857:
1834:
1804:
1785:
1778:
1768:
1726:
1712:
1705:
1663:
1660:October 2013
1640:
1633:
1610:
1580:
1557:
1527:
1504:
1477:Common sense
1474:
1451:
1424:Common sense
1421:
1402:
1382:
1359:
1332:Common sense
1329:
1251:
1227:my talk page
1224:
1205:
1200:
1199:
1195:
1194:
1188:
1187:
1184:
1181:
1178:
1173:
1172:
1168:
1166:
1158:
1157:
1154:
1151:
1147:
1145:
1142:
1139:
1134:
1133:
1129:
1127:
1124:
1121:
1118:
1115:
1110:
1109:
1106:
1103:
1099:
1098:
1094:
1091:
1087:
1084:
1081:
1078:
1075:
1071:
1069:
1066:
1063:
1059:
1056:
1053:
1050:
1047:
1044:
1040:
1039:
1036:
1033:
1029:
1028:
1025:
1022:
1019:
1016:
1013:
1009:
1008:
1005:
1001:
999:
995:
992:
988:
985:
982:
979:
975:
974:
970:
968:
963:
962:
959:
955:
954:
951:
948:
945:
941:
940:
937:
934:
931:
928:
925:
922:
918:
917:
914:
911:
908:
905:
902:
898:
896:
893:
888:
883:I note that
882:
878:
853:
847:
824:
797:Common sense
794:
775:
756:
738:
672:ā Preceding
669:Thank you.
668:
664:
641:
592:Common sense
571:
546:
520:
516:
491:Common sense
475:
452:
429:Modern times
425:Common sense
422:
403:
385:
341:
292:
286:
261:
103:
75:
43:
37:
4150:Kansas Bear
4076:of Suevi.
4071:Suevi/Suavi
4016:Prime mover
3994:Leo Strauss
3920:the phrase
3847:Thomas More
3168:User:Myrvin
3154:Andrew, in
3126:Leo Strauss
3026:Burgundians
2962:Hello, I'm
2796:Burgundians
2326:Nick Matzke
1742:Banochaemae
1732:Hello, I'm
1679:Banochaemae
1669:Hello, I'm
1636:Clan MacLea
1630:Clan MacLea
1336:Malebranche
611:Peripatetic
481:Hello, I'm
472:August 2013
36:This is an
4389:. Thanks,
4346:Obenritter
4310:topic bans
4255:topic bans
4131:Obenritter
4036:. Thanks,
3826:. Thanks,
3698:grudgingly
3641:Dave souza
3414:this reply
3333:uninvolved
3287:how I edit
3176:dave souza
3111:. Thanks,
3058:. Thanks,
3007:BracketBot
2964:BracketBot
2938:. Thanks,
2828:. Thanks,
2777:TomS TDotO
2667:dave souza
2328:observed:
2219:Discussion
2213:Atethnekos
2074:User:Zad68
1928:. Thanks,
1839:. Thanks,
1788:BracketBot
1734:BracketBot
1715:BracketBot
1671:BracketBot
1615:. Thanks,
1562:. Thanks,
1509:. Thanks,
1456:. Thanks,
1364:. Thanks,
1309:dave souza
1295:dave souza
1262:dave souza
829:. Thanks,
740:Jackmcbarn
646:. Thanks,
523:BracketBot
483:BracketBot
457:. Thanks,
406:Dougweller
387:Dougweller
378:. You can
343:Dougweller
334:. You can
266:. Thanks,
160:Chattuarii
124:Hermunduri
4373:Read the
4306:site bans
4251:site bans
4020:Read the
3934:proposals
3922:I propose
3872:Tlhslobus
3857:Tlhslobus
3810:Read the
3722:Kekoolani
3435:WP:FRINGE
3253:Nishidani
3095:Read the
3042:Read the
2968:your edit
2922:Read the
2812:Read the
2728:WP:POINTy
2608:, pg. 19.
2524:memorable
2124:this blog
2106:forbidden
2102:Limousine
1983:template.
1893:Watershed
1864:Read the
1823:Read the
1738:your edit
1675:your edit
1599:Read the
1546:Read the
1493:Read the
1440:Read the
1348:Read the
1231:MisterDub
1010:AL wrote:
919:AL wrote:
813:Read the
759:BabyJonas
578:Read the
559:EarwigBot
487:your edit
441:Read the
240:Chasuarii
188:Dulgubnii
110:Read the
92:ArchiveĀ 7
87:ArchiveĀ 6
82:ArchiveĀ 5
76:ArchiveĀ 4
70:ArchiveĀ 3
65:ArchiveĀ 2
60:ArchiveĀ 1
4369:John Kay
4163:MedLands
4093:contribs
4081:unsigned
3976:resonate
3740:KAVEBEAR
3667:Johnuniq
3637:the post
3544:details.
3522:Johnuniq
3492:Johnuniq
3458:Johnuniq
3407:WP:SNYTH
3366:Johnuniq
3345:policies
3005:Thanks,
2972:Tongeren
2489:unsigned
2466:unsigned
2210:fan. --
1786:Thanks,
1713:Thanks,
1587:Frankish
1428:A priori
1239:contribs
1041:AL said:
1002:I wrote:
942:I wrote:
862:Johnuniq
778:Yopienso
713:Talkback
686:contribs
678:Mccarthd
674:unsigned
607:Gassendi
521:Thanks,
356:Talkback
312:Talkback
282:Discorsi
207:Lombardi
139:Domitius
4391:DPL bot
4194:again.
4038:DPL bot
3828:DPL bot
3780:Rukn950
3579:presume
3430:Charles
3191:page.--
3113:DPL bot
3079:Vandals
3060:DPL bot
2940:DPL bot
2830:DPL bot
2511:summary
2396:of the
2394:history
2380:design.
2176:Thomist
1930:DPL bot
1841:DPL bot
1617:DPL bot
1564:DPL bot
1511:DPL bot
1458:DPL bot
1366:DPL bot
1189:Myrvin:
1159:In the
1148:I said:
1100:Myrvin:
1030:I said:
964:Myrvin:
831:DPL bot
648:DPL bot
459:DPL bot
289:MOS:DAB
268:DPL bot
216:Chamavi
175:Triumph
39:archive
4296:. The
4241:. The
4216:Aigest
4196:Victar
4177:Victar
4058:Khazar
3998:MaxEnt
3918:notice
3776:Nature
3753:Awards
3570:wrong.
3388:WP:NOR
3357:blocks
3339:, our
3208:Myrvin
3083:Veneti
2976:syntax
2910:Sophia
2843:Reason
2800:Probus
2696:WP:3RR
2692:WP:3RR
2663:WP:NPA
2421:Sorry
2238:Andrew
2072:Hello
2018:Sitush
1917:Batavi
1811:Batini
1746:syntax
1683:syntax
1481:Seneca
1208:Myrvin
885:WP:npa
858:WP:UCN
844:WP:TPO
495:syntax
295:Ignatz
3663:WP:AE
3454:WP:DR
3439:WP:AE
3355:, or
3030:Etzel
2078:still
1807:Suebi
1534:Varus
1530:Suebi
801:Locke
151:Ister
16:<
4395:talk
4350:talk
4330:talk
4275:talk
4220:talk
4200:talk
4181:talk
4154:talk
4135:talk
4110:talk
4089:talk
4062:talk
4042:talk
3957:talk
3942:talk
3899:talk
3876:talk
3861:talk
3832:talk
3784:talk
3744:talk
3706:talk
3671:talk
3609:talk
3575:post
3526:talk
3496:talk
3488:here
3478:talk
3462:talk
3418:here
3400:diff
3392:diff
3386:and
3384:WP:V
3370:talk
3353:bans
3326:here
3320:and
3283:talk
3257:talk
3227:talk
3212:talk
3197:talk
3180:talk
3158:and
3141:talk
3117:talk
3064:talk
3011:talk
2944:talk
2891:talk
2867:talk
2853:talk
2834:talk
2781:talk
2736:talk
2671:talk
2639:talk
2624:talk
2579:talk
2565:talk
2536:talk
2497:talk
2474:talk
2442:talk
2413:talk
2398:term
2304:name
2260:as:
2248:.
2133:talk
2114:talk
2092:talk
2046:same
2022:talk
1934:talk
1845:talk
1792:talk
1719:talk
1651:talk
1621:talk
1568:talk
1515:talk
1462:talk
1409:talk
1390:talk
1370:talk
1313:talk
1299:talk
1284:talk
1278:. --
1266:talk
1235:talk
1212:talk
866:talk
835:talk
782:talk
763:talk
744:talk
703:talk
682:talk
652:talk
609:and
527:talk
463:talk
410:talk
391:talk
347:talk
304:talk
299:mice
272:talk
205:and
177:and
149:and
143:Saal
4375:FAQ
4290:Hi,
4235:Hi,
4022:FAQ
3812:FAQ
3692:it?
3639:of
3596:not
3588:any
3584:any
3437:is
3428:by
3097:FAQ
3044:FAQ
2970:to
2924:FAQ
2814:FAQ
2402:now
2182:'s
2054:Zad
2011:RSN
1978:ygm
1973:or
1866:FAQ
1825:FAQ
1740:to
1677:to
1601:FAQ
1548:FAQ
1495:FAQ
1442:FAQ
1350:FAQ
1201:AL:
1174:AL:
1135:AL:
1111:AL:
976:AL:
891:."
854:not
815:FAQ
580:FAQ
489:to
443:FAQ
255:Ems
231:Ems
203:Ems
179:Ems
112:FAQ
4397:)
4352:)
4332:)
4308:,
4277:)
4253:,
4222:)
4202:)
4183:)
4156:)
4137:)
4112:)
4095:)
4091:ā¢
4064:)
4044:)
3978:)
3959:)
3944:)
3901:)
3878:)
3863:)
3834:)
3786:)
3746:)
3708:)
3673:)
3645:no
3611:)
3528:)
3520:.
3498:)
3480:)
3464:)
3372:)
3351:,
3328:.
3289:)
3285:,
3259:)
3229:)
3221:--
3214:)
3199:)
3178:,
3143:)
3119:)
3089:|
3066:)
3036:|
3013:)
2986:.
2946:)
2916:|
2893:)
2869:)
2855:)
2836:)
2806:|
2783:)
2738:)
2669:,
2641:)
2626:)
2602:ā
2581:)
2567:)
2538:)
2499:)
2476:)
2444:)
2415:)
2221:,
2135:)
2116:)
2094:)
2083:no
2061:68
2024:)
1981:}}
1975:{{
1971:}}
1965:{{
1936:)
1912:)
1908:|
1888:)
1884:|
1847:)
1817:|
1794:)
1779:]]
1769:]]
1756:.
1721:)
1706:]]
1693:.
1653:)
1623:)
1593:|
1570:)
1540:|
1517:)
1487:|
1464:)
1434:|
1411:)
1392:)
1372:)
1342:|
1311:,
1297:,
1286:)
1264:,
1241:)
1237:|
1214:)
868:)
837:)
807:|
784:)
765:)
746:)
705:)
688:)
684:ā¢
654:)
630:)
626:|
602:)
598:|
529:)
505:.
465:)
435:|
412:)
393:)
349:)
274:)
250:)
246:|
226:)
222:|
198:)
194:|
170:)
166:|
145:,
141:,
134:)
130:|
4393:(
4381:.
4348:(
4328:(
4273:(
4218:(
4198:(
4179:(
4152:(
4133:(
4108:(
4087:(
4060:(
4040:(
4028:.
3974:(
3970:-
3955:(
3940:(
3897:(
3874:(
3859:(
3830:(
3818:.
3782:(
3778:.
3742:(
3704:(
3669:(
3607:(
3524:(
3494:(
3476:(
3460:(
3368:(
3281:(
3255:(
3225:(
3210:(
3195:(
3139:(
3115:(
3103:.
3085:(
3062:(
3050:.
3032:(
3009:(
2998:(
2942:(
2930:.
2912:(
2889:(
2865:(
2851:(
2832:(
2820:.
2802:(
2779:(
2734:(
2711:c
2707:t
2637:(
2622:(
2577:(
2563:(
2534:(
2495:(
2472:(
2440:(
2411:(
2353:c
2349:t
2225:)
2217:(
2131:(
2112:(
2090:(
2020:(
1999:c
1995:t
1932:(
1904:(
1880:(
1872:.
1843:(
1831:.
1813:(
1790:(
1717:(
1649:(
1619:(
1607:.
1589:(
1566:(
1554:.
1536:(
1513:(
1501:.
1483:(
1460:(
1448:.
1430:(
1407:(
1388:(
1368:(
1356:.
1338:(
1282:(
1233:(
1210:(
864:(
833:(
821:.
803:(
780:(
761:(
742:(
728:.
701:(
680:(
650:(
622:(
594:(
586:.
552:"
525:(
461:(
449:.
431:(
408:(
389:(
371:.
345:(
327:.
302:ā¢
270:(
242:(
218:(
190:(
162:(
126:(
118:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.