773:"such" there, are you not. I began that discussion complaining that a fair use quote of a few lines from a Tennessee Williams play was deleted by Crisco. That's an example where an administrator arguably is using his powers to control content. There are other examples there I could give examples of the same sort of thing. It looks as if this nomination is going to go through with a nominated image that in all probability (an expert in the forum agrees there is a color-cast in the image) is not even remotely a faithful representation of its subject. Thus I dismissed the painting at glance on the basis of the nominated image. When I did finally see an image of it as it was (and there's no reason to suppose a painting that is barely 100 years old and stored by the Met is not basically in the same condition) I'm prepared to concede that it has real merit, though that still does not stop me from opposing it. You were pinged on an issue concerning another editor. I have courteously addressed another issue you nevertheless presented here. I can't see I need to host you here again in the foreseeable future. I shall continue to oppose nominations at WP:FP I regard as inappropriate, whether nominated by Crisco, the other editor you say you like, or for that matter any other editor. Probably, as I did in this case, I shall simply record my opposition, indicate a reason as required by the forum in the case of opposition, and indicate that I should prefer not to debate it. On another occasion perhaps
379:. But what seems to have really piqued him was the rejection of his nomination by the forum's closer (who came up for RfA shortly after as it happens, supported by me but not our mentoring admin I noticed). I might have some sympathy for the mentee's plight were it not for his ingratiating himself on this Talk page in the apparent belief that I am a sock-puppet he was formerly matey with, his threat to out me, his subsequent disruptive canvassing, and a disgraceful personal attack on the admin's Talk page when I ventured to chill the dispute. Looking though his contributions I see a history of disruptive canvassing, a previous four year absence and a new identity. Needless to say I am unmoved.
1672:). Regarding all the renewed dramah about " ... on this account" over at ANI, that was meant in a rather general life-encompassing sense. Short of a miracle I shan't be back. My ex categorically refuses to valedict me here, but you can safely trust me on that. I did notice something else there from the the editor the administrator I don't care to cite likes. He (she) said that I was a man because I said "I'm a Turner man". But that's a remark that in colloquial English both men and women make. I did note early on that a possible reason for this editor's sensitivity is his problems with English as a second language. Erm (safe to admit now I think) ... I'm a lady, pink bits and everything (
694:. I was in fact in the Middle East in a country that is essentially a police state. Of course one has to be careful. The posts I made referenced an art historian I was responsible for introducing to the discussion and I chose an IP from Crisco's locality (which he necessarily makes no attempt to hide since he uploads so many fine photographs from his locality, many of whose nominations I have supported incidentally). Of course he might have surmised it was me. The moment I was challenged by another editor, I disclosed myself. The
1712:
117:(unless I'm reading-impaired), and I consider it a personal attack. I'm not sure what your problems are with these FA nominations, since I don't speak digital/art/whatever language, but I'm sure that there is a better way of addressing it than by making derogatory comments in an FA nomination process, and I encourage you to remove it altogether, or at least strike it through. If you have a problem with a user, solve it elsewhere--there are plenty of acronyms to go around, including
843:
1249:
360:
to me exactly as I say: there are now tens of thousands of high res images out there, all of them eligible. It's become a somewhat pointless in-house game. Thus presently we have a somewhat minor
Gainsborough portrait attracting enthusiastic support on the basis of it being a NGA high res image newly discovered by that community. Yet when I nominate a much more noteworthy painting by Mary Cassatt uploaded by me last year from the same NGA source, it is ignored.
76:
2351:
2299:
2245:
2189:
2090:
2034:
51:
21:
1885:
poor artistic merit but because it also inappropriate by today's standards of decency. I have also instructed my agents to try and contact the estate of the late
Suzanne Delvé, who I think is quite clearly the subject of that painting, with a view to finding out if there is other material which corroborates her story and perhaps documents her experience. If you would like to open a Knowledge ANI board about those actions feel free.
205:. I was in fact responding to Adam Cuerden who has posted once in a friendly and constructive way on this page and whose excellent restorations I invariably support. I was pointing out in the first place that the NGA high resolution pics he has been championing recently are not especially new and then just chattily banging on about criteria again. Perhaps you could let me know if you are satisfied with my explanation.
1141:
1668:
1965:(reproduced as a Fair Use image in his Knowledge article). You made no reply, as indeed you and your supporters made no effort to address any of the issues I raised. Well I can tell you, as indeed I could have told you then had you cared to enquire, what the Met's position is: in the first place they had the option to purchase this painting but refused it, and secondly it was not displayed at
668:
suggestion. Stay away from Crisco and his FPs. I am now convinced that you are engaged in a pattern of harassment, and in this case chose the low blow of the anonymous accusation of pedophilia; it will not take much more to convince me that the proper way to respond to any next provocation is with a block. Feel free to respond as cutely or patronizingly as you like--it's like eating glass,
718:"As for your closing note, about an "overt intent to re-establish Chabas as an artist of note"... You assume much too much. I couldn't care less if he's seen as an artist of note, an academic who only did art because its fashionable, or what have you. I want to cover this painting because it was a (ridiculously popular) social phenomenon, with a very interesting and complicated history.
905:
subject. I don't understand much about the first issue, and the second one is not of concern to me. Perhaps you could have halted its advancement if you hadn't spent your time on suggesting evil motives for the nominator. Honi soit qui mal y pense. Please don't ping me unless you need urgent admin help, and I have no desire to have the lost word here.
2368:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see
2316:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see
2264:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see
2208:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see
2109:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see
2053:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see
457:. Read the article before you accuse me of OR: "They were comforted when I took first prize for both tragedy and comedy, and glad of the money I made on the stage when the war reduced our resources ... my stage work has taken me even to Hollywood". I did not say she was the same DelvĂ© as in the French Knowledge article. That's your OR. â
1952:. It is exactly as I say: the painting is in good condition and is in storage. It's unlikely to be displayed again except as part of a specialist exhibition. The donating family is held in high esteem by the museum (amongst other things they made available the funds for the Philadelphia's purchase of Mary Cassatt's
848:
of women by starvation, and the dwarfing of childhood by physical and spiritual nightâare not solved; so long as, in certain regions, social asphyxia shall be possible; in other words, and from a yet more extended point of view, so long as ignorance and misery remain on earth, books like this cannot be useless
1515:
have copyrighted images in userspace at all. The image from Les
Miserables is copyrighted, please remove it or I will have no choice to report this image, I don't want to , but that is policy. As to your question, the artwork is used in Les Miserables, thus, it is copyrighted. (Wiki always assumes
1049:
and after that would review my account. That event is past and I briefly considered closing my account in protest (much as you yourself were doing at the time, incidentally, in connection with some other drama involving politeness), but in the end thought better of it. It's quite plain to me that you
847:
So long as there shall exist, by reason of law and custom, a social condemnation, which, in the face of civilization, artificially creates hells on earth, and complicates a destiny that is divine with human fatality; so long as the three problems of the ageâthe degradation of man by poverty, the ruin
488:
I'll be busy mostly today. Only back briefly to cover the Scots referendum and then off again. My opposition to that image remains as before. It's inappropriate by today's standards. No UK gallery today would dare to exhibit it (even if for some reason they wanted to on its negligible artistic merits
1884:
that you valorize so much, and I should expect an answer and that it will confirm the painting is undamaged, that the image you have featured is color-toned and poor, and that the painting has been removed from display (except for perhaps the occasional specialist exhibition) not only because of its
816:
comes to mind in the UK. I can cite similar cases in The
Netherlands. I made a principled oppose in that forum. I never once mentioned the p-word, simply not wanting to go there, until frankly the discussion needed a reality check. Perhaps as little as ten years ago it was still possible to collect
739:
If Crisco has persisted in expressing injury over the border-line attack, I should have been happy to reassure him further, but he did not. Of course I wasn't implying he was a paedophile. Needless to say if Crisco thought I was accusing him of being a paedophile, he would not have described it as a
559:
In the end, this does strike me as an ownership issue at WP:FP. I made it clear above I'm not interested any more in
Featured works of art. I do finally think that exercise is pretty pointless, actually hard to understand, but I suppose it's a harmless enough hobby for the most part. But I also made
472:
I tried to read the article on newspapers.com but I'm not familiar with the interface and it was very slow for me. I have limited visual acuity and I was bothered by a continuous pop-up window and could only get small glimpses of it in my system. I missed on the stage stuff. The article named her as
359:
Off on my travels again, and this time I shall be away some weeks. Regarding this latest unsolicited drama, I'm sorry if I ruffled feathers. That was entirely not the intent. I would say there is some understandable sensitivity at FP regarding exactly what the game plan is for works of art. It seems
1487:
Yes, I've restored them. That was a rather annoying intervention Kosh. I do hope I don't have to do this again. I'm not planning to edit any more on this account, but I would like to maintain the Talk page as I left it. The translation of the preface by the way is from the
Knowledge article. It's a
796:
is to be discussed all over the place? God gave us user talk pages and dramah boards for that--not article talk pages, not AfDs and FA and FP and GA reviews. You can oppose any nomination you like (but leave
Hafspajen out--and please don't drop oblique "infernal" references), for whatever reason, I
791:
Challenging, maybe, but offensive, hardly. And certainly not as offensive as the suggestion that some editor is trying to redeem some pedophile for deeply suspicious reasons. Look, I don't care about a fair use discussion or whatever. Bringing "admin" in that way is a ruse. Whatever happens in that
754:
As an administrator he knows better then to act in the first place, since he is involved according to the letter and the spirit. And I, as an administrator, am not that as concerned with "intervening on his behalf" (Crisco is a big boy and can handle himself) as I am with intervening on
Knowledge's
645:
edit, an elderly lady (a chat mate of Crisco's) had opposed the image on grounds of decency. Your infernal editor I really prefer not to speak his name, imagine, only responds by bold-linking a really upsetting Lewis
Carroll image (the more upsetting I always think for how unhealthy and dispirited
513:
did earlier. Please avoid engaging with
Hafspajen. There was no real need to ping him in your response at the September Morn FP nomination, and he'd reminded you he does not wish to engage with you further. Please if yuo feel you must refer specifically to that editor, keep it in plain text - he's
374:
Regarding the administrator dramatising his infernal mentee here, the 'something' I had to do with the mentee's current by me unlamented absence is simply that I opposed (I believe my only opposition at that forum) one of his (her) nominations. The image was hideous and it turned out that even the
176:
I know of Johnbod only tangentially because of a remark I saw he once made about Google Art Project pics as not necessarily the best choice, which I do agree with. They're quite often rather poor. Back in the old country for the Zurich games at the moment. Off again after the weekend, so any input
1879:
Well I can't comment there, but I can comment here that I don't care and I ask you to stop following me around like this. Amongst other actions I have taken is that I have written personally (i.e. not emailed merely as a Knowledge editor) the curator of European paintings at the Met regarding the
1095:
if I engage in personal attacks and shots below the belt. (Incidentally, I noticed that another editor asked you to apology, and you couldn't muster a non-apology apology.) "It's quite plain to me that you are not going to allow me to edit at WP:FP"--where you get that from, I don't know. You can
904:
Coat of Many Colours, I don't understand your coded messages very well. I don't know who "our visiting administrator is"--is that me? And why would an admin intervene in a content matter? I understand you got a problem with this image being an FP, either because of its color (?) or because of the
667:
from that IP were in fact from you. And you didn't have the decency to disclose this until much later. I find it hard to express how disappointed I am--yet another needless occasion of drama. (I realize you said you didn't accuse Crisco of et cetera, and I'm not buying it.) So let me make another
170:
which brought me to FPC in the first place to see what was going on). I would like to debate the criteria for a Featured Picture of a painting now that there are so many candidates, now that there are literally tens of thousands of high resolution images available. Really just "like what I see so
1907:
you mention at the ANI and I wouldn't normally want to. I didn't know the painting and I suppose it's a curiosity in its own right. It's not frankly something I would want to see valorized as an example of Knowledge's finest images (boobs?) and I might have made a comment (not an oppose) to that
1815:
When the block is lifted I think you should return. Why let this keep you from contributing. Even the very best of friends will never agree on everything. My best friend and I are still disagreeing about when the "Big Valley" started...with or without the Lee Majors character. LOL! (I never said
1114:
Believe me I feel oppressed. I feel attacked and I feel bullied by that group. When I pointed out a simple inconsistency in an editor's position there you reverted me with a threat of a block if I persisted in personal attacks. Hence my response. I do think you should let me be now to indulge my
609:
I'm just asking you not to use the ping feature unnecessarily since it bothers that editor. The other issues you raise are neither here nor there in my view, but again I will thank you for that essay on Commons, which helped me write up the picture here, although we disagree about which image is
333:
I had a skinful. I have to say all this is not much clearer to me in the cold light of day. My comments were not directed at the nominator (I was directly addressing another editor whose efforts I have a lot of respect for), nor "at" anyone for that matter. You can have shitty and smelly. He who
163:
start, tidying up the citations and was grateful for that and thanked him. That was in the early days in my account when I had taken on a citation model I struggled a bit with and never really got to grips with. I can't frankly understand why you are so invested here. I don't have a problem with
811:
It's offensive because paedophilia has both benign and pathological presentations. Chabas I should imagine was of the essentially benign sort, though posing a nude adolescent girl over three years strikes me as borderline. In the pathological presentations, those involving babies are absolutely
398:
And I see that an image of Albert Einstein up for deletion that I fought tooth-and-nail to keep, whose nomination was closed out by an admin as a "keep" following an intervention by an expert, has now had its keep reversed by another admin avowedly not an expert. It really isn't surprising that
234:
Yes, and that's right about Yorck Project (though funnily enough I saw one recently I liked, can't remember where). They've served their time. I frankly don't understand FPC when it comes to paintings. A very few perhaps which sets new benchmarks for reproductions. "Own work" a quite different
1649:
image being used on the article is copyrightable but just trademarked. The image may not pass the threshold of originality as the image itself is not an original work and has no copyright and the rest is just colors and type set. Might make for a good discussion on the non free content review
730:"Yes, but the fact is that Ruskin, Carroll and Chabas are dead and their paedophilia routinely cited. I think you are disingenuous to assert this article isn't an attempt to rehabilitate Chabas' reputation. It plainly is, and it should examine his paedophilia without attempting to repress it.
310:
Well, I haven't had a beer yet and I may skip tonight. I am a bit puzzled as to how this wasn't directed at the nominator. I mean, I'm glad you removed it, but its smell still lingers. Well, I hope tomorrow is a new day. I think daylight will be good, esp. daylight between you and a few other
875:
The image is now a Featured Picture, an example of Knowledge's finest images that it offers, a lurid yellow color-cast image paint-buckets away from the 1961 image featured elsewhere in the article with no explanation of how it arrived in that condition in the unlikely event that it actually
1888:
Regarding the other place you found me commenting, in the first place I was responding to a supporter Andrew whose posts are in fact injurious to my reputation (all that I am at pains to defend here). You have been the subject of commentary there before now unrelated to me, have indeed been
1207:
Hello Coat of Many Colors. In my wanderings around Knowledge I've noticed you've had some unhappy interactions with other editors and am sorry that you now feel it best perhaps to leave off editing here. Just would like to say that I very much valued your excellent help last December on the
489:- he might have well as painted his wank rag for the backgound) and what you are trying to do effectively is to have Knowledge exhibit it. I notice that his teacher was a fine artist who painted charming and decent pictures of young girls. I would be happy to see you nominate any of those.
888:
painting of naked pubescent and pre-pubescent young girls, none of which are any longer on display in French museums as is the example Featured also not on display at the US museum holding it. Our visiting administrator might well care to intervene there on Knowledge's behalf as well.
1434:
Thanks for this. Don't know Rodney Pople. I hope he's not the same gentleman who paints with his dick. I really do find that quite extraordinarily offensive (and also, obviously very dangerous from a carcinogenic point of view - and yes you can and the only recourse to chop it ...)
219:
The comment was rather too harsh, but I do question the point of going through the FP process for all these "official" hi-res painting images, at least without seeing the original at the same time. And what was a Yorck Project pic doing on the nom? They are invariably terrible.
533:(who I notice you've pinged) that was both ironic and patronizing, but it's no skin off my back not to notice him. What I'm not prepared to do is to ignore issues he raises and equally I think he ought to be aware of responses. As for the user you refer to he has made a
382:
I don't believe I can be getting on with stinky seconds all this when I return. I'm here until tomorrow evening should fellow devotees of the theatrical arts feel the need to respond. So long as it's not too entirely absurd you are welcome to have the last word on me.
1954:
514:
probably checking the progress of the discussion anyway. Echo was one of the WMF's few good ideas, but it requires an update to our wiki-etiquette because unnecessary pings may be unwelcome. Thank you for understanding and honouring your previous commitment.
2308:
564:
is precisely one such nomination. Whereas the painting is more or less unknown in Europe and I had never heard of it, its creator Paul Chabas certainly was known to me (sexuality is one of my editing interests: you can find an article I am preparing in
295:
I'm truly sorry to find your name implicated in all this drama. Believe me that wasn't a remark directed at you. I'm also rather drunk and better off in bed than my Talk page right now. Truly I'm sorry. It was not all my intention. I'll add when sober.
714:
The first remark I had already made before and the second, which references the article and not Crisco, simply expresses an opinion. Crisco indicated he felt it was a border-line attack (I'm having difficulty finding the edits in the edit history)
1492:
that was circulated privately some years ago. All my associates will recognise it and I chose it as my final statement here: it amounts to summation of a life's work that is drawing to a close, and I really would appreciate if it were left alone.
553:
that span out of that drama, were all reverted, not withstanding that the article was started in its entirety from contributions I made at Commons about that portrait. I think that's pretty disgraceful, don't you? I documented it all on the Talk
338:. You might have noticed I'm not even prepared to mention him by name, so I'm at a loss to understand your "again". At my advanced situation in life you get like that; I mean you do learn to send back post surplus to requirement, does one not?
633:! I had quite forgotten. We have bad eyesight in common it would seem. Not much else. Do me a favour and don't come back. As for the editor you mention, believe me I don't want to notice him. He came on to that forum this time with the remark
991:. Your oppose was a personal attack and I can only surmise it was intended to sabotage the nomination. I cannot discern right now if you intend to continue down this path, so I will not block immediately, but if you persist I will block you.
2293:
262:
is equally insulting and derogatory; and (b) I've also learnt that my attempts at nominating FPCs are derided as questionable/stupid as I'm obviously such an idiot I include a Yorck image as an FPC. No worries, I won't bother in future.
2101:
2200:
614:
as you made it, since I don't have very good eyesight (which is the main reason I don't participate at Featured Picture). My point about pings requiring an update to our wiki-etiquette is made; thanks in advance for incorporating it.
574:
odalisque is exploitative (a bold link provided to an image should we feel the need to remind ourselves how exploitative) whereas Chabas' paintings are not. But this is simply not how Chabas is viewed in the literature: Anne Witchard
1458:
I just removed two images, one from your user page, and one from this talk page. It's not personal or anything. The reason was that copyrighted images are not allowed in userspace at all. (I happen to like Les Miserables too! )
705:"This article needs to set Chabas' paedophilia within the context of, for example, Johns Ruskin's and Lewis Carroll's i.e. within the late Victorian tradition of the so-called "erotic innocent girl" identified by Kincaid, Dijkstra
2082:
1075:
Concerning this threat of a block, I am refraining from editing Knowledge article main space (excluding Talk pages and dramah boreds) for a period of one month as a personal protest. I shall resume after 13:03, 28 October 2014.
257:
I only saw this because I was pinged - I've certainly learnt that (a) personal attacks are obviously considered acceptable - the change from being accused of being a "talk page badge collector" to being referred to as someone who
2181:
925:
See, the thing is you don't care. Not really. So I'm going to throw you over the bridge every time you come back here, whatever your issue, whoever it is you like whose interests you are trying to protect. In conclusion go away.
2256:
646:
his child subjects look, and they all came from privileged middle-class Oxford don families). Is that gentlemanly (ladylike)? I think not. One of these days I might just tell him (her) to fuck off and hang the consequences.
2237:
2045:
235:
proposition. When I return I shall probably ignore FPC for works of art, unless they're genuinely innovative (or conversely definitely yorckish), but I do mean to continue supporting own work. Thank you for your time.
2026:
569:
on a landmark transsexualism case). The flak I have had to endure from that group on my oppose is extraordinary. The editor you refer to is quite wrong in the assertion he made to the effect that Lewis Carroll's
1858:
478:
But I think it quite likely she indeed was the French actress Suzanne Delvé. That would have placed her at 17 when she first posed for Chabas and I was merely suggesting you might like to research it yourself.
141:
here, not because they have an admin badge (they don't) but because they know art, articles, and Knowledge: John, is this going too far? Is this kind of commentary acceptable in a FP nomination? Thank you.
817:
and disseminate indecent images of children without being labelled a paedophile. No longer, and Chabas was unquestionably a paedophile by today's standard. You can have the last word if you like.
550:
376:
1227:
Cheers, thanks for that Xenxax. Much appreciated. I might do some editing on Gustav Klimt next year if I can work up the enthusiasm again, but on the whole I think I'm better off at Commons.
988:
595:
I really don't want to hear from Drmies again here. Indeed from any of you. In the case of Drmies I naturally shall respond, but I think I've interacted all I need to with the rest of you.
2133:
428:
165:
2340:
2232:
2360:
2288:
2077:
2345:
164:
these FA nominations, and especially the "own work" ones which I generally support warmly. As far as I can recall I've only actually opposed one (and of course I raised Cain about
1731:, as both a reflection of consensus in the ANI discussion, and a review of contributions and the material provided in the thread. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to
1096:
edit when and where you like, but you must do it without personal attacks. "The administrator I dare not mention"--pff. I asked you to stop pinging me all the time. That's all.
672:, but other editors, who are doing their best to improve the project (even if you disagree with their nominations), should not have to be subjected to more of this. Thank you.
203:
110:
1358:" - I did not post the duplicate, you did. I did not attempt to make the alteration myself as some may have seen it as re-factoring, hence my polite request for you to do so.
797:
couldn't care less, as long as that reason isn't some suspicion about the nominator's motivation or aspersions on their character. But I've taken up enough of your time.
732:
I can understand that you feel personally attacked, but you have taken upon yourself a task which lays you open to such attack. It works both ways. Welcome to the mill."
1320:
I should think that was Mark Miller who's presently posting within comment bodies, but I'll go back and have a look for you. Of course you could have done it yourself!
1347:
976:
440:
408:
399:
Knowledge can't keep its editors any longer. I've already mentioned I have a single further edit in mind and after that I don't think I'll ever be very active again.
214:
2392:
1988:
1586:"This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 100 years or less."
1212:
page I initiated; had hoped to call on you again when your expertise might be helpful. I really did appreciate it and many other edits that I've seen you do. -
1388:
1374:
1329:
305:
171:
much I've put it on my User page"? That's the point I was making. However, obviously if I can't be heard in the group I'll go away. I've told you that already.
1940:
1924:
1839:
1825:
1685:
1284:
624:
604:
498:
334:
smelt it dealt it, Confucius say. As for the editor you mention, the last I heard was from you when you asked me simply to ignore his (her) edits and I said
157:
Certainly didn't mean it as a personal attack. Happy to delete it. Wasn't having a go at the editor you mention. I noticed earlier that he was editing at my
371:. I shall also champion the occasional meritorious "own work" nomination by outsiders, who I've noticed generally don't receive a very attentive scrutiny.
1810:
740:"border-line" attack and as an administrator he would have known how to proceed. I don't see why a second administrator need now intervene on his behalf.
1502:
1444:
244:
229:
1589:"This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1923."
1236:
1124:
1105:
1063:
1036:
1018:
1000:
956:
935:
914:
826:
806:
786:
764:
749:
347:
328:
186:
2000:
1640:
1619:
1311:
1292:
1272:
774:
1911:
Added: I don't know what the acronym PM you use at the ANI means, but clearly you seek to implicate me in what you consider "disruptive editing" at
1659:
1728:
1253:
1792:. I'm not sure I'll be able to edit when the block is lifted. At any rate I should hope to finally contribute my long projected article start for
1771:
1428:
279:
1482:
1400:
681:
1783:
1054:. I have one or two more edits I should like to do at Knowledge outside visual arts and then indeed I propose to edit exclusively at Commons.
1958:- that image uploaded to Commons by me incidentally) and plainly they don't wish to be embarrassed by any controversy over the painting.
1085:
898:
2018:
2153:
1801:, a landmark transgender decision in the European Court of Justice. Beyond that I doubt I shall care to continue editing at Knowledge.
792:
article is a matter for that article, not for an FP discussion about one of the guy's paintings. What is this, that editors think that
134:
311:
editors. Which reminds me: please don't bring Hafspajen's name up again. They are no longer here and it has something to do with you.
2380:
2328:
2276:
2220:
2121:
2065:
1981:
549:
that has apparently inspired all this hatred from the user you mention. I remind (or inform) you that edits I made at the article
1915:. But I find the editor involved is actually a considerable editor in the visual arts active since 2006. Of course it's not me.
523:
709:. I have to say I find its overt intent to re-establish Chabas as an artist of note both ridiculous and deeply deeply suspect."
690:
Indeed I don't care to hear from you, but I did say I would respond. This editor knows I post on an IP when I am abroad and
392:
1271:
Of course I defend your right to protest to my dying breath. Forgive me if I don't get involved. At the outset of all this
1764:
1265:
1221:
1870:
1798:
1752:
566:
1859:
Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard#What_to_do_about_offline_meatpuppeting_when_all_we_have_is_circumstantial_evidence
720:
I particularly resent the "deeply deeply suspect" comment at the end; the implications are borderline personal attacks"
483:
The fact is you were very reluctant to include mention of her very plausible story. I'm glad you have now at my urging.
2364:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a
2312:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a
2260:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a
2204:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a
2105:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a
2049:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a
543:
2168:
1794:
1544:
1470:
466:
691:
1893:
453:
Again, the article's content is not germane to the FPC discussion. I described Delve (Delvé) as an actress because
2177:: Courcelles, DGG, Doug Weller, Euryalus, GorillaWarfare, Guerillero, LFaraone, Seraphimblade, Thryduulf, Yunshui
1046:
534:
530:
427:), and about to step onto a chique jet to whisk me off to who knows what exotic adventures ahead. I've nominated
335:
1664:
Yes, I'm inclined to agree. It would be interesting to take it up at NFCR if you have time (kisses to Stef ...
965:
944:
881:
695:
664:
159:
57:
This user has been tragically disappointed in wiki-love. Once bitten twice shy. Please respect the user's pain.
2369:
2317:
2265:
2209:
2110:
2054:
777:. I cannot imagine a more challenging and offensive response in the context of child abuse I was referencing.
151:
663:
You don't care to hear from Drmies; Drmies will be happy to oblige--and I was, until I discovered that those
431:. If I am to continue editing Knowledge, Gustav Klimt would be my next topic. I'll see how that progresses.
1091:
You are not being oppressed. There is no "threat of a block" anymore than there is a threat of a block for
880:
in that condition, with on-going contributions to the article presently degenerating into squabbling over
1966:
1736:
1646:
2365:
813:
2143:
1973:
1961:
Right at the beginning of this little drama I asked you what your policy would be regarding Balthus'
1932:
1916:
1831:
1802:
1719:
1677:
1494:
1436:
1380:
1339:
1321:
1276:
1228:
1116:
1077:
1055:
1010:
968:
948:
927:
890:
818:
778:
741:
647:
596:
490:
432:
400:
384:
339:
297:
236:
206:
178:
1615:
529:
I'm not engaging with him (or her - I'm not sure what the preferred gender identity is). Regarding
504:
64:
Email the user if you would like some suggestions for some discrete surrogate wiki-loving (phwaaw).
1367:
1304:
1202:
319:
just kicked it a little further. He speaks bluntly but I am sure he meant no disrespect. Thanks.
272:
1969:. Museums do have to make choices like this from time to time, and Knowledge ought to as well.
1732:
1628:
473:
Delve without an acute accent and described her as a hostess. Actress would be your synthesis.
2294:
Orphaned non-free image File:Maria Helena Vieira da Silva - The Coridor - (reduced 300px).jpg
1866:
1821:
1705:
1655:
1636:
1261:
620:
576:
519:
462:
375:
provenance of the painting had been poorly researched - that lingers on in the Talk pages of
1896:, you wilfully misunderstand the remark above to the effect that in all probability I shall
1610:
If the picture is under a copyright then the licenses for the images needs to be changed. -
2163:
1538:
1521:
1464:
1987:
I've added three additional months to your block for your abuse of multiple accounts. See
641:
wrong. It's another color-cast image apparently and it shouldn't be featured. As for that
8:
1611:
1209:
1779:
1760:
1359:
1296:
1242:
312:
290:
264:
114:
1631:. But only a specific part of the image..and trademark is not the same as copyright.--
1565:
can you prove the copyright claim? All of the images are currently marked as free per:
2129:
2073:
1851:
1477:
1476:
Both of those images are marked as public domain, are you seeing something I am not?
1424:
1415:
Artists like Pople have license to be deliberately controversial and confrontational.
770:
225:
90:
86:
856:
560:
it clear that I will continue to oppose nominations that I think are inappropriate.
2083:
Orphaned non-free image File:Lucien Smith - Two Sides of the Same Coin (detail).jpg
1862:
1817:
1742:
1651:
1632:
1257:
1217:
1101:
1032:
996:
910:
802:
760:
677:
616:
515:
458:
324:
147:
94:
2182:
Orphaned non-free image File:Oscar Murillo - Untitled, 2012 (0.1 MP reduction).jpg
2388:
2336:
2284:
2228:
2157:
2014:
1996:
1560:
1535:
1518:
1461:
419:
130:
2156:) is hereby banned from the English Knowledge. For the Arbitration Committee, --
590:. I'm entitled to point out that and I am entitled to ping your editor about it.
2138:
1450:
35:
1115:
protest. It is not as if you never make similar protests in your own editing.
2238:
Orphaned non-free image File:Oscar Murillo - Untitled, 2012 (4.7% detail).jpg
1789:
1775:
1756:
1533:
be a trademark of Les Mis, but the image itself is not copyrighted. My bad
448:
126:
118:
27:
1729:
WP:ANI#Battleground_mentality_and_disruptive_editing_by_Coat_of_Many_Colours
2313:
2261:
2205:
2125:
2106:
2069:
2050:
1735:. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may
1711:
1420:
1408:
1051:
316:
221:
138:
122:
2027:
Orphaned non-free image File:Lucien Smith - Two Sides of the Same Coin.jpg
1256:
regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. â
1213:
1097:
1028:
992:
906:
870:
851:
842:
798:
756:
673:
510:
320:
197:
143:
104:
755:
behalf. There is no place here for uttering such suspicions. Thank you.
75:
2384:
2332:
2280:
2224:
2010:
1992:
97:
for their activism against the oppression of children and young people.
2309:
File:Maria Helena Vieira da Silva - The Coridor - (reduced 300px).jpg
1417:
That license does not apply to encyclopedia writers, like you and me.
1149:
1140:
882:
exactly which bits of the "young woman's" erogenous zones are visible
50:
698:
you say I make is presumably contained in this concluding paragraph:
551:
Portrait of Doña Isabel de Requesens y Enriquez de Cardona-Anglesola
377:
Portrait of Doña Isabel de Requesens y Enriquez de Cardona-Anglesola
20:
81:
Two girls protesting against child slavery in New York, 1 May 1909.
89:, who has campaigned especially against child slavery, shared the
1972:
I have no other comment to make. It's unlikely I shall return.
1295:
of my comment - I expect you had hit an edit conflict, Thanks.
177:
from Johnbod he wants me to respond to quickly should be soon.
1354:
Thank you; however, your edit summary is incorrect to state: "
1516:
copyright unless it's explicitly stated as not copyrighted).
2102:
File:Lucien Smith - Two Sides of the Same Coin (detail).jpg
1948:
In the end I made some informal enquiries at the Met about
2201:
File:Oscar Murillo - Untitled, 2012 (0.1 MP reduction).jpg
260:
just "like what I see so much I've put it on my User page"
2346:
Orphaned non-free image File:Joan Mitchell - No Birds.jpg
537:
in the past and he continues to respond very agressively.
1989:
Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Coat of Many Colours
1413:
His "Degas's Night" is a deliberately confronting work.
363:
When I return, I propose to continue monitoring FP for
113:
is kind of a shitty thing to say. You're talking about
2120:
will be deleted after seven days, as described in the
2064:
will be deleted after seven days, as described in the
315:, I think it was Adam who got the Yorck ball rolling;
2257:
File:Oscar Murillo - Untitled, 2012 (4.7% detail).jpg
1816:
disagreements are all about important issues! ;-) )--
1488:
bastardized version from a beautiful translation of
1180:
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
2379:will be deleted after seven days, as described in
2327:will be deleted after seven days, as described in
2275:will be deleted after seven days, as described in
2219:will be deleted after seven days, as described in
2046:File:Lucien Smith - Two Sides of the Same Coin.jpg
1356:Removing duplicate comment per request from poster
1182:The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed:
1955:Portrait of Alexander J Cassatt and his son Kelso
1931:I really would like to see the last of you here.
1172:Stand in the desert . . . Near them, on the sand,
987:If you don't wish to hear from, don't beg for me
1908:effect, but that would have been the sum of it.
1880:condition and hanging criteria for the painting
1739:by adding the following text below this notice:
1174:Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
692:I had told him the day before I was going abroad
36:Trolls and drama royals thrown over bridges here
1254:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
1178:Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
1170:Who said: âTwo vast and trunkless legs of stone
582:directly cites Chabas' paintings and Carroll's
2381:section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion
2375:Note that any non-free images not used in any
2329:section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion
2323:Note that any non-free images not used in any
2277:section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion
2271:Note that any non-free images not used in any
2221:section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion
2215:Note that any non-free images not used in any
2116:Note that any non-free images not used in any
2060:Note that any non-free images not used in any
1407:I wrote a little stub about Australian artist
202:I have reworded my remark per your suggestion
1047:of of this drama that I was awaiting an event
1194:The lone and level sands stretch far away.â
1176:And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
423:all my anxious page followers. In transit (
336:indeed that's exactly what I proposed to do
1967:an important retrospective there last year
1192:Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
1188:Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!'
884:, the French artist himself noted for his
637:Erm ... it would seem that so many people
135:Knowledge talk:Featured picture candidates
1273:I said I didn't want to debate the issues
1027:I would like nothing better, believe me.
2009:More socking. Block is now indefinite.--
1379:Well I do hope it's all right now Phil!
1139:
841:
74:
1190:Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
1184:And on the pedestal these words appear:
635:Support: So many people can't be wrong.
1903:Incidentally, I haven't intervened at
1401:Some things that may be very pertinent
1186:âMy name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
1168:I met a traveller from an antique land
1511::::: Sorry -- but again, per NFC we
1050:are not going to allow me to edit at
1665:
1009:I do wish you would leave me alone.
1830:Thanks for this Mark. Appreciated.
1645:In fact, I am not even sure if the
1624:Well...that was rather odd. And it
1275:. Your response left me no choice.
1252:There is currently a discussion at
1160:Percy Bysshe Shelley, 1792 - 1822
947:(let's hope it doesn't get nasty).
13:
2349:
2297:
2243:
2187:
2088:
2032:
1710:
1045:I told you right at the beginning
610:preferable - you will note I left
14:
2403:
2361:File:Joan Mitchell - No Birds.jpg
1795:P v S and Cornwall County Council
1900:be editing further at Knowledge.
1770:For info the closing comment is
1666:
1540:Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti
1523:Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti
1466:Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti
1247:
586:odalisque together via Dijkstra
49:
19:
2158:
1751:. However, you should read the
1291:Please could you correct your
1237:01:35, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
1222:00:36, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
1086:01:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
1064:17:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
1037:16:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
1019:15:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
1001:13:03, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
977:08:49, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
957:00:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
936:01:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
915:00:20, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
899:21:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
827:23:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
807:23:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
787:19:53, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
765:18:53, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
750:05:25, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
682:02:43, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
625:17:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
605:17:18, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
524:16:05, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
499:12:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
467:11:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
160:Little Girl in a Blue Armchair
1:
2370:our policy for non-free media
2318:our policy for non-free media
2266:our policy for non-free media
2210:our policy for non-free media
2164:
2111:our policy for non-free media
2055:our policy for non-free media
1723:from editing for a period of
1529:My bad , the Les Mis image
1527:17:43, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
2393:03:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
2122:criteria for speedy deletion
2066:criteria for speedy deletion
2019:19:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
2001:23:32, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
1982:21:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
1165:
1155:
111:"Talk page badge collectors"
62:
55:
34:
25:
7:
2169:01:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
1941:05:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
1925:06:07, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
1871:00:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
1840:05:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
1826:01:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
1811:16:49, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
1784:13:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
1765:13:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
1686:01:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
1660:00:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
1641:00:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
1620:18:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1545:18:08, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1503:16:48, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1483:16:21, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1471:16:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1445:17:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1429:13:56, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1405:Hello Coat of Many Colours.
1389:08:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1375:07:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1348:07:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1330:07:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1312:06:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1285:01:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1266:01:29, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
1125:02:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
1106:02:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
441:14:57, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
409:13:04, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
393:08:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
348:04:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
329:02:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
306:21:48, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
280:21:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
245:21:15, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
230:21:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
215:20:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
187:20:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
152:18:12, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
10:
2408:
2134:23:50, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
2078:14:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
2350:
2341:17:32, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
2298:
2289:17:42, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
2244:
2233:17:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
2188:
2089:
2033:
1753:guide to appealing blocks
1733:make useful contributions
1676:alas, but there you go).
1419:Peter in Australia aka --
1138:
542:You were involved in the
48:
28:Big Daddy is Watching You
18:
1977:
1936:
1920:
1835:
1806:
1681:
1647:Les Misérables (musical)
1498:
1440:
1384:
1343:
1325:
1280:
1232:
1120:
1081:
1059:
1014:
972:
952:
931:
894:
822:
782:
745:
651:
600:
535:disgraceful attack on me
494:
436:
404:
388:
343:
301:
240:
210:
182:
1293:inadvertent duplication
665:pretty vile allegations
2355:
2303:
2249:
2193:
2094:
2038:
1857:I've mentioned you at
1715:
1152:
861:
429:a Klimt painting at FP
109:Coat of Many Colours,
98:
2358:Thanks for uploading
2353:
2306:Thanks for uploading
2301:
2254:Thanks for uploading
2247:
2198:Thanks for uploading
2191:
2099:Thanks for uploading
2092:
2043:Thanks for uploading
2036:
1747:Your reason here ~~~~
1714:
1143:
945:Erogenous zone update
845:
775:Crisco will let me be
567:one of sandboxes here
531:my response to Drmies
78:
2144:Coat of Many Colours
1974:Coat of Many Colours
1933:Coat of Many Colours
1917:Coat of Many Colours
1832:Coat of Many Colours
1803:Coat of Many Colours
1678:Coat of Many Colours
1495:Coat of Many Colours
1437:Coat of Many Colours
1381:Coat of Many Colours
1340:Coat of Many Colours
1322:Coat of Many Colours
1277:Coat of Many Colours
1229:Coat of Many Colours
1117:Coat of Many Colours
1078:Coat of Many Colours
1056:Coat of Many Colours
1011:Coat of Many Colours
969:Coat of Many Colours
949:Coat of Many Colours
928:Coat of Many Colours
891:Coat of Many Colours
819:Coat of Many Colours
779:Coat of Many Colours
742:Coat of Many Colours
648:Coat of Many Colours
597:Coat of Many Colours
491:Coat of Many Colours
433:Coat of Many Colours
401:Coat of Many Colours
385:Coat of Many Colours
340:Coat of Many Colours
298:Coat of Many Colours
237:Coat of Many Colours
207:Coat of Many Colours
179:Coat of Many Colours
137:. I'm going to ping
1788:Thank you for this
1210:Charles Prendergast
1146:Ozymandias Colossus
966:Vulva out, pubes in
670:it does not hurt me
455:that's what she was
2356:
2304:
2250:
2194:
2095:
2039:
1716:
1455:CoatOfManyColors,
1153:
862:
696:"vile allegations"
99:
83:
2366:claim of fair use
2314:claim of fair use
2262:claim of fair use
2206:claim of fair use
2107:claim of fair use
2051:claim of fair use
1963:The Guitar Lesson
1737:appeal this block
1200:
1199:
91:Nobel Peace Prize
87:Kailash Satyarthi
79:
69:
68:
41:
40:
2399:
2352:
2300:
2252:
2246:
2196:
2190:
2166:
2160:
2097:
2091:
2041:
2035:
1750:
1671:
1670:
1669:
1564:
1543:
1526:
1469:
1372:
1364:
1363:
1309:
1301:
1300:
1251:
1250:
1136:
1135:
874:
769:Yes, but you're
727:My response was
579:Dark Chinoiserie
545:Duchess of Malfi
505:Asking you again
294:
277:
269:
268:
201:
95:Malala Yousafzai
53:
46:
45:
23:
16:
15:
2407:
2406:
2402:
2401:
2400:
2398:
2397:
2396:
2383:. Thank you. --
2348:
2331:. Thank you. --
2296:
2279:. Thank you. --
2241:
2240:
2223:. Thank you. --
2185:
2184:
2141:
2086:
2085:
2030:
2029:
1913:Beauty Revealed
1905:Beauty Revealed
1854:
1767:
1740:
1708:
1667:
1558:
1534:
1517:
1460:
1453:
1403:
1368:
1361:
1360:
1305:
1298:
1297:
1248:
1245:
1205:
1203:verbal barnstar
1196:
868:
812:heartbreaking.
577:at page 186 of
507:
451:
288:
273:
266:
265:
195:
107:
12:
11:
5:
2405:
2347:
2344:
2295:
2292:
2239:
2236:
2183:
2180:
2179:
2178:
2140:
2137:
2124:. Thank you.
2084:
2081:
2028:
2025:
2024:
2023:
2022:
2021:
2004:
2003:
1950:September Morn
1946:
1945:
1944:
1943:
1929:
1928:
1927:
1901:
1890:
1886:
1882:September Morn
1874:
1873:
1853:
1850:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1846:
1845:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1717:You have been
1709:
1707:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1697:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1688:
1612:Knowledgekid87
1599:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1587:
1575:
1574:
1573:
1572:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1490:Les Misérables
1452:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1418:
1416:
1414:
1412:
1406:
1402:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1351:
1350:
1333:
1332:
1315:
1314:
1288:
1287:
1244:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1204:
1201:
1198:
1197:
1193:
1191:
1189:
1187:
1185:
1183:
1181:
1179:
1177:
1175:
1173:
1171:
1169:
1166:
1163:
1162:
1154:
1133:
1132:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1109:
1108:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1067:
1066:
1040:
1039:
1022:
1021:
1004:
1003:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
960:
959:
941:
940:
939:
938:
918:
917:
857:Les Misérables
840:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
831:
830:
829:
737:
736:
735:
725:
724:
723:
712:
711:
710:
700:
699:
685:
684:
660:
659:
658:
657:
656:
655:
592:
591:
562:September Morn
556:
555:
539:
538:
506:
503:
502:
501:
485:
484:
480:
479:
475:
474:
450:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
425:non sic gloria
412:
411:
357:
356:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
283:
282:
254:
253:
252:
251:
250:
249:
248:
247:
190:
189:
173:
172:
106:
103:
101:
84:
72:
71:
67:
66:
60:
59:
54:
43:
39:
38:
32:
31:
24:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2404:
2395:
2394:
2390:
2386:
2382:
2378:
2373:
2371:
2367:
2363:
2362:
2343:
2342:
2338:
2334:
2330:
2326:
2321:
2319:
2315:
2311:
2310:
2291:
2290:
2286:
2282:
2278:
2274:
2269:
2267:
2263:
2259:
2258:
2251:
2235:
2234:
2230:
2226:
2222:
2218:
2213:
2211:
2207:
2203:
2202:
2195:
2176:
2173:
2172:
2171:
2170:
2167:
2161:
2155:
2152:
2149:
2145:
2136:
2135:
2131:
2127:
2123:
2119:
2114:
2112:
2108:
2104:
2103:
2096:
2080:
2079:
2075:
2071:
2068:. Thank you.
2067:
2063:
2058:
2056:
2052:
2048:
2047:
2040:
2020:
2016:
2012:
2008:
2007:
2006:
2005:
2002:
1998:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1985:
1984:
1983:
1979:
1975:
1970:
1968:
1964:
1959:
1957:
1956:
1951:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1930:
1926:
1922:
1918:
1914:
1910:
1909:
1906:
1902:
1899:
1895:
1891:
1887:
1883:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1872:
1868:
1864:
1860:
1856:
1855:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1828:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1814:
1813:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1799:in my sandbox
1797:
1796:
1791:
1787:
1786:
1785:
1781:
1777:
1773:
1769:
1768:
1766:
1762:
1758:
1754:
1748:
1744:
1738:
1734:
1730:
1726:
1722:
1721:
1713:
1706:Block message
1687:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1663:
1662:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1648:
1644:
1643:
1642:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1627:
1623:
1622:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1588:
1585:
1584:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1562:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1542:
1541:
1537:
1532:
1528:
1525:
1524:
1520:
1514:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1491:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1481:
1480:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1468:
1467:
1463:
1456:
1446:
1442:
1438:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1411:in July 2014.
1410:
1390:
1386:
1382:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1373:
1371:
1365:
1362:SagaciousPhil
1357:
1353:
1352:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1334:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1313:
1310:
1308:
1302:
1299:SagaciousPhil
1294:
1290:
1289:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1238:
1234:
1230:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1195:
1164:
1161:
1158:
1151:
1147:
1142:
1137:
1134:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1094:
1090:
1089:
1088:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1048:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1020:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
986:
985:
978:
974:
970:
967:
964:
963:
962:
961:
958:
954:
950:
946:
943:
942:
937:
933:
929:
924:
923:
922:
921:
920:
919:
916:
912:
908:
903:
902:
901:
900:
896:
892:
887:
883:
879:
872:
866:
865:
860:
858:
854:, preface to
853:
849:
844:
828:
824:
820:
815:
810:
809:
808:
804:
800:
795:
790:
789:
788:
784:
780:
776:
772:
768:
767:
766:
762:
758:
753:
752:
751:
747:
743:
738:
734:(my emphasis)
733:
729:
728:
726:
722:(my emphasis)
721:
717:
716:
713:
708:
704:
703:
702:
701:
697:
693:
689:
688:
687:
686:
683:
679:
675:
671:
666:
662:
661:
653:
649:
644:
640:
636:
632:
628:
627:
626:
622:
618:
613:
608:
607:
606:
602:
598:
594:
593:
589:
585:
581:
580:
573:
568:
563:
558:
557:
552:
548:
546:
541:
540:
536:
532:
528:
527:
526:
525:
521:
517:
512:
500:
496:
492:
487:
486:
482:
481:
477:
476:
471:
470:
469:
468:
464:
460:
456:
442:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
421:
416:
415:
414:
413:
410:
406:
402:
397:
396:
395:
394:
390:
386:
380:
378:
372:
370:
366:
361:
349:
345:
341:
337:
332:
331:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
313:Sagaciousphil
309:
308:
307:
303:
299:
292:
291:Sagaciousphil
287:
286:
285:
284:
281:
278:
276:
270:
267:SagaciousPhil
261:
256:
255:
246:
242:
238:
233:
232:
231:
227:
223:
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
204:
199:
194:
193:
192:
191:
188:
184:
180:
175:
174:
169:
168:
162:
161:
156:
155:
154:
153:
149:
145:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
115:Sagaciousphil
112:
102:
96:
92:
88:
82:
77:
73:
65:
61:
58:
52:
47:
44:
37:
33:
30:
29:
22:
17:
2376:
2374:
2359:
2357:
2324:
2322:
2307:
2305:
2272:
2270:
2255:
2253:
2242:
2216:
2214:
2199:
2197:
2186:
2174:
2150:
2147:
2142:
2117:
2115:
2100:
2098:
2087:
2061:
2059:
2044:
2042:
2031:
1971:
1962:
1960:
1953:
1949:
1947:
1912:
1904:
1897:
1881:
1793:
1746:
1724:
1718:
1673:
1625:
1539:
1530:
1522:
1512:
1510:
1509:
1489:
1478:
1465:
1457:
1454:
1409:Rodney Pople
1404:
1369:
1355:
1306:
1246:
1206:
1167:
1159:
1156:
1145:
1131:
1092:
1074:
989:to intervene
885:
877:
867:
864:
863:
855:
846:
793:
731:
719:
706:
669:
642:
638:
634:
630:
611:
587:
583:
578:
571:
561:
544:
508:
454:
452:
424:
418:
381:
373:
368:
364:
362:
358:
274:
259:
166:
158:
108:
100:
80:
70:
63:
56:
42:
26:
1892:Concerning
1863:Crisco 1492
1818:Mark Miller
1774:. Regards,
1652:Mark Miller
1633:Mark Miller
1629:trademarked
1258:Crisco 1492
852:Victor Hugo
814:Ian Watkins
617:Yngvadottir
516:Yngvadottir
459:Crisco 1492
2175:Supporting
2165:Parlez Moi
2159:Guerillero
1561:KoshVorlon
1536:KoshVorlon
1519:KoshVorlon
1462:KoshVorlon
1243:ANI notice
1157:Ozymandias
1889:"doxxed".
1852:AN notice
1150:Ramasseum
771:finessing
629:That was
85:In 2014,
2377:articles
2325:articles
2273:articles
2217:articles
2154:contribs
2118:articles
2062:articles
1790:Euryalus
1776:Euryalus
1757:Euryalus
1755:first.
1745:|reason=
1725:3 months
794:behavior
367:such as
365:debacles
131:WP:RFC/U
2126:Stefan2
2070:Stefan2
1743:unblock
1720:blocked
1674:intacto
1650:page.--
1479:Chillum
1421:Shirt58
1148:at the
369:Olympia
317:Johnbod
222:Johnbod
167:Olympia
139:Johnbod
2139:Banned
1513:cannot
1451:Images
1338:Done.
1214:Xenxax
1098:Drmies
1029:Drmies
993:Drmies
907:Drmies
871:Drmies
799:Drmies
757:Drmies
674:Drmies
511:Drmies
321:Drmies
198:Drmies
144:Drmies
127:WP:ANI
119:WP:DRN
2385:B-bot
2333:B-bot
2281:B-bot
2225:B-bot
2011:Bbb23
1993:Bbb23
1052:WP:FP
886:genre
707:et al
643:Hatch
588:et al
584:Hatch
572:Hatch
554:page.
547:drama
449:Delve
133:--or
123:WP:3O
93:with
2389:talk
2337:talk
2285:talk
2229:talk
2148:talk
2130:talk
2074:talk
2015:talk
1997:talk
1978:talk
1937:talk
1921:talk
1894:this
1867:talk
1861:. â
1836:talk
1822:talk
1807:talk
1780:talk
1772:here
1761:talk
1727:per
1682:talk
1656:talk
1637:talk
1616:talk
1499:talk
1441:talk
1425:talk
1385:talk
1370:Chat
1344:talk
1326:talk
1307:Chat
1281:talk
1262:talk
1233:talk
1218:talk
1144:The
1121:talk
1102:talk
1082:talk
1060:talk
1033:talk
1015:talk
997:talk
973:talk
953:talk
932:talk
911:talk
895:talk
823:talk
803:talk
783:talk
761:talk
746:talk
678:talk
652:talk
639:were
621:talk
612:that
601:talk
520:talk
495:talk
463:talk
437:talk
420:ciao
405:talk
389:talk
344:talk
325:talk
302:talk
275:Chat
241:talk
226:talk
211:talk
183:talk
148:talk
2372:).
2320:).
2268:).
2212:).
2113:).
2057:).
1991:.--
1898:not
1531:may
631:you
509:as
417:So
105:NPA
2391:)
2339:)
2287:)
2231:)
2162:|
2132:)
2076:)
2017:)
1999:)
1980:)
1939:)
1923:)
1869:)
1838:)
1824:)
1809:)
1782:)
1763:)
1749:}}
1741:{{
1684:)
1658:)
1639:)
1626:is
1618:)
1501:)
1443:)
1427:)
1387:)
1366:-
1346:)
1328:)
1303:-
1283:)
1264:)
1235:)
1220:)
1123:)
1104:)
1093:me
1084:)
1062:)
1035:)
1017:)
999:)
975:)
955:)
934:)
913:)
897:)
878:is
825:)
805:)
785:)
763:)
748:)
680:)
623:)
603:)
522:)
497:)
465:)
439:)
407:)
391:)
346:)
327:)
304:)
271:-
243:)
228:)
213:)
185:)
150:)
129:,
125:,
121:,
2387:(
2354:â
2335:(
2302:â
2283:(
2248:â
2227:(
2192:â
2151:·
2146:(
2128:(
2093:â
2072:(
2037:â
2013:(
1995:(
1976:(
1935:(
1919:(
1865:(
1834:(
1820:(
1805:(
1778:(
1759:(
1680:(
1654:(
1635:(
1614:(
1563::
1559:@
1497:(
1439:(
1423:(
1383:(
1342:(
1324:(
1279:(
1260:(
1231:(
1216:(
1119:(
1100:(
1080:(
1058:(
1031:(
1013:(
995:(
971:(
951:(
930:(
909:(
893:(
873::
869:@
859:)
850:(
821:(
801:(
781:(
759:(
744:(
676:(
654:)
650:(
619:(
599:(
518:(
493:(
461:(
435:(
403:(
387:(
342:(
323:(
300:(
293::
289:@
239:(
224:(
209:(
200::
196:@
181:(
146:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
