User talk:Fram/Archive 22

673:, from November 2008. I don't restore BLP violations or copyright violations to users. Anyone requesting that I do so, or that I take pages in either of those categories to MfD instead of speedy, again isn't worth being an admin. If people have such bad judgment in those matters, I don't really trust their judgment wrt my supposed involvement either. Seraphimblade, have you looked at the page I deleted for copyvio? It was 100% identical, and the text quoted was not a footnote, but part of the body of the list anyway. Addione, your argument that "It is also clearly marked as NOT AN ARTICLE, which I think exempts it from being a WP:FAKEARTICLE... " from an MfD, is a perfect excuse for wikilawyering, and would make FAKEARTICLE utterly toothless. And the argument that they are "works in progress" is clearly incorrect as well, these are all pages that have not been edited in one to three years, basically since their creation. His userspace is filled with dozens and dozens of abandoned articles, often about BLPs, often userfied after an AfD. Please, all of you, check his contribution history, the history of these pages, his deleted contributions, and some of our policies, before coming here and attacking the messenger. 399:, and will ask the individual making this suggestion for a fuller explanation." were more than sufficient to make it clear that the good faith I extended a few weeks ago was totally misplaced. I am not emotionally engaged though, I am doing what every admin should do with such pages, but which I held off for a few weeks to give you the chance of doing this yourself. While you started doing this, your progress slowed down, and more problematic, your reasons for keeping pages are still severely at odds with community standards, as evidenced by the Abdul Zahir page. I am not engaged in any content disputes with you, I am engaged in cleaning up your userspace. You asked for a chance to do it yourself, and blew that, while at the same time making comments about "an individual" on a page that was not the page the questions were raised about, but a totally new one with the same title. It is obvious that you try to personalize this, and then paint me as "involved", to get me of your back. That won't work though. I'll continue speedy deleting G10 pages in your userspace, and MfD'ing all other problematic ones. 4964:

some edits myself the unnecessary ones seem to be about 1 in 20 or so. Personally I find many (but admitedly not all) of the edits that Fram points out to be "problems" to be rather petty and hardly worth mentioning unless it is his intention to drive Rich from the Project. I have already basically left and only do a few talk page edits a day (eventually I will likely stop those as well) instead of the thousand or more edits a day I was doing. It would be a shame to push yet another editor out so that a few harmless edits don't get made. I have a real problem with editors who do less than a dozen edits a day (outside talk pages) hounding those that do a lot. That is one of the reasons I stopped editing myself. But if its more important to make sure that a few unneeded edits get made then have at it. If you work hard enough at it we will push all the editors away and Knowledge can go the way of so many other fads in history. Popular for a while, but eventually succumbing to its own weight. For all of his banter Fram can't even add a template correctly. Looking at his edits he is adding bunches of

1537:, and sometimes other policies. The vast majority of my deletion nominations have been supported and resulted in actual deletion. The speedy deletions have mostly been unchallenged, and the two challenged ones were not clearly incorrect by far (one is ongoing, the other DRV was closed with the page remaining deleted). Geo Swan doesn't like the scrutiny, and is trying to stop me, so that he can continue doing whatever he likes, even in those cases where policy is clearly against him. If you or other admins take over the pruning of his userspace, I have no problem to remove myself from the picture. But I will not let policy violations remain in place only because the editor complains about being scrutinized. Have you seen his list of deleted contributions? I doubt that we have many other editors who have that many of their contributions deleted, and where there is still so much deletable material left in both userspace and mainspace. 1345:. "the passages you claim entitled the Brookings authors to claim intellectual property rights did entitle them to claim IP rights, they were so short, and were such a tiny fraction of the whole document, that they qualified for inclusion under "fair use". " The passages I claimed gave them intellectual property rights are the whole of the document, which is an ordered list based on their conclusions, not simply a reporting of facts. If they were undeniable, uncopyrightable facts, they wouldn't have "tentative conclusions" and so on. You continue about the one example i gave of the clearest (but not the sole by far) copyright violation, and ignore now for more than a week all other arguments I have made and all explanations I have given of my position on this. I am not interested in continuing to discuss this in this manner. 677:

that someone is cleaning up his mess, and claims that I am involved because I am goiing through his pages and nominating many of them for deletion. That is not "being involved", or no one could ever take a more large scale action towards an other editor ever again. I have no content dispute with Geo Swan, he has not hindered me or done anything for which I would want revenge: I have just regularly come across dubious articles by him, and then became aware that he has an extensive and problematic userspace. I have given him the chance to clean it up himself, after he requested this, but he failed to live up to this offer, and instead attacked me with feigned innocence. I then restarted going through his userspace and nominating pages for deletion, with a speedy of the few most extreme ones. That is all there is to it. ~~

3120:

or in my actions in general? If the latter I would be intersted to know what other claims your talking about because I have no clue other than that I have accused you of submitting large groups of articles for deletion at a time and rate faster than can be reviewed before they are deleted and acting inappropriately by submitting articles for deletion by a user you have been in an ongoing edit conflict with. As far as not stopping me, when I have to engage in needless discussions because other editors decide to do things like submit large groups of articles for deletion, that then make me review so that I can determine the merits of the deletion request, many of which are either submitted with invalid or subjective deletion determinations, that takes me away from writing. --

4886:

a problem recognising whenever they are acting against consensus, and change and move on, and I leave them well alone then. Some, very few, remain stuck in their patterns. You are apparently one of them. The only ways to get you to change your behaviour so far are either to keep a very close watch on your edits, or to block you. Neither has a lasting effect, although your SmackBot edits seem to be unproblematic now, since you stick to the approved and tested ones. The simple solution to end this problem seems to be that you would stick to approved and tested edits for your main account as well. As an editor, as an admin, it would be wrong for me to just ignore problems because the editor creating them doesn't like the scrutiny.

3105:

rank and "the matter was swiftly swept away" instead of your failure to provide facts and to back them up with diffs, your failure to show that there was any urgent matter or even any actions warranting admin action at all, it gets hard to take anything you claim seriously. No one is stopping you from writing an encyclopedia, I am doing my part as well, but making an encyclopedia means that we have to write articles on the one hand, and that we have to improve if possible or otherwise remove those pages that are not up to our standards. That not more people want to get involved in this is too bad, but not unexpected when those people willing to take on that role as well regularly get abused by a handful of people.

627:

go through MfD—it looks like several of them are looking toward keeping, and I don't think a request for a hearing is an unfair one. Others are indeed leaning toward deleting right now. There's time to let discussions run their course. Same for the "copyvio"—the majority of that, at least, is just a simple list of facts and as such is uncopyrightable. It's possible some of the footnotes have enough "creativity" to sustain copyright (though really, even that's questionable, "X is from Y" is a pretty factual, noncreative statement), but that's awfully slim, and those certainly wouldn't render the whole thing a blatant G12 copyvio. If you really think it needs to be checked out, I'd say handling it through the normal

766:, and I just don't see it. It's pretty dry stuff that I find confirmation of through Findlaw in one google. Where's the "attack" or "unsourced contentious BLP material" there? I just don't see it. Now, I even have some sympathy for your position that userspace drafts aren't to hang around forever, especially when it appears there's not enough that they'd ever be ready for prime time, though I also don't have a tremendous problem with people keeping notes in their userspace if they find them useful (as someone at one of the MfDs said, talk page archives are "duplicative" of the page history, but if you want to find an old conversation, they're a much more useful format and are very widely used). I'm not saying 3086:

agenda. Whether that is true or not I am not certain but when its the same 5 users voting on the majority of them with cut and paste responses, of course it doesn't appear as honest and simple as you lay out because the discussions. Thats not consensus. I will let you in on one secret though. I have been on WP for a few years now and mostly involved myself with Medal of Honor recipients and only recently started to actively participate in discussions because I saw the same couple dozen users, most of which are admins, trying to push their will on the community because most of us don't want to involve ourselves in the drama or discussions and actually want to

610:

I myself am too involved to take or revert any admin action over his articles or in connection with anyone challenging them. (except for deleting what he tags as user request G7s). Refusing to email a page to a good faith user, in particular, is imo almost never justified. I have refused it only once or twice, to obvious trolls. (And I have requested Geo to ask someone other than me to email deleted material to him.) My principle, and I think the only fair principle, is that if anyone in good faith challenges a personal involvement, the admin is bound to refrain, however justified they think their actions.

1492:

interested in you, neither in a positive or negative way. When I notice a problem or a task, I work on it systematically. This time, I have noticed, as have other users independently, that your userspace and your article contrributions, inbetween the many valuable additions, has a more-than-average number of problematic pages, ranging from the fixable to the speedy deletable. You are welcome to discuss these pages at their deletion discussion or at DRV. Continued discussion of the same page after it has had a DRV and an ANI discussion is pointless, and I would urge you to move on to other topics.

649:. None of this stuff is an emergency. If MfD discussions and copyvio checks need to run their course, let them. If someone else who's not quite as invested in this needs to be enlisted to sort it out, there's time for that too. These are just userspace drafts, and they're noindexed, clearly marked as non-article userspace drafts. These are not pages being viewed by a hundred thousand random people a day (especially since the noindex would mean they don't even show up in search engines), and very likely, most of them have never been looked at but by those involved in the discussions over them. 4999:

than a very superficial glance at my edits. As you could have seen from this talk page alone, I have e.g. had one DYK in January, and two in February. I created in March (i.e. the previous three days) 16 new articles. I have created hundreds of articles, including a few GA's. I do some admin work as well. I don't think that your complaint has any merit on that basis. Apart from that, the problem is not that Rich or anyone else makes errors, the problem is that he continues after people have pointed them out.

3753: 2849: 2128: 31: 3437:, many of which are no longer active. In fact, since Wellesley Farms is still an active one, I wonder if that should be renamed with the suffix, and have the NRHP related name redirected there. While we're on the subject of MBTA related stations(which is what Wellesely Farms is today), people have tried to remove the name "station" from the "MBTA" suffixes at least twice, and they were sent back, because there are alreay articles with the "MBTA" suffix( 5230: 5063: 3663: 2432: 2581: 4799: 4776: 4865:

I thought since I explained this to you at another forum you had mended your ways and were attempting to be positive, but I see that was a vain hope. You take no account of the effect your shenanigans have upon the people you target, and that is a shame. Or worse you have some idea and glory in causing pain and distress, destroying the work of others, sewing seeds of discord and generally being the cause of more trouble than you are worth.

808:

headings, order, ...) is not relevant. Again, you should really get to understand these policies better if you want to criticize anyone for applying them. "Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained." No such earlier versions exist. No work is being lost either, the deletion summary contains the url of the source, where

3582: 3900:

corresponding information, and the information in the stub itself, that the artist isn't notable enough for inclusion. However, this is about seventy-four steps away from any field I have experience in, so I thought I'd check with you first; I know that sometimes some fields recognize inclusion in certain reference works as automatically sufficient to establish notability (even when that doesn't necessarily match

1488:. You have, completely by chance probably, divided the detainees in exactly the same three "groups", with exactly the same descriptions, section headers, ... Not a copying of their conclusions, but a case of great minds thinking alike, of course. That inside these sections, you added the "sortable" to the tables, is really an extremely minimal change, which is irrelevant to the basic pure copyright violation. 3071:

fuss about it. If he wants me to stop, he has to start writing articles and keeping userspace subpages that are policy compliant. The vast amount of pages that have been deleted after discussions show that the problem is not with the nominations, but with the creations. So please take you complaints to Geo Swan's page and ask him to stop creating such pages; instead of asking me to stop nominating them.

3998: 4359: 3138:, I don't care about what you do in other discussions. And I am not going to nominate less articles for deletion because you don't have the time to both write articles and determine the merits of the deletion request, there are with or without me more than enough deletion requests to keep you or anyone busy anyway if you are so inclined. Or are you singling out only 3936:, so he is clearly notable. I try to do a similar check for all artists I create an article on, so that Bryan's isn't the only or most recent reliable source available. Google Scholar is often not the best tool for artists though, Google Books and even regular Google (for e.g. msueum websites, or auction houses like Sotheby's and Christie's) can be more helpful. 704: 4027:. Thank you. Having said that, you've been here long enough to know what you were doing. The article had been nominated for deletion just 3 months ago, and was speedily kept. Please do not try to over-ride this by making the page into a redirect. If you think a merge or redirect is the best use of the page, please discuss it on the talk page first. 784:. (Sometimes very ornate formatting or the like can be copyrightable, but removal or alteration of the formatting still renders the underlying facts right back to PD. Similarly, if a fact list contains some copyrightable prose/commentary, removal of the prose would render the bare list PD.) It definitely wasn't a G12 case, where the whole thing is 111:: you're very welcome to date the tags I leave; but it seems rather an odd way to use your energy, as SmackBot will do the same thing. I don't date the tags myself as doing so each time takes a very small amount of time and energy, an amount that adds up; and I know that SmackBot will anyway do the job. But, well, feel free to continue! -- 1117:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 127:

with their destinations really makes this lots easier (so far, it isn't, but SXmackbot does more than my AWB xml does of course); and finally, because Smackbot (understandably) misses a number of harder-to-code datings, which have to be done manually. Through AWB, it is relatively easy to spot these, and then manually correct them.

590:. Poor or pointed writing are no reason to delete - ESPECIALLY from user pages. If he moved them to article space that way, I would agree with speedy deletes for copyright and/or unsourced BLPs, and tagging for POV - but they aren't. They are works in progress and should have been treated as such, in my opinion. 1228:

correspondents with an open mind as to whether I might be mistaken. I expect myself to own up when I realize I made a mistake, or when one is drawn to my attention. I expect myself to do my best to fix my errors. And I believe my contribution history shows, I have, in general, done a pretty good job at this.

684: 594:

articles he decided to abandon. I don't think it was particularly fair to delete pages outright, do a mass MFD of his userpages, or refuse to email the contents of the pages to him after the fact. I want to assume good faith here, but your actions and your comments to GeoSwan above seem a bit spiteful. -

5028:

Your remark is purely based on editcountitis, not on quality of work. I could save new articles in ten edits instead of one, increasing my mainspace number of edits, without any benefit for the encyclopedia. Number of edits is a mostly meaningless number if you ignore what is actually done in these edits.

5027:

No, kinda irritating when people who have been here for a while and made thousands of edits still don't know how to properly indent their replies so it becoems obvous what you are replying to... Anyway, the problem is not with people complaining, but with people incorrectly complaining, like you did.

4998:

Kumioko, MSGJ's message is not about me, so you starting with "I also find it somewhat irritating that Fram..." is a non sequitur. Apart from that, your claim that I do seldom anything else except for following Rich and Smackbot around is quite incorrect, which would be clear for anyone who took more

4924:

I first posted at your talk page, but you continued regardless. Considering how the last time I raised a problem at your talk page, about the unapproved macBot task, you showed yourself a master at filibustering, making empty claims time and time again (but then again, you did the same at the RfD for

4822:

I had already done a short check of their edits when I saw the results of the checkuser, but there is nothing really obvious to tie these to Sherurcij, apart from the similarities you already listed at the SPI. The six additional accounts don't give me enough information to tie these to any user, and

4458:

Nothing to add, really. Sherurcij seems a better possibility than Geo Swan, but some outsider is equally possible (there have been a number of people who have voted "keep" on a string of Geo Swan AfD's without advancing serious arguments). The editing of an article created and almost solely edited by

3449:

that are not about the station, but still about the LIRR. As for you, you are dead wrong about me "using stawman arguments," and not sticking to the subject. The articles are about the stations, and that's why they're named as such. The same goes for every article related to a Sacramento RT Light Ral

3051:

First just because I don't have the admin tools doesn't mean I don't know how WP works. I know the rules having started and or voting on several of them myself. I didn't expect a group of administrators to do anything about another admin anyway and the matter was quickly swept away as expected. Thats

2518:

Do you happen to know someone experienced who also edits at wiktionary? The reason why I'm asking is that we're supposed to fight original research, hoaxes, unsourced material on Knowledge and add references, but checking some definitions on Wiktionary, it seems all unreferenced information has moved

1178:

Please note that I did recognize that you think I have challenged your good faith. Let me go on record, I recognize that you seem to honestly believe all your recent use of administrator authority has been compliant with your obligations. So, although I am extremely distressed by how you have been

1051:

I repeat that I believe I have an essentially unblemished record as a good faith contributor, and that I deserve the assumption of good faith. I believe it is a mistake for you to continue to exercise administrator authority over material I have contributed, when you have gone on record, and asserted

978:

I would ask you to review your deletion of this page - especially looking at the extensive edit history. I certainly do not consider it eligible the Speedy deletion process. At most the infringing edits should have been removed back to the last non-infringing version. But surely this should have gone

933:

Yes, it looks like Bytemeh, EmilySchooley, and a few others were the same person, or a very closely related group of editors. I'm waiting for another CU to confirm this, but it certainly looks like it, and if confirmed these users will be blocked. This may mean, if necessary, that the AfD's they were

865:

their national competition on Knowledge. This has been going on for a a while, at least checking his username history and with other usernames whose only purpose is advertisement. If you have the name of someone with past experience with this type of promotion-only accounts and how to deal with them,

676:

Telling is a comment like "I don't even know what the history is between you and Geo (though given the way it's going, I'd say it's a fair bet such a history exists)". Please, show me where the history of this is. I don't know it, and I don't fit any definition of involved here. Geo Swan doesn't like

609:

Fram, Geo asked me for an opinion. My opinion is that you are too involved with his work here to take admin action concerning either him or material he works on, and this is proven by the curtness of your final two responses above. I however freely say that he has asked me for assistance enough that

4963:

I also find it somewhat irritating that Fram seldom does anything else except for following Rich and Smackbot around. Its beginning to look more and more like the boy who cried Wiki!. I admit that there have been some uneeded edits but there have also been a lot more positive ones and after checking

4885:

I have no intention to drive anyone away from the project. I notice a few editors who have among their good edits too many problematic ones. I try to see if their is a consensus that these edits are indeed problematic, and I try to get these editors to change their behaviour. Most editors don't have

4864:

The reason I used the term should be clear to you. I have made it amply clear that that is how your behaviour comes across. You move between a few target editors, attacking their work. It gives the impression to your victims, if to no one else that you are attempting to drive them from the project.

3828:

Bots shouldn't be doing unapproved tasks, certainly not when those tasks violate bot policy. You were asked to provide the supposed task approval, which you didn't. Looking through the list of approved tasks didn't give any results either. That doesn't mean that such approval doesn't exist, but when

3637:

Regardless of whatever arguments we may've had with each other, Mitch, you should consider how the articles on various railroad stations in New Jersey would look if he removed the suffixes from them, or just got rid of the standard names. BTW, there's an inactive fomer Reading Railroad station which

3119:

Actually it was closed because mizsabot archived it. Not because someone closed it due to lack of merit. Which, after reviewing the last couple weeks of Mizsabot archives on that page, apparently happens regularly. As far as taking what I claim seriously are you referring to this little disagreement

3070:

If you don't know what an "edit conflict" is on Knowledge, then please don't post your nonsense here anymore. The only "conflict" I have with Geo Swan is that he doesn't like my nominations of his articles and user pages. I see no reason to stop doing this just because he doesn't like it and makes a

3028:

Please provide a link to such a discussion in the future, I had to search through your contributions to find the actual discussion. Furthermore, in such a discussion, please provide evidence or strike through statements you make which are utterly without merit, like me closing discussion I initiated

2066:

If so then take the close to deletion review. Why is it okay, in your eyes, for you to ignore the correct venue for a discussion but not okay for somebody to ignore a rule for closing a deletion discusison, or to close an inappropriately sited discussion with a recommendation for the correct venue?

2041:

My concern is that people shouldn't be closing AfD's early without good reasons, and that the reason you provided clearly doesn't fall under such good reasons, but is a typical example of circular reasoning. You closed a (part of a) discussion you are involved in, for no good reason. If other people

1227:

One of your comments from about a week ago was that you thought I was trying to find fault with others, to avoid taking responsibility for my own mistakes. I expect myself to acknowledge when my correspondents make a good point. I expect myself to read the challenges, concens and questions from my

1182:

Please note that I tried to be careful, and go over that note to make sure I was sticking to the specific topic of that DRV, and not try to drag in all your other deletions, your unwillingness to assume good faith, and various other highly disturbing elements of your recent behavior. I'd appreciate

909:

Forgive me, but I somehow stumbled onto the whole Emily Schooley fiasco when it was put up for AFD. I am not very familiar with the more technical side of things, such as Check User and what not, but am I understanding correctly that your investigation resulted in a finding that, in all likelihood,

799:

I can't help it if you don't see how saying that someone is a captive and being held in extrajuducial detention is not perhaps just a tad lening towards slightly contentious... That you can find confirmation of it through Google is irrelevant for a G10 speedy, it was at the time of deletion, and for

626:

I guess I'll say something, then, since I don't have a horse in this race either way, and I don't even know what the history is between you and Geo (though given the way it's going, I'd say it's a fair bet such a history exists). For the pages you speedied, I'd much encourage you to instead let them

367:

IIRC one choice the administrator's handbook recommended was that the concerned administrator could take off their administrator's hat, and use all the same regular channels for expressing their concern as any regular wikipedian. Another choice, if they felt the situation required urgent attention,

5048:

MSGJ, an RfCU may be the best solution. I don't have the time now to do this, I'll edit little or not the next week, but I'll get back to this afterwards. If you or anyone else starts one in the meantime, I'll obviously either certify it or add my own comment, but I may not be able to certify it in

3899:

because I have the dab page on my watchlist. I checked your contribution list, and saw that you've created a number of stubs based on text from this book. My initial thought was that, the fact that it's based on only a single source, and that a (non-exhaustive) search on Google Scholar turns up no

3510:

had won an award in Danmark, Germany, or the Netherlands, the local translations oft he characters don't suddenly become important enough to be included here. Generally, only the original and English language names of characters are included (in this case, they are the same of course), otherwise we

3104:

Well, if you want to get anywhere with me (or with most other users), the best way is not to start with an ANI discussion about a non-urgent matter and which has a lot more incorrect statements than it had diffs. If you then blame the failure of any result from that ANI discussion on admins closing

1483:

I prefer honest, frank but civil communication over fake civility, personally, but to each his own. Apart from that, you are exteremely well versed in cherrypicking from responses whatever pleases you, and ignoring the rest. If all you have remembered or read in my post is "ordered", then you are a

1211:

I am going to repeat, for the record, that I acknowledge that you have stated I challenged your good faith. For the record, I accept, at face value, that you honestly believe all your actions and comments were consistent with your obligations. For the record it was not my intent to challenge your

994:

This page was tagged for a week as a problematic copyvio. As the tag it sported says, such pages may be deleted after that week, which I did. Considering that Camelbinky, who inserted the plagiarism, is the one that created the page and wrote almost all the contents before anyone else got involved,

4559:

Apart from the issue of possible socks, the topic as such is somewhat notable, although the actual title of the article may be incorrect. He has, according to what I could find, attempted to assassinate an Egyptian president, and did get some attention for that. Coupled with his famous relative, I

4221:

This is really an annual thing now, I know the guy won't give up (yeah, he posted another abusive message after you protected my page again last year, but there would be more if you didn't) but thanks for protecting my talk, and I would politely ask that you extend the protection until such a time

3922:

In general, it should be enough, as inclusion in one encyclopedia (even when it is called a biographical dictionary) warrants inclusion in another one. However, I usually do check whether enough info is available and whether the artist has received further attention, and I skip a lot of artists in

3623:

I need to be fair because its a near pissing match, and in fairness, neither you or DanTD have had reputable sides in this. The mention of ANI was only if you or Dan removed the archive and kept arguing. ;) - As much as I try to help DanTD with stuff I've been in three edit wars in the last month

1799:

with "stalking", which is a serious charge; as an editor involved with the discussion, I have a right to reply. Campaigning for !votes is against established consensus, and is considered a form of talk page spamming. Notifications should be given to users who have made substantial contributions to

1443:

I have requested you, many times before, to please make a greater effort to communicate in a manner that complies more fully with our project's civility policies, guidelines and established convention. I repeat that request. The angry, suspicious, hostile tone of many of your replies represent a

1278:

I accept, at face value, your assurance that you can not see how your behavior appears to be the actions of a bully. But since I am the target of your actions, and I do, in fact feel you are bullying me, and I am finding the experience very distressing, I think you should consider the possibility

1252:

You have the time to respond at length at SnottyWongs talk page, and here, but you don't have the time to reply to my post at your ANI discussion? You had again misrepresented my position badly, while it of course is a rather essential point in a discussion about my deletions and actions. I am not

4944:

I observe that there is little progress with the concerns that have been expressed about this editor's actions. Certainly he is now more willing to discuss (or at least defend) his edits, but in the end there has been no real improvement on (a) the high proportion of mistakes, (b) the unnecessary

4889:

Apart from that, I would urge you to refrain from speculating on other editor's motives and thoughts, and stick to the facts. Had your first reply at the current ANI discussion been a factual explanation of what you attempted to do, instead of simply attacking me, you might at least have had some

2196:

or at least expanding on it withing the AfD. The article lacks any reliable sources and a search shows none. No one provided any reliable sources during the discussion and no one has added any since the AfD close on November 15, 2010. A reason I am asking is that the page is embarrassingly sparse

126:

Thanks for the message. Reasons I do this is because SmackBot has been blocked a lot recently, with Richard Farmbrough complaining about the backlog in dating tgas that this generates; because I also want to know whether this really is such a complicated task that replacing all template redirects

3085:

I am clearly wasting my time thinking that I am going to get anywhere with you. My problem is that when you submit 40 or 50 at a time its hard to review them before they are deleted unless I stop actually editing articles and spend all my time in deletion discussions with users with an apparenty

2402:

The only persons objecting to the deletion were you (the article creator) and an editor who created his account specifically for this discussion, and has no edits before or since. The keep arguments are not based on policy, the delete arguments were. When there are more people for deletion, with

2228:

I don't really understand why you reverted the redirect implemented by another user, if you don't want this article to exist anyway. Do you dispute that this episode will air soon, or that it will have this title, or what? Anyway, the AfD was unanimous, whit one redirect and the others keep (one

1315:

Another administrator has already suggested that, even if, for the sake of argument, the passages you claim entitled the Brookings authors to claim intellectual property rights did entitle them to claim IP rights, they were so short, and were such a tiny fraction of the whole document, that they

807:

copyvio, it still gets speedy deleted as such, since there are no copyright-violating free versions in it. Again, that's basic policy, and the fact that even a large part of the contents of the list was not copyrightable (note that the page also copied the exact same structure, sections, section

3862:

Bot operators should be communicative about their bot. You are not willing or able to answer a very simple, specific and relevant question about edits your bot is doing. You could have ended this all without much effort from your side, assuming that the task indeed had approval, as you claimed.

3555:

Every language is universal. I doubt seriously though that the success of the series is due ti the French names of the characters. The series was successful in many countries, without any help from the French (and before the French publication). Note how every translation except the French is a

593:

Granted, if it were me, I'd keep my subpages a bit cleaner, but that's more for him to decide how he wishes to edit. And if you went and asked him to prune the pages because you felt excessive space was being used or abandoned articles were an issue, I am sure he could have culled some of the

1491:

Do you really expect that someone who has to explain five times why something is a copyright violation, only to be somehow misunderstood or totally ignored time after time, to listen to your endless preachings about civility, bullying, ANI reports, RfCs, and so on? For the last time: I am not

663:

If he has a problem with my deletions, he should go to DRV, as I said, not go to admins who are known to be friendly to his position, like DGG. The curtness of my replies does not prove any involvedness, just a lack of reason to give yet another lengthy reply (note e.g. that he asked the same

3036:

matters, when I haven't started any discussion on Geo Swan's pages since December 16, i.e. more than a week before your complaint, is also rather useless, and only had the effect of having the discussion archived before I even had the chance to comment on it, if I wanted to. Please learn how

956:

Hey - thanks for bringing these socks up for investigation again. I was shocked when the previous investigation found they were unrelated - because it seemed like it wouldn't take much effort to show that they were. It looks like this time the check came back with a different result... :)

196:

but enough people misunderstand the instructions that I have to deal with {Subst:July 2010} and similar. for SB to do a few hundred more tag datings a day takes almost no effort, to correct 3 or 4 weird typos takes some. Having said that SB does actually get almost all of them these days.

1217:

Responding to what feels like an attack, without responding in kind, is extremely difficult. I am not authorized to respond in kind if I think you challenged my good faith, and you are not authorized to respond in kind if you think I challenged your good faith. I drafted an opinion piece

390:

I stated on your talk page: "it looked like this, and could easily have been deleted as a G10 negative unsourced BLP article. It did not contain a single source, and was clearly negative and one-sided in tone." How was that not "a response to your defense"? The fact that you changed a very

1237:. If you think I owe you an apology, please read the essay. If someone suggests you apologize to me, please read the essay. No offense, but I think it would be worth your while to try to read this essay, without regard to whether you think either one of us owes the other an apology. 3511:

would have a never ending list of character names for many series. The title of the series in other languagese is informative enough to be included on an article on the series, and obviously all awards should be included, but local character translations are a case of too much detail.

2334:

Another editor posted a deletion review notice further up the discussion for some reason, I fixed a couple of problems with it but the stupid edit filter won't let me remove it to place it here. So just in case you miss it as not being a new section here as you might expect...

3526:

The lectors have a right to know why the serie have succeeded in french language. The french language is universal. And the original authors have a debt in front of french authors because the french names of characters have been and are the keys of the success of the serie.

1831:

Thank you for your comment. As you can see, my messages are entirely non-partisan and neutral, and they total only four in number. I do not know these editors and I have no idea what their opinions on anything are. They are simply the editors who made some edit(s) to the

719: 191:

No it doesn't actually. Humans make so many mistakes dating tags. When I am doing the manual clean up at the end of a run I see my fingers making the same typos as the human editors I've been cussing. the same applies to cleaver stuff like "{Subst:DATE}". It's great

1179:

using your authority, although I believe your use of administrator authority after having gone on record as being unwilling to extend to me the assumption of good faith does not comply with the instructions for administrators, I am not challenging your sincerity.

585:

He clearly marks all of his subpages as USER SPACE and NOT ARTICLES - and each of them is NOINDEXed. The whole point of creating articles in userspace is so that you can take the time to find sources, etc. If you feel they are one-sided and incomplete - that is

3330:

misrepresented the subjects. I've tried to given you the benefit of the doubt, because you're from Belgium, and you don't seem like you understand the way things work here. But there are still others who like me, tried to remind you that the articles are about

2992:

Although I can appreciate your zeal for ensuring that the most notible have an article in WP you need to slow down a little on he mass deletion campaign. You have submitted so many articles for deletion at one time its nearly impossible to comment on them all.

391:

problematic page to a completely different one, and then start complaining about "I would welcome clarification as to why anyone would regard this subpage as problematic.", and (on the page) "It has been suggested that this page of notes does not comply with

3829:

there is doubt, you should give the requested link. Instead you restarted the bot and utter some vague threat here. I'm quite curious as to how you are going to "deal with me", if not by answering a simple request for a link to a specific bot approval page.

739: 1040: 2724:. Thanks for the suggestion, but no. And is there any reason why "some internal links" have any relevance to decide whether a page is a BLP violation or not? Certainly when you consider that these "internal links" included rather loaded redlinks like 2229:

duplicate, but that doesn't change the consensus). The troubled editing history of the page (with people adding and removing e.g. imdb referencing) should have no bearing on the outcome of the AfD. But if you disagree, you are free to take it to

352: 1416:

explicitly states lists with mundane obvious ordering, like numeric, alphabetic, or chronological ordering are not copyrightable. While these tables has an order, it is merely the kind of mundane, obvious ordering that does not merit copyright

4945:

minor edits, (c) mass-editting without (or against) consensus and (d) ahering to the bot policy. I am wondering what would be the best avenue to take now. One option would be an RFCU which has not yet been tried. What is your opinion? — Martin

3950:

Sorry I didn't respond sooner; I forgot, then got ill. That makes sense to me; looking at your other contributions and info it looked like you definitely knew your subject material, so I figured I'd check first. Thanks for the detailed info!

364:, give the appearance that your emotions are engaged. I am pretty sure the administrator's handbook recommends that administrators who find their emotions engaged should step back, and not exercise administrator authority in those instances. 1874:, there is overwhelming evidence that you have been paid to edit by a client, please do not obfuscate the point. Also, let's keep and continue the discussion on your talk page, and not bother other users. Don't let this be a race to have the 2097:

Well, sort-of. The discussion in question, however, is an attempt to raise a consensus to subvert a fundamental policy. I've no objection to people wasting their time like this, but it's not the most productive use of other people's time.

689: 668:

should have been MfD'ed instead of G10 speedied aren't worthy of being an admin, basically, as they can't even upheld our most basic policies. Note that that page was from February 2008, so not really a work in progress. The same goes for

1312:. I didn't think they did. I accept at face value you think they do. If I were to accept the worst case, that those passages pass de minimus then a version with those passage excised is uncopyrightable. I think you ignored this point. 3777: 2725: 1367:

I accept, at face value that you honestly believe an ordered list of facts is copyrightable, merely because it has been ordered. I considered this possibility in my very first messages on this issue. Which is why I asked you to review

5341:

up into individual nominations. As a whole, nothings likely to get done. Individual AfDs require a bit more labor, but will make it much more likely that the undeserving articles get viewed separately from the potentially better ones.

4397:. It seems pretty conclusive on the behavioral evidence = consider that fully 100% of the AFDs commented at by the possible sock, were on articles previously created by Geo Swan. Perhaps you may have additional evidence to present? -- 2087:

This is silly. Discussions are had, on policy, among other things, all over the place–noticeboards, aricle talk pages, user talk pages, XfD discussions. That doesn't subvert process or bypass the established methods for altering

1899:

To clarify, I have made no admissions about payment for anything in the locations you list. Go and see. (And I have not removed any links from anywhere - I would not even know how to do that in Twitter, if it's even possible...)

761:

Please, then, allow me again to apologize for my lack of worth. I'm sure disagreeing with you further will make me even more unworthy, so I suppose maybe I should even apologize twice! That being done, I took a careful look at

745:

Not a bad track record, I believe... If you add to that that two of the three "keeps" for that last MfD are based on an incorrect assumption, then there isn't much reason anymore to believe that my deletions are so incorrect.

5338: 694: 1854:

in the edit history, even if their edit is as minor as a typo correction, is disruptive. I understand your frustration that your client's article is being nominated for deletion, but please refrain from breaking behaviour

763: 665: 335: 714: 1532:

No. I think your point of view in this case is not only uninvolved, but also uninformed. Geo Swan has a massive userspace (the largest I have seen), with many useful pages but many problematic ones, clearly violating

4904:

Had you a little more patience rather than jumping into ANI, you would not have had such a response. And it was an accurate response, that is how you behave, it is annoying, and I have asked you many times to stop.

1776:

My good friend, am I being being stalked? What proof do you have of any so-called "financial relationships"? Why are you so averse to other editors knowing of your own good work? If something is "borderline," but

1757:

1484:

master of selective reading. The "order" is not solely or primarily about the number of each detainee, but the ordering in three separate sections, based on the level of certainty they feel they can give to their

4823:

since they are blocked anyway and the possible sockmaster is not editing at all, there isn't much to be achieved by looking any further, I fear. The initial SPI was of course a worthwhile and fruitful exercise!

4050:? A bunch of IP editors seem to think it would be a funny idea to claim its alternative name is "Charleroi-sur-Vesdre". At first I fell for it, but Google turns up nothing but Knowledge and its mirrors. Cheers, 3783: 637:

template, for uncertain cases, would be the way to go—this has valid grounds to contest that it's a copyvio, as there are valid grounds to contest that the material is copyrighted at all. You might also ask for

145:

That's OK then. If the editor were named, say, "FramBot", I wouldn't have said a thing; I just felt sorry that a human was doing this when a bot could. ¶ Perhaps I should really be dating my own tags myself. --

3007: 709: 3012:

Sorry it took me a bit to add this but I wanted to let you know that I also added a comment at ANI regarding this and what I feel is a conflict of interest/POV issues relating to some of your recent actions.

1071:. Apart from that, what is the purpose of asking the same question again and again and again? What makes you think that you wouldn't get the same answer again and again and again? 20:11, 9 November 2010 (UTC) 3595: 2698: 1023: 1012: 670: 372: 361: 4925:

the chinese torture donkey, claiming that some youtube movie was not a copyright violation without any evidence to back that up; or at the Queen's Award AfD), I didn't believe it useful to wait any longer.

4686:

Considering that I filed the RfC (and notified you of this) a few hours before this post from you, I don't have the possibility to wait anymore. You are welcome to post your reply here and/or at the RfC.

3279:

I've been telling you all along what was wrong with removing the suffixes from these articles. If you can't see how you've screwed things up, you've got some problems. There are plenty of other people on

2794: 2365: 870:

and hope to stop this nonsense. Check him out: just looking at his first 100 edits you'll see the way he behaves, and his first 500 edits show a history of this kind of behavior since at least February.

2107:

Saying that in the discussion and then unwatching it might have been a better option than closing it, perhaps. Occasionally an idea may spring from a seemingly useless discussion ... occasionally ...

223: 2403:

stronger arguments, and with more experience on Knowledge, there is little left to decide or argue for the closing admin: I just followed the rather clear consensus. You are free to take this to

1010: 2187: 1141: 1305:. I asked you if you are familiar with it implications. It seems to me you aren't. The "sweat of the brow" is honored in the copyright laws of other nations, but it is not honored in US law. 1222:, which was my attempt to respond, in general, to your comments on my motives, my character, my judgment, without making a personal reply. I encourage you to try to read it, with an open mind. 734: 4623:

Yes, it was never certified, and so deleted. I thought that creating mine at Geo Swan/2 would give the impression that it already was the second RfC on Geo Swan, which would be rather unfair.

582:

I don't think its unreasonable for Geo Swan to have these pages in his User space - and I definitely don't think it's unreasonable to have the contents of the deleted articles emailed to him.

699: 4342:

I have no idea, you could better ask Iqinn whether he has reported this. Otherwise he should probably stop stating his suspicions. I have never known Geo Swan to use sock- or meatpuppets.

774:

MfD them if you don't think they should be kept. I just don't see anything of speedy caliber. Same thing with the "copyvio"—the vast majority of that piece is just a list of facts, and so

2148: 1341:

Yet again, you obviously either haven't read or haven't understood my point. It may be incorrect (although the support for your claims that it is incorrect is far from overwhelming), but

729: 1253:

going to read your essays, thank you, I have better things to do than continue to discuss things with you when you can't be bothered to reply or to all appearances read my posts anyway.

3795: 1061: 384: 3928: 3450:

station, or a Portland MAX station, or a Dallas Area Rapid Transit Light Rail station, or a South Florida Tri-Rail Station, or an MBTA station, or Washington Metro station, etc. -----

2970: 2936: 1273:

How many other administrators have to tell you that you appear to be acting like a bully before you will consider the possibility that you really do appear to be acting like a bully?

2902: 3037:

Knowledge works and how to make attempts at dispute resolution properly in the future, instead of wasting everyone's time with a non-event which you described rather incorrectly.

514:

repeated my request that you recuse yourself, because you don't feel you can extend the assumption of good faith to me, and confine yourself to the channels ordinary contributors.

217: 2280:. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 1026:. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 4761: 2953: 2919: 2299:

I always check for file links when I delete an image that's on Commons with a different name; I apparently didn't look closely enough, so I'll fix it. Thanks for the pointer.

1075: 2885: 2394: 2193: 2031:

because it seems to be misplaced. Since you think that it's important to observe established procedures, please do follow the very well established procedures in this case. --

2154: 3288:

who know the justification for these standards. I know that Sacramento has nothing to do with the New York Tri-State area, but the suffixes are important there as well. ----

426:

I think it would be best if any exercise of administrator powers were carried out by an administrator who is willing and able to extend to me the assumption of good faith.

577: 4796:) was stale, and the reviewing admin did not wish to block on the behavioral evidence alone. Do you think it is worthwhile to spend a bit more time going over the already 949: 2264: 2987: 375:

were an emergency. I think it was a mistake for you to delete the subpage yourself. I am disappointed that you did not offer a response to my defense of the subpage.

3056:

shouldn't submit a group of articles for deletion that were created by a user you have had ongoing edit conflicts with. As an admin you should know better than that. --

1035: 3863:

Instead you have made two rather unspecific posts here, and a not really helpful email one as well. You aren't helping anyone, the least of all yourself, in this way.

2206: 2153:

Based on your comments on my talk page and some things I have observed I started a policy clarification discussion regarding the use of the BLP unsourced template at

3495: 2166: 1308:

I already said I thought the passages you claim entitled the Brookings authors to claim intellectual property rights were too short to unquestionably qualify for

5013:

I was commenting on the original post. Kinda irritating when people pick out one or 2 specific things to complain about out of hundreds or thousands isn't it? --

266:

I have read it, and this seems to be exactly what I had in mind. Changes all those that need changing, and leaves alone those that a bot can't address. Thanks!

4782:

results linking (7) sock accounts to each other, and they were all then indefinitely blocked. However, technical data on the suspected main sockmaster account,

803:

The talk page archive is at MfD, not speedied, and sincxe you all want me to MfD things, I don't see the problem there. And if every version of an article is a

236: 3535: 2962: 2928: 2797:, it appears he has opened a counter-thread. Please notify me if the disruptive behavior continues post-this-ANI-thread, it indeed is blockable. Thank you, -- 3322:

what I've been doing. There were never any incorrect reasons for my actions, nor have a I misrepresented my reasons for renaming them. You, on the other hand

3183: 2894: 1293:

I strongly dispute I misrepresented your position. On the contrary, I found your comment, like other comments you have made, seemed disturbingly inaccurate.

2982: 2948: 2020:

until a satisfactory consensus is reached on perceived conduct problems. If your concern is with the circumstances of one particular close, take it through

1734:

is discouraged. It is perfectly acceptable to notify contributors who have added substantial content, but notifying every user who has only done so much as

966: 4816: 2914: 2289: 950: 3002: 4139:

After looking at that talk page archive from November, I have to wonder--does Geo Swan need to be blocked for a bit? Clearly this guy isn't getting it.

1581: 1219: 705:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/articles that aren't ready yet/Guantanamo documents/Terrorist-Related Locations and Facilities

2505: 4728: 4275: 4020: 3373:

because when I brought up a similar example of an article about a station named after a street, which happens to be in the NYT part of the discussion,

3052:

why I didn't waste a significant amount of my time on carefully documenting a matter that would lead to nothing anyway. The bottom line though is that

2382: 1110: 4237:

The protection is still in place until May, I have no problem extending it if the vandalism starts again, but perhaps best to simply wait until then?

1790: 1430:

Further, as I am sure you noticed. I created the list in a table, with the sortable property. So, my table was in an order chooseable by the reader.

130:

If I would notice that the backlog is gone (it is severely reduced already), or that my AWB runs don't accomplish anything, I'll obviously stop them.

4252: 828: 328: 287: 3022: 2042:

feel that the discussion is tangential, they can close it. But you shouldn't close a discussion just beacuse someone disagrees with your reasoning.

1959:

I sincerely apologise that this dispute on a user's financial COI has spilled on to your talk page. It shouldn't have escalated the way it did, but

1940: 1917: 1892: 1845: 1826: 1771: 1752: 2519:

there, and then some Knowledge articles have a link to Wiktionary, which means original research is just one click away. Not sure how to fix it. --

5205:

Why wouldn't it support more than these 12? Anyway, why did you create two categories for the same type of articles when a third already existed?

1168: 1019: 4201:, if you think this is a good idea you may change it as you please and see if there are things I have forgotten or have represented incorrectly. 4156:, if you think this is a good idea you may change it as you please and see if there are things I have forgotten or have represented incorrectly. 3441:), which is not about a station. This is why I brought up "Main Line" and "Springfield Junction" dab pages. Because they have articles about the 2422: 958: 595: 880: 4197:

Oh yes, definite AfD candidate, negative BLP purely based on primary sources. By the way, as I just said to Blueboy96, I am drafting an RfC in

505: 495: 2344: 4767: 4564:. This is just based on some basic research though, further research may reveal whether this is correct or incomplete or biased or whatever. 4452: 4438: 4418: 4408: 4336: 2721: 2683: 2329: 2221: 1994: 208: 5214: 5185:

Are you restoring a type based categorization system that supports about 12 articles instead of leaving the one supports several thousand?

4934: 4916: 4899: 4716: 3872: 3854: 3838: 3569: 2833: 2753: 2737: 2111: 2102: 2092: 1867: 1518:

You should take a step back from Geo Swan and refrain from pursuing any matter regarding him further. From an uninvolved point of view, it

1183:

it, if you choose to weigh in in that discussion, if you also stuck strictly to the topic of the copyright status of the page in question.

501:

are time consuming to respond to, and requested you let the ones you have already initiated run their course, before initiating any further

332: 4394: 3446: 1982: 1661: 1636: 1622: 3520: 2002: 819: 794: 4269: 4231: 3647: 3377:

felt the suffix should be removed from there as well. So no, I'm not dragging any irrelevant aspects into the subject, and actually it's

2670: 2071: 2051: 1246: 655: 545: 4126: 4113: 4073: 2416: 108: 5305: 4805:

and blocked sock accounts tied to each other, and link them back to the main suspected sockmaster account? Thank you for your time, --

4246: 3770: 3638:

New Jersey Transit wants to reopen that I'd like to discuss with you, so I think I'll take it there if it won't cause any trouble. ----

2862: 2323: 2256: 2242: 2141: 943: 5145: 4165: 2359: 1683: 4696: 3960: 3945: 2371: 1568: 1501: 1466: 1354: 1332: 1004: 866:

please let me know as well. I'm really concerned and feel administration intervention is necessary. I may post this exact message on

559: 528: 457: 435: 408: 346: 275: 5315:

Fran: Can you merge these articles as I suggested, or provide a comment and your thoughts on the subject? It makes a lot of sense.

5037: 5022: 5008: 4993: 4146: 3335:, not the intersection, parks, buildings, and other locations that they stop at, and that this is why they need those suffixes. ---- 3159: 3129: 3114: 3099: 3080: 3065: 3046: 2561: 2547: 2181: 2035: 898: 621: 3459: 3390: 3344: 3297: 3262: 3240: 3214: 2273: 312:

Joseph Djugvili -- or at least Djugvili is one transliteration of his original name -- and thus, I suggest, a plausible redirect.

260: 4740: 4210: 4090:. In fact, it seems that the namespaces should be reversed. Could you kindly execute a page move over redirect, please? Cheers, -- 1989:

Because you've been involved in cleaning up Geo Swan's userspace, you may be interested in a discussion about a possible RfC/U at

1546: 170: 139: 5172: 4876: 4848: 4832: 4648: 4632: 4589: 4573: 4514: 4498: 4484: 4468: 4431: 4381: 4351: 4216: 2569: 1836:

page. In addition, I should note there are no mentions of any payments of any sort for anything on my Twitter account. Cheers!

1130: 685:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Category talk -- Tunisian extrajudicial prisoners of the United States

2016:. If your concern is that somebody is making bad AfD closes, please take that up with the editor in question, taking it through 3195: 2652: 2028: 1801: 1720: 1114: 4473:

About the last part, agreed. Do you think it would be helpful for you to comment and point that out, at the SPI case page? --

3916: 2469:

from 1562 is considered to be "one of the most successful architectural textbooks ever written" despite having almost no text?

5287:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

5156: 5127:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

3741: 3718:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

3543: 2701:? It contained a link to a Wikisource page, and some internal links! I seriously think you need to take a couple months off. 2676:

P.S. I realize you havent seen this article in almost 2 years, but your one of the only editors who touched it.v/r, --v/r -

2487:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

988: 2374:. However I do not really see that a consensus was reached on the discussion page. Could you please explain your decision? 1963:. This is my first time encountering a paid editor, and I apologise for any incovenience that the dispute may have caused.-- 1153: 927: 3434: 889:

may be your best bet, it has normally a number of editors with experience in COI related edits and such patterns of edits.

4191: 3593:

has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath

2056:

I've given you very good reasons above. Please read them and take them seriously. In your reply you state (and I bold):

1067:

Deleting material is not an indication of good or bad faith towards another contributor. Like I said in one of the DRV's,

4293: 4134: 3491: 241: 5236: 5069: 4553: 3631: 1800:

articles, not every editor in the editing history, especially if said controbution was just a typo correction. As admin

185: 155: 120: 4098: 3700:, written around 1190, was reprinted at least 25 times in two decades three hundred years later, between 1479 and 1499? 3669: 3177: 2955: 2921: 2887: 2535: 2438: 1977: 1591: 1048:

I repeat my request that you recuse yourself from exercising administrator authority over material I have contributed.

5349: 4957: 4036: 5150: 4617: 4299: 4281: 4002: 3547: 3442: 2780: 2390: 2308: 1904:, let's keep and continue the discussion elsewhere, and not bother other users. Don't let this be a race to have the 1526: 1199: 1118: 222:

As an editor involved in prior discussions over AWB, templates and first letter casing please consider commenting on

3986: 3560:

that the success of the series has anything to do with the French names of the characters, then it can be included.

603: 536:

Just to be clear, you are declining all of my requests, including emailing me the source of the pages you deleted?

4287: 3931: 3819: 3499: 3426: 2712: 2007: 1609:

Just a quick follow up, I've reverted all his edits, and he is on a final warning for vandalism. I've also filed a

1094: 475: 5196: 3624:

with him. I know you're trying to make some change, but unfortunately its become a lot worse than it needs to be.

3613: 1444:

terrible temptation to respond in kind. As I am sure you are aware, none of us are authorized to respond in kind.

5327: 4793: 4722: 4263: 2656: 2528: 2464: 2450: 2336: 1871: 1735: 1656: 1171:. Although I didn't specifically mention your name I am nevertheless informing you that I initiated a section at 4415: 4058: 3766: 1298:

With regard to the diffs you offered on the WPANI thread, briefly, I think you are ignoring several key points:

755: 5220: 4322: 3924: 3882: 2879: 2277: 2266: 1149: 4015: 1858:

You posted a message specifically linking to the article (that you've now removed), but another post remains:

1603: 720:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/additional notes/Sharbat (Guantanamo detainee 1051)

5053: 4756: 4680: 4171: 1192: 971: 4526: 4023:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the

3759: 3752: 2017: 1698: 321: 2855: 2848: 861:

and edits he's been making since he's a member here, and several of his buddies who are here basically to

337:, ever? Creating redirects for things, even misspellings, you made up one day, is not a good idea at all. 5301: 5141: 4603: 3202: 2644: 2592: 2570: 2501: 2082: 1262: 1100: 1041:/* I request you refrain from exercising your administrator powers over concerns over my contributions */ 102: 5337:

Hi. I commented already in the AfD discussion, but I just wanted to recommend ending and then splitting

2808: 5288: 5274: 5128: 5114: 4859: 4258: 4001:

Welcome to Knowledge. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from

3719: 3705: 3653: 3430: 2795:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#WP:POINT_violations_through_AWB_by_User:Rich_Farmbrough

2648: 2488: 2474: 2458: 1990: 1983: 1967: 1930: 1882: 1816: 1742: 1234: 904: 38: 4152:

Idon't think a block is needed yet, I am trying to find a different solution. I am drafting an RfC in

2814:

Er. How is it disruptive to attempt to bring and end to a long running and extensive conflict between

5190: 5160: 4910: 4870: 4597: 3848: 3813: 3539: 2827: 2774: 2747: 2706: 2608:. There are some unsourced BLP issues that are commented out that could hold some notability if true. 2021: 1145: 740:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/An experiment -- are 90 percent of new articles junk?

664:

question 1 on his own talk page, and I did give a lengthy reply there. People who believe that e.g.

642:

input, she has a tremendous amount of experience assessing material of questionable copyright status.

202: 94: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 1960: 1556: 5332: 3896: 1513: 1126: 353:

I request you refrain from exercising your administrator powers over concerns over my contributions

2407:

if you believe I misread the consensus on this AFD, but looking at it again, I don't think I did.

3438: 2478: 1863: 1046: 995:

there is no older version to revert to. Feel free to write a new page about the subject though.

5297: 5137: 4668:

I request you read that reply, and respond to it, and engage me in civil and collegial dialog.

3421:

You shoudln't have closed that discussion, because there's more to it than this. Stations like

3326:

misrepresented my motives for renaming the articles, and in fact when you renamed the articles

2497: 2294: 2099: 2068: 2032: 1850:

It is appropriate to notify users who have made substantial edits, like the anon IP. Notifying

1585: 842: 5229: 5062: 3662: 2431: 690:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Captured lists of al-Qaeda suspects

5241: 5074: 4978: 4736: 4712: 4179: 4172: 4124: 4096: 4013:. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the 3991: 3736: 3674: 3618: 3422: 3029:(the only ones I did close were those I withdrew, which is hardly a thing to complain about). 2443: 2386: 1964: 1927: 1913: 1879: 1841: 1813: 1786: 1767: 1739: 1716: 972: 357:

I thought you reassured me, a couple of weeks ago, that you were not doubting my good faith.

2247:

I reverted the redirect by another user because it went against the AfD consensus close. --

2155:

Knowledge:Village pump (policy)#Determination of usage needed for the BLP unsourced template

5323: 5187: 4907: 4867: 4532: 4227: 4079: 3845: 3810: 3531: 3487: 2824: 2771: 2744: 2703: 2680: 2667: 2631: 2378: 2285: 2252: 2217: 2202: 1288:

because policy recommends informing other contributors when you have brought up their name.

1285: 923: 858: 396: 392: 199: 3778:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/St. Mark Church (Stratford, Connecticut) - One list needed

8: 4787: 4750:

for reverting the vandalism at my user pages. I seem to have annoyed someone, somewhere!

4704: 4143: 4032: 4010: 3982: 3968: 3791: 3575: 3370: 2875: 2660: 2340: 1708: 1651: 1632: 1618: 1599: 1534: 1122: 639: 3784:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/St. Mark Church (Stratford, Connecticut)#One list needed

800:

the years before, an unsourced negative BLP. That you don't see this is indeed worrying.

368:

would be to direct the attention of another, uninvolved administrator to their concern.

5284: 5168: 5124: 4968: 4676: 4662: 4316: 3956: 3912: 3715: 3599:

and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --

3228: 3147: 2510: 2484: 2013: 1564: 1462: 1328: 1242: 1188: 1057: 1031: 984: 962: 915: 834: 789: 650: 599: 541: 524: 431: 380: 317: 251: 247: 227: 3484:

The french name of the characters is important because the award was a french award.

3144:

I have not submitted articles for deletion from an editor I have an edit conflict with

1666:

Damn, how did you konw it was me? Joking aside, and for the record, this was of course

695:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Captured on the battlefield

5018: 4989: 4198: 4153: 4024: 4006: 3606: 3590: 3125: 3095: 3061: 3018: 2998: 2627: 2557: 2524: 2319: 2304: 2162: 2134: 2127: 1730:

with the subject,you are concerned that your client's article could get deleted, but

1613:

report, and have removed the text on his userpage that made the false claim. Thanks,

1555:

I believe I have an obligation to inform you when I have discussed you. I did so at

876: 854: 846: 2769:

There are other admins. You are in personal dispute with Geo, you should walk away.

2614: 2012:

If your concern is that Knowledge should be more bureaucratic, please raise that at

1142:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Dictionary of National Biography#Too much of a good thing

715:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/abusive presiding officer

5346: 5210: 5089: 5033: 5004: 4930: 4895: 4828: 4732: 4708: 4692: 4628: 4569: 4494: 4464: 4347: 4242: 4206: 4161: 4119: 4109: 4091: 4069: 4052: 3941: 3868: 3834: 3746: 3728: 3565: 3516: 3281: 3155: 3110: 3076: 3042: 2733: 2543: 2412: 2355: 2238: 2177: 2047: 1998: 1909: 1837: 1833: 1796: 1782: 1763: 1731: 1712: 1704: 1679: 1542: 1497: 1350: 1258: 1135: 1082: 1000: 939: 894: 862: 838: 815: 751: 631: 555: 453: 404: 342: 271: 166: 135: 5093: 3556:

variation of Redeye, not of "La tribu terrible". If you can provide evidence from

2172:

Thanks! I'll drop by to give my comments (though perhaps only after the weekend).

1812:

on your Twitter account. This is an explicit violation of the neutrality policy.--

1316:

qualified for inclusion under "fair use". I think you ignored this point as well.

5319: 5310: 4367: 4223: 4187: 3643: 3455: 3386: 3340: 3293: 3258: 3236: 3210: 3191: 2978: 2944: 2910: 2677: 2664: 2613:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

2588: 2574: 2281: 2248: 2213: 2198: 1954: 1860:

Just put the finishing touches on a trio of Knowledge pages for a client in Texas

1203: 1090: 919: 181: 151: 116: 5278: 3974: 3923:

Bryan's for that reason. For William Cochran, I e.g. found his biography at the

2060:

My concern is that people shouldn't be closing AfD's early without good reasons,

46:

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

5271:

You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page

5257: 5248: 5118: 5111:

You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page

4984:. If you are spending the time to add the template Fram add the correct one. -- 4952: 4844: 4812: 4783: 4745: 4665:

I am drafting a reply to it, and I request you wait until I finish that reply.

4644: 4613: 4585: 4549: 4510: 4480: 4448: 4427: 4404: 4377: 4332: 4140: 4028: 3978: 3787: 3702:

You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page

3479: 3285: 2871: 2842: 2804: 2764: 2605: 2471:

You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page

1905: 1875: 1646: 1628: 1614: 1595: 1413: 1369: 1302: 886: 867: 850: 780: 710:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/al Janki prison riot

485: 47: 17: 3934: 1627:

And he's now indef blocked (vandal only account, username violates policy) :)

1279:

you are making a mistake by ignoring the advice of your fellow administrators.

5164: 5098: 5081: 4672: 4656: 4561: 4539: 4489:

I don't think so, everything is there for the checkusers (or clerks) to see.

4390: 4312: 4308: 4041: 3952: 3908: 3901: 3374: 3205:" wouldn't know that you're talking about a Saracamento light rail stop. ---- 2819: 2637:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

2404: 2230: 1727: 1703:

FYI - As someone who has worked on the page, it might interest you know that

1610: 1576: 1560: 1458: 1324: 1238: 1184: 1172: 1164: 1158: 1053: 1027: 980: 934:

involved in will need rechecking to see whether they influenced the outcome.

857:? Or you just point to the username(s) in question? There's a case here with 617: 537: 520: 427: 376: 313: 298: 5155:

Hello Fram, In your recent ref-link for DYK/Albert Clement/Clement Bayard (

4441:. Thoughts? Anything to add as far as more evidence and diffs and links? -- 3709: 1412:

the list's order is unique, has a spark of creativity. IIRC the wording of

5106: 5014: 4985: 4751: 4087: 4080: 3803: 3602: 3557: 3224: 3121: 3091: 3057: 3014: 2994: 2788: 2692: 2553: 2520: 2315: 2300: 2197:

and, per the page history, people continue to struggle over its status. --

2158: 2108: 2089: 1805: 1671: 911: 872: 1926:

Your admissions on Knowledge are still there, but yes, let us end it. :)--

1522:

look like a bad case of bullying — regardless of your original intent. —

5343: 5180: 3892: 2601: 1268:

I did not respond at WPANI because that thread had already been archived.

281: 2742:

You misunderstand everything so much it is hard to know where to begin.

2728:? Perhaps you need to refersh your knowledge of our BLP policy instead. 2121: 5266: 4183: 4009:

and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's

3691: 3681: 3639: 3586: 3451: 3382: 3336: 3289: 3254: 3232: 3206: 3187: 2974: 2940: 2906: 2580: 1709:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Archimedes,_Inc

1523: 1309: 1086: 735:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Brook DeWalt

177: 147: 112: 2314:

Okay, thanks for fixing the problem, and sorry for making you do it.

1738:(in this case, for a cleanup template), is borderline inappropriate.-- 1389:

claimed the whole list was copyrightable, because it had been ordered.

161:

Dating your own tags does make the life of bots and humans easier :-)

5262: 5206: 5029: 5000: 4948: 4926: 4891: 4839: 4824: 4807: 4688: 4639: 4624: 4608: 4580: 4565: 4544: 4505: 4490: 4475: 4460: 4443: 4422: 4399: 4372: 4343: 4327: 4238: 4202: 4157: 4105: 4065: 3937: 3864: 3830: 3561: 3512: 3151: 3106: 3072: 3038: 2815: 2799: 2729: 2539: 2408: 2351: 2234: 2173: 2043: 1675: 1538: 1493: 1346: 1254: 996: 935: 890: 811: 747: 700:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Betsy Haws

551: 449: 400: 338: 267: 162: 131: 2366:

Deleted article without reaching a consensus on the discussion page?

730:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/ARB lists

4311:

for checkuser investigation??? Do you think it could be related to

1645:

you, please let me know so I can temporarily block you as well. :)

778:

is uncopyrightable—bare fact lists are public domain, according to

612: 5316: 3581: 3146:, ongoing or not, and ignoring again your rather confusing use of 4459:

Sherurcij is the most damning aspect to point to him, I believe.

4222:

comes as he shall not return to preform more harassment, thanks.

4086:

Hi, I have just created the above article, and also the redirect

1781:

that, then why do you feel the need to sound an alarm? Thanks!

1762:

that, then why do you feel the need to sound an alarm? Thanks!

1106: 770:

to MfD them if you disagree they should stick around, I'm saying

1859: 1809: 4578:

Okay, I will defer to your judgment on that one, thank you. --

853:

articles with no hits, now just looking to make propaganda via

1052:

that you will not extend to me the assumption of good faith.

4707:- when you are available, will need to talk to you off wiki. 4047: 3843:

You failed to stop being disruptive. Why am I not surprised?

3697: 2961:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

2927:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

2893:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

2194:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Down the Block There's a Riot

2188:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Down the Block There's a Riot

1641:

I've blocked this account - I'm assuming it's not you. If it

334:, and that this version of his name is not used anywhere else 5253:, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was 5086:, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was 4064:

Done. Thanks for the note, I have now watchlisted the page.

3773:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

3686:, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was 2865:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

2455:, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was 2149:

Determination of usage needed for the BLP unsourced template

2144:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

5159:) the bit about 'Thomas Jefferson Gascoyne' caught my eye. 3887:

Question: Is there a presumption that any artist listed in

2726:

International Islamic Front for Fighting Jews and Crusaders

1113:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 833:

Hi, Fram. Have a question for you. Where do you you report

308:) was a nom de guerre? Were you aware that his birth name 4729:

Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Lihaas#Uncertified_RfC

1385:

This is, as near as I can recall, the first time you have

3201:

Wrong. Look around every other system. Anybody who sees "

4005:. When removing content, please specify a reason in the 3433:

are named as such because they're station listed on the

1594:) is impersonating you, all edits are vandalism.Thanks, 218:

AWB & templates starting with acronyms in upper case

4762:

Result of Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Sherurcij

3808:

Being disruptive. I will deal with you when I get in.

3625: 2655:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

481:

requested you email me the source of the deleted pages;

2620:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

918:

are the same person...or at least using the same CPU?

327:

Are you aware that the only references that exist for

4727:

I have referred to you at 10:54, 16 February 2011 at

1862:" (which will likely soon disappear as well). But as 5269:, and another to copy sculptures at a reduced scale? 951:

Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Misssinformative

2988:

You need to slow down on the mass deletion campaign

764:

User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Bagram captives/Mohibullah

666:

User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Bagram captives/Mohibullah

360:I think your comments, and your recent deletion of 4890:more support or understanding from other editors. 1167:to respond to my questions about their recent DRV 979:through the longer copyvio procedure, not speedy. 4542:account = notable for retention on Knowledge? -- 3253:Fram, you really screwed everything up here! ---- 1069:it's not about the editor, it's about the content 488:affects whether lists of facts are copyrightable; 478:to your note about your most recent deletions I: 680:As for the current MfD's: Heading for deletion: 5049:time the next week... 07:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC) 3227:" sounds like a gay porn title taking place in 1810:you've admitted to being paid to write articles 810:everything that was on the page can be found". 417:I believe I merit the assumption of good faith. 331:are the few you created on a Commons discussion 4178:Could you please have a look at this article: 4768:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Sherurcij 4439:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Sherurcij 3381:who doesn't understand the problem here. ---- 3008:I submitted a comment on ANI about it as well 2722:Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2010 November 8 1343:it is not what you continue to claim it to be 4538:Created by the (possible) sock and definite 4395:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Geo Swan 3904:). Appreciate any insight you can provide. 3889:Bryan's Dictionary of Painters and Engravers 3447:Springfield Junction (Long Island Rail Road) 2699:User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges 1024:User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges 1013:User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges 671:User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges 373:User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges 362:User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges 292:"R3: Recently created, implausible redirect" 4182:. Seems to be problematic in terms of BLP. 3786:and comment or volunteer to make a list. -- 2969:redirect, you might want to participate in 2935:redirect, you might want to participate in 2901:redirect, you might want to participate in 2370:Hi, you have currently deleted the article 1220:User:Geo Swan/the lessons of "tit for tat"? 3186:. Most of us would disagree with you. ---- 2965:. Since you had some involvement with the 2931:. Since you had some involvement with the 2897:. Since you had some involvement with the 2538:, they may be able to help you with this. 5245:was updated with a fact from the article 5078:was updated with a fact from the article 4253:Possible socking by Papermoneyisjustpaper 3678:was updated with a fact from the article 3032:Starting an ANI discussion, which is for 2447:was updated with a fact from the article 1674:. Thanks to everyone who ated upon this. 829:How to deal with promotion-only accounts? 4773:This socking investigation case yielded 3973:Thanks for your thanks. There are still 395:. I don't understand how it lapses from 4389:FYI, I went ahead and reported this to 3758:Hello, Fram. You have new messages at 2854:Hello, Fram. You have new messages at 2626:notice, but please explain why in your 2423:DYK for The Five Orders of Architecture 2350:Thanks for the note, I appreaciate it. 2192:Would you mind reviewing your close of 2133:Hello, Fram. You have new messages at 448:Obviously you would think so. I don't. 14: 4974:templates which is just a redirect to 3231:. I'm bringing this to TWP again. ---- 1707:has been nominated for deletion. At: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3603:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 2330:Deletion review notice at top of page 1802:User:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 1206:left in the WPANI thread I initiated. 5224: 5057: 3930:, and he has an entry in the Oxford 3906:I'm watching, so you can answer here 3657: 3435:National Register of Historic Places 3142:deletion requests? Apart from that, 2973:(if you have not already done so). 2939:(if you have not already done so). 2905:(if you have not already done so). 2426: 1991:User talk:Cunard#Myriads of MFDs ... 1984:User talk:Cunard#Myriads of MFDs ... 25: 5261:invented a working machine to make 2212:P.S. - I love your air filters. -- 1163:After waiting a couple of days for 23: 4003:Marian art in the Catholic Church‎ 3751: 2847: 2615:deleted for any of several reasons 2595:because of the following concern: 2579: 2536:Category:Wiktionary administrators 2126: 1557:User_talk:Coren#Your_advice_please 246:Please take a look at my draft of 24: 5360: 3443:Main Line (Long Island Rail Road) 1804:first brought up on AfD and then 1726:I understand that, as you have a 776:even if copied without alteration 533:No. 15:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 371:I don't think your concerns over 252: 228: 5228: 5061: 4797: 4774: 4357: 3996: 3932:Dictionary of National Biography 3661: 3580: 3427:Wellesley Farms Railroad Station 2430: 1795:Please don't confuse noticing a 1284:I informed you of my comment on 1202:on their talk page to a comment 29: 4217:Request for talk page extension 2954:March 21 in baseball listed at 2920:April 16 in baseball listed at 2465:The Five Orders of Architecture 2451:The Five Orders of Architecture 2067:You can't have it both ways. -- 1971: 1968: 1934: 1931: 1886: 1883: 1820: 1817: 1746: 1743: 3925:National Galleries of Scotland 3506:I don't follow your logic. If 2886:April 1 in baseball listed at 2027:I closed Cirt's discussion at 1233:I have another essay I wrote: 13: 1: 5350:06:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC) 5328:22:34, 24 February 2011 (UTC) 5306:12:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC) 5265:from medals, coins and other 5215:17:22, 19 February 2011 (UTC) 5197:09:29, 19 February 2011 (UTC) 5173:20:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC) 5146:00:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC) 4935:07:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC) 4917:21:32, 17 February 2011 (UTC) 4900:20:24, 17 February 2011 (UTC) 4877:20:15, 17 February 2011 (UTC) 4849:15:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 4833:15:42, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 4817:15:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 4757:11:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 4741:10:57, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 4697:17:41, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4681:16:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4649:13:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4633:13:33, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4618:13:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4590:12:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4574:12:44, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4554:12:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4515:13:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4499:13:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4485:13:29, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4469:13:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4453:13:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4432:13:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4409:13:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4382:12:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4352:12:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4337:12:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4247:12:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4232:12:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC) 4211:08:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4192:00:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4166:08:47, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4147:20:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC) 4127:08:20, 11 February 2011 (UTC) 4114:08:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC) 4099:07:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC) 3961:08:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC) 3591:Did You Know nominations page 3160:11:05, 29 December 2010 (UTC) 3130:15:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC) 3115:15:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC) 3100:22:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC) 3081:22:00, 26 December 2010 (UTC) 3066:21:56, 26 December 2010 (UTC) 3047:21:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC) 3023:15:46, 24 December 2010 (UTC) 3003:15:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC) 2983:04:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC) 2949:04:07, 20 December 2010 (UTC) 2915:04:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC) 2880:07:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC) 2360:07:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC) 2345:22:11, 27 November 2010 (UTC) 2324:12:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 2309:01:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 2290:17:30, 21 November 2010 (UTC) 2278:Down the Block There's a Riot 2267:Down the Block There's a Riot 2257:17:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC) 2243:10:39, 20 November 2010 (UTC) 2222:08:37, 20 November 2010 (UTC) 2207:08:31, 20 November 2010 (UTC) 2182:20:18, 19 November 2010 (UTC) 2167:20:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC) 2112:11:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC) 2103:10:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC) 2093:10:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC) 2072:10:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC) 2052:10:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC) 2036:10:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC) 2003:23:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1978:05:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1941:04:01, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1918:03:58, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1893:03:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1846:03:30, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1827:03:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1791:02:53, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1772:02:53, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1753:02:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1721:20:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1684:07:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1670:me, my only other account is 1662:17:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 1637:17:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 1623:17:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 1604:17:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 1569:20:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1547:08:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1527:15:04, 13 November 2010 (UTC) 1502:19:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1467:17:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1355:09:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1333:03:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC) 1263:08:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1247:17:58, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 1193:19:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC) 1154:20:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 1131:19:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 4074:10:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC) 4059:10:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC) 4037:14:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 3987:08:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 3946:07:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 3917:23:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 3873:15:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 3855:15:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 3839:13:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 3820:13:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 3796:14:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC) 3767:09:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC) 3742:12:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC) 3696:, the first German language 3648:16:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC) 3632:15:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC) 3614:18:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC) 3570:10:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC) 3548:10:04, 12 January 2011 (UTC) 3521:10:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC) 3500:09:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC) 3460:16:06, 14 January 2011 (UTC) 3391:12:22, 14 January 2011 (UTC) 3345:12:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC) 3298:01:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC) 3263:22:43, 12 January 2011 (UTC) 3241:12:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC) 3215:12:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC) 3196:11:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC) 2834:09:40, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 2809:08:44, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 2781:08:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 2754:08:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 2738:07:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 2713:05:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 2697:How can you possibly speedy 2684:02:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 2671:02:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 2562:18:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 2548:08:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 2529:01:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 2506:00:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 2417:07:53, 6 December 2010 (UTC) 2395:11:11, 5 December 2010 (UTC) 1111:featured article review here 1095:20:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC) 1062:19:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC) 1036:19:40, 8 November 2010 (UTC) 1005:15:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 989:17:46, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 967:17:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 944:15:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 928:15:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 899:08:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 881:00:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 820:16:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 795:15:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 756:15:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 656:00:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC) 622:23:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 604:19:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 560:15:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 546:15:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 529:15:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 458:08:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC) 436:16:01, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 409:12:54, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 385:12:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 347:07:58, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 322:23:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC) 276:12:22, 3 November 2010 (UTC) 261:11:55, 3 November 2010 (UTC) 237:20:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC) 209:05:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 186:09:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC) 176:Er . . . all right then. -- 171:08:58, 2 November 2010 (UTC) 156:08:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC) 140:07:54, 2 November 2010 (UTC) 121:14:17, 1 November 2010 (UTC) 7: 4604:User:Geo Swan/RfC 2006-4-17 4135:Geo Swan might need a block 3203:4th Avenue / Wayne Hultgren 2856:Rich Farmbrough's talk page 2659:allows discussion to reach 2640:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 2623:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 2029:Administrators' noticeboard 1961:the issue has been resolved 1864:Chase me Ladies pointed out 1169:I started a thread at WPANI 248:Moved pages DEFAULTSORT bot 242:Moved pages DEFAULTSORT bot 10: 5365: 5038:09:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC) 4717:05:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC) 4703:Please see what I said at 4661:I saw yesterdays' note on 4307:Has this been reported to 3585:Hello! Your submission of 3431:Opa-Locka Railroad Station 3178:Re: Sacramento RT Stations 2534:You may need someone from 2459:Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola 2272:An editor has asked for a 1868:you've admitted on the AfD 1235:User:Geo Swan/On apologies 1018:An editor has asked for a 5255:... that French engineer 5151:Thomas Gascoyne (cyclist) 5023:15:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC) 5009:07:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC) 4994:18:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC) 4958:17:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC) 4046:Hi. Can you semi-protect 3738:Penny for your thoughts? 2645:proposed deletion process 1797:clear guideline violation 1732:indiscriminate canvassing 1115:featured article criteria 588:why they are in userspace 4370:. Good idea. Cheers, -- 3897:William Cochran (artist) 3782:Please note my request, 2956:Redirects for discussion 2922:Redirects for discussion 2888:Redirects for discussion 2008:Problems with AfD closes 5289:Did you know? talk page 5129:Did you know? talk page 4837:Alright, thank you. -- 4723:In case you are unaware 3720:Did you know? talk page 3596:your nomination's entry 3439:Old Colony Lines (MBTA) 2971:the redirect discussion 2937:the redirect discussion 2903:the redirect discussion 2822:? Rather the opposite. 2632:the article's talk page 2489:Did you know? talk page 304:Were you aware Stalin ( 5221:DYK for Achille Collas 4705:User talk:Cunard#RfC/U 3883:William Cochran, et al 3756: 2852: 2584: 2131: 1728:financial relationship 224:this discussion thread 5096:called French writer 5054:DYK for Octave Uzanne 4259:Papermoneyisjustpaper 4180:Abd al-Muhsin al-Libi 4173:Abd al-Muhsin al-Libi 4019:. Take a look at the 3755: 3423:Vero Railroad Station 2851: 2657:articles for deletion 2593:proposed for deletion 2583: 2130: 973:Helderberg Escarpment 42:of past discussions. 4602:Did you notice this 4533:Showqi Al-Islambouli 4527:Showqi Al-Islambouli 4437:Update: Moved it to 3760:Athapoli's talk page 3369:I mentioned this on 3223:Don't even try it. " 3090:and encyclopedia. -- 2967:March 21 in baseball 2963:March 21 in baseball 2933:April 16 in baseball 2929:April 16 in baseball 2663:for deletion. v/r - 2265:Deletion review for 1699:RE: Archimedes, Inc. 1301:The implications of 1286:User talk:Snottywong 1011:Deletion review for 859:User:Richie Campbell 845:usernames, who also 484:reminded you of how 3182:See the discussion 3134:Anything you claim 2899:April 1 in baseball 2895:April 1 in baseball 2135:Kumioko's talk page 1101:Belgium FAR listing 519:Collegially yours, 103:Dating warning tags 4860:Regular harassment 4663:User talk:Geo Swan 3771:remove this notice 3757: 3654:DYK for Lucidarius 3229:Watts, Los Angeles 3148:Help:Edit conflict 3136:in this discussion 2863:remove this notice 2853: 2649:deletion processes 2600:Does not meet the 2585: 2142:remove this notice 2132: 2018:dispute resolution 1872:your own talk page 1406:be copyrightable, 916:user:EmilySchooley 905:Re: Emily Schooley 491:reminded you that 5298:Materialscientist 5295: 5294: 5282: 5200: 5138:Materialscientist 5135: 5134: 5122: 5088:... that Belgian 4956: 4920: 4880: 4598:RFC and older one 4366:. Left a note at 4199:User:Fram/Sandbox 4154:User:Fram/Sandbox 3907: 3891:is automatically 3858: 3823: 3726: 3725: 3713: 3551: 3534:comment added by 3490:comment added by 3333:railroad stations 2837: 2784: 2757: 2716: 2571:Proposed deletion 2552:Thanks, Fram. -- 2498:Materialscientist 2495: 2494: 2482: 2398: 2381:comment added by 2083:talk page stalker 1105:I have nominated 793: 654: 297:It redirected to 212: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5356: 5333:Individual AfDs? 5272: 5237:20 February 2011 5232: 5225: 5195: 5112: 5070:18 February 2011 5065: 5058: 4983: 4977: 4973: 4967: 4946: 4915: 4875: 4801: 4800: 4778: 4777: 4754: 4365: 4361: 4360: 4325:)? Thoughts? -- 4303: 4276:deleted contribs 4122: 4094: 4055: 4018: 4000: 3999: 3905: 3853: 3818: 3774: 3739: 3733: 3703: 3665: 3658: 3627: 3611: 3609: 3584: 3558:reliable sources 3550: 3528: 3502: 2866: 2832: 2779: 2752: 2711: 2642: 2641: 2625: 2624: 2472: 2434: 2427: 2397: 2375: 2145: 2086: 1975: 1970: 1938: 1933: 1890: 1885: 1834:Archimedes, Inc. 1824: 1819: 1750: 1745: 1705:Archimedes, Inc. 1659: 1649: 1514:A word of advice 792: 653: 640:Moonriddengirl's 636: 630: 510: 504: 500: 494: 258: 234: 207: 194:most of the time 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5364: 5363: 5359: 5358: 5357: 5355: 5354: 5353: 5335: 5313: 5223: 5183: 5153: 5056: 4981: 4975: 4971: 4965: 4862: 4798: 4775: 4764: 4752: 4748: 4725: 4659: 4600: 4560:think he meets 4529: 4368:User talk:Iqinn 4358: 4356: 4261: 4255: 4219: 4176: 4137: 4120: 4118:Many thanks. -- 4092: 4084: 4053: 4044: 4014: 3997: 3994: 3971: 3885: 3806: 3780: 3775: 3764: 3749: 3737: 3729: 3670:19 January 2011 3656: 3621: 3612: 3607: 3601: 3578: 3536:Claudeclaude007 3529: 3485: 3482: 3180: 3010: 2990: 2959: 2925: 2891: 2867: 2860: 2845: 2791: 2767: 2695: 2653:speedy deletion 2639: 2638: 2622: 2621: 2604:guidelines for 2578: 2513: 2439:7 December 2010 2425: 2376: 2368: 2332: 2297: 2274:deletion review 2270: 2190: 2151: 2146: 2139: 2124: 2122:My recent edits 2080: 2022:deletion review 2010: 1987: 1957: 1701: 1657: 1647: 1579: 1516: 1204:User:Snottywong 1161: 1138: 1103: 1078: 1043: 1020:deletion review 1016: 976: 954: 907: 843:WP:MEATPUPPETRY 831: 725:No consensus: 634: 628: 580: 508: 502: 498: 492: 355: 329:Joseph Djugvali 288:Joseph Djugvali 284: 244: 220: 105: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5362: 5334: 5331: 5312: 5309: 5293: 5292: 5283:and add it to 5258:Achille Collas 5249:Achille Collas 5233: 5222: 5219: 5218: 5217: 5201: 5182: 5179: 5177: 5152: 5149: 5133: 5132: 5123:and add it to 5066: 5055: 5052: 5051: 5050: 5046: 5045: 5044: 5043: 5042: 5041: 5040: 4942: 4941: 4940: 4939: 4938: 4937: 4921: 4887: 4881: 4861: 4858: 4856: 4854: 4853: 4852: 4851: 4771: 4770: 4763: 4760: 4747: 4744: 4724: 4721: 4720: 4719: 4700: 4699: 4658: 4655: 4654: 4653: 4652: 4651: 4599: 4596: 4595: 4594: 4593: 4592: 4536: 4535: 4528: 4525: 4524: 4523: 4522: 4521: 4520: 4519: 4518: 4517: 4435: 4434: 4387: 4386: 4385: 4384: 4305: 4304: 4254: 4251: 4250: 4249: 4218: 4215: 4214: 4213: 4175: 4170: 4169: 4168: 4136: 4133: 4132: 4131: 4130: 4129: 4083: 4078: 4077: 4076: 4043: 4040: 3993: 3990: 3970: 3967: 3966: 3965: 3964: 3963: 3884: 3881: 3880: 3879: 3878: 3877: 3876: 3875: 3859: 3824: 3805: 3802: 3800: 3779: 3776: 3765:Message added 3763: 3750: 3748: 3745: 3724: 3723: 3714:and add it to 3666: 3655: 3652: 3651: 3650: 3620: 3617: 3600: 3577: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3524: 3523: 3481: 3478: 3477: 3476: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3470: 3469: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3400: 3399: 3398: 3397: 3396: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3356: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3352: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3307: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3270: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3246: 3245: 3244: 3243: 3218: 3217: 3179: 3176: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3162: 3030: 3009: 3006: 2989: 2986: 2958: 2952: 2924: 2918: 2890: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2859: 2846: 2844: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2790: 2787: 2785: 2766: 2763: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2717: 2694: 2691: 2689: 2687: 2686: 2643:will stop the 2611: 2610: 2577: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2512: 2509: 2493: 2492: 2483:and add it to 2435: 2424: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2367: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2331: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2296: 2295:Image deletion 2293: 2269: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2225: 2224: 2189: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2150: 2147: 2138: 2125: 2123: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2009: 2006: 1986: 1981: 1956: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1856: 1774: 1700: 1697: 1695: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1578: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1550: 1549: 1515: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1504: 1489: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1414:Feith v. Rural 1402:Ordered lists 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1370:Feith v. Rural 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1336: 1335: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1313: 1306: 1303:Fieth v. Rural 1295: 1294: 1290: 1289: 1281: 1280: 1275: 1274: 1270: 1269: 1250: 1249: 1230: 1229: 1224: 1223: 1214: 1213: 1208: 1207: 1160: 1157: 1137: 1134: 1123:Cordless Larry 1102: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1042: 1039: 1015: 1009: 1008: 1007: 975: 970: 953: 948: 947: 946: 906: 903: 902: 901: 830: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 801: 786:unquestionably 781:Feist v. Rural 743: 742: 737: 732: 723: 722: 717: 712: 707: 702: 697: 692: 687: 661: 660: 659: 658: 643: 579: 576: 575: 574: 573: 572: 571: 570: 569: 568: 567: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 517: 516: 515: 512: 489: 486:Feist v. Rural 482: 465: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 441: 440: 439: 438: 421: 420: 419: 418: 412: 411: 354: 351: 350: 349: 283: 280: 279: 278: 243: 240: 219: 216: 215: 214: 213: 174: 173: 143: 142: 128: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 18:User talk:Fram 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5361: 5352: 5351: 5348: 5345: 5340: 5330: 5329: 5325: 5321: 5317: 5308: 5307: 5303: 5299: 5290: 5286: 5280: 5276: 5270: 5268: 5264: 5260: 5259: 5252: 5251: 5250: 5244: 5243: 5242:Did you know? 5238: 5234: 5231: 5227: 5226: 5216: 5212: 5208: 5204: 5203: 5202: 5198: 5193: 5192: 5189: 5178: 5175: 5174: 5170: 5166: 5163:. Thank you. 5162: 5158: 5148: 5147: 5143: 5139: 5130: 5126: 5120: 5116: 5110: 5108: 5102: 5101: 5100: 5099:Octave Uzanne 5095: 5094:Félicien Rops 5091: 5085: 5084: 5083: 5082:Octave Uzanne 5077: 5076: 5075:Did you know? 5071: 5067: 5064: 5060: 5059: 5047: 5039: 5035: 5031: 5026: 5025: 5024: 5020: 5016: 5012: 5011: 5010: 5006: 5002: 4997: 4996: 4995: 4991: 4987: 4980: 4970: 4962: 4961: 4960: 4959: 4954: 4950: 4936: 4932: 4928: 4923: 4922: 4918: 4913: 4912: 4909: 4903: 4902: 4901: 4897: 4893: 4888: 4884: 4883: 4882: 4878: 4873: 4872: 4869: 4857: 4850: 4846: 4842: 4841: 4836: 4835: 4834: 4830: 4826: 4821: 4820: 4819: 4818: 4814: 4810: 4809: 4804: 4795: 4792: 4789: 4785: 4781: 4769: 4766: 4765: 4759: 4758: 4755: 4743: 4742: 4738: 4734: 4730: 4718: 4714: 4710: 4706: 4702: 4701: 4698: 4694: 4690: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4678: 4674: 4669: 4666: 4664: 4650: 4646: 4642: 4641: 4636: 4635: 4634: 4630: 4626: 4622: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4615: 4611: 4610: 4605: 4591: 4587: 4583: 4582: 4577: 4576: 4575: 4571: 4567: 4563: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4555: 4551: 4547: 4546: 4541: 4534: 4531: 4530: 4516: 4512: 4508: 4507: 4502: 4501: 4500: 4496: 4492: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4482: 4478: 4477: 4472: 4471: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4450: 4446: 4445: 4440: 4433: 4429: 4425: 4424: 4420:. Cheers, -- 4419: 4416: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4406: 4402: 4401: 4396: 4392: 4383: 4379: 4375: 4374: 4369: 4364: 4355: 4354: 4353: 4349: 4345: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4329: 4324: 4321: 4318: 4314: 4310: 4301: 4298: 4295: 4292: 4289: 4286: 4283: 4280: 4277: 4274: 4271: 4268: 4265: 4260: 4257: 4256: 4248: 4244: 4240: 4236: 4235: 4234: 4233: 4229: 4225: 4212: 4208: 4204: 4200: 4196: 4195: 4194: 4193: 4189: 4185: 4181: 4174: 4167: 4163: 4159: 4155: 4151: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4145: 4142: 4128: 4125: 4123: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4111: 4107: 4103: 4102: 4101: 4100: 4097: 4095: 4089: 4082: 4075: 4071: 4067: 4063: 4062: 4061: 4060: 4057: 4056: 4049: 4039: 4038: 4034: 4030: 4026: 4022: 4017: 4012: 4008: 4004: 3992:February 2011 3989: 3988: 3984: 3980: 3976: 3962: 3958: 3954: 3949: 3948: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3935: 3933: 3929: 3926: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3918: 3914: 3910: 3903: 3898: 3895:? I noticed 3894: 3890: 3874: 3870: 3866: 3861: 3860: 3856: 3851: 3850: 3847: 3842: 3841: 3840: 3836: 3832: 3827: 3826: 3825: 3821: 3816: 3815: 3812: 3801: 3798: 3797: 3793: 3789: 3785: 3772: 3768: 3761: 3754: 3744: 3743: 3740: 3734: 3732: 3721: 3717: 3711: 3707: 3701: 3699: 3694: 3693: 3689: 3688:... that the 3685: 3684: 3683: 3677: 3676: 3675:Did you know? 3671: 3667: 3664: 3660: 3659: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3636: 3635: 3634: 3633: 3630: 3619:Re: Archiving 3616: 3615: 3610: 3604: 3598: 3597: 3592: 3588: 3583: 3571: 3567: 3563: 3559: 3554: 3553: 3552: 3549: 3545: 3541: 3537: 3533: 3522: 3518: 3514: 3509: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3501: 3497: 3493: 3492:90.40.181.210 3489: 3461: 3457: 3453: 3448: 3444: 3440: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3420: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3415: 3414: 3413: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3392: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3375:User:Sameboat 3372: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3358: 3357: 3346: 3342: 3338: 3334: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3317: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3264: 3260: 3256: 3252: 3251: 3250: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3242: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3226: 3222: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3216: 3212: 3208: 3204: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3185: 3161: 3157: 3153: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3137: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3112: 3108: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3084: 3083: 3082: 3078: 3074: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3063: 3059: 3055: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3035: 3031: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3020: 3016: 3005: 3004: 3000: 2996: 2985: 2984: 2980: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2964: 2957: 2951: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2938: 2934: 2930: 2923: 2917: 2916: 2912: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2896: 2889: 2881: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2868: 2864: 2857: 2850: 2835: 2830: 2829: 2826: 2821: 2820:User:Geo Swan 2817: 2813: 2812: 2811: 2810: 2806: 2802: 2801: 2796: 2786: 2782: 2777: 2776: 2773: 2755: 2750: 2749: 2746: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2735: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2720: 2719: 2718: 2714: 2709: 2708: 2705: 2700: 2690: 2685: 2682: 2679: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2669: 2666: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2650: 2646: 2635: 2633: 2629: 2618: 2616: 2609: 2607: 2603: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2594: 2590: 2582: 2576: 2572: 2563: 2559: 2555: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2516: 2508: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2490: 2486: 2480: 2476: 2470: 2467: 2466: 2462: 2460: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2446: 2445: 2444:Did you know? 2440: 2436: 2433: 2429: 2428: 2418: 2414: 2410: 2406: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2396: 2392: 2388: 2384: 2380: 2373: 2361: 2357: 2353: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2342: 2338: 2325: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2306: 2302: 2292: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2275: 2268: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2240: 2236: 2232: 2227: 2226: 2223: 2219: 2215: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2195: 2183: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2164: 2160: 2156: 2143: 2136: 2129: 2113: 2110: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2101: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2091: 2084: 2079: 2078: 2073: 2070: 2065: 2061: 2058: 2057: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2049: 2045: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2034: 2030: 2025: 2023: 2019: 2015: 2005: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1992: 1985: 1980: 1979: 1976: 1974: 1966: 1962: 1942: 1939: 1937: 1929: 1925: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1891: 1889: 1881: 1877: 1873: 1869: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1825: 1823: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1803: 1798: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1780: 1775: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1761: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1751: 1749: 1741: 1737: 1736:fixing a typo 1733: 1729: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1696: 1685: 1681: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1660: 1655: 1654: 1650: 1644: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1590: 1587: 1583: 1570: 1566: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1525: 1521: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1490: 1487: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1468: 1464: 1460: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1415: 1411: 1410: 1405: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396: 1388: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1371: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1356: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1322: 1321: 1314: 1311: 1307: 1304: 1300: 1299: 1297: 1296: 1292: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1282: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1271: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1248: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1232: 1231: 1226: 1225: 1221: 1216: 1215: 1210: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1190: 1186: 1180: 1176: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1165:User:Lifebaka 1156: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1133: 1132: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1079: 1070: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1049: 1047: 1038: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1014: 1006: 1002: 998: 993: 992: 991: 990: 986: 982: 974: 969: 968: 964: 960: 952: 945: 941: 937: 932: 931: 930: 929: 925: 921: 917: 913: 900: 896: 892: 888: 885: 884: 883: 882: 878: 874: 869: 864: 860: 856: 852: 848: 844: 840: 836: 822: 821: 817: 813: 806: 802: 798: 797: 796: 791: 790:Seraphimblade 787: 783: 782: 777: 773: 769: 765: 760: 759: 758: 757: 753: 749: 741: 738: 736: 733: 731: 728: 727: 726: 721: 718: 716: 713: 711: 708: 706: 703: 701: 698: 696: 693: 691: 688: 686: 683: 682: 681: 678: 674: 672: 667: 657: 652: 651:Seraphimblade 648: 645:Really, just 644: 641: 633: 625: 624: 623: 619: 615: 614: 608: 607: 606: 605: 601: 597: 591: 589: 583: 561: 557: 553: 549: 548: 547: 543: 539: 535: 534: 532: 531: 530: 526: 522: 518: 513: 507: 497: 490: 487: 483: 480: 479: 477: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 459: 455: 451: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 442: 437: 433: 429: 425: 424: 423: 422: 416: 415: 414: 413: 410: 406: 402: 398: 397:WP:User pages 394: 393:WP:User pages 389: 388: 387: 386: 382: 378: 374: 369: 365: 363: 358: 348: 344: 340: 336: 333: 330: 326: 325: 324: 323: 319: 315: 311: 307: 302: 300: 299:Joseph Stalin 295: 293: 289: 277: 273: 269: 265: 264: 263: 262: 259: 257: 256: 249: 239: 238: 235: 233: 232: 225: 210: 205: 204: 201: 195: 190: 189: 188: 187: 183: 179: 172: 168: 164: 160: 159: 158: 157: 153: 149: 141: 137: 133: 129: 125: 124: 123: 122: 118: 114: 110: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5347:(let's chat) 5336: 5314: 5296: 5256: 5254: 5247: 5246: 5240: 5186: 5184: 5176: 5154: 5136: 5104: 5097: 5087: 5080: 5079: 5073: 4979:Unreferenced 4943: 4906: 4866: 4863: 4855: 4838: 4806: 4802: 4790: 4779: 4772: 4749: 4726: 4670: 4667: 4660: 4638: 4607: 4601: 4579: 4543: 4537: 4504: 4503:Alright, -- 4474: 4442: 4436: 4421: 4414:Please note 4398: 4388: 4371: 4362: 4326: 4319: 4306: 4296: 4290: 4284: 4278: 4272: 4266: 4220: 4177: 4138: 4088:Lo Hsien-che 4085: 4081:Lo Hsieh-che 4051: 4045: 4021:welcome page 4016:page history 4007:edit summary 3995: 3972: 3888: 3886: 3844: 3809: 3807: 3799: 3781: 3730: 3727: 3695: 3690: 3687: 3680: 3679: 3673: 3628: 3622: 3594: 3579: 3530:— Preceding 3525: 3507: 3483: 3378: 3332: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3318:No, that is 3225:Watt/Manlove 3181: 3143: 3139: 3135: 3087: 3053: 3033: 3011: 2991: 2966: 2960: 2932: 2926: 2898: 2892: 2823: 2798: 2792: 2770: 2768: 2743: 2702: 2696: 2688: 2651:exist. The 2647:, but other 2636: 2628:edit summary 2619: 2612: 2599: 2587:The article 2586: 2517: 2514: 2496: 2468: 2463: 2456: 2449: 2448: 2442: 2369: 2333: 2298: 2271: 2191: 2152: 2059: 2026: 2011: 1988: 1972: 1958: 1935: 1901: 1887: 1851: 1821: 1778: 1759: 1747: 1702: 1694: 1672:User:EngFram 1667: 1652: 1642: 1588: 1580: 1535:WP:USERSPACE 1519: 1517: 1485: 1408: 1407: 1403: 1386: 1342: 1251: 1181: 1177: 1162: 1139: 1104: 1076:My Two Cents 1068: 1050: 1044: 1017: 977: 955: 912:user:Bytemeh 908: 832: 809: 804: 785: 779: 775: 771: 767: 744: 724: 679: 675: 662: 646: 611: 592: 587: 584: 581: 578:My Two Cents 370: 366: 359: 356: 309: 305: 303: 296: 291: 286:You deleted 285: 254: 253: 245: 230: 229: 221: 198: 193: 175: 144: 106: 78: 43: 37: 5279:quick check 5267:bas-reliefs 5119:quick check 5107:Bibliophile 4733:Ncmvocalist 4709:Ncmvocalist 4637:Agreed, -- 4121:Ohconfucius 4093:Ohconfucius 4054:Oreo Priest 3969:Pyrénéistes 3731:HJ Mitchell 3710:quick check 3576:DYK problem 3486:—Preceding 2479:quick check 2383:Rotarucalin 2377:—Preceding 2233:of course. 1910:Danieldis47 1855:guidelines. 1838:Danieldis47 1783:Danieldis47 1764:Danieldis47 1713:Danieldis47 1582:Fram's sock 1486:conclusions 1417:protection. 1140:Please see 847:WP:BOMBARDs 835:WP:CITESPAM 788:a copyvio. 36:This is an 5320:Yachtsman1 5318:Thanks. -- 5275:here's how 5263:engravings 5191:Farmbrough 5115:here's how 5109:'s dream"? 5103:(pictured) 4911:Farmbrough 4871:Farmbrough 4731:. Thanks, 4294:block user 4288:filter log 4224:Btzkillerv 3849:Farmbrough 3814:Farmbrough 3769:. You can 3706:here's how 3692:Lucidarius 3682:Lucidarius 3587:Lucidarius 2828:Farmbrough 2793:Regarding 2775:Farmbrough 2748:Farmbrough 2707:Farmbrough 2606:professors 2602:notability 2589:Ümit Sayın 2575:Ümit Sayın 2515:Hi, Fram. 2511:Wiktionary 2475:here's how 2282:Uzma Gamal 2249:Uzma Gamal 2214:Uzma Gamal 2199:Uzma Gamal 1457:Candidly, 1387:explicitly 1323:Candidly 1310:de minimus 1212:sincerity. 920:The Eskimo 855:WP:ARTSPAM 476:this reply 203:Farmbrough 95:Archive 25 90:Archive 24 85:Archive 23 79:Archive 22 73:Archive 21 68:Archive 20 60:Archive 15 5342:Thanks!-- 5161:Voila :-) 5090:Symbolist 4969:Unsourced 4803:Confirmed 4784:Sherurcij 4780:Confirmed 4393:, now at 4300:block log 4029:Escapepea 4011:talk page 3979:Ericoides 3975:many more 3788:DThomsen8 3282:WP:Trains 2816:User:Fram 2661:consensus 2591:has been 2457:... that 2337:82.7.40.7 1906:last word 1876:last word 1866:, and as 1629:Acather96 1615:Acather96 1596:Acather96 1200:responded 1083:WP:Kettle 1081:For Geo: 863:WP:ADVERT 839:WP:AGENDA 647:slow down 250:. Thanks 226:. Thanks 5285:DYKSTATS 5165:Chienlit 5125:DYKSTATS 4794:contribs 4673:Geo Swan 4671:Thanks 4323:contribs 4313:Geo Swan 4270:contribs 3953:Qwyrxian 3909:Qwyrxian 3747:Talkback 3716:DYKSTATS 3544:contribs 3532:unsigned 3488:unsigned 2861:You can 2485:DYKSTATS 2461:'s book 2391:contribs 2379:unsigned 2140:You can 2088:policy. 1852:everyone 1592:contribs 1561:Geo Swan 1459:Geo Swan 1325:Geo Swan 1239:Geo Swan 1185:Geo Swan 1136:DNBfirst 1054:Geo Swan 1028:Geo Swan 981:Rmhermen 959:Addionne 596:Addionne 538:Geo Swan 521:Geo Swan 428:Geo Swan 377:Geo Swan 314:Geo Swan 255:Rjwilmsi 231:Rjwilmsi 5311:Merger? 5092:artist 5015:Kumioko 4986:Kumioko 4141:Blueboy 4025:sandbox 3977:to do! 3927:as well 3893:notable 3589:at the 3371:WT:NYCS 3286:WP:NYCS 3122:Kumioko 3092:Kumioko 3058:Kumioko 3015:Kumioko 2995:Kumioko 2872:Kingpin 2554:John KB 2521:John KB 2372:AZImage 2316:Nyttend 2301:Nyttend 2159:Kumioko 1955:Apology 1107:Belgium 887:WP:COIN 873:John KB 868:WP:COIN 851:WP:MASK 805:partial 632:copyvio 39:archive 5344:Yaksar 4746:Thanks 4562:WP:BIO 4540:WP:SPA 4391:WP:SPI 4309:WP:SPI 4104:Done! 3902:WP:GNG 3508:Redeye 3480:Redeye 3429:, and 3034:urgent 2843:Rich 2 2765:Really 2630:or on 2405:WP:DRV 2231:WP:DRV 2014:WT:NOT 1995:Cunard 1173:WP:ANI 1109:for a 290:as an 5105:"the 4753:pablo 4657:reply 4606:? -- 4184:IQinn 4048:Eupen 4042:Eupen 3698:summa 3640:DanTD 3626:Mitch 3608:talk 3452:DanTD 3383:DanTD 3337:DanTD 3290:DanTD 3255:DanTD 3233:DanTD 3207:DanTD 3188:DanTD 3088:write 2975:Mhiji 2941:Mhiji 2907:Mhiji 2109:pablo 2090:pablo 1973:speak 1969:Laozi 1936:speak 1932:Laozi 1888:speak 1884:Laozi 1822:speak 1818:Laozi 1806:WP:SI 1748:speak 1744:Laozi 1524:Coren 1087:IQinn 1045:WRT 618:talk 550:Yes. 306:Steel 178:Hoary 148:Hoary 113:Hoary 16:< 5339:this 5324:talk 5302:talk 5211:talk 5207:Fram 5188:Rich 5169:talk 5157:1896 5142:talk 5034:talk 5030:Fram 5019:talk 5005:talk 5001:Fram 4990:talk 4953:talk 4949:MSGJ 4931:talk 4927:Fram 4908:Rich 4896:talk 4892:Fram 4868:Rich 4845:talk 4840:Cirt 4829:talk 4825:Fram 4813:talk 4808:Cirt 4788:talk 4737:talk 4713:talk 4693:talk 4689:Fram 4677:talk 4645:talk 4640:Cirt 4629:talk 4625:Fram 4614:talk 4609:Cirt 4586:talk 4581:Cirt 4570:talk 4566:Fram 4550:talk 4545:Cirt 4511:talk 4506:Cirt 4495:talk 4491:Fram 4481:talk 4476:Cirt 4465:talk 4461:Fram 4449:talk 4444:Cirt 4428:talk 4423:Cirt 4417:and 4405:talk 4400:Cirt 4378:talk 4373:Cirt 4363:Done 4348:talk 4344:Fram 4333:talk 4328:Cirt 4317:talk 4282:logs 4264:talk 4243:talk 4239:Fram 4228:talk 4207:talk 4203:Fram 4188:talk 4162:talk 4158:Fram 4110:talk 4106:Fram 4070:talk 4066:Fram 4033:talk 3983:talk 3957:talk 3942:talk 3938:Fram 3913:talk 3869:talk 3865:Fram 3846:Rich 3835:talk 3831:Fram 3811:Rich 3804:STOP 3792:talk 3644:talk 3566:talk 3562:Fram 3540:talk 3517:talk 3513:Fram 3496:talk 3456:talk 3445:and 3387:talk 3341:talk 3324:have 3294:talk 3284:and 3259:talk 3237:talk 3211:talk 3192:talk 3184:here 3156:talk 3152:Fram 3126:talk 3111:talk 3107:Fram 3096:talk 3077:talk 3073:Fram 3062:talk 3043:talk 3039:Fram 3019:talk 2999:talk 2979:talk 2945:talk 2911:talk 2876:talk 2825:Rich 2818:and 2805:talk 2800:Cirt 2789:Rich 2772:Rich 2745:Rich 2734:talk 2730:Fram 2704:Rich 2693:WTF? 2558:talk 2544:talk 2540:Fram 2525:talk 2502:talk 2413:talk 2409:Fram 2387:talk 2356:talk 2352:Fram 2341:talk 2320:talk 2305:talk 2286:talk 2253:talk 2239:talk 2235:Fram 2218:talk 2203:talk 2178:talk 2174:Fram 2163:talk 2157:. -- 2048:talk 2044:Fram 1999:talk 1914:talk 1878:. -- 1870:and 1842:talk 1787:talk 1779:only 1768:talk 1760:only 1717:talk 1680:talk 1676:Fram 1633:talk 1619:talk 1600:talk 1586:talk 1565:talk 1543:talk 1539:Fram 1520:does 1498:talk 1494:Fram 1463:talk 1351:talk 1347:Fram 1329:talk 1259:talk 1255:Fram 1243:talk 1189:talk 1150:talk 1127:talk 1119:here 1091:talk 1058:talk 1032:talk 1001:talk 997:Fram 985:talk 963:talk 940:talk 936:Fram 924:talk 914:and 895:talk 891:Fram 877:talk 841:and 816:talk 812:Fram 752:talk 748:Fram 600:talk 556:talk 552:Fram 542:talk 525:talk 454:talk 450:Fram 432:talk 405:talk 401:Fram 381:talk 343:talk 339:Fram 318:talk 301:. 272:talk 268:Fram 200:Rich 182:talk 167:talk 163:Fram 152:talk 136:talk 132:Fram 117:talk 109:this 5235:On 5181:Why 5068:On 3668:On 3379:you 3328:you 3320:not 3054:you 2573:of 2437:On 2276:of 1965:res 1928:res 1902:Now 1880:res 1814:res 1740:res 1711:. 1668:not 1658:Man 1611:UAA 1577:FYI 1559:. 1404:can 1159:fyi 1146:PBS 1144:-- 1085:-- 1022:of 849:to 768:not 613:DGG 506:xfd 496:xfd 474:In 310:was 282:fyi 107:On 5326:) 5304:) 5277:, 5239:, 5213:) 5194:, 5171:) 5144:) 5117:, 5072:, 5036:) 5021:) 5007:) 4992:) 4982:}} 4976:{{ 4972:}} 4966:{{ 4951:· 4933:) 4914:, 4898:) 4874:, 4847:) 4831:) 4815:) 4739:) 4715:) 4695:) 4679:) 4647:) 4631:) 4616:) 4588:) 4572:) 4552:) 4513:) 4497:) 4483:) 4467:) 4451:) 4430:) 4407:) 4380:) 4350:) 4335:) 4245:) 4230:) 4209:) 4190:) 4164:) 4144:96 4112:) 4072:) 4035:) 3985:) 3959:) 3944:) 3915:) 3871:) 3852:, 3837:) 3817:, 3794:) 3735:| 3708:, 3672:, 3646:) 3629:32 3568:) 3546:) 3542:• 3519:) 3498:) 3458:) 3425:, 3389:) 3343:) 3296:) 3261:) 3239:) 3213:) 3194:) 3158:) 3150:. 3140:my 3128:) 3113:) 3098:) 3079:) 3064:) 3045:) 3021:) 3013:-- 3001:) 2993:-- 2981:) 2947:) 2913:) 2878:) 2870:- 2831:, 2807:) 2778:, 2751:, 2736:) 2710:, 2634:. 2617:. 2560:) 2546:) 2527:) 2504:) 2477:, 2441:, 2415:) 2393:) 2389:• 2358:) 2343:) 2335:-- 2322:) 2307:) 2288:) 2255:) 2241:) 2220:) 2205:) 2180:) 2165:) 2100:TS 2098:-- 2069:TS 2050:) 2033:TS 2024:. 2001:) 1993:. 1916:) 1908:. 1844:) 1808:, 1789:) 1770:) 1719:) 1682:) 1648:TN 1643:is 1635:) 1621:) 1602:) 1567:) 1545:) 1500:) 1465:) 1409:IF 1353:) 1331:) 1261:) 1245:) 1198:I 1191:) 1175:. 1152:) 1129:) 1121:. 1093:) 1060:) 1034:) 1003:) 987:) 965:) 942:) 926:) 897:) 879:) 871:-- 837:, 818:) 772:to 754:) 635:}} 629:{{ 620:) 602:) 558:) 544:) 527:) 509:}} 503:{{ 499:}} 493:{{ 456:) 434:) 407:) 383:) 345:) 320:) 294:. 274:) 206:, 184:) 169:) 154:) 138:) 119:) 64:← 5322:( 5300:( 5291:. 5281:) 5273:( 5209:( 5199:. 5167:( 5140:( 5131:. 5121:) 5113:( 5032:( 5017:( 5003:( 4988:( 4955:) 4947:( 4929:( 4919:. 4894:( 4879:. 4843:( 4827:( 4811:( 4791:· 4786:( 4735:( 4711:( 4691:( 4675:( 4643:( 4627:( 4612:( 4584:( 4568:( 4548:( 4509:( 4493:( 4479:( 4463:( 4447:( 4426:( 4403:( 4376:( 4346:( 4331:( 4320:· 4315:( 4302:) 4297:· 4291:· 4285:· 4279:· 4273:· 4267:· 4262:( 4241:( 4226:( 4205:( 4186:( 4160:( 4108:( 4068:( 4031:( 3981:( 3955:( 3940:( 3911:( 3867:( 3857:. 3833:( 3822:. 3790:( 3762:. 3722:. 3712:) 3704:( 3642:( 3605:| 3564:( 3538:( 3515:( 3494:( 3454:( 3385:( 3339:( 3292:( 3257:( 3235:( 3209:( 3190:( 3154:( 3124:( 3109:( 3094:( 3075:( 3060:( 3041:( 3017:( 2997:( 2977:( 2943:( 2909:( 2874:( 2858:. 2836:. 2803:( 2783:. 2756:. 2732:( 2715:. 2681:P 2678:T 2668:P 2665:T 2556:( 2542:( 2523:( 2500:( 2491:. 2481:) 2473:( 2411:( 2385:( 2354:( 2339:( 2318:( 2303:( 2284:( 2251:( 2237:( 2216:( 2201:( 2176:( 2161:( 2137:. 2085:) 2081:( 2046:( 1997:( 1912:( 1840:( 1785:( 1766:( 1715:( 1678:( 1653:X 1631:( 1617:( 1598:( 1589:· 1584:( 1563:( 1541:( 1496:( 1461:( 1372:. 1349:( 1327:( 1257:( 1241:( 1187:( 1148:( 1125:( 1089:( 1056:( 1030:( 999:( 983:( 961:( 957:- 938:( 922:( 893:( 875:( 814:( 750:( 616:( 598:( 554:( 540:( 523:( 511:; 452:( 430:( 403:( 379:( 341:( 316:( 270:( 211:. 180:( 165:( 150:( 134:( 115:( 50:.

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

Index