526:
that A Nobody was permanently banned from
Knowledge, mainly for socking(?). Well, since I have not been involved in Knowledge for about a year, I am in no position to comment. I will say that when A Nobody did adopt me, I thought that they were very nice but not very helpful, and I honestly did not learn much, at all. They shared so little about themselves with me, that I can honestly tell you, I am not sure if A Nobody was male or female. Anyway, I have been involved in the WikiAnswers Community, which has been a great place, and a learning experience. I am not going to leave WikiAnswers but would like to know how I can rejoin the Knowledge Community and seek another, experienced Wikipedian to adopt me. Could you please advice? Thank you, Irshgrl500
31:
132:
offended because of the comment I left on Jimbo's talk page. I apologize, but as a constructive editor who obviously cares about consensus and the work-arounds of
Knowledge, I implore you to understand that 16 hours is not enough time to decide on the exiling of a community member. Not only is it not enough time, but it doesn't provide a good example to how conscientious we are about making decisions on Knowledge. 21:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC) Feedback â21:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
100:
International
Tribunal but at least a few days. RFAs take a week. AFDs take a week. Community bans of 24-48 hours are way too short. Some people even mention that they do not edit on weekends so they would miss some ban discussions. A minimum of 72 hours to a standard 7 days should be done. Why the rush? This is particularly true if someone is already blocked since e-mailed responses that are posted take time.
1113:. It seems that Daedalus is unhappy about the outcome of yesterday's incident and needs to make up for it somehow in his own mind. The long and the short of this is that Daedalus has been told numerous times that he is not to interact with me at all on Knowledge, but as you can see from his posts on RegentsParks talk page, he is disregarding that and once again attempting to provoke an
277:
1429:. Your Outside view is the only one that's widely supported, by people from different camps. It's very good. But that guy's comment sticks out like a sore thumb. Maybe I'm being fussy here, but I think I'll have to remove my own sig from the list , if that comment stays. :-( What's your take on it? Should I simply send in Bishzilla? Her sig has the strength of thousands, you know.
1153:. What it had to do with was an editor who was posting unrelenting, unacceptable personal attacks aimed at myself and others. They have been rightly indef blocked with their talk page removed. If you even read the report to which you refer, you would see how out of line it is for you to refer to it,
1378:
You were acting vehemently unreasonably in attacking PMA there. Expressing your opinion and engaging in the discussion are ok, but you were pushing way harder than was useful or constructive, to the point that it was disruptive. It wasn't about you - but your engagement there became an issue on its
846:
We've had occasional reappearances by Ronnie, which a few of us have typically reverted. Last night there was a rash of vandalism on the ref desk talk page with familiar-sounding comments, which might or might not have been Ronnie, but they did emanate from the New York area. I recommend you run this
525:
Until about a year ago, I used to contribute to
Knowledge, quite often. Even though I did contribute often, and considered myself to be part of the Knowledge Community, I felt I was a bit "green" on the rules, and procedures. I decided to put myself up for adoption, and was adopted by A Nobody. I see
1170:
Lastly, you are the only one here attempting to provoke anything, first calling me disruptive for a fairly minor incident, and now this. My post to Regent's page had everything to do with records, and nothing to do with sparking anything. That page is for logging restrictions. You are an editor,
969:
Of course I'm not a newbie. Had I been a newbie, faced with your unwarranted hostility I would have withered and cried and given up on wikipedia forever and never made another contribution to the project. Who needs uncalled for hostility from people who say "I expect I worked on 12 GAs, and you I
1210:
That's fine, as I indicated our policy allows you to do that all you want. But if you call it vandalism again, as I warned you, it's a form of personal attack, and ultimately if you keep making personal attacks you get blocked for it. Removing the comment and attacking those who made the comment
929:
of overlapping edits at another article over the past week. Have I expressed ownership of it? Have you expressed to Jay that he should stay away from it? Have you said "Jay - I don't want to blame you here, but its an article where he has been the major contributor, and his participation there,
913:
Wikistalkers are people who follow others to articles they work on and make disruptive edits. They are not people, who months after being on of many in disagreement with Jay, and who Jay has made overlapping edits with for weeks without any friction, happen to edit an article within their typical
70:
Read on ANI you're going to open a thread at AN on community bans. I completely agree that there needs to be a set policy for community bans (minimum discussion time, history, etc). I'm actually thinking there should be a separate noticeboard for bans as well. They take up too much room and ANI is
1233:
Hi, I noticed you tagged Viper 265 as a sock of Yattum and also the rangeblock of the IP. I'm not sure if my AN/ANI requests were very clear but to clarify, I'm not interested in banning the IP range; just a community ban on Yattum. Also, I'm 99% sure that a block of 88.106.0.0/16 isn't necessary
976:
I've also explained at the AN/I how this article falls squarely in my topics of editing (NY and
Judaism articles), and how I came to that article today (I seem to have been editing another article in that sphere, that was in the same cat, and went from there). And I think we've both edited still
1403:
it wasnât my intention to âpush buttonsâ but to state what I truly believed without personal attacks. Sorry. And as mark pointed out there, I too consider that particular ANI settled. My point was that on the broader issue of making ANI more effective, if admins decide a complaint such as markâs
708:
Ya... I know that there are benefits to both keeping and deleting those reports, but LTA still needs to be cleaned up. Regarding your comments about growing sophistication of long-term abuse vandals, the new system was designed from scratch to provide an easy to use project that editors can pull
99:
These community bans are happening way too fast. None of the community bans are emergencies. The massive vandalism attack by a user is handled by rapid block, not community ban. ArbCom takes time to carefully ban people and so should we. We are not talking about formal arguments before the
131:
I am however seeking a proper way to achieve consensus on future bans. The ban was justifiable, but the means on how justice was served were not (a less than 24 hour discussion and the lack of response from the accused user). Forget Sugar Bear, as this applies to all bans. You seem personally
943:
Plus, as you will gather from my response at AN/I, I believe that on a number of levels Jay has violated wp:admin. I have special concern when admins bully others in violation of wikipedia guidelines. Good newbie editors are driven away by such behavior. That isn't good for the
930:
even if well intentioned, seems to be becoming something unrelated to the content. Would you consent to moving on to other articles, or at least finding someone else you trust on source citations to help on this and restrict yourself to the talk page there for a while?"
936:
The reason I haven't asked for you to tell Jay to go away is that I don't own the article. It seems odd that you would ask me to stay away from an article where I have fixed two dozen mistakes, which from his reaction appear all to be his.
959:
You're not a newbie (by a long shot), and I didn't threaten you with any admin tools (much less use them). Now, exactly how was it you ended up editing that article I'd recently nominated for GA? Have you edited other GA nominees recently?
899:
of items in articles I've been the primary contributor to. I've not complained once. I've simply gone about supplying refs. On related issues, though we haven't had one of late, I've engaged in discussion with him on the talk page.
921:
The language requiring refs in sentences that have quotes couldn't be clearer. It won't take you hours to look at the "are refs required in a sentence with a quote" issue. I gave you, at the AN/I, the precise quote. Jay is wrong.
75:
abbreviation to it) with specific instructions for what is to be included in a ban discussion and the time required before one is considered closed. Just a few thoughts. You can be sure I'll be commenting at your AN thread. Cheers!
674:
back in June 2007, but from what I can see, this user is no longer active. Could you verify that he is no longer active so we can delete the report? Or, if he still is, please help us update the report. Thanks.
103:
By being responsible and fair, Knowledge's reputation is enhanced. Having a procedure will not let anyone who is going to be banned get off unbanned! However, a rush to justice will only make us look bad.
669:
project to provide a more effective and centralized project to effectively counter long-term vandalism. As part of this cleanup, old inactive reports are being deleted. I see that you created the report on
873:. As per my previous complaint, despite the existence of the 1rr and numerous violations, it has never been enforced. If it will never be enforced wouldn't be a good idea to simply scrap it altogether.
107:
Having rules for bans doesn't affect 99.9% of users so there is no rule creep in practice. Others just edit and fix. Only when they do pseudo-criminal acts do they have to be afraid of the rules.
689:
I'm not sure that removing old inactive reports is a good idea - a lot of these people got more sophisticated about sock evading and sleeper accounts - but I'll take that to the new abuse team page.
1358:
for calling mark a âsemi-literate imbecileâ and since he has a history of this and isnât apologetic, he needs to be blocked. I did no personal attacks and I honestly stated the truth as I saw it.
999:
FYI I believe
Daedalus was referring to Sweetpoet reverting him on his (Daedalus's) talk page, not Sweetpoet's page. Especially as I do not see Daedalus reverting him on Sweetpoet's page. See
431:
263:
1354:
again? I wasnât involved with the edit war and name calling going on between mark and PMA. I came to the ANIâafter mark started itâto state my opinion that PMA was clearly in violation of
1222:
344:
305:
933:
You haven't. Nor have I asked you. Nor is that what this is about. They are entirely separate issues. But you feed the wp:own monster here with such an un-evenhanded response.
400:
317:
301:
546:
1400:
488:
362:
309:
1033:
738:
724:
703:
382:
313:
1088:
1413:
1018:
164:
1286:
791:
604:
213:
1302:
1275:
1045:
I blocked SweetPoet before reading your note on his/her talk page. Wasn't intending to second guess you. Feel free to unblock if you see fit. I'm going to be offline.
799:
783:
612:
596:
221:
205:
1339:
1184:
836:
649:
1310:
1294:
807:
683:
620:
588:
474:
258:
229:
197:
903:
Look at my DYKs, and you will see that this article falls within the sphere of articles I edit, and is clearly (in addition to the timing) not a case of wp:stalk.
71:
pretty much impossible to navigate because of all the issues that are brought up there. Perhaps there could be an
Administrators noticeboard/bans (maybe move the
517:
123:
986:
964:
1404:
isnât actionable, then stating as much would settle things sooner and prevent threads from unnecessarily growing. Wouldnât you agree that is a fair statement?
1259:
1074:
759:
572:
181:
973:
You, as I've explained at the AN/I, seem not to be familiar with the fact that wp:admin does not (as you seem to misapprehend) relate to abuse of admin tools.
882:
870:
89:
502:
564:
512:
1267:
994:
767:
580:
411:
189:
1143:
116:
460:
775:
940:
And not ask him to stay away form an article where all he has done is make edits that are other than additive, as I have quietly responded to them.
895:
I haven't, though you've not asked, been stalking Jay. This AN/I follows by many months the incident Jay points to. In the interim, he has tagged
1390:
892:
Hi. Don't want to further clutter the AN/I, as it promises to get long. I recognize and appreciate that you are trying to do the right thing.
717:
676:
1243:
914:
scope. And improve it greatly. And request that within the precise indubitable language of the guidance, sentences with quotes be referenced.
855:
1003:
1000:
1204:
654:
1248:
748:
553:
401:
LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour
170:
1056:
953:
1371:
1437:
1063:
Never mind. After the email I got and the rant on the talk page, this editor should remain blocked. I've disabled talk page privs.
452:. To complete the process, I'd like to merge the page histories. Just checking that you have no objection as the protecting admin.
1234:(only 88.106.64.0/18) as all of the disruptive IPs originate from that sub-range based on my review of the range contributions.
59:
1327:
824:
729:
I'll try and contribute over there - currently in a new and challenging work situation but I have bandwidth after work hours.
709:
needed information from, so hopefully we can more effectively counter them. if you have suggestions on how to make LTA better,
637:
345:
Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new
Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank
291:
246:
655:
860:
410:
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section
1323:
1157:. Instead you insist on stalking my talk page and my edits, in violation of that warning. Second of all, it took place
851:
820:
633:
242:
496:
1426:
1268:
Knowledge leads in customer satisfaction, Google
Translate and India, Citizendium transition, Jimbo's media accolade
1386:
1218:
1084:
1029:
734:
699:
542:
484:
150:
47:
17:
1200:
1096:
479:
No problem. Protection was to end the edit warring, not keep consensus process from moving forwards. 8-)
1318:
815:
628:
437:
237:
112:
1101:
I believe we're going to have another problem with
Daedalus969. Following on the heels of the incident
1228:
866:
445:
38:
1382:
1214:
1149:
Thanks for completely lying, and misconstruing the facts. First of all, the 48 hour interaction ban
1080:
1025:
917:
And look at the wp:own displayed by Jay. The threats. The hostility. And look at how I responded.
730:
695:
692:
Regarding Ron specifically, I have not seen anything during 2010 but I'm asking around if others did.
662:
480:
1196:
666:
977:
other Brooklyn synagogue articles in the past. And, as you know, it's a synagogue I've been to.--
1102:
108:
1178:
94:
1335:
1140:
982:
949:
878:
832:
645:
538:
530:
438:
254:
8:
841:
508:
1434:
1012:
848:
760:
Politician defends editing own article, Google translation, Row about a small Knowledge
427:
1069:
1051:
1039:
1109:
to the talk page of the closing admin of an AN/I I was involved in which took place
1409:
1367:
1239:
1173:
671:
83:
1211:
are two very different things. Remove all you want. Don't attack the commenters.
137:
You should be posting this on the AN page to continue our path towards consensus.
1344:
1331:
1119:
1114:
978:
945:
874:
828:
641:
534:
467:
453:
449:
250:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
768:
Wikimania, Former Wikimedia employee looks back, Editing controversial articles
504:
1430:
1355:
1006:
423:
139:
72:
63:
1171:
who has restrictions. It is per policy that yours should be logged there.â
1106:
1064:
1046:
887:
60:
1024:
I see that now and I sit corrected. I will note that on the discussion.
1421:
1405:
1363:
1235:
1190:
589:
Article ownership, WikiProjects vs. Manual of Style, Unverifiable village
78:
869:. The 1RR has been violated including the multiple violations listed in
961:
776:
Vandalism edits fool media and a government, become object of bets
182:
WMF expansion, community hires, award for MediaWiki, admin recall
865:
The status of the 1RR has recently been called into question on
800:
ArbCom to appoint CU/OS positions after dumping election results
190:
Accidentally anonymized donation, democratized learning and more
581:
Foundation plans, David Barton, dangerous occasional glitches
264:
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
1155:
especially because you have been warned to stay away from me
665:
project is currently being revamped and integrated with the
383:
June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members
276:
1260:
New interwiki project improves biographies, and other news
970:
expect worked on a smaller number, so fealty is in order".
847:
subject past Wknight94, if you have not done so already. â
906:
Furthermore, look at my edits to the article. They are
573:Board changes, Wikimania, Public Policy Initiative
1195:Any unwanted edition, will be promptly reversed.
518:A Nobody Banned from Knowledge - Need Your Help
363:Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
1311:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
1151:had absolutely nothing to do with you at all
808:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
621:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
230:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
995:Sweetpoet/Daedalus (A last note discussion)
565:British politicians accused of WP cover-ups
122:Suomi, this is similar to what I posted on
1295:Controversial e-mail proposal, Invalid AfD
466:Cancel that. Someone else has done it. :)
501:Would appreciate a second opinion here.
1399:I see. You had me guessing. As to your
422:This has been an automated delivery by
14:
448:, and the contents added as policy to
408:
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1276:These Are the Voyages of WikiProject
656:Long-term abuse report on Ron_liebman
25:
23:
198:Gearing up for Wikimania in GdaĹsk
24:
1449:
784:Up close with WikiProject Animals
444:The title has been redirected to
206:WikiProject Children's Literature
1350:What was unreasonable? Donât do
1303:The Report on Lengthy Litigation
613:The Report on Lengthy Litigation
275:
222:The Report on Lengthy Litigation
29:
18:User talk:Georgewilliamherbert
13:
1:
925:Jay and I have had literally
716:suggest it on the talk page.
861:1RR on race and intelligence
292:Military history WikiProject
7:
1161:months ago. Not five, but
10:
1454:
1319:Read this Signpost in full
867:Talk:Race and intelligence
816:Read this Signpost in full
629:Read this Signpost in full
446:Knowledge:Child protection
388:
370:
350:
332:
238:Read this Signpost in full
1438:17:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
1414:23:48, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
1391:19:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
1372:01:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
1340:03:07, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
1244:03:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
1223:22:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
1205:22:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
1185:02:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
1144:02:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
1089:22:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
1075:01:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
1057:01:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
1034:00:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
1019:00:42, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
987:10:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
965:07:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
954:07:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
883:16:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
856:19:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
837:15:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
739:21:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
725:20:04, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
704:19:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
684:13:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
650:20:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
547:05:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
497:Race and Intelligence 1RR
513:18:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
489:22:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
475:09:30, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
461:05:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
432:19:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
259:15:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
165:18:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
117:15:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
90:03:59, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
296:: Issue LII (June 2010)
1250:The Knowledge Signpost
750:The Knowledge Signpost
597:WikiProject Apple Inc.
555:The Knowledge Signpost
214:This week's highlights
172:The Knowledge Signpost
134:
1401:last post at the ANI,
1285:Features and admins:
1097:Not even for 48 hours
790:Features and admins:
603:Features and admins:
212:Features and admins:
129:
42:of past discussions.
1383:Georgewilliamherbert
1301:Arbitration report:
1287:The best of the week
1274:WikiProject report:
1215:Georgewilliamherbert
1081:Georgewilliamherbert
1026:Georgewilliamherbert
798:Arbitration report:
792:The best of the week
782:WikiProject report:
731:Georgewilliamherbert
696:Georgewilliamherbert
611:Arbitration report:
605:The best of the week
595:WikiProject report:
481:Georgewilliamherbert
439:Knowledge:Pedophilia
220:Arbitration report:
204:WikiProject report:
1309:Technology report:
1293:Discussion report:
908:highly constructive
806:Technology report:
619:Technology report:
587:Discussion report:
228:Technology report:
196:Wikimania preview:
124:Daedalus' talk page
1362:is unreasonable?
1229:Rangeblock and ban
109:Suomi Finland 2009
66:and community bans
1073:
1055:
550:
533:comment added by
473:
459:
434:
419:
418:
328:
327:
324:
323:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1445:
1258:News and notes:
1181:
1176:
1137:
1134:
1131:
1128:
1125:
1122:
1067:
1049:
1015:
1009:
758:News and notes:
722:
681:
672:User:Ron liebman
571:News and notes:
549:
527:
472:
470:
458:
456:
421:
394:
376:
356:
338:
330:
329:
320:
297:
285:
279:
272:
271:
268:
267:
180:News and notes:
163:
158:
147:
88:
86:
81:
33:
32:
26:
1453:
1452:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1444:
1443:
1442:
1424:
1347:
1342:
1315:
1254:
1231:
1193:
1179:
1174:
1135:
1132:
1129:
1126:
1123:
1120:
1111:five months ago
1099:
1042:
1017:
1013:
1007:
997:
890:
863:
844:
839:
812:
754:
718:
677:
663:long-term abuse
659:
652:
625:
559:
528:
520:
499:
468:
454:
442:
395:
392:
377:
374:
357:
354:
339:
336:
300:
288:
282:
266:
261:
234:
176:
162:
159:
152:
148:
141:
138:
97:
84:
79:
77:
68:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1451:
1423:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1394:
1393:
1380:
1375:
1374:
1346:
1343:
1316:
1314:
1313:
1306:
1305:
1298:
1297:
1290:
1289:
1282:
1281:
1271:
1270:
1263:
1262:
1255:
1253:
1252:: 26 July 2010
1247:
1230:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1212:
1192:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1167:
1166:
1098:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1041:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1011:
996:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
974:
971:
920:
889:
886:
862:
859:
843:
840:
813:
811:
810:
803:
802:
795:
794:
787:
786:
779:
778:
771:
770:
763:
762:
755:
753:
752:: 19 July 2010
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
741:
693:
690:
667:abuse response
658:
653:
626:
624:
623:
616:
615:
608:
607:
600:
599:
592:
591:
584:
583:
576:
575:
568:
567:
563:UK COI edits:
560:
558:
557:: 12 July 2010
552:
519:
516:
498:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
441:
436:
417:
416:
406:
405:
397:
396:
391:
387:
379:
378:
373:
368:
367:
359:
358:
353:
349:
341:
340:
335:
326:
325:
322:
321:
316:
312:
308:
304:
298:
287:
286:
280:
265:
262:
235:
233:
232:
225:
224:
217:
216:
209:
208:
201:
200:
193:
192:
185:
184:
177:
175:
169:
168:
167:
161:
151:
140:
128:
127:
96:
93:
67:
58:
56:
52:
51:
34:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1450:
1441:
1439:
1436:
1432:
1428:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1402:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1395:
1392:
1388:
1384:
1381:
1377:
1376:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1357:
1353:
1349:
1348:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1321:
1320:
1312:
1308:
1307:
1304:
1300:
1299:
1296:
1292:
1291:
1288:
1284:
1283:
1280:
1279:
1273:
1272:
1269:
1266:In the news:
1265:
1264:
1261:
1257:
1256:
1251:
1246:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1213:
1209:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1186:
1183:
1182:
1177:
1169:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1142:
1139:
1138:
1116:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1079:No problem.
1078:
1077:
1076:
1071:
1066:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1053:
1048:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1016:
1010:
1004:
1001:
988:
984:
980:
975:
972:
968:
967:
966:
963:
958:
957:
956:
955:
951:
947:
941:
938:
934:
931:
928:
923:
918:
915:
911:
909:
904:
901:
898:
893:
885:
884:
880:
876:
872:
868:
858:
857:
853:
850:
849:Baseball Bugs
838:
834:
830:
826:
822:
818:
817:
809:
805:
804:
801:
797:
796:
793:
789:
788:
785:
781:
780:
777:
773:
772:
769:
766:In the news:
765:
764:
761:
757:
756:
751:
740:
736:
732:
728:
727:
726:
723:
721:
715:
712:
707:
706:
705:
701:
697:
694:
691:
688:
687:
686:
685:
682:
680:
673:
668:
664:
657:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
630:
622:
618:
617:
614:
610:
609:
606:
602:
601:
598:
594:
593:
590:
586:
585:
582:
579:In the news:
578:
577:
574:
570:
569:
566:
562:
561:
556:
551:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
523:
515:
514:
510:
506:
503:
490:
486:
482:
478:
477:
476:
471:
465:
464:
463:
462:
457:
451:
447:
440:
435:
433:
429:
425:
415:
413:
407:
404:
403:
402:
390:
389:
386:
385:
384:
372:
371:
369:
366:
365:
364:
352:
351:
348:
347:
346:
334:
333:
331:
319:
315:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
293:
284:
281:
278:
274:
273:
270:
269:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
239:
231:
227:
226:
223:
219:
218:
215:
211:
210:
207:
203:
202:
199:
195:
194:
191:
188:In the news:
187:
186:
183:
179:
178:
174:: 5 July 2010
173:
166:
160:
157:
156:
149:
146:
145:
136:
135:
133:
125:
121:
120:
119:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
95:Your AN topic
92:
91:
87:
82:
74:
65:
62:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1425:
1359:
1351:
1317:
1277:
1249:
1232:
1194:
1172:
1162:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1118:
1110:
1105:, he posted
1100:
1044:
1043:
998:
942:
939:
935:
932:
926:
924:
919:
916:
912:
907:
905:
902:
896:
894:
891:
875:Wapondaponda
864:
845:
814:
749:
719:
713:
710:
678:
660:
627:
554:
524:
521:
500:
443:
420:
409:
399:
398:
381:
380:
361:
360:
343:
342:
337:Project news
306:Project news
289:
283:
236:
171:
154:
153:
143:
142:
130:
106:
102:
98:
69:
55:
43:
37:
1328:Unsubscribe
1324:Single-page
1197:VĂtor&R
1117:incident.
1103:referred to
871:this report
842:Re: Liebman
825:Unsubscribe
821:Single-page
774:Vandalism:
638:Unsubscribe
634:Single-page
529:âPreceding
247:Unsubscribe
243:Single-page
36:This is an
1332:EdwardsBot
979:Epeefleche
946:Epeefleche
944:project.--
829:EdwardsBot
642:EdwardsBot
535:Irshgrl500
469:SlimVirgin
455:SlimVirgin
302:Front page
294:Newsletter
251:EdwardsBot
1278:Star Trek
1040:collision
1008:Mauler90
505:mikemikev
393:Editorial
318:Editorial
1431:Bishonen
720:Netalarm
679:Netalarm
543:contribs
531:unsigned
450:WP:BLOCK
424:BrownBot
355:Articles
310:Articles
1427:Oh crap
1345:PMA ANI
1115:uncivil
1065:Toddst1
1047:Toddst1
852:carrots
522:Hello,
375:Members
314:Members
39:archive
1406:Greg L
1364:Greg L
1356:WP:NPA
1236:Vedant
1141:â˘talkâ˘
1005:. Â ;)
962:Jayjg
927:dozens
897:dozens
714:please
711:please
73:WP:ANB
64:WP:ANI
1180:dÎąlus
1163:three
1159:three
61:WP:AN
16:<
1435:talk
1410:talk
1387:talk
1379:own.
1368:talk
1360:That
1352:what
1336:talk
1240:talk
1219:talk
1201:talk
1107:this
1085:talk
1070:talk
1052:talk
1030:talk
1014:talk
1002:and
983:talk
950:talk
910:.
888:AN/I
879:talk
833:talk
735:talk
700:talk
661:The
646:talk
539:talk
509:talk
485:talk
428:talk
412:here
290:The
255:talk
155:back
144:Feed
113:talk
80:N419
1422:FYI
1191:RE:
1440:.
1433:|
1412:)
1389:)
1370:)
1338:)
1330:¡
1326:¡
1322:¡
1242:)
1221:)
1203:)
1175:DĂŚ
1133:th
1130:pa
1127:io
1124:ad
1087:)
1032:)
985:)
952:)
881:)
854:â
835:)
827:¡
823:¡
819:¡
737:)
702:)
648:)
640:¡
636:¡
632:¡
545:)
541:â˘
511:)
487:)
430:)
414:.
257:)
249:¡
245:¡
241:¡
115:)
85:BH
1408:(
1385:(
1366:(
1334:(
1238:(
1217:(
1199:(
1165:.
1136:y
1121:R
1083:(
1072:)
1068:(
1054:)
1050:(
1028:(
981:(
948:(
877:(
831:(
733:(
698:(
644:(
537:(
507:(
483:(
426:(
253:(
126::
111:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
