User talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive 13

1578:

into your userspace so you can work on improving it. I think that another good idea would be to ask Yopie for specifics on what he wants as far as MoS edits goes. It's very, very common for editors to quote a policy without going into a huge amount of detail about why this has to be as such, so asking for a little more detail would be a good idea. I think that what he was referring to was that the way you listed the sources was not how we typically list references on Knowledge. It's kind of a tricky thing, since citing sources like that would suffice in other places but not on Knowledge. Another tricky thing is that because Knowledge is a place that can be edited by anyone, you can't really use Knowledge as a source to show notability. At best it's a trivial source and for the most part I try to avoid using it because of how easily information can be added, removed, or edited to make that reference obsolete or otherwise incorrect. As far as the page in general goes, one of the biggest issues I see is that many of the links in the external sources section aren't really what we'd consider to be reliable sources that show notability. For example, while some of the registries list the ARL, it is more in a "see also" or "these are places where you can get this done" type of manner and would be considered trivial. The other issue is that you'd have to show that these mentions show notability and would not be considered to be

286:. The bar is set pretty high and band articles are some of the most frequently deleted articles on Knowledge. If you can find a few sources like the Beat or ABC, then that'd really help firmly establish notability. The thing about sources is that not all sources are considered to be reliable per Knowledge's RS guidelines. Someone can be well-known, but being known doesn't always mean that they'd be considered reliable. I run into this a lot when I write articles for books or movies: there are a lot of sites that I frequent, some of which are incredibly popular. However at the same time, the sites don't always have editorial oversight or an editorial process that we can really verify and as such they'd probably be considered unusable if the article would come up at AfD (articles for deletion). It's kind of a struggle sometimes to argue for a site's usability, so that's why I'm usually a little strict when it comes to judging sources. It's better to be a little strict now and know that it can be well argued for if it comes up for AfD, in my opinion. 2668:

Not only has it become a common expression among different age groups (which is totally not seen before considering that expressions originated from the internet usually affect teenagers, but this time, the influence is very extensive even someone who doesn't go to the Internet very often would use the expressions for different purposes, such as teasing). Other than that, I also included information that this incident was a notable one that reflected the poor relationship between Hong Kong and Mainland China. In Hong Kong, people use Cantonese as their mother tongue while in Mainland China use Mandarin instead. The conflict between these two districts has been fierce in recent years and "Thick Toast (Hau Dor Si)" can serve as an indicator on this issue because it is intriguing to know that Hongkongers in general despise the Mainland Chinese, even those have immigrated to Hong Kong but speak with strange, non-native and funny accent of Cantonese.

1595:

bad faith, but may just have been on the defensive. Unfortunately people can get pretty defensive when editing articles and sometimes things will get heated. The best course of action is to first politely ask for more explanation as to why they did what they did and ask if there is more that they can do to help show notability or edit the article. If they request that you do the work or give no answer, the next best step is to ask what you can do to make it better and to then request help from others, which looks to be what you've done here. The number one thing is to try not to get angry or make any sort of accusation unless you have quite a bit of evidence, because there's really not a lot that admins can do without that evidence. I may make a request at DRN or RFC for the article. I'm not taking anyone's side here, but I think that we do need a neutral third party to mediate here.

1534:

is very necessary. In the heraldry world, a person eventually gets to know everybody of importance - it is a small world. (I personally know all the members of both the College of Arms and the Lyon Court, two of the Canadian Heralds, one South African and the royal Serbian herald. So, of course, I know the two directors of the Armorial Register. But, I am not employed by them and have not received any payment from them (in money or in kind). They have consulted me in the past about blazoning foreign shields and I have done so freely because (1) I'm good at it and (2) I enjoy it. There is no conflict of interest. I was the main author of the page, because I saw the page for the

1095: 2976:), as does very closely paraphrasing the text. I do understand that there are only so many ways to write a sentence, but this was just too closely paraphrased to be seen as anything other than a copyright violation. It's kind of a little like writing a paper for class: if a student were to hand you a paper where they pretty much copied someone else's work verbatim or nearly verbatim, you wouldn't be able to accept that as a valid student paper. Now even if the foundation were to submit a ticket through 603: 1088: 31: 1622: 792: 112: 2981:

company to the reader. That's expected and even encouraged for the organization because they have to get their message out, but it's just not acceptable on Knowledge and the entire article would pretty much have to be completely re-written to meet the policies on writing with a neutral, encyclopedic point of view and without any copyright violations. I can e-mail the text to you, but I really can't restore it to AfC space given that it has both of these issues.

1969:

the reasoning for the decision. I am new to Knowledge and am a producer on the project that we will be debuting in a few weeks. I have seen and been in projects that have had a Knowledge page before. Should I add more references? Other websites, IMDB, etc.? If you could give me insight and guidance on this, I would appreciate it. I am not using Knowledge as an advertising platform, rather adding a page on this controversial media piece.

1473: 2028:

promotional-ish language elsewhere then it can really come across as promotional as a whole. There's an additional problem that some of the information (character sections) can come across as too "in universe" in how it's written and would require a re-write anyway. I think that right now a better option would be to start a Wikia site and edit there for the time being since it's just too soon for this to have an entry right now.

3071: 3019: 1832: 1943: 1799:, where you can work on improving the article by providing more information and by providing coverage in reliable sources. Reliable sources would be coverage in independent and reliable sources like newspaper articles, articles by reliable music magazines and websites like Pitchfork. The trouble with saying that they produced notable songs is that notability isn't entirely inherited by that ( 647:

problems. Apparently the other editor did not feel the same and then deleted it. I am awaiting to hear back from that editor to see how I can adjust the article to fix it. In the meantime, can you assist in restoring the article to my sandbox? I am reaching out because I saw you were responsible for it's deletion. Thank you for your consideration as I learn the Knowledge process.

165:

reviews on prominent indie websites by respected Australian music journalists would be sufficient. I've read through the information provided by Wikpedia but feel as if this application has been misunderstood. I suppose I'd like to know what kind of other objective signs of notability I require to legitimize the band in the eyes of editors. Regards Mango North.

1541:

Yopie deleting references and saying "Read MoS". Although he told me that he wanted to improve the article, he has not done so. He put up the Advert Notice and the Notability Notice and when nobody took any interest in that he nominated for speedy deletion. When the speedy failed, he then went down the AfD route. Then out of nowhere

1997:

may have been unintentional, but it still came across as promotional. The other element is that the series has not yet started and hasn't received any coverage to show that it would pass notability guidelines even upon its release. The thing about series of any type is that existing doesn't equal out to notability on Knowledge (

1367:) and submit it for consideration. My biggest concern though is that I couldn't really see anything to show that this person passes notability guidelines. He's successful and he's worked for various companies, but that does not mean he's notable per Knowledge's guidelines. We're not really a place to post 2737:

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine

2667:

Nice to meet you. I created an article called Thick Toast (Hau Dor Si) which was deleted by you on 09:26, 6 November 2014 for not indicating the significance. However, I think I did state the importance of this article. The colloquial expression "Hau Dor Si" has had an immense influence on Hong Kong.

2396:

Heh, I had a humongous crush on Vincent Price growing up. I haven't seen The Uninvited, but it sounds absolutely amazing! I haven't seen the original House of Wax either, although I'm embarrassed to say that I've seen the 2005 Paris Hilton movie. That actually wasn't that bad for what it was- I admit

2070:

that talks about how one article it isn't a valid reason to keep another. And that article is about something in the past with at least one good source, from Vanity. That is different than something that is in the future and has no strong sources at all. Each article has to stand on its own merits,

1996:

What bothered me were the sentences like this: "The series address them in a unique captivating way allowing the viewers to peek in to the dark side of Los Angeles. " That's very, very promotional in tone and would need to be completely re-written in order to be neutral per Knowledge requirements. It

1918:

Nah, if you've already done it then let's give it a whirl. I was going to initially but I was concerned that they didn't really change much promotional-wise between the two times they submitted it and figured that it was probably because they didn't want to do the re-writes. I figure let 'em have one

1594:

for that sort of thing. Although... I do have to say that when/if you post there, that you try to be as neutral as possible and make sure that you back up your claims with article differences. Also make sure that you take into account that it's entirely possible that the others might not be acting in

1577:

Hmm... this is a good first start, asking for help- I'd definitely recommend avoiding getting overly upset on the AfD page because of how poorly that can sometimes be received. I think that what you should ask is that if this gets deleted via AfD, that the closing admin transfer a copy of the article

1540:

So I wrote the article. I know that it is not very good. I know that it reads like an advert. I know that it is not very Knowledge like. What I don't know is how to improve it! I would welcome collaboration. Frankly, I have had no help with this at all and don't know how to get any. All I have had is

1017:

Thanks for looking at Jonas's article - could you perhaps have a dig through the history? I think the author (who is not Jonas...) could have a case of OWN (and possibly COI), or perhaps the stuff being added wasn't properly referenced. I'm not sure of the reliability or otherwise of some of this pop

2722:

Hello ReaderofthePack. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the

2671:

Indeed, I have tried hard to make my article stick to the notability guidelines but surely there are still something I haven't done enough, so if it's the case, please kindly give me additional advice on how to improve it to an appropriate Wiki article. And may I ask to retrieve the deleted material

2601:

I've blocked them and given them a warning about adding information without showing proof. Given some of the stuff they tried to add, I'd hope that this wasn't Binay herself. If this keeps up then we may have to open up a SPI to check for sleepers, unfortunately. I have a feeling that this is a case

2049:

as I've tried to use it as a reference. They have one secondary source and their 2 primary sources are IMDB and their own website. We too have a full interview with Supermodel Magazine. I'm just trying to understand how they were alright and not flagged for deletion. The series will be released this

1586:, a page where you can request people come in and help give a third opinion on disputes about article content and sourcing. I would not recommend addressing any of the sockpuppetry or bullying allegations there, since that page is meant to be used for just content issues. You can ask for help at the 1552:

What do I do? I feel as if I am being attacked from all sides. Apart from me, no one in the discussion has any heraldic knowledge or background. Yopie hates me and the article for reasons that I cannot fathom; SR-7v is a sock or a troll, again for unknown reasons; Northamerica1000 could re-list from

1533:

Hello Tokyogirl79, I am writing to you, because I am in a quandary and truly do not know what to do. May I give you some background information? I do most of my editing in Commons - adding blazons to the many thousands of coats of arms that are there. A (quite literally) thankless task, but one that

1362:

I don't see it listed on deletion review, but to be honest I don't think that it would be overturned at DR or anywhere else. It was a very clear copyright violation and even if the information was given up as fair use, it would still require a complete re-write to read as neutral. The best option in

1153:

I did a punt close of this one, to leave the door open for you and your version, which I'm confident will actually pass criteria. As I said in the close, I leave it to your discretion if you want to merge histories or just delete and move. Hopefully, this is something you can do sooner rather than

970:

I've put a semi-protect on the page. It's my first time doing this for a page that would otherwise be still edited, so I hope I did this right. I've also left a note on the article's talk page. It looks like at least one person has signed up with an account, so I'll direct them to the article's talk

755:

sourcing, I'll look into how to run it through the reliable sources noticeboard. Lastly, if you do have the time and inclination, I'd enjoy hearing your thoughts on the other issues. I've worked rather hard on this article and want it to be able to proudly be added to Knowledge. Thanks again for the

2765:

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly

2531:

Hmm... I didn't realize that this was still at AfD. We usually don't like to protect pages when they're up for AfD. I'll do it for a day rather than a week and see if that does anything. I'll put a post on the AfD page and the talk page. I have a feeling that this is the same guy that I temporarily

2259:

I've actually got Black Sunday on my Netflix queue! I wasn't able to get through Repulsion- the film just sort of creeped me out a little too much at times. I'll admit that I'm not an overly big fan of slasher films myself- I mostly like my horror to be slow building supernatural flicks. I've never

1660:

Hi, Tokyogirl79 this is Gmxian89 for A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events),, Sapphire International Aviation Academy is indicated as Institution or Colleges, School. For G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion, I think I havent promote anything

882:

would be usable, except that it doesn't seem to mention Arora at all. Was it written by him? If so, then that'd make it a primary source as well. I think that it might be best to move this to your userspace if you're interested in still working on it, otherwise it may still run the risk of deletion

646:

Hi there, I noticed you deleted my sandbox draft page for the Abbey Rader article. Is there any chance at restoring it so that I can work on the edits that are needed to publish this article? Prior to the review in the Articles for Creation space, it was reviewed by another Knowledge editor with no

244:

This is a YT video of the ferry, which cannot be used to show notability for the band since notability is not inherited by association with notable things (ie, past jobs). With YT videos there's also a bit of a problem with copyright, as we can't always verify that the uploader is also the owner of

2753:

decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Knowledge to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the

1968:

Hello Tokyogirl79, I have read your "FAQ" section and am still curious as to the decision for deleting the Angels in Paradise page? I expected a notification regarding specific reasoning but I contested the page and made revisions and added its significance. Not upset, just genuinely curious as to

1406:

and we'll keep you posted when we have an actual interface to work with. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have, of course, so let me know if there's anything about the space you'd like to know more about. Much like the Teahouse, the only way we'll know if our project is useful is if we

928:

That's fine, I just wish that you hadn't posted a disruptive editing template to my page because I don't really see that my specific edits were disruptive per se. I can see where you're coming from with the intro, but another person making a similar edit with a promotional intent doesn't mean that

689:

tagged it as copyvio and offhand it looks like it was because you very closely paraphrased the article in several different places, not including the quotes. I'd ask him as to what exactly it was that caused him to tag the page. That aside, I would like to warn you about relying overly much on the

2013:

source and as such cannot show notability either. A good example of a reliable source would be if say, Twitch Film did an article on the production where they interviewed you and went into depth about the production. However I do need to caution that reprints of press releases are seen as primary

1401:

with a small team. I wanted to ask if you might be interested in mentoring 1 or 2 editors during our pilot in January 2015. The idea is that mentors will be doing one-on-one teaching of specific skills based on what an editor wants to do or accomplish, and it's not some huge commitment to teach

2934:

I've seen today my article has been rejected due to copyright issues. I can't seem to see any comments on the draft page -- which has been deleted already. I don't believe I violated copyright, I put sources whenever I used material that was not written by myself. I would like to know more about

1172:

I'll move my copy and delete the history, but I'll make a mention on the article's talk page that if anyone particularly wants it in the edit history, I'll make it available. I don't see much use for the old article version, to be honest, as it was so promotional. Part of me wants to restore the

825:

Hi, I am creating a page deleted by you ( 08:13, 18 October 2014 Tokyogirl79) deleted page Amol Arora ((G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion). The reason of deletion is that the page lacks notability. I have tried to improve the page and collect more information to

281:

Basically my problem with the page is that we only had two really good usable sources and one potentially usable source. If someone wanted to nominate it for deletion via AfD (if I'd accepted it) then odds are high that someone could argue that the coverage in the article is not enough to firmly

164:

Hi Tokyo Girl this is Mango North. I put together the draft page for Australian band The Night Party. I'm unsure which specific references / citations you felt were not objective enough to warrant notability. I figured the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) citation as well as the link to

2980:

giving permission to use the work, we still wouldn't be able to accept the article and it would still have to be deleted on the basis of it being extremely promotional in tone. That's kind of the unsaid thing about using an organization's work: it's almost always written in order to promote the

2109:

is where you draft. AFC is the best place for a new user to build an article because it is in "draft" space, not "main" space. You get it reviewed, they offer tips, you don't have to worry about it getting deleted as long as you are working on it once a month or so. It is a slow process, but

2345:

listed- have you ever seen the remake? Once I got past my incredibly rabid dislike for how much they changed, it wasn't that bad of a film. But man oh man, I do love a good haunted house flick. There's just something great about people venturing into a place with a History (with a capital H),

2027:

giving permissions for use is still something that we can delete the entry for. The only thing about using copyrighted material is that in most instances the text is written in a way that can give off somewhat promotional vibes as well. This isn't as much of a problem except that if there is

698:, our reliable sources noticeboard. It does seem to have an editor, which works in its favor, but not every site is considered to be reliable. There were some other issues I saw with the page, but I figure since that's not exactly what you came here for I'm not really going to go into those. 1795:. Unfortunately there just isn't enough in the article to really firmly establish how they meet notability guidelines. However since you are interested in writing the article, I'm hoping that you will be interested in continuing to work on it. I've moved the article to the draftspace at 1807:

and asking for help on finding sources and generally improving the article, since the editors there will be more familiar with searching and so on. I'm not entirely unfamiliar with the process, but I do think that you'd benefit more by going directly to WP:HIPHOP in this instance.

766:

Very cool tool! Thank you so much for posting it. I was already trying to figure out how I'd find the areas of my article that too closely resemble AMN and it seems like this tool will do the heavy lifting. I'll spend some considerable time seeing how I can best rework things.

677:. I deleted a redirect to a non-existent page, but not the material itself per se. I'd normally have no problem restoring it (although I'd prefer it was the admin who deleted the actual page), but what bothers me is that the page was labeled as being a copyright violation from 2340:

Brrr... stuff based on a true story is usually pretty scary for me, so I'll have to check that one out. I think that's why I tend to dislike many slasher films- real life murderers are scary enough as it is, so slashers usually pale in comparison. I notice that you have

905:

I self-reverted and fixed the problems I found instead. The problem is a very bad edit with the same opening paragraph was added earlier in the day. I checked the rest of your edit and it was an improvement. However, albums are italicized and songs are placed in quotes.

2065:

Just butting it to say that using another article as a guide is often problematic. It could be that the other article needs deleting, and no one has gotten around to it. With over 4 million articles, we have many that need deleting. It is why we have a policy page

1545:

appears. I am sure you have noted that he has made no edits at all, but knows how to add information and format. I am sure that he must be a sock puppet. Whose, I don't know, but I would believe that it is Yopie. Then when the AfD seems not to set the world alight,

2110:

effective. You can also go to any Wikiproject, or to any editor and ask them for help building it. Once it is ready for main space, you just ask for it to get moved over, and it becomes an article. It takes the pressure off, lets you work at your own pace.

2971:

From what I could see, the copyright issues came from you very, very closely paraphrasing and occasionally outright copying broad swaths of text. Even if you cite the source, copying the text into the main article still violates Knowledge's copyright policies

235:

This one is better, since it does have a staff and an editor. It could potentially be used as a reliable source. The problem here is that this is the sort of thing that could be argued against if it came up to AfD since it isn't as wildly recognizable on

2260:

quite gotten into the films that were mostly about body counts, although I can see where they're popular. I remember seeing one of the Zombi films and knowing that I'd never really enjoy that sort of thing. My favorite horror films tend to be stuff like

2192:

Done- I've blocked him for 48 hours and left him a strong warning not to spam edit the article again. If he does, I'll block him for disruptive editing again, possibly even permanently since the spam edits seem to be his only real reason for editing.

971:

page. Thank you for letting me know about this! I don't think that it's the film crew necessarily (although I did need to warn about that), but either way this seems to be a clear attempt to make the page more promotional. (sighs) Stuff like that can

1857: 1371:, as we are not an extension of Linkedin. I'll warn you, if either you or the other editor continues to try to post copyvio or promotional articles, you both stand the risk of getting blocked from further editing, either temporarily or permanently. 1763:

Hello TokyoGirl79, I wanted to write an article about a group of producers based in my area. They're called Blvck Amsterdam, It seems someone wrote about them and deleted the post. Please let me know if its ok to write another article about them.

2441:. I've restored the content and left him a message. I personally wouldn't leave it on my page, but it's not my place to remove it if this was something he wanted to have on his page- and he's re-added it several times despite people removing it. 2018:

sources that can be used to back up some information but would not really count towards notability as a whole. The other thing I should probably mention is that the page had a lot of information that would be considered a copyright violation

1269:

I would actually need to see some sort of coverage in reliable sources before I'd be willing to unlock the page. You could probably create a new version of the article in your userspace or at AfC. However since this was deleted at AfD

2397:

that I mostly saw it for the same reasons a lot of other people did: to see if Paris Hilton actually died in the film. She was a surprisingly good sport about all of the "see Paris die" t-shirts and posters, if I remember correctly.

2644:

I honestly don't think she is either, given that she alleged that someone stole building funds and said that the building had started construction in the early 1900s. Claiming either doesn't really look good for her, if it was her.

2552:

in Maharashtra. Older IPs are in Mumbai. The motive defeats me. The article is neutral, I think. You have made it clear that unsourced material will be removed – but they keep adding it. Maybe the article was not meant to be. Sigh.

3103:

to be about the book rather than the cover illustration. I was able to find quite a bit of coverage about the book, so I expanded the article with references. I think between us we may have rescued an article about a notable book.

1402:

comprehensively about Knowledge. Obviously, your experience as an admin, with article building and deletion processes would be valuable to us in terms of providing appropriate guidance to editors. If you're interested, please

2313:, both "slow building supernatural flicks". Oh me too I love the supernatural and classic horror films, but I really don't like those low budget generic slasher/zombie types films, nasty stuff! An old one I really recommend is 1689:

The page had some fairly promotional prose in it and the history section was actually a copyright violation of the academy's "about us" page. The article would need to be re-written to meet our neutrality standards as a whole.

580:

could do with some additional "expert" opinion. As it happens, OrangeMike would be my other go-to person in this instance but he's already there and we know what he thinks about it. Your thoughts would be appreciated! Cheers,

2484:

I wonder if you could semi-protect this one to prevent IPs editing it. The subject is certainly notable and quite interesting, but there seems to be a drive to add all sorts of unsourced rubbish including honorific titles, a

2050:

week which is when I will try to create another article using the information you have given me, so if you could help me not get flagged again, and clarify the other web series' inclusion on Knowledge, I would appreciate it.

226:

since it greatly resembles a personal blog and we can't really verify that there is any true editorial oversight. I couldn't see anything that suggested that there was an editorial board of any sort, which works against

1154:

later, considering there is a clear consensus to remove that old article. That makes me lean delete/move. If you like, I can do that for you, to keep you removed, but I don't think it is required via my close.

1038: 2096:

Thank you for clarifying, Dennis. Is there a good place to go that explains all the necessary steps to building a solid article aside from reading all 35 different abbreviated links? At least to get a start?

2009:. IMDb can't be used as a reliable source since it is, at best, a database. It can be used to back up trivial information, but it is not a reliable source in and of itself. The official website is seen as a 1903:

Holy smokes, I restored that, went to update REFUND and you had already declined... I saw DGG's last decline and no further edits, so I figured maybe give them a chance. You want me to nuke it again?

253:

This one is good and it's one that I'd argue can be used to show notability for the band. Beat is pretty recognizable published magazine and I know that it has editorial oversight, so it'd be usable.

2928: 826:

prove the notability. Thank you for your advice and help. Pls review the page and give me some suggestions to improve it. I will really appreciate that! Best Regards (User talk:Interactanand)

1737:

an extension of your school's website and that not only should any text be written neutrally and without copyright, but we actually prefer that people with a very strong conflict of interest (

1550:"Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached." I would have thought that as there was so little interest in deleting, that would have been a clue. 1538:. At the time the web page had been blanked and there was a rumour that the owner was dead. I thought that I knew of another registry that was 100x better and deserved to be promulgated. 523:

Since you're already on archive 12, I've made a minor modification to your code so that it archives to the newest instead of to the first. You can see a working example at my talk page.

2926: 1146: 1803:) association with the notable singers and you'd still have to have some sort of coverage for that. It's kind of tricky when it comes to producers. I definitely recommend hitting up 1173:

history, but I'm very slightly concerned over the potential for people to revert to that history. Not overly so, but just enough to where it is/was a concern in the back of my head.

245:

the footage. It doesn't entirely matter with this video, but if it was a video of the band getting interviewed on a news or major TV show then that would potentially become an issue.

2807:

Thanks for the barnstars. I enjoy expanding articles on obscure topics, so will not let them go to my head. I certainly would not claim to have a great and perfect personality like

1853: 2697: 1338:. 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. 1166: 2992: 2797: 694:

vibe since it's published through WordPress. Most blog-type sources aren't usable as a reliable source, so I'd recommend that if the page is restored, that you run it through

2730:

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when

309: 3067:

The English language versions DO indeed remind of something by Tim Burton. While it's personal opinion... they share unexpected quality for an animated film from Spain.

2427: 1655: 1147: 878:

would also be a good place to ask as well and would probably be the first place you should ask about these, as they'd likely have more experience with those sites. The

2867: 2782: 1681: 995:

Thanks for that. It was probably just a fan. And yes I've seen that behaviour on other movie articles too, even going as far as to alter the Rotten Tomatoes ratings!

1582:

in some manner, meaning that the website owners is not involved with the ARL in some form or fashion. What I can do for you in this instance is to refer you towards

1196: 1535: 1075: 1796: 1364: 1258: 3161: 2515:

Seems reasonable- I'll do a semi protect for about a week and see if that helps deter it. If it keeps happening I'll protect it for a little longer and so on.

3086: 3058: 2452: 1741:) not edit their own pages at all, especially if there is a strong chance that they might make the same actions again that caused the page to become deleted. 3006:

Thank you so much for the feedback, that makes a lot of sense! I must still have the original text I submitted so I'm going to rewrite it. Much appreciated!!

1912: 940: 2711: 2683: 2656: 2635: 2613: 1955: 1930: 859: 380: 2717: 2691: 2675: 2146: 1819: 1184: 834: 364: 2408: 2357: 2295: 2204: 1731:

Like I said, it was a copyright violation meaning that it copied the "about us" section word for word in the article. Please understand that Knowledge is

1382: 1297: 443: 2083: 1786: 1770: 1460: 1441: 1347: 1232: 577: 297: 2881: 2700:. The only thing is that you must show coverage of this phrase in reliable sources like newspapers and the like before moving it back to the mainspace. 2039: 737: 2966: 2947: 2935:

this, and would also like the opportunity to amend the article and resubmit it. I also believe that the "copyright infringement" was originally cited (

2562: 2543: 2526: 2422:

Can you please delete its userpage? Because other user wrote on userpage "Good block me, I don't care!..." would be deleted, but it would permanently.

1752: 1701: 1357: 1339: 557: 509: 463: 423: 1606: 1004: 986: 2122: 1335: 1324: 709: 195: 173: 2770:; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors. 1725: 656: 532: 484: 2731: 2153: 2051: 1991: 1975: 1403: 2916: 2900: 2161: 2059: 1983: 894: 1707: 1669: 338: 776: 1564: 1317: 1053: 751:

I realize I made that mistake just after I sent you the message, but thank you for clarifying. I also very much appreciate your insight on the

1450:

Fantastic! Thank you so much. Could you sign up at the talk page I mentioned above? We'll be getting in touch with everyone in this month.

1247:. It would be really Helpful if you can unlock it. I can assure you that i wont try to create a page again without valid sources. Thank You. 929:

mine were necessarily disruptive. Just informing me of the changes would have been fine- I don't have any issue with the changes you've made.

406: 3034: 2431: 1898: 3113: 2662: 1639: 1129: 964: 3146: 2738:

in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied

185: 2472: 1322: 1208: 641: 2588: 2502: 498:

I think I have- I put some code on so maybe it'll work soon? You can take a peek at it if you want- I posted it at the top of the page.

3047:

I was wondering if that's what you did! I have to admit, the movie sounds cute enough that I was debating seeing if it was on Netflix.

2734:

in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

1271: 371:

No content to worry about. I just came across it when I was assessing new Milhist articles, and realised it was retread. Thanks again.

2278:. I'll freely admit that 80s and early 90s horror has a pretty soft spot in my heart. On a side note, have you ever seen the original 2005:) that are independent of the series and in places Knowledge would consider to be reliable, there's no way that the series would pass 1778: 812: 154: 133: 2346:

especially if it's been abandoned. I've always thought that if I were a bit more bold I'd have really gotten into urban exploration.

1647: 915: 319: 2383: 2327: 2246: 2179: 1587: 879: 863: 200:

Gosh- that was a while ago! I'm glad to see that you're still interested in improving the article! Here's a rundown of the sources:

1893: 2866:

Sure- do you want any of the sources from the previous versions? My only request is that you build it in your userspace first at

2832: 2301:

Not seen those, will add them to my see list. Yeah Repulsion is a really creepy one, 10 Rillington Place too! I highly recommend

1262: 2280: 1963: 621:) have some time to contribute a few thoughts! Your considered and detailed analysis and explanation is very much appreciated. 2816: 955:. I noticed an IP is insistent on altering the reception to be "positive" rather than mixed and erasing the critical reviews. 2853: 2423: 1528: 1417: 546:

Sweet! I'll have to give you a Wiki-beer or a Wiki-kitten. Maybe both! You uh, aren't allergic to gluten or cats are you? XD

2936: 2793: 820: 256: 94: 86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 2238:! Generic slasher type films admittedly don't float my boat but if they're gripping and unpredictable I might like them!♦ 2576: 842: 633: 593: 388: 1523: 1027: 2045:

Interesting. I have read and understood all of your arguments for deletion. Would you kindly take a look at this page:

324: 2808: 2490: 2955: 1331: 1254: 946: 3094: 2234:

also have horror ingredients and are great films. You're most welcome to recommend great films on the talk page of

181: 2575:

After a user named after the Vice President of the Philippines, here comes a user named Iamnancybinay and his/her

1032: 2789: 2723:

issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to

2458: 2262: 2106: 2758:}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url= 1221:

Hmm... I probably meant to, but forgot to move it. I'll restore adn then move it to the proper hoax receptacle.

1715: 1677: 1591: 805: 217: 3010: 1483: 2477: 1804: 1612: 1303: 782: 159: 1856:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

874:

looks like it'd be usable for the most part, although that would probably be something to ask RS/N as well.

124:

I just want to say thanks for proactively protecting my userpage and watching it for vandalism. Keep it up!

3100: 2235: 2102: 1190: 1282:

for his perspective and if he doesn't believe that you've met the issues at AfD, you'd have to go through

2778: 2414: 871: 451: 394: 102: 2023:) per Knowledge's guidelines. Even though you are the producer, posting this without filing a ticket at 911: 804:

Dear Tokyogirl79, thank you for all your contributions to Knowledge, especially your recent creation of

2939:...). Please do let me know. I am keen to learn and thought I had followed all the guidelines. Thanks. 2268: 142: 38: 2532:

blocked for making those extremely unhelpful edits and continually removing the AfD template, though.

3118: 3083: 3031: 2773:

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--

2371: 1491: 1313: 1283: 1072: 1050: 952: 47: 17: 3157: 3142: 2570: 2365: 2342: 2212: 1481:

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can

1138: 1081: 678: 376: 334: 2679: 2631: 2584: 1758: 838: 2905:

Yep- that way you can work on it more at your leisure and make sure that it passes, yada yada.

2802: 2117: 2078: 1800: 1774: 1583: 1161: 316: 2284:? Admittedly slashers aren't my sort of thing, but it was sort of fascinating in its own way. 923: 907: 3130: 3051: 2985: 2951: 2909: 2874: 2704: 2649: 2606: 2536: 2519: 2478: 2445: 2401: 2350: 2288: 2197: 2166: 2139: 2032: 1923: 1825: 1812: 1745: 1694: 1599: 1547: 1434: 1375: 1343: 1290: 1225: 1177: 1126: 979: 933: 887: 702: 550: 502: 436: 416: 357: 303: 290: 271:

source. It can back up some trivial information, but cannot give notability in and of itself.

2486: 2171:

Hi, can you block him? He's just removed the AFD banner and spam edited the article again.♦

1881: 1791:

Hmm... it looks like you did create an article, but it was tagged for a speedy deletion per

866:

are usable, as I can't entirely verify their editorial oversight. I'd run those two through

3076: 3042: 3024: 2943: 2820: 2774: 2315: 1889: 1721: 1665: 1458: 1415: 1397:

Hey Tokyogirl. So, I'm developing and will be piloting a new mentorship space here called

1309: 1277: 1250: 1204: 1065: 1043: 900: 830: 177: 169: 1118:

Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Knowledge, and have a happy and enjoyable

8: 3153: 3138: 2937:

http://www.bigsocietycapital.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Building%20the%20Capacity%20for%

2849: 2157: 2055: 1979: 1368: 1060: 761: 722: 684: 720:

to verify the copyvio and the result given by this tool made me to tag it. Thank you! —

393:

I noticed that you archive your talk page yourself. Out of curiosity, why don't you let

3109: 2828: 2627: 2623: 2596: 2580: 2558: 2498: 1998: 1949: 1906: 1711: 1673: 1238: 528: 480: 459: 402: 150: 129: 2489:

from a blogsite and an unsourced genealogy - probably all by the same person. See the

2363:

Not seen the remake! Anything with Vincent Price is usually pretty good. I still have

2973: 2837: 2468: 2130: 2111: 2091: 2072: 2020: 2015: 2010: 1579: 1560: 1155: 1023: 1000: 960: 372: 348: 330: 313: 268: 2437:

I initially deleted it, but it looks like the content was re-added several times by

1706:

Please provide me which part of the "about us" I violated,, Thanks comment added by

3048: 3001: 2982: 2906: 2871: 2812: 2767: 2701: 2646: 2603: 2533: 2516: 2442: 2398: 2391: 2376: 2347: 2335: 2320: 2285: 2254: 2239: 2194: 2187: 2172: 2136: 2029: 1920: 1809: 1742: 1691: 1635: 1596: 1555:

Tokyogirl79, you are an Admin - advise me. What should I do? Thank you in advance.

1431: 1390: 1372: 1287: 1222: 1174: 976: 930: 884: 772: 746: 699: 652: 623: 583: 547: 518: 499: 470: 433: 413: 354: 287: 3137:

Scratch that. It's a youtube copyvio screenshot. I'll nom it for deletion. Best,

2438: 2415: 2303: 2274: 2218: 1885: 1836: 1643: 1519: 1451: 1425: 1408: 1398: 1391: 1216: 1200: 1094: 875: 858:

are primary, so they still can't show notability. I'm not entirely certain that

851:

Hmmm... some of the sources would be useful, but others still have some issues:

46:

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

2977: 2861: 2845: 2844:

Hi. Can you please un-protect this page title? I'd like to write an article. --

2319:, the carriage appearing in the mist, one of the most atmospheric films ever!♦ 2024: 1880:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow

1845: 1012: 867: 695: 672: 283: 267:

This is the official website and cannot be used to show notability, as it is a

1087: 602: 239: 3105: 2824: 2554: 2510: 2494: 2067: 2006: 1738: 752: 691: 617:

I was hoping you might glace quickly at it over the next couple of days and (

541: 524: 493: 476: 455: 398: 223: 146: 125: 262: 2464: 2002: 1792: 1572: 1556: 1501: 1019: 996: 956: 248: 230: 3125: 1621: 809: 808:. Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, 791: 768: 664: 648: 571: 329:

Thanks, Tokyogirl79. I probably should have just asked an admin. Cheers,

111: 2105:

is where you learn. You can probably just breeze through most of that.

222:

The problem with this is that a lot of people might consider it to be a

1542: 1515: 310:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive265#Threatened with blocks

852: 2838: 2230: 1119: 1105: 855: 3152:

Just to be clear, I nommed the image for deletion, not the article.

2891: 2309: 2224: 2001:) and until the series has receive reception in reliable sources ( 1841: 1478:

Hello, ReaderofthePack. Please check your email; you've got mail!

1430:

Sounds good. I could probably mentor one person during that time.

259:

This one is also usable as a source for obvious reasons: it's ABC.

576:

Hi TG! I not trying to canvass you (I'm really not!) but I think

2742:, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the 1870:# ''Freddy and the French Fries: The Mystery of Silas Finklebean 1363:

this instance is to write a new article in your draftspace (ie,

669:

I actually wasn't the one who deleted the page itself- that was

2549: 1849: 353:

It's no problem- I can userfy the content for you if you like.

2672:

please? Thank you and look forward to hearing from you soon.

2743: 2046: 1148:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Black Feminist Anthropology

3015:

I actually downloaded both films to double-check credits.

1197:

Knowledge:List of hoaxes on Knowledge/Snappy & friends

1553:

now until forever, or such time as he gets his consensus.

3099:

Hello! I wanted to thank you for converting the article

2821:

https://m.facebook.com/AuliaEManikpur/about?expand_all=1

412:(turns red) Because I never thought about doing that... 145:

page instead of on this page. Could you please move it?

2754:

page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=

717: 3129:

back in 2013. Someone just made the director article

2766:

informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with

2210:

Nice one. BTW, if you like horror movies I recommend

2622:

She claims to be the real Binay, see her message on

1244: 975:

backfire on people. I wish they wouldn't do that...

2696:I've restored it and moved it to the draftspace at 2101:Yes there is! I have two links for you, actually. 1852:by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just 1656:

Sapphire International Aviation Academy Deletetion,

1199:? You did link to that page, but it doesn't exist. 2071:and can't be compared to the quality of others. 1638:, rescuing an article created by a troll account. 1919:last try- maybe they'll get it right this time? 1865:List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page: 1195:Tokyo, were you planning on archiving Snappy at 475:Have you figured out how to get it to work yet? 2890:You mean transfer it to mainspace afterwards? 1141:}} to user talk pages with a friendly message. 2749:If you do find a copyright violation, please 1243:Hi Tokyo Girl, You have locked 16 Symbols at 756:response, and showing me how to do this ping! 2718:Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews 1452: 1409: 690:AMN source because it does somewhat hit the 432:How would I go about getting it to do that? 312:, you might want to join in the discussion. 2047:https://en.wikipedia.org/Blue_(web_series) 3133:. Thought you might like to have a look. 2626:. I personally think she is not Binay. -- 600: 2870:and then transfer it to your userspace. 2809:Shaikh Abdul Rashid, Shaiklh Ahmad etc. 2929:Impetus - The Private Equity Foundation 14: 3135:(Maybe COI by the looks of the photo.) 2548:Thanks. Could be. Recent IPs are near 2281:The Last House on the Left (1972 film) 141:Oops; guess I forgot to put it on the 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2746:is very useful for sussing that out.) 1940: 1899:American Orthopsychiatric Association 1839:. I have automatically detected that 3068: 3016: 2663:Deletion of Thick Toast (Hau Dor Si) 1876:'' (Little, Brown and Company, 2006) 1482: 25: 642:Bodrad Sandbox: Abbey Rader Deleted 23: 1471: 1093: 1086: 718:https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios 24: 3173: 2602:of sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry. 2375:is pretty good, you seen that? ♦ 1592:requests for comments noticeboard 1137:Send Halloween cheer by adding {{ 3069: 3017: 1941: 1830: 1620: 790: 601: 110: 29: 2263:Night of the Demons (1988 film) 1245:http://wikipedia.org/16_Symbols 732: 729: 726: 723: 2698:Draft:Thick Toast (Hau Dor Si) 1964:Deletion of Angels in Paradise 1588:dispute resolution noticeboard 806:List of Nancy Drew video games 716:Tokyogirl79, I used the tool, 13: 1: 3147:10:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC) 3114:20:20, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3087:17:00, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3059:09:00, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3035:08:59, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 2993:04:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC) 2917:04:35, 21 November 2014 (UTC) 2901:02:43, 21 November 2014 (UTC) 2882:04:36, 18 November 2014 (UTC) 2854:18:55, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2833:17:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC) 2798:02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC) 2783:02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC) 2712:10:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2684:10:07, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2657:04:35, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2636:04:33, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2614:04:13, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2589:02:49, 17 November 2014 (UTC) 2563:13:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC) 2544:04:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC) 2527:04:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC) 2503:15:47, 13 November 2014 (UTC) 2473:09:16, 14 November 2014 (UTC) 2453:08:07, 14 November 2014 (UTC) 2432:07:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC) 2409:04:41, 12 November 2014 (UTC) 2384:12:25, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2358:12:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2328:12:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2296:12:04, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2247:11:08, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2205:04:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2180:13:12, 10 November 2014 (UTC) 2162:20:34, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2147:04:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 2123:09:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC) 1956:04:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 1931:04:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 1913:04:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC) 1805:Knowledge:WikiProject Hip hop 1529:The Armorial Register Limited 1407:can get folks to help teach. 3162:13:39, 1 December 2014 (UTC) 3101:The Little Chapel That Stood 3077: 3025: 2823:, but may not be a copyvio. 2236:User:Dr. Blofeld/Great films 2103:Knowledge:Your first article 2084:20:22, 9 November 2014 (UTC) 2060:20:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC) 2040:07:47, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 1984:07:34, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 1894:14:18, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 1820:04:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 1779:15:21, 7 November 2014 (UTC) 1753:04:45, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 1726:02:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC) 1702:10:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC) 1682:10:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC) 1648:12:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC) 1607:05:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC) 1565:19:45, 5 November 2014 (UTC) 1524:22:36, 5 November 2014 (UTC) 1487:at any time by removing the 1461:06:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC) 1442:05:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC) 1418:05:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC) 1383:04:32, 5 November 2014 (UTC) 1348:07:09, 4 November 2014 (UTC) 1318:05:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC) 1298:03:58, 28 October 2014 (UTC) 1263:11:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 1233:03:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC) 1209:17:04, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 1185:03:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC) 1167:23:08, 26 October 2014 (UTC) 1130:06:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC) 1076:19:11, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 1066: 1054:11:12, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 1044: 1028:16:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 1005:09:19, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 987:09:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC) 965:05:44, 24 October 2014 (UTC) 941:05:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 916:05:26, 25 October 2014 (UTC) 895:10:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC) 821:Recreation of a deleted page 813:04:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC) 777:22:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 738:13:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC) 710:21:33, 12 October 2014 (UTC) 657:20:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC) 634:11:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 594:09:31, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 558:05:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 533:05:05, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 510:04:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC) 485:19:11, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 464:06:22, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 444:03:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 424:03:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 407:00:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 381:10:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 365:09:39, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 339:09:36, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 320:19:28, 10 October 2014 (UTC) 7: 2152:Much appreciated you guys! 452:User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo 395:User:Lowercase sigmabot III 389:Archiving on your talk page 325:Cheers. Re: Seizo Ishikawa 308:You have been mentioned at 298:04:43, 8 October 2014 (UTC) 186:07:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC) 155:21:16, 6 October 2014 (UTC) 134:21:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC) 10: 3178: 2790:MediaWiki message delivery 2269:The Changeling (1980 film) 1882:these opt-out instructions 1330:An editor has asked for a 2372:The Uninvited (1944 film) 1619: 1274:, you'd have to also ask 953:Truth or Dare (2013 film) 947:Truth or Dare (2013 film) 789: 611:The Barnstar of Diligence 607: 282:establish notability via 109: 18:User talk:ReaderofthePack 3095:Little Chapel that Stood 2868:User:MZMcBride/ClassDojo 2819:. The diff is a copy of 2343:The Haunting (1963 film) 2213:Black Sunday (1960 film) 2107:WP:Articles for creation 1661:from that page. Thanks 2459:Watchlisted, will watch 1858:my operator's talk page 3123:Hello! :) You started 1536:U.S. Heraldic Registry 1476: 1098: 1091: 3131:James Cullen Bressack 2732:hallmarks of copyvios 2479:Muhibullah Allahabadi 1797:Draft:Blvck Amsterdam 1628:The Writer's Barnstar 1475: 1365:Draft:Abhijeet Thakar 1308:thanks. Added to AfD. 1304:coolhouse productions 1139:subst:Happy Halloween 1097: 1090: 1033:I'd like your opinion 870:to know for certain. 798:The Writer's Barnstar 224:self-published source 160:The Night Party draft 42:of past discussions. 2927:Deletion review for 2316:The Phantom Carriage 2014:sources or at best, 1848:may have broken the 1323:Deletion review for 1191:Snappy & friends 118:The Special Barnstar 3011:Mummy, I'm a Zombie 2491:latest set of edits 1613:A barnstar for you! 1061:How to be a Redhead 783:A barnstar for you! 103:A barnstar for you! 2624:User_talk:Mcmatter 2068:Other stuff exists 1484:remove this notice 1477: 1143: 1116:Hello Tokyogirl79: 1112: 1099: 1092: 951:I saw you created 450:Take a look here: 3119:New director stub 2960: 2946:comment added by 1685: 1668:comment added by 1653: 1652: 1634:for your work at 1253:comment added by 1142: 1135: 1100: 1059:Well, it's live: 1037:...Before I take 1003: 963: 847: 833:comment added by 818: 817: 639: 638: 619:*fingers crossed* 277: 276: 189: 172:comment added by 139: 138: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3169: 3079: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3055: 3046: 3027: 3022: 3021: 3020: 3005: 2989: 2970: 2959: 2940: 2913: 2898: 2878: 2865: 2813:Mohammadi Fayyaz 2708: 2695: 2653: 2610: 2600: 2571:Username madness 2540: 2523: 2514: 2449: 2405: 2395: 2381: 2354: 2339: 2325: 2292: 2258: 2244: 2201: 2191: 2177: 2143: 2134: 2095: 2036: 1995: 1954: 1952: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1927: 1911: 1909: 1875: 1861: 1834: 1833: 1816: 1790: 1749: 1728: 1698: 1684: 1662: 1636:The Russell Girl 1624: 1617: 1616: 1603: 1590:and also at the 1576: 1548:NorthAmerica1000 1508: 1506: 1500: 1496: 1490: 1486: 1474: 1456: 1438: 1429: 1413: 1379: 1361: 1294: 1281: 1265: 1229: 1220: 1181: 1136: 1109: 1082:Halloween cheer! 1068: 1046: 999: 983: 959: 937: 927: 891: 846: 827: 794: 787: 786: 765: 750: 734: 731: 728: 725: 706: 688: 676: 668: 630: 628: 605: 598: 597: 590: 588: 554: 545: 522: 506: 497: 474: 440: 420: 361: 352: 294: 264:Official website 205: 204: 199: 188: 166: 114: 107: 106: 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3177: 3176: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3121: 3097: 3070: 3053: 3043:MichaelQSchmidt 3040: 3018: 3013: 2999: 2987: 2964: 2941: 2932: 2911: 2892: 2876: 2859: 2842: 2805: 2775:Fuhghettaboutit 2744:Wayback Machine 2720: 2706: 2689: 2665: 2651: 2608: 2594: 2573: 2538: 2521: 2508: 2487:copyvio picture 2482: 2461: 2447: 2424:183.171.180.173 2420: 2403: 2389: 2377: 2369:to see though! 2352: 2333: 2321: 2290: 2252: 2240: 2199: 2185: 2173: 2169: 2141: 2128: 2089: 2034: 1989: 1966: 1950: 1947: 1942: 1925: 1907: 1904: 1901: 1871: 1840: 1831: 1828: 1814: 1801:WP:NOTINHERITED 1784: 1761: 1759:Blvck Amsterdam 1747: 1719: 1696: 1663: 1658: 1615: 1601: 1584:WP:THIRDOPINION 1570: 1531: 1509: 1504: 1498: 1494: 1492:You've got mail 1488: 1480: 1472: 1436: 1423: 1395: 1377: 1355: 1336:Abhijeet-Thakar 1332:deletion review 1328: 1325:Abhijeet Thakar 1310:CerealKillerYum 1306: 1292: 1284:deletion review 1278:Salvio giuliano 1275: 1248: 1241: 1227: 1214: 1193: 1179: 1151: 1144: 1103: 1084: 1035: 1015: 981: 949: 935: 921: 903: 889: 864:Franchise India 828: 823: 785: 759: 744: 704: 682: 670: 662: 644: 626: 624: 586: 584: 574: 552: 539: 516: 504: 491: 468: 438: 418: 397:do it for you? 391: 359: 346: 327: 306: 292: 278: 210: 193: 167: 162: 105: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3175: 3165: 3164: 3154:Anna Frodesiak 3139:Anna Frodesiak 3120: 3117: 3096: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3062: 3061: 3012: 3009: 3008: 3007: 2996: 2995: 2931: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2885: 2884: 2841: 2836: 2804: 2803:Thanks, but... 2801: 2761: 2757: 2740:from the draft 2727:in particular. 2719: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2664: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2638: 2617: 2616: 2572: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2529: 2481: 2476: 2460: 2457: 2456: 2455: 2419: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2361: 2360: 2304:Don't Look Now 2299: 2298: 2275:Trick 'r Treat 2219:Don't Look Now 2208: 2207: 2168: 2165: 2150: 2149: 2125: 2087: 2086: 2043: 2042: 1965: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1934: 1933: 1900: 1897: 1878: 1877: 1867: 1866: 1846:David Baldacci 1827: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1760: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1729: 1724:comment added 1704: 1657: 1654: 1651: 1650: 1631: 1630: 1625: 1614: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1554: 1551: 1539: 1530: 1527: 1479: 1470: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1445: 1444: 1394: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1327: 1321: 1305: 1302: 1301: 1300: 1240: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1192: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1150: 1145: 1134: 1133: 1124: 1117: 1113: 1085: 1083: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1041:live. Thanks, 1034: 1031: 1014: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 990: 989: 948: 945: 944: 943: 924:Walter Görlitz 908:Walter Görlitz 902: 899: 898: 897: 880:Economic Times 822: 819: 816: 815: 801: 800: 795: 784: 781: 780: 779: 762:Cutest Penguin 757: 741: 740: 713: 712: 685:Cutest Penguin 643: 640: 637: 636: 614: 613: 608: 606: 573: 570: 569: 568: 567: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 561: 560: 536: 535: 513: 512: 447: 446: 427: 426: 390: 387: 386: 385: 384: 383: 368: 367: 326: 323: 305: 302: 301: 300: 275: 274: 273: 272: 260: 254: 246: 237: 228: 219:Raw Roots Rock 212: 211: 208: 203: 202: 201: 161: 158: 137: 136: 121: 120: 115: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3174: 3163: 3159: 3155: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3128: 3127: 3116: 3115: 3111: 3107: 3102: 3088: 3085: 3084: 3081: 3080: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3060: 3057: 3056: 3050: 3044: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3033: 3032: 3029: 3028: 3003: 2998: 2997: 2994: 2991: 2990: 2984: 2979: 2975: 2968: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2957: 2953: 2949: 2945: 2938: 2930: 2918: 2915: 2914: 2908: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2899: 2897: 2896: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2883: 2880: 2879: 2873: 2869: 2863: 2858: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2840: 2835: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2822: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2800: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2786: 2784: 2780: 2776: 2771: 2769: 2763: 2760:URL of source 2759: 2756:URL of source 2755: 2752: 2747: 2745: 2741: 2735: 2733: 2728: 2726: 2713: 2710: 2709: 2703: 2699: 2693: 2692:Stevenwai1217 2688: 2687: 2686: 2685: 2681: 2677: 2676:Stevenwai1217 2673: 2669: 2658: 2655: 2654: 2648: 2643: 2642: 2637: 2633: 2629: 2628:Carlojoseph14 2625: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2615: 2612: 2611: 2605: 2598: 2597:Carlojoseph14 2593: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2586: 2582: 2581:Carlojoseph14 2578: 2564: 2560: 2556: 2551: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2542: 2541: 2535: 2530: 2528: 2525: 2524: 2518: 2512: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2504: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2488: 2480: 2475: 2474: 2470: 2466: 2454: 2451: 2450: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2429: 2425: 2417: 2410: 2407: 2406: 2400: 2393: 2388: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2382: 2380: 2374: 2373: 2368: 2367: 2359: 2356: 2355: 2349: 2344: 2337: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2326: 2324: 2318: 2317: 2312: 2311: 2306: 2305: 2297: 2294: 2293: 2287: 2283: 2282: 2277: 2276: 2271: 2270: 2265: 2264: 2256: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2245: 2243: 2237: 2233: 2232: 2227: 2226: 2221: 2220: 2216:! Films like 2215: 2214: 2206: 2203: 2202: 2196: 2189: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2178: 2176: 2167:Usaidfarooqui 2164: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2148: 2145: 2144: 2138: 2132: 2126: 2124: 2121: 2120: 2115: 2114: 2108: 2104: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2093: 2085: 2082: 2081: 2076: 2075: 2069: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2057: 2053: 2048: 2041: 2038: 2037: 2031: 2026: 2022: 2017: 2012: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1993: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1981: 1977: 1973: 1970: 1957: 1953: 1951:FreeRangeFrog 1938: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1932: 1929: 1928: 1922: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1910: 1908:FreeRangeFrog 1896: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1874: 1869: 1868: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1859: 1855: 1854:edit the page 1851: 1847: 1843: 1838: 1826:November 2014 1821: 1818: 1817: 1811: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1794: 1788: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1765: 1754: 1751: 1750: 1744: 1740: 1736: 1735: 1730: 1727: 1723: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1703: 1700: 1699: 1693: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1632: 1629: 1626: 1623: 1618: 1608: 1605: 1604: 1598: 1593: 1589: 1585: 1581: 1574: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1562: 1558: 1549: 1544: 1537: 1526: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1512: 1503: 1493: 1485: 1469: 1462: 1459: 1457: 1455: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1443: 1440: 1439: 1433: 1427: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1416: 1414: 1412: 1405: 1400: 1393: 1384: 1381: 1380: 1374: 1370: 1366: 1359: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1326: 1320: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1299: 1296: 1295: 1289: 1285: 1279: 1273: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1246: 1234: 1231: 1230: 1224: 1218: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1206: 1202: 1198: 1186: 1183: 1182: 1176: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1165: 1164: 1159: 1158: 1149: 1140: 1132: 1131: 1128: 1123: 1121: 1111: 1110: 1107: 1096: 1089: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1070: 1069: 1062: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1052: 1051: 1048: 1047: 1040: 1030: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1006: 1002: 998: 994: 993: 992: 991: 988: 985: 984: 978: 974: 969: 968: 967: 966: 962: 958: 954: 942: 939: 938: 932: 925: 920: 919: 918: 917: 913: 909: 896: 893: 892: 886: 881: 877: 873: 869: 865: 861: 857: 854: 850: 849: 848: 844: 840: 836: 835:Interactanand 832: 814: 811: 807: 803: 802: 799: 796: 793: 788: 778: 774: 770: 763: 758: 754: 748: 743: 742: 739: 736: 735: 719: 715: 714: 711: 708: 707: 701: 697: 693: 686: 680: 674: 666: 661: 660: 659: 658: 654: 650: 635: 632: 631: 620: 616: 615: 612: 609: 604: 599: 596: 595: 592: 591: 579: 559: 556: 555: 549: 543: 538: 537: 534: 530: 526: 520: 515: 514: 511: 508: 507: 501: 495: 490: 489: 488: 487: 486: 482: 478: 472: 467: 466: 465: 461: 457: 453: 449: 448: 445: 442: 441: 435: 431: 430: 429: 428: 425: 422: 421: 415: 411: 410: 409: 408: 404: 400: 396: 382: 378: 374: 370: 369: 366: 363: 362: 356: 350: 345: 344: 343: 342: 341: 340: 336: 332: 322: 321: 318: 315: 311: 304:AN discussion 299: 296: 295: 289: 285: 280: 279: 270: 266: 265: 261: 258: 255: 252: 251: 247: 243: 242: 238: 234: 233: 229: 225: 221: 220: 216: 215: 214: 213: 207: 206: 197: 192: 191: 190: 187: 183: 179: 175: 171: 157: 156: 152: 148: 144: 135: 131: 127: 123: 122: 119: 116: 113: 108: 96: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3134: 3124: 3122: 3098: 3082: 3075: 3052: 3030: 3023: 3014: 2986: 2942:— Preceding 2933: 2910: 2894: 2893: 2875: 2843: 2806: 2787: 2772: 2768:weasel words 2764: 2750: 2748: 2739: 2736: 2729: 2724: 2721: 2705: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2650: 2607: 2574: 2537: 2520: 2483: 2462: 2446: 2421: 2402: 2378: 2370: 2366:House of Wax 2364: 2362: 2351: 2322: 2314: 2308: 2302: 2300: 2289: 2279: 2273: 2267: 2261: 2241: 2229: 2223: 2217: 2211: 2209: 2198: 2174: 2170: 2151: 2140: 2131:Dennis Brown 2118: 2112: 2092:Dennis Brown 2088: 2079: 2073: 2044: 2033: 1974: 1971: 1967: 1924: 1902: 1879: 1872: 1829: 1813: 1787:Kingmarcus88 1771:Kingmarcus88 1769: 1766: 1762: 1746: 1733: 1732: 1720:— Preceding 1695: 1664:— Preceding 1659: 1627: 1600: 1532: 1513: 1510: 1467: 1453: 1435: 1410: 1404:sign up here 1396: 1376: 1329: 1307: 1291: 1249:— Preceding 1242: 1226: 1194: 1178: 1162: 1156: 1152: 1127:NorthAmerica 1115: 1114: 1102: 1101: 1071: 1064: 1049: 1042: 1036: 1016: 980: 972: 950: 934: 904: 901:October 2014 888: 860:Elets Online 829:— Preceding 824: 797: 721: 703: 645: 622: 618: 610: 582: 575: 551: 503: 437: 417: 392: 377:send... over 373:Peacemaker67 358: 349:Peacemaker67 335:send... over 331:Peacemaker67 328: 307: 291: 263: 249: 240: 232:Mess + Noise 231: 218: 168:— Preceding 163: 140: 117: 75: 43: 37: 3126:To Jennifer 3049:Tokyogirl79 3002:Tokyogirl79 2983:Tokyogirl79 2967:Awesomelisa 2948:Awesomelisa 2907:Tokyogirl79 2872:Tokyogirl79 2702:Tokyogirl79 2647:Tokyogirl79 2604:Tokyogirl79 2534:Tokyogirl79 2517:Tokyogirl79 2443:Tokyogirl79 2399:Tokyogirl79 2392:Dr. Blofeld 2379:Dr. Blofeld 2348:Tokyogirl79 2336:Dr. Blofeld 2323:Dr. Blofeld 2286:Tokyogirl79 2255:Dr. Blofeld 2242:Dr. Blofeld 2195:Tokyogirl79 2188:Dr. Blofeld 2175:Dr. Blofeld 2137:Tokyogirl79 2030:Tokyogirl79 1999:WP:ITEXISTS 1972:Thank you. 1921:Tokyogirl79 1835:Hello, I'm 1810:Tokyogirl79 1743:Tokyogirl79 1692:Tokyogirl79 1597:Tokyogirl79 1454:I, JethroBT 1432:Tokyogirl79 1411:I, JethroBT 1373:Tokyogirl79 1358:Rohanthakar 1340:Rohanthakar 1288:Tokyogirl79 1255:103.1.80.15 1223:Tokyogirl79 1175:Tokyogirl79 977:Tokyogirl79 931:Tokyogirl79 885:Tokyogirl79 872:News Square 747:Tokyogirl79 700:Tokyogirl79 548:Tokyogirl79 519:Tokyogirl79 500:Tokyogirl79 471:Tokyogirl79 434:Tokyogirl79 414:Tokyogirl79 355:Tokyogirl79 288:Tokyogirl79 36:This is an 2974:WP:COPYVIO 2788:Sent via-- 2493:. Thanks, 2439:Radiopathy 2416:Radiopathy 2021:WP:COPYVIO 2016:WP:TRIVIAL 2011:WP:PRIMARY 1939:Okeydokey 1886:BracketBot 1884:. Thanks, 1837:BracketBot 1580:WP:PRIMARY 1426:I JethroBT 1239:16 Symbols 1217:Oiyarbepsy 1201:Oiyarbepsy 269:WP:PRIMARY 236:Knowledge. 196:Mangonorth 174:Mangonorth 95:Archive 20 87:Archive 15 82:Archive 14 76:Archive 13 70:Archive 12 65:Archive 11 60:Archive 10 3078:Schmidt, 3026:Schmidt, 2862:MZMcBride 2846:MZMcBride 2839:ClassDojo 2817:this diff 2811:See also 2231:Repulsion 2154:M.osman07 2052:M.osman07 1992:M.osman07 1976:M.osman07 1842:your edit 1767:thanks, 1507:template. 1399:the Co-op 1120:Halloween 1106:Halloween 1067:Schmidt, 1045:Schmidt, 856:two links 679:this page 673:Jimfbleak 143:barnstars 3106:MelanieN 2956:contribs 2944:unsigned 2825:Aymatth2 2555:Aymatth2 2511:Aymatth2 2495:Aymatth2 2418:userpage 2310:The Omen 2225:The Omen 1716:contribs 1708:Gmxian89 1678:contribs 1670:Gmxian89 1666:unsigned 1392:WP:Co-op 1251:unsigned 883:via G4. 876:WP:INDIA 843:contribs 831:unsigned 578:this AFD 542:Gparyani 525:Gparyani 494:Gparyani 477:Gparyani 456:Gparyani 399:Gparyani 182:contribs 170:unsigned 147:Gparyani 126:Gparyani 3054:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2988:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2978:WP:ORTS 2912:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2877:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2707:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2652:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2609:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2539:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2522:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2465:Shirt58 2448:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2404:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2353:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2291:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2200:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2142:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2127:Thanks 2035:(｡◕‿◕｡) 2025:WP:ORTS 1926:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1815:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1748:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1722:undated 1697:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1602:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1573:Kiltpin 1557:Kiltpin 1437:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1378:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1369:resumes 1293:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1228:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1180:(｡◕‿◕｡) 1020:Peridon 1018:stuff. 997:Stickee 982:(｡◕‿◕｡) 957:Stickee 936:(｡◕‿◕｡) 890:(｡◕‿◕｡) 868:WP:RS/N 733:Penguin 705:(｡◕‿◕｡) 696:WP:RS/N 553:(｡◕‿◕｡) 505:(｡◕‿◕｡) 439:(｡◕‿◕｡) 419:(｡◕‿◕｡) 360:(｡◕‿◕｡) 317:Snowman 293:(｡◕‿◕｡) 284:WP:BAND 241:YouTube 39:archive 2751:do not 2550:Washim 2272:, and 2113:Dennis 2074:Dennis 2007:WP:GNG 1850:syntax 1739:WP:COI 1640:Avono♂ 1157:Dennis 1104:Happy 1013:Thanks 1001:(talk) 973:really 961:(talk) 810:Anupam 769:Bodrad 753:WP:SPS 692:WP:SPS 665:Bodrad 649:Bodrad 2003:WP:RS 1793:WP:A7 1543:SR-7v 1516:SR-7v 853:these 629:lwart 589:lwart 314:Giant 209:Title 16:< 3158:talk 3143:talk 3110:talk 2952:talk 2850:talk 2829:talk 2815:and 2794:talk 2779:talk 2680:talk 2632:talk 2585:talk 2579:. -- 2577:edit 2559:talk 2499:talk 2469:talk 2428:talk 2228:and 2158:talk 2056:talk 1980:talk 1890:talk 1775:talk 1712:talk 1674:talk 1644:talk 1561:talk 1520:talk 1468:== 1344:talk 1314:talk 1272:here 1259:talk 1205:talk 1039:THIS 1024:talk 912:talk 839:talk 773:talk 653:talk 529:talk 481:talk 460:talk 403:talk 250:Beat 178:talk 151:talk 130:talk 2895:Lor 2762:}}. 2725:you 1844:to 1734:not 1718:) 1511:== 1502:ygm 1497:or 1334:of 1125:– 862:or 727:ute 572:AFD 257:ABC 227:it. 3160:) 3145:) 3112:) 3104:-- 2958:) 2954:• 2852:) 2831:) 2796:) 2781:) 2682:) 2634:) 2587:) 2561:) 2501:) 2471:) 2463:-- 2430:) 2307:, 2266:, 2222:, 2160:) 2135:! 2119:2¢ 2116:- 2080:2¢ 2077:- 2058:) 1982:) 1892:) 1777:) 1714:• 1680:) 1676:• 1646:) 1563:) 1522:) 1514:-- 1505:}} 1499:{{ 1495:}} 1489:{{ 1346:) 1316:) 1286:. 1261:) 1207:) 1163:2¢ 1160:- 1063:. 1026:) 914:) 845:) 841:• 775:) 730:st 681:. 655:) 625:St 585:St 531:) 483:) 462:) 454:. 405:) 379:) 337:) 184:) 180:• 153:) 132:) 91:→ 3156:( 3141:( 3108:( 3045:: 3041:@ 3004:: 3000:@ 2972:( 2969:: 2965:@ 2950:( 2864:: 2860:@ 2848:( 2827:( 2792:( 2785:. 2777:( 2694:: 2690:@ 2678:( 2630:( 2599:: 2595:@ 2583:( 2557:( 2513:: 2509:@ 2497:( 2467:( 2426:( 2394:: 2390:@ 2338:: 2334:@ 2257:: 2253:@ 2190:: 2186:@ 2156:( 2133:: 2129:@ 2094:: 2090:@ 2054:( 2019:( 1994:: 1990:@ 1978:( 1948:§ 1905:§ 1888:( 1873:] 1860:. 1789:: 1785:@ 1773:( 1710:( 1672:( 1642:( 1575:: 1571:@ 1559:( 1518:( 1428:: 1424:@ 1360:: 1356:@ 1342:( 1312:( 1280:: 1276:@ 1257:( 1219:: 1215:@ 1203:( 1122:! 1108:! 1022:( 926:: 922:@ 910:( 837:( 771:( 764:: 760:@ 749:: 745:@ 724:C 687:: 683:@ 675:: 671:@ 667:: 663:@ 651:( 627:★ 587:★ 544:: 540:@ 527:( 521:: 517:@ 496:: 492:@ 479:( 473:: 469:@ 458:( 401:( 375:( 351:: 347:@ 333:( 198:: 194:@ 176:( 149:( 128:( 50:.

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

Index