1019:
in that locality and then complained to me about it. That makes zero sense to me, and as such I will just ignore any direction you give because I cannot respect your opinion. If you genuinely believed the word fuck should not be used in an edit summary, even when somebody has added something to a page that has fuck all to do with the subject matter, you would not go ahead and use it yourself. As you did use the word fuck I have to assume that you are both ok with using the word fuck and with others seeing the word fuck in an edit summary. There is not really another interpretation that makes sense to me. To argue that you can be profane so long as you slap quotation marks around words is "fuck all" sense. I think in reality you yourself realise that to be true. So why the hypocrisy? Just another standard wikipedia admin eh.--
1792:(OK, that was a bit exaggerated, but admins generally prefer caution and PROD and AFD are more cautious paths.) In the Joshua Wood case, the claims of film production, acting in some well known movies (even as an extra), and entries in some well-known databases left me feeling that there was an "assertion" of notability, even though it was weak. In those cases, I give the article a temporary reprieve so that people can have a chance to review the matter more deeply. The extra wait for a deletion which seems inevitable anyway may be a bit frustrating, but I hope you will be understanding of some of the thought processes which go on for an admin at CSD. By the way, thanks for tagging the article and notifying us.
2286:
the ArbCom case you refer to either Your points concerning that the AFD nominator has possible political motivations behind what he is doing is not relevant either. I am in no way any friend of
Creationism or its related pseudosciences (and I believe that interpreting biblical stories as an accurate and literal description of history and science is harmful to all education), but dismissing everything JJB says because he is a WND contributor is wrong. His arguments, like everyone else's, are evaluated according to the merit of the specific argument, not the political position of the person making them. Your third point, which relates to notability, is an argument which has merit only if the
2643:
learned a few lessons from reading the DRV debate, and there are things I would have written differently in the closing rationale (for instance, I would have given some more explanation on why I did not close it as a "keep but rephrase"). I cannot say I regret the deletion outcome, because I felt, and still feel, that the concerns over the template's vagueness and lack of beneficial effects were not adequately addressed by the keep vote.
326:
2245:
for the list, GRG, was not a reliable. The only keep voter who, to his credit, mentioned sources at all was
Thecheesykid, but even he did not consider the reliability of the source. The arguments that this seems to be a regular almanac entry, and that the material is better in list form than individual articles seem rather irrelevant unless the sourcing issue is addressed. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
2055:
1087:
2415:
yet you think those !votes are more convincing? That's conflicting logic. That said (or "ranted"), I would like to ask you to re-think your close and change it to something that reflects the consensus of the debate, i.e. "keep but change" or "no consensus". A number of people arguing for deletion have agreed that the template can be useful if changed and we should not delete something that can be made to work. Regards
2594:
2636:"My other concern, however, is just as strong: this decision will end up increasing the power of Admins, who will inevitably move away from a role of implementing community consensus and towards a role of arbitrating discussions. That, I believe, is a negative trend that would extend the power structures on Knowledge and move us away from the flat structured community that has been the foundation of our success."
1776:, and admins are usually eager to go through them quickly, and will only make a superficial 30-second long review before deciding whether to speedy delete right there, or whether to defer the decision to the community. If there is reasonable doubt over speedy deletion, they will decline it, because speedy deleting something wrongly will upset people so much that they complain at
1876:, a band with no assertions of significance. From what I saw on the page, the artilce consisted of the band's members and songs, there were only claims by the band itself of being the best rap group in Iran. With no evidence of having sold any releases, or any well-known performances, the article seems to fall short of those standards. Generally,
1566:
even. Had I seen the AFD and voted in it, I would probably have voted to delete the article. However, at DRV, I am wearing a slightly different hat, where my vote is based on how I interpret the consensus of the AFD: that is, was there a consensus that an article on the incident should be deleted? In my view, the answer to that was "no".
445:
are readily sourceable, but it did worry me that I had to make a few factual corrections to several of them (nothing really serious or libellous, but worrying nonetheless). One article was an utter hoax which I prod-ed and which
Decltype speedy-deleted; that one really ought to have been discovered sooner.
2467:
Regarding the "keep but change" option, I did mention it in the penultimate sentence: "Some of the concerns mentioned could be addressed by a different template (for example, a template a required parameter to specify what with the article needs expanding), but that would be a different template from
2433:
Thanks for your comments. I can see where you are coming from, because I did indeed make judgements of the arguments presented. There is certainly a fine line between such judgement and entering a consensus-ignoring "supervote", because both of them consist of the closer making an opinion. I am fully
2244:
The result was delete. At "vote count" we have 5 delete vs. 3 keep (in a "normal" case with reasonable arguments on both sides this is borderlining on rough consensus), but what is compelling in this particular case is a lack of reliable sourcing for the list. It was well argued that the main source
1771:
I agree with all the points you make as to why the article should be deleted. However for a speedy deletion, there needs to be "no assertion of notability", and a mere assertion is a really weak requirement. I'll let you in on a little secret about how admins work with CSD: There are typically scores
1565:
which agree with what you are saying. However, if you are referring to my "overturn and move" vote on the DRV, I am not sure how that affects the argument. I have already opined that Steven Slater should not have a biography due to BLP1E. I am sceptical about having a separate article on the incident
1451:
You're welcome! I think we may disagree a bit on how important these particular bilateral relations are, but I wasn't really in much doubt on how to close it when I see a rough balance in arguments and suppor. Still, some summary for long and/or contentious debates is something which I usually try to
753:
In a working example of CDA; ater the 'discussion and polling phase' is over, if the "rule of thumb" baseline percentage for
Support votes has been reached, the bureaucrats can start to decide whether to desysop an admin, based in part on the evidence of the prior debate. This 'baseline' has now been
444:
BTW, The last prod-notices have been because I have taken some arbitrary picking of (mostly) Norwegians in the unreffed BLP category to get an idea of what is there and give my small contribution to fix them up if worth fixing. It is a mixed bag. Most of the articles on
Norwegians I have found so far
2642:
This is a sensitive area: how do you distinguish between "careful weighing of the arguments" and "dictatorial supervotes"? The rationale on the TFD, with an analysis of several of the arguments presented, was an attempt to demonstrate that I was doing the former rather than the latter. Still, I have
2478:
template for use on top of articles, only a template which asks for expansion without saying what and why. However, the work required following a "keep but reword" result would also be very complicated, perhaps more so than the "delete this template, then create a new reworded template which is used
2285:
I have reviewed the close again, and I have decided not to restore it. You are, of course, free to appeal to WP:DRV. Concerning your points, none of the AFD participants did anything to defend the reliability of GRG as a source, and the link you gave me is also from the GRG website. I could not find
440:
Perhaps, but I haven't run a search of Google sources to see if the institution is notable or not. Institutions often have more impact than the employees, including the leader, which explains why we have many articles on high schools but few on principals. Whether this institution is notable or not,
2373:
Thanks. I fully expect to receive mixed feedback on this one, with so much participation closing something which is roughly balanced on vote count is bound to be somewhat controversial. There are several people who voted "keep" whom I have the utmost respect for, and I can understand it if they are
1192:
pages, and I cannot see that Alefbe has operated other accounts. Please show me the evidence. You say that the edit wars are the other person's fault, because the other person won't engage in constructive discussion. But I cannot see that you tried opening any discussion on the
Tabaristan talkpage.
1018:
You were using profanity, you wrote fuck in an edit summary. By writing fuck in the edit summary you were using the word. You then told me off for using the word fuck in an edit summary, even though you had just used the word fuck yourself. In this context you doubled the proliferation of profanity
2498:
Thought I'd weigh in as well. I thought your rationale was very well-considered and well-thought-out. I support your decision, and I'm glad that you considered the merit behind the arguments and not just the !vote count. I'll be interested to see how it fares at DRV. Although I didn't !vote on the
2414:
be that the template is kept but changed to address concerns, yet you closed it as delete which I don't think reflects consensus. Many "delete" arguments were based on rationales like "use stub tags instead" or "states the obvious" and you yourself say that it's for "articles which are not stubs",
1213:
Hi and Sorry, I dont know where to send you a message so I quickly added it here for you to find. Anyway, I was wondering if you would kindly just send me the code of the
Haunted Games page which you deleted on the 23rd of March 2010. Because I spent hours writing that code for my business. Thanks
358:
New editors' lack of understanding of
Knowledge processes has resulted in thousands of BLPs being created over the last few years that do not meet BLP requirements. We are currently seeking constructive proposals on how to help newcomers better understand what is expected, and how to improve some
2451:
was needed and useful, and going through some of the examples given was necessary to determine the merit of that argument. I did my very best to be objective about those examples. Two of the examples had already replaced the template with something more specific, and two more examples were clear
754:
slightly-adjusted to 65% (from 70%) per VOTE 1. VOTE 2 was asking if there is a ballpark area where the community consensus is so strong, that the bureaucrats should consider desysopping 'automatically'. This 'threshold' was set at 80%, and could change pending agreement on the VOTE 2 results.
675:
I have in one sense always been aware of those templates (although that I will confess that I never used them), but in this case I was a bit unsure as to whether there really was a "consensus" to merge (Starblind, who appears to be the one who put the most thought into the matter, went for an
2264:
3. This article was continent-wide in scope. It beggars belief that one would consider an entire continent not notable when it comes to longevity records. Also, given the fact that the systems of recordkeeping 100+ years ago were mostly not reliable in places like Africa, yet there were some
2167:
I believe you were instrumental in deleting the 'List of South
American supercentenarians'. Unfortunately there were some primary source references on that page that I require for a research project. Has the deleted page been archived in some way so that I can get access to those references?
1943:
may have contributed to that impression, because it is from those versions that the article takes a decidedly promotional tone. I see that the (considerably shorter) versions of
December 24, 2009 seem to be OK in that respect, even though there is room for improvement in the writing and
40:
I do not respond to every message (most notably RFA thank you notices), although I normally reply to requests and questions. Sometimes I am unable or do not have the time to do so (or I see that the problem has already been fixed). If I don't respond to your posting, please forgive
1880:
gives advice on the kind of things we look for in music bands before they are considered notable enough for Knowledge; these criteria are more restrictive than the A7 criteria for speedy deletion, but they give a good idea of what type of material will be ultimately included.
1896:
I see what you mean. However, a few months ago I believe when I visited the page such information did exist. There is a possibility that someone might have deleted it. In that case, wouldn't be more appropriate to revert the changes by any chance? Thanks for the response.
259:
Perhaps some time in the future, but the the mass redirection I made with these articles was in the slow "manual" manner (aided by multitabbing, but still tedious). At the moment I'm a bit short on time for wiki-activity I'm afraid. Thanks for redirecting what you can. :-)
827:
Since the poll, it has been suggested that ambiguity in the term "none at all" could have affected some of the votes. Consequently there has been no consensus over what percentage to settle on, or how to create a new compromise percentage. The poll results are summarised
114:. If you need something done which needs admin tools, and it's uncontroversial, I'll do my best to be at your service. If it's an action which would be controversial, or which needs some sort of community discussion beforehand, I'll direct you to the appropriate forum.
2251:
1. It was NOT well argued that the GRG is not a reliable source. In fact, it was decided in a 2007 ArbCom decision that the GRG is, indeed, a reliable source...and in fact, the GRG is listed in Guinness World Records, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, etc.
29:
Ordinarily, any comments placed here will stay, and only simple vandalism will be reverted. If you wish to make a personal attack against me it will stay for everyone to see. Someone else will judge whether an attack says more about you or about me however.
1059:
2260:
2. JJBulten is an anti-science advocate for a political website, WorldNetDaily. He is on a "crusade" to destroy the scientific view that humans live to only about 115 years (122 max), not "950" or "969" as Noah and Methuselah are reported in the Bible.
1999:
where there appears to be consensus. I wanted to invite a small number of people to look at it before figuring out a next step (whether that's to invite more people, to work on another RFC, or to scrap what I've written altogether). Take a look at
1341:
As such, is it still possible for you to access the article and send me the information? I am not planning on putting it up on Knowledge but probably set up a separate website. It would helpful to both me and the IONA debating circuit as a whole.
698:
1157:, So talking with who doesn't consider it as constructive is just wasting of time, Furtheremore, He has been blocked for EDIT WAR not only in his current account, but also in numerous previous accounts that he had, even indefinity such as
1254:
in Knowledge. According to our records, you participated in a large number of AfD. We are currently soliciting editors with a long record of participation in AfD discussions to send us their feedback via a very informal survey.
1664:
with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage.
1933:"There are a few groups in Iran for which, One can say "each song is an event", but You certainly can about ZedBazi. Each time the group releases a new song, it is talked about and discussed within the Iranian Music community."
1036:
2627:
Thanks for the barnstar! I have only made one comment on the DRV, but I am reading the proceedings and comments there with interest. Some of the overturn comments are well reasoned, for example one of the "overturn" voters,
2400:
but where consensus lies. Also, you have said that concerns of abuse were not rebutted but several people (including myself) provided solutions for those problems that do not require deletion, yet you did not address this
1742:
Notability is established by a IMDB profile, which is identical to the originally created article and written by the same person as the article. This is circular citing. IMDB really isn't a reliable source in this
1309:
You're more than welcome, and thanks for bringing the matter to administrator attention! A very good example of how WP:ANI should be used. :-) Always happy to get rid of the mess editors like that leave behind.
122:
After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.
2409:
which says "If a template is being misused, consider clarifying its documentation to indicate the correct use, or informing those that misuse it, rather than nominating it for deletion." ). Consensus at TFD
374:
348:
2438:
I was on the right side of it, because I started working on its close without any preconceptions, and tried very hard to follow the "keep" arguments to come up with situations where the template was useful.
2608:
For daring to even consider closing the expand tag TFD, and for providing an excellent, well reasoned and thorough rationale. Whatever happens at DRV, even taking on a task like that deserves recognition.
1433:
170:
It has been pointed out that VOTE 3 was confusing, and that voters have been assuming that the question was about creating an actual two-phase CDA process. The question is merely about having a two-phase
741:
1499:
861:
I realise that many of you clarified your meaning after your initial vote, but the only realistic way to move forward is to be as inclusive as possible in this vote query. Sorry for the inconvenience,
128:
640:
Hi! You said: "The suggestion to merge appears to have some support, but I am a bit unsure how to do this in a neat manner". There are now templatea to put at the page which is supposed to be merged:
1054:
199:
Given the strong opposition to a two-tier system, I don't think there is much point in running a poll as it is certain to produce a "no" result. My opposition to putting it "on the ballot" stays.
289:
Just need some clarification because I will be writing another article and I read through MANY other articles on wikipedia and I have no idea why they are allowed to stay, but mine was deleted.
117:
1806:
I removed the prod you placed on this article as it was prodded on 8 July 2010. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this; I have no prejudice to opening an AfD. Cheers! â
2082:
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
2140:
Thanks for your AFD close. It appears I did not make clear enough that it was a nomination of two similar articles for exactly identical reasons. Could you please delete the second article,
178:
As I wrote the question, I'll take responsibility for the confusion. It does make sense if read through to the end, but it certainly wasn't as clear as it should have been, or needed to be!
1359:
957:
The questions were also quite helpful because it pointed to an aspect of chess openings, namely their relation to other phases of the game, which was not fully covered in the article. :-)
2024:
852:
In cases where the question was genuinely misunderstood, change your initial vote if you wish to (please explain the ambiguity, and don't forget to leave a second choice if you have one).
2305:
691:
89:
466:
1521:
1149:
has no interest for discussions, moreover we had many long discussions almost eveywhere from fa.wp to the variuos articles that he is involved as edit war with me, You may check
1069:
363:
2555:. 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.
1707:
Thanks for the notification. I see that the article has been put on AFD and that there are a few more sources than in the version I deleted. I'll let the AFD run its course.
2574:
OK, thanks for the notice. I'll weigh in if there are comments which need answering, but I generally follow a (self-imposed) policy of not voting to endorse my own actions.
2313:
1643:
422:
1846:
I was wondering why you deleted the page for the Iranian band "Zedbazi"? This group was the first of it's kind in Iran and father of Iranian Rap. You might as well delete
1996:
1045:
1038:
1291:
150:
2001:
1495:
1908:
1861:
723:
280:
I really wanted to know why this page was deleted and marked as being an advertisement, when other pages, written extremely similar to my own, are allowed to stay?
1732:
2539:
1331:
2522:
2329:
1680:
829:
601:
Hi Sjakkalle. You're one of the (few) admins who leave a nice explanatory note while closing AfDs. I appreciate that. Thought I'll just leave a note. Thanks.
495:
I read the postings this morning, and I understand your concerns. There has certainly been a lot of unacceptable edits there which reminds me of a line in an
1667:
1660:
1644:
1101:
156:
2005:
1940:
1532:
1334:. Now, I'm not here to argue for it going back up - it's a decision that's been made and I totally respect that. However, much on the information on there
2317:
2306:
2068:. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Knowledge policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the
2568:
2120:
No problem! All the stuff submitted to Knowledge is, after all, meant to be copied and edited without mercy. :-) Glad to see my suggestions were of use.
2044:
2037:
332:
2618:
2091:
977:
Why are you telling me not to use profanity in edit summaries when you are doing it yourself? Is that a coded message for heh dude, nice edit summary?--
397:
Sorry about not responding earlier. I am at present in a tight spot on time, and unable to contribute heavily to policy discussions. I can mention that
163:
909:
There is not evidence that Snyder has coaching an open or woman IM or of open or woman team that has competed in an Olympiad or similar team tourament.
460:
193:
297:
37:
If it is a response I think several people might be interested in reading, I might respond here. Otherwise, I will probably respond on your talkpage.
2031:
2076:
1686:
1546:
Do you know that he lied about his confrontation with a passenger about that flight, and that Salter has since refused to talk about the incident?
906:
His chess strength seem to be at best US national master, with not evidence of a open or woman IM normal nor of contested in any US Championship.
2512:
1616:
1526:
1393:
1363:
1074:
489:
141:
ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community.
545:
Unfortunately, the protection policy is an area where I will need to plead cluelessness, but good luck in your efforts in resolving the issues.
175:
on CDA at the eventual RfC, where the community will have their vote (eg a "yes/no for CDAâ poll, followed a choice of proposal types perhaps).
2666:
2265:
exceptions, it makes sense to list those exceptional records cases as proof that there are, indeed, records for supercentenarians from Africa.
1319:
1162:
84:
69:
64:
2222:
1960:
1890:
1116:
2396:
reviewed examples and were not convinced by them. As closing admin, your job is not to judge whether someone made an argument that convinces
2321:
2129:
1801:
1728:
1637:
1461:
1158:
79:
74:
2583:
2534:
2392:"Disappointed" is a strong word, I'd rather say I disagree (obviously). Your close is, unfortunately, flawed, since you admit yourself that
966:
181:
Please amend your vote if appropriate - it seems that many (if not most) people interpreted the question in the way that was not intended.
2652:
2383:
1828:
1814:
1028:
1013:
685:
586:
572:
454:
228:
208:
2299:
1980:
1610:
2507:
2018:
1716:
1415:
1401:
1385:
1202:
1131:
554:
269:
1122:
I think my only edit there was nominating a vandal revision for speedy deletion back in 2005. I have no opinion on the current article.
629:
2344:
2268:
I will wait to see if you change your mind and re-list this for discussion. If not, I will appropriately take this to deletion review.
1280:
1241:
932:
2488:
2428:
2279:
1575:
1536:
1516:
2367:
877:
410:
1481:
2141:
857:
Please do nothing if you interpreted the question correctly (or just confirm this if you wish), as this query cannot be a new vote.
59:
49:
1562:
1511:
2114:
872:
2228:
1912:
1865:
401:
would be easier to navigate if it could be split up by nationality, but at present I'm afraid I don't have much else to offer.
309:
2013:
697:
I am contacting everyone who participated in the previous AFD to inform them the same exact article is up for deletion again.
2177:
1746:
The claims about film production are uncited and incredibly vague. Does this really count as a credible claim to notability?
359:
48,000 articles about living people as created by those 17,500 editors, through our proper cleanup, expansion, and sourcing.
347:
Hi Sjakkalle/2010, I would like to invite you and anyone watching who shares an interest in moving forward constructively to
94:
54:
2101:
Hi Sjakkalle, thanks for the great suggestions you made on the WP:NOR talk page. They have been combined into a new essay,
1371:
2662:
2350:
1651:
1178:
434:
1752:
The article creator has a clear COI, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are not actually the afore mentioned Joshua Wood.
1376:
My belief is that it probably has outlived its usefulness. Barring any objections, I will delete the article in one week.
986:
2169:
2161:
1904:
1857:
1739:
It's a recreation of an article that has been speedy deleted twice before. I only noticed this after I had nominated it.
1445:
778:
the Administrator standing under CDA if the percentage reaches this 'threshold'. Currently it is 80% (per proposal 5.4).
391:
253:
1595:
1489:
99:
1765:
1622:):) A huge thanks for the support vote :) And the comments too. I appreciated each word Sjakkalle. Warm wishes always.
1260:
1234:
2548:
1929:, indicating that it was considered too promotional in tone. I believe much of that comes from quotes like this one:
1701:
247:. I have started to redirect a few of them, but your help in finishing the job would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
1303:
1230:
951:
305:
2004:. Note the point of the summary I wrote isn't to re-open the discussion, but to ask "does this describe the RFC"?
577:
Or maybe "talk shit about him". :-) I really enjoy Sunde at his best, and these are wonderfully satirical lyrics.
2065:
1555:
1470:
a very good close--a model of how it should be done--and also a very helpful guide in general to these articles.
729:
669:
614:
699:
Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_The_Simpsons_couch_gags_(2nd_nomination)#List_of_The_Simpsons_couch_gags
1338:
accurate. I am a member of that debating circuit and I know this because I was at many of the events on their.
398:
275:
2096:
1692:
For your info: the above article has been recreated, if you are interested in pursuing it further. Thanks! --
1325:
1150:
316:
219:
Hello. I noticed that a few years ago you redirected many useless substubs about uninhabited islands such as
887:
2239:
1919:
You are right that there was a version which was deleted July 7 this year. The reason for the deletion was
1498:, you may be interested to know I have renominated this article for deletion. Your comments are welcome at
1137:
2145:
2102:
1841:
2632:, wrote well on a concern which I sympathize with, although I ultimately disagree with his conclusion:
1990:
1819:
Thanks for the notice, I'm sorry I dodn't check for previous PRODs. I have voted to delete on the AFD.
416:
2135:
2069:
1655:
1154:
1097:
972:
812:
Where "none" means that there is no need for a point where the bureaucrats can automatically desysop.
744:. Unfortunately, there is a hitch regarding the "none" vote that can theoretically affect all votes.
214:
1749:
There is evidence of attempt to 'hijack' the article and citations belonging to another Joshua Wood.
1432:
Just wanted to say thanks for the very fair and comprehensive closure rationale you gave us over at
919:
Sorry for asking you to look at this, but you seem the best qualified to guide in this as you are a
2441:
A very important cornerstone in the "keep" argument was that there were several articles where the
2087:
1299:
1193:
What I see are two editors accusing each other of vandalism while engaging in a reverting contest.
1100:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at
104:
132:(intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;
2358:
2173:
2028:
2009:
1581:
441:
I have not checked, but if you think it isn't notable, I think a PROD template will be in order.
2456:) illustrated the concerns with the tag, rather than its benefits, as it gave no indication of
2453:
2110:
1685:
1441:
654:
136:
gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and
2562:
1541:
1427:
1208:
1093:
1079:
947:
895:
891:
879:
387:
05:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC) Refactored this message a bit. thanks, hoping to hear from you.
1947:
This issue is a bit more complicated than I thought when I deleted it, I will bring this to
2614:
1900:
1853:
1676:
1226:
1218:
1024:
982:
868:
665:
644:
568:
467:
Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard#Semiprotection_of_BLP_articles_for_Super_Bowl_players
430:
325:
301:
293:
189:
146:
476:'s article two weeks ago, and on my request to semiprotect all the articles of players in
8:
2647:
2578:
2503:
2483:
2378:
2339:
2294:
2240:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_African_supercentenarians
2217:
2156:
2124:
2083:
1975:
1955:
1885:
1823:
1796:
1722:
1711:
1605:
1591:
1570:
1456:
1410:
1380:
1314:
1295:
1197:
1126:
1008:
961:
680:
624:
596:
581:
549:
449:
405:
264:
203:
17:
2027:. If you have already participated, then please disregard this notice and my apologies.
2468:
the one being discussed here." The TFD result, if endorsed, does not forever forbid an
1697:
1507:
1397:
1367:
1351:
1174:
1112:
485:
224:
2106:
1789:
1760:
1630:
1437:
937:
928:
775:
609:
362:
These constructive proposals might then be considered by the community as a whole at
1060:
Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy
2557:
2530:
2325:
2079:
until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
2061:
2046:
1923:
1406:
Sorry that I forgot about it. The article is deleted now. Thanks for the reminder.
1276:
943:
701:
635:
244:
240:
2184:
All the sources were from the GRG. I can list the sources in the article for you:
496:
2610:
2552:
2541:
2518:
2472:
2445:
2422:
2405:(oOn a side note, citing misuse as a reason for deletion directly conflicts with
2364:
2363:
instead so that other editors have some idea of what is to be expanded. Regards,
2144:? (I think it would be counterproductive to relist for such a technical reason.)
1877:
1808:
1781:
1672:
1551:
1222:
1020:
978:
920:
899:
864:
661:
564:
477:
426:
185:
142:
111:
2152:
Thanks for the note, I missed that the second article was also on the same AFD.
1873:
817:
Please vote "80" or "90", or "None", giving a second preference if you have one.
783:
Please vote "80" or "90", or "None", giving a second preference if you have one.
2644:
2575:
2480:
2375:
2336:
2291:
2271:
2214:
2153:
2121:
2105:, which is currently linked to the main WP:NOR policy page. Hope this is okay!
1972:
1952:
1882:
1820:
1793:
1708:
1602:
1587:
1567:
1453:
1407:
1377:
1311:
1285:
1194:
1123:
1005:
958:
677:
621:
578:
546:
446:
402:
261:
200:
2335:
Thanks for the notice, I have made a nice wishy-washy comment on the DRV. :-)
942:
Your comments on the Chess opening talk page were quite helpful. Thank you!--
375:
User:Ikip/Discussion about creation of possible Wikiproject:New Users and BLPs
2629:
2406:
1948:
1785:
1777:
1693:
1503:
1477:
1348:
1189:
1170:
1166:
1108:
1075:
731:
481:
248:
898:. It make helpful if you could have a discreet look at the situation. AFAIK
1847:
1623:
1500:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Neglected Mario Characters (2nd nomination)
1185:
924:
602:
473:
232:
227:). I'd like to thank you for that, but there are still many that remain in
2236:
I am extremely surprised and disappointed at the below decision you made:
2207:
2202:
2192:
2526:
2287:
1434:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/IcelandâMexico relations (2nd nomination)
1272:
1146:
236:
2023:
A request for comment that may interest you is currently in progress at
1265:
2417:
1547:
1139:
902:
has no clear criteria for notable, but I'm not sure Snyder is notable:
2523:
Knowledge talk:Templates for discussion#Review instructions for Expand
1971:
article is back online! Thanks for your note concerning this one. :-)
1066:
388:
384:
2255:
2025:
Knowledge:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure
915:
Sex offenders are unfortunately so common that most are not notable.
740:
you are receiving this message as you voted in VOTE 2 at the recent
563:"drit'n ut" = "throw shit on him"?? More like "ridicule him", hehe.
472:
Please read and comment on my observation of extensive vandalism to
2054:
1472:
1107:
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.
1086:
220:
2036:
You received this message because you participated in the earlier
1755:
Never under-estimate aspiring actors attempts at self publicity :)
90:
User talk:Sjakkalle/September, October, November and December 2006
2593:
2187:
1968:
1773:
1264:. Should you have any questions about this project, feel free to
1561:
I have read a bit about the case, and I have read articles like
364:
Knowledge talk:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
118:
Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal
33:
Note that I am quite inconsistent with where I make responses.
2517:
I've placed draft review instructions in the holding cell for
1050:
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
2314:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Valeri Lilov (2nd nomination)
2197:
794:
Do you prefer a "rule of thumb" 'auto-desysop' percentage of
1735:, where I point out a few things on regarding this article.
1727:
Hi, I noticed you declined my speedy deletion nomination of
1044:
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of
167:
at the Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll.
2452:
candidates for having the template replaced. The last one (
2434:
aware that I was treading pretty close to that line, but I
2064:, which you created or to which you contributed, should be
1601:
Thanks! Certainly feels good to be done with that now. :-)
1046:
Knowledge:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
1039:
Knowledge:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
2318:
Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2010 December 3#Valeri Lilov
2307:
Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2010 December 3#Valeri Lilov
1995:
I put together a short summary of the principles from the
1496:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Neglected Mario Characters
1290:
Hi. Just a quick message to say thanks for your help with
1252:
quality control mechanisms and inclusion/deletion policies
912:
There is no evidence of review or sales of Snyder's books.
692:
An article you previously commented in is up for AFD again
1258:
The survey takes less than 5 minutes and is available at
774:
As a "rule of thumb", the Bureaucrats will automatically
480:
for the next two weeks until a week after the game ends.
1246:
As part of a project funded by the European Commission (
2355:
A tough call and a good one. Well done. Let's all use
1247:
1645:
Knowledge:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
1102:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Faith-based community
842:
Directly below this querying message, please can you;
161:
You are receiving this message as you have voted in
1092:An article that you have been involved in editing,
742:
Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll
788:This is the VOTE 2 question without any ambiguity;
2060:A discussion has begun about whether the article
1250:), we are collecting and analysing data to study
284:
45:Previous archives of my talkpage can be found at
2077:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Stonewall Attack
531:Boo him, throw shit on him, he is just a nothing
1731:. Could you please refer to the talk page and
349:a discussion about Biographies of Living People
2248:Some MAJOR issues that need to be considered:
85:User talk:Sjakkalle/June, July and August 2006
70:User talk:Sjakkalle/November and December 2005
65:User talk:Sjakkalle/September and October 2005
157:Important notice about VOTE 3 in the CDA poll
80:User talk:Sjakkalle/March, April and May 2006
75:User talk:Sjakkalle/January and February 2006
2499:TfD (I didn't know it was happening... : -->
2374:disappointed with the decision I made here.
229:Category:Uninhabited islands of the Maldives
847:Clarify what you meant if you voted "none".
2479:in a much more restricted manner" option.
1524:. That's all; no need to reply. Cheers. â
461:Semi-protection of Super Bowl players BLPs
2591:
1788:, with demands that the abusive admin be
1658:, this is to notify you that there is an
1654:regarding the ongoing usage and trial of
514:Pip'n ut, drit'n ut, han er bare et null,
2142:List of South American supercentenarians
1850:, as he shouldn't be important either.
323:
60:User talk:Sjakkalle/July and August 2005
50:User talk:Sjakkalle/March and April 2005
2657:DRV closed as "Endorse deletion". Yay.
2513:Review instructions for Template:Expand
1617:My second note to you on your talk page
764:Do you prefer a 'desysop threshold' of
540:He should have been killed on the spot!
520:Det er hans skyld at ikke vi fikk gull,
14:
1733:that of the article's original creator
1671:on this issue is greatly appreciated.
1184:I have looked through archives of the
537:It's his fault we didn't win the gold.
2525:are particularly welcome. Regards. --
2500:<), I did give an opinion at DRV.
1650:Hi. As you recently commented in the
1330:A while back you deleted the article
605:â WirΔĆΔĆĆ â FidΔĆitÒ± â ÄĆĂąĆĆ â ÎnΔ â
95:User talk:Sjakkalle/January-June 2007
55:User talk:Sjakkalle/May and June 2005
2019:ArbCom Election RFC courtesy notice
1360:User:KingR-IX/IONA Debating Circuit
421:If PĂ„l Johansen is deleted, should
23:
2188:Validated living supercentenarians
1242:Survey on quality control policies
100:User talk:Sjakkalle/July 2007-2008
24:
2680:
2256:http://www.grg.org/JZaslowWSJ.htm
2075:The article will be discussed at
1065:Your opinion on this is welcome.
2592:
2540:DRV Notice: Deletion review for
2053:
1085:
534:Step on him while he lies prone!
523:han burde vÊrt gjella pÄ stedet.
517:trÄkk pÄ'n mens han ligger nede!
505:Strike when the dead body is hot
324:
320:
2198:Verified Supercentenarian Cases
1517:Wow, that's a beautiful summary
285:http://en.wikipedia.org/Aelyria
223:to their relevant atolls (here
2229:Request for Undo before review
2148:14:33, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
1829:08:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
1815:20:15, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
1802:17:51, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
1766:17:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
1717:06:56, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
1702:22:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
1681:23:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
1638:19:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
399:Category:All unreferenced BLPs
13:
1:
2584:07:06, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
2569:00:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
2535:16:22, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
2508:02:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
2489:07:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
2429:17:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
2384:15:20, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
2368:15:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
2162:14:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
2130:08:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
2115:12:22, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
1586:Congratulations on your PhD.
1070:02:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
1029:12:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
1014:06:54, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
987:17:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
967:08:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
952:23:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
933:18:46, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
873:14:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
2351:Good call on expand template
2345:11:02, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
2330:09:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
2312:Because you participated in
2300:11:02, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
2280:20:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
2223:07:44, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
2178:06:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
2092:11:54, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
2032:12:21, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
2014:15:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
1981:08:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
824:What was wrong with VOTE 2?
724:04:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
686:17:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
670:15:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
630:17:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
620:Thanks for the support. :-)
615:18:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
587:17:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
573:15:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
555:12:16, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
490:03:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
455:12:19, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
435:08:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
411:12:16, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
392:17:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
346:
310:17:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
270:07:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
254:01:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
209:08:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
194:16:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
151:01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
7:
2667:01:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
2653:15:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
2619:03:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
2316:, you may be interested in
2290:issues are resolved first.
1961:13:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
1913:23:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
1891:10:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
1866:16:39, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
1611:13:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1596:11:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
1576:06:29, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
1556:14:21, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
423:Evidence Knowledge Exchange
10:
2685:
2547:An editor has asked for a
1951:for community discussion.
1939:Many of the expansions by
1872:The deletion was based on
1490:Neglected Mario Characters
1354:13:05(GMT), 20th May 2010
1235:11:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
1203:09:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
1179:04:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
1145:I am writing this because
1055:Proposal to Close This RfC
356:
2598:
2460:needs to be expanded, or
1537:15:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
1416:06:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
1402:21:32, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
1281:10:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
1169:and many of the others --
1155:Talk:Mazandarani language
1132:10:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
1117:21:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
2038:ArbCom secret ballot RFC
2002:User:Shooterwalker/Lists
1512:15:16, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
1482:08:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
1462:08:33, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
1446:15:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
1386:06:13, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
1372:11:15, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
1320:13:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
1304:10:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
1271:Thanks for your help! --
1214:for your help and time
1151:Talk:MÄzandarÄn Province
768:, or having none at all?
105:User talk:Sjakkalle/2009
26:Welcome to my talkpage!
923:member and an admin. --
501:Smi mens liket er varmt
425:be considered as well?
2454:mobile phone recycling
1345:Thanks for your help.
1096:, has been listed for
750:Background of VOTE 2:
276:Castle Beware deletion
2097:Courtesy notification
1332:IONA Debating Circuit
1326:IONA Debating Circuit
1094:Faith-based community
1080:Faith-based community
1037:Final discussion for
896:Robert Michael Snyder
892:User:Hell in a Bucket
880:Robert Michael Snyder
317:Discussion invitation
2602:The Admin's Barnstar
2103:WP:Combining Sources
1494:As a contributor to
886:SyG is getting some
730:Your VOTE 2 vote at
528:which translates to
2521:. Your comments at
1842:Deletion of Zedbazi
18:User talk:Sjakkalle
2665:and a clue-bat âą
2208:GRG Deaths in 2003
2203:GRG Deaths in 2008
2193:GRG Deaths in 2006
2029:A Horse called Man
1991:consensus on lists
1941:User:Zedbazihelper
1661:interim straw poll
417:Another candidate?
225:Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll
2650:
2624:
2623:
2581:
2486:
2381:
2342:
2297:
2220:
2159:
2136:Supercentenarians
2127:
2041:
1978:
1958:
1903:comment added by
1888:
1856:comment added by
1826:
1799:
1714:
1608:
1573:
1535:
1459:
1413:
1392:
1383:
1317:
1238:
1221:comment added by
1200:
1129:
1011:
973:Why the Hypocrisy
964:
683:
627:
584:
552:
452:
408:
382:
381:
337:add this project
313:
296:comment added by
267:
215:Maldives substubs
206:
129:finalisation poll
2676:
2660:
2659:Ten Pound Hammer
2648:
2596:
2589:
2588:
2579:
2565:
2560:
2506:
2484:
2477:
2471:
2450:
2444:
2425:
2420:
2379:
2362:
2340:
2295:
2277:
2274:
2218:
2157:
2125:
2062:Stonewall Attack
2057:
2047:Stonewall Attack
2035:
1976:
1956:
1928:
1922:
1915:
1886:
1868:
1824:
1813:
1797:
1763:
1712:
1627:
1606:
1571:
1531:
1525:
1457:
1411:
1390:
1381:
1315:
1237:
1215:
1198:
1127:
1089:
1009:
1000:it, and that is
962:
758:This was VOTE 2;
720:
717:
714:
711:
708:
705:
681:
676:outright keep).
659:
653:
649:
643:
625:
606:
582:
550:
450:
406:
369:Please help us:
343:
328:
321:
312:
290:
265:
251:
245:Gaafu Alif Atoll
241:Alif Dhaal Atoll
231:; most are from
204:
2684:
2683:
2679:
2678:
2677:
2675:
2674:
2673:
2658:
2563:
2558:
2553:Template:Expand
2549:deletion review
2545:
2542:Template:Expand
2519:Template:Expand
2515:
2501:
2475:
2469:
2448:
2442:
2423:
2418:
2356:
2353:
2310:
2275:
2272:
2231:
2138:
2099:
2070:deletion policy
2058:
2051:
2021:
1993:
1926:
1920:
1898:
1851:
1844:
1807:
1772:of articles in
1761:
1725:
1690:
1656:Pending changes
1648:
1634:
1625:
1619:
1584:
1582:Congratulations
1544:
1529:
1519:
1492:
1430:
1362:still needed ?
1328:
1288:
1244:
1216:
1211:
1143:
1090:
1083:
1042:
996:profanity, not
975:
940:
884:
735:
718:
715:
712:
709:
706:
703:
694:
657:
651:
647:
641:
638:
612:
604:
599:
478:Super Bowl XLIV
463:
419:
378:
344:
330:
319:
291:
278:
249:
217:
159:
120:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2682:
2672:
2671:
2670:
2669:
2640:
2639:
2638:
2622:
2621:
2605:
2604:
2599:
2597:
2587:
2586:
2544:
2538:
2514:
2511:
2504:GorillaWarfare
2496:
2495:
2494:
2493:
2492:
2491:
2465:
2439:
2387:
2386:
2359:expand section
2352:
2349:
2348:
2347:
2309:
2304:
2303:
2302:
2230:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2212:
2211:
2210:
2205:
2200:
2195:
2190:
2165:
2164:
2137:
2134:
2133:
2132:
2098:
2095:
2084:Colonel Warden
2052:
2050:
2045:Nomination of
2043:
2034:
2020:
2017:
1992:
1989:
1988:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1984:
1983:
1945:
1937:
1936:
1935:
1894:
1893:
1843:
1840:
1838:
1836:
1835:
1834:
1833:
1832:
1831:
1757:
1756:
1753:
1750:
1747:
1744:
1740:
1724:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1689:
1687:Jumpshot Films
1684:
1647:
1642:
1641:
1640:
1632:
1618:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1583:
1580:
1579:
1578:
1543:
1540:
1518:
1515:
1491:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1465:
1464:
1429:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1327:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1296:Cordless Larry
1287:
1284:
1243:
1240:
1210:
1207:
1206:
1205:
1142:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1084:
1082:
1078:nomination of
1073:
1063:
1062:
1057:
1041:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1031:
974:
971:
970:
969:
939:
936:
917:
916:
913:
910:
907:
883:
876:
859:
858:
854:
853:
849:
848:
819:
818:
814:
813:
809:
808:
785:
784:
780:
779:
771:
770:
737:Hi Sjakkalle,
734:
728:
727:
726:
693:
690:
689:
688:
637:
634:
633:
632:
610:
598:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
558:
557:
543:
542:
541:
538:
535:
532:
526:
525:
524:
521:
518:
515:
509:
508:
470:
469:
462:
459:
458:
457:
442:
418:
415:
414:
413:
380:
379:
371:
354:
353:
345:
340:
338:
336:
335:automatically
334:
331:
329:
318:
315:
277:
274:
273:
272:
216:
213:
212:
211:
158:
155:
154:
153:
138:
137:
119:
116:
108:
107:
102:
97:
92:
87:
82:
77:
72:
67:
62:
57:
52:
43:
42:
38:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2681:
2668:
2664:
2656:
2655:
2654:
2651:
2646:
2641:
2637:
2634:
2633:
2631:
2626:
2625:
2620:
2616:
2612:
2607:
2606:
2603:
2600:
2595:
2590:
2585:
2582:
2577:
2573:
2572:
2571:
2570:
2567:
2566:
2561:
2554:
2550:
2543:
2537:
2536:
2532:
2528:
2524:
2520:
2510:
2509:
2505:
2490:
2487:
2482:
2474:
2466:
2463:
2459:
2455:
2447:
2440:
2437:
2432:
2431:
2430:
2427:
2426:
2421:
2413:
2408:
2404:
2399:
2395:
2391:
2390:
2389:
2388:
2385:
2382:
2377:
2372:
2371:
2370:
2369:
2366:
2360:
2346:
2343:
2338:
2334:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2327:
2323:
2319:
2315:
2308:
2301:
2298:
2293:
2289:
2288:verifiability
2284:
2283:
2282:
2281:
2278:
2269:
2266:
2262:
2258:
2257:
2253:
2249:
2246:
2242:
2241:
2237:
2234:
2224:
2221:
2216:
2213:
2209:
2206:
2204:
2201:
2199:
2196:
2194:
2191:
2189:
2186:
2185:
2183:
2182:
2181:
2179:
2175:
2171:
2170:124.179.13.71
2163:
2160:
2155:
2151:
2150:
2149:
2147:
2143:
2131:
2128:
2123:
2119:
2118:
2117:
2116:
2112:
2108:
2104:
2094:
2093:
2089:
2085:
2080:
2078:
2073:
2071:
2067:
2063:
2056:
2048:
2042:
2039:
2033:
2030:
2026:
2016:
2015:
2011:
2007:
2006:Shooterwalker
2003:
1998:
1982:
1979:
1974:
1970:
1966:
1965:
1964:
1963:
1962:
1959:
1954:
1950:
1946:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1931:
1930:
1925:
1918:
1917:
1916:
1914:
1910:
1906:
1905:99.241.141.77
1902:
1892:
1889:
1884:
1879:
1875:
1871:
1870:
1869:
1867:
1863:
1859:
1858:99.241.141.77
1855:
1849:
1839:
1830:
1827:
1822:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1812:
1811:
1805:
1804:
1803:
1800:
1795:
1791:
1787:
1783:
1779:
1775:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1767:
1764:
1754:
1751:
1748:
1745:
1741:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1734:
1730:
1718:
1715:
1710:
1706:
1705:
1704:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1688:
1683:
1682:
1678:
1674:
1670:
1669:
1663:
1662:
1657:
1653:
1646:
1639:
1636:
1635:
1629:
1628:
1621:
1620:
1612:
1609:
1604:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1577:
1574:
1569:
1564:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1542:Steven Slater
1539:
1538:
1534:
1528:
1523:
1514:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1497:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1474:
1469:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1463:
1460:
1455:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1435:
1428:Double Thanks
1417:
1414:
1409:
1405:
1404:
1403:
1399:
1395:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1384:
1379:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1353:
1350:
1346:
1343:
1339:
1337:
1333:
1321:
1318:
1313:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1283:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1269:
1267:
1263:
1262:
1256:
1253:
1249:
1239:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1209:Haunted Games
1204:
1201:
1196:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1176:
1172:
1168:
1167:user:Pejman47
1164:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1148:
1141:
1133:
1130:
1125:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1105:
1104:. Thank you.
1103:
1099:
1095:
1088:
1081:
1077:
1072:
1071:
1068:
1061:
1058:
1056:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1048:
1047:
1040:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1012:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
990:
989:
988:
984:
980:
968:
965:
960:
956:
955:
954:
953:
949:
945:
935:
934:
930:
926:
922:
914:
911:
908:
905:
904:
903:
901:
897:
893:
889:
881:
875:
874:
870:
866:
862:
856:
855:
851:
850:
846:
845:
844:
843:
839:
838:How to help:
837:
833:
831:
825:
823:
816:
815:
811:
810:
807:
805:
801:
797:
792:
791:
790:
789:
782:
781:
777:
773:
772:
769:
767:
762:
761:
760:
759:
755:
751:
749:
745:
743:
738:
733:
725:
722:
721:
700:
696:
695:
687:
684:
679:
674:
673:
672:
671:
667:
663:
656:
655:Afd-mergefrom
646:
631:
628:
623:
619:
618:
617:
616:
613:
608:
607:
588:
585:
580:
576:
575:
574:
570:
566:
562:
561:
560:
559:
556:
553:
548:
544:
539:
536:
533:
530:
529:
527:
522:
519:
516:
513:
512:
511:
510:
506:
502:
498:
497:Ăystein Sunde
494:
493:
492:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
468:
465:
464:
456:
453:
448:
443:
439:
438:
437:
436:
432:
428:
424:
412:
409:
404:
400:
396:
395:
394:
393:
390:
386:
376:
370:
367:
365:
360:
355:
352:
350:
342:
333:Click here to
327:
322:
314:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
287:
286:
281:
271:
268:
263:
258:
257:
256:
255:
252:
246:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
222:
210:
207:
202:
198:
197:
196:
195:
191:
187:
182:
179:
176:
174:
168:
166:
165:
152:
148:
144:
140:
139:
135:
134:
133:
131:
130:
124:
115:
113:
112:administrator
106:
103:
101:
98:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
81:
78:
76:
73:
71:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
56:
53:
51:
48:
47:
46:
39:
36:
35:
34:
31:
27:
19:
2635:
2601:
2556:
2546:
2516:
2497:
2461:
2457:
2435:
2416:
2411:
2402:
2397:
2393:
2354:
2311:
2270:
2267:
2263:
2259:
2254:
2250:
2247:
2243:
2238:
2235:
2232:
2166:
2139:
2107:FeydHuxtable
2100:
2081:
2074:
2059:
2049:for deletion
2022:
1994:
1932:
1895:
1848:Tupac Shakur
1845:
1837:
1809:
1762:Escape Orbit
1758:
1726:
1691:
1666:
1659:
1649:
1631:
1624:
1585:
1545:
1520:
1493:
1471:
1438:FeydHuxtable
1431:
1347:
1344:
1340:
1335:
1329:
1289:
1270:
1266:get in touch
1259:
1257:
1251:
1245:
1212:
1163:user:Palm555
1144:
1106:
1091:
1064:
1049:
1043:
1001:
997:
993:
976:
941:
918:
885:
863:
860:
841:
840:
835:
834:
826:
821:
820:
803:
799:
795:
793:
787:
786:
765:
763:
757:
756:
752:
747:
746:
739:
736:
702:
639:
603:
600:
504:
500:
474:Nate Kaeding
471:
420:
383:
368:
361:
357:
351:
288:
282:
279:
233:Dhaalu Atoll
218:
183:
180:
177:
172:
169:
162:
160:
127:
125:
121:
109:
44:
32:
28:
25:
2233:Greetings,
2180:Chris_Amos
1967:And so the
1899:âPreceding
1852:âPreceding
1759:Thanks. --
1729:Joshua Wood
1723:Joshua Wood
1391:aide memoir
1217:âPreceding
1159:user:Behmod
1147:user:Alefbe
1004:different.
944:Jimbo Wales
645:Afd-mergeto
597:Just a note
292:âPreceding
237:Faafu Atoll
2663:his otters
2611:Beeblebrox
2365:SunCreator
1810:KuyaBriBri
1673:Off2riorob
1668:Your input
1652:straw poll
1626:Wifione
1223:Haunted360
1140:Tabaristan
1138:Regarding
1021:ZincBelief
1002:completely
979:ZincBelief
865:Matt Lewis
766:80% or 90%
662:Geschichte
565:Geschichte
427:Geschichte
298:Tanisloray
283:Example:
186:Matt Lewis
143:Matt Lewis
2645:Sjakkalle
2576:Sjakkalle
2481:Sjakkalle
2376:Sjakkalle
2337:Sjakkalle
2292:Sjakkalle
2215:Sjakkalle
2154:Sjakkalle
2122:Sjakkalle
1973:Sjakkalle
1953:Sjakkalle
1944:language.
1883:Sjakkalle
1874:WP:CSD#A7
1821:Sjakkalle
1794:Sjakkalle
1790:desysoped
1709:Sjakkalle
1603:Sjakkalle
1588:Rettetast
1568:Sjakkalle
1522:Well done
1454:Sjakkalle
1452:provide.
1408:Sjakkalle
1378:Sjakkalle
1312:Sjakkalle
1248:QLectives
1195:Sjakkalle
1124:Sjakkalle
1006:Sjakkalle
959:Sjakkalle
938:Thank you
678:Sjakkalle
622:Sjakkalle
579:Sjakkalle
547:Sjakkalle
447:Sjakkalle
403:Sjakkalle
341:watchlist
262:Sjakkalle
201:Sjakkalle
184:Regards,
2649:(Check!)
2630:AndrewRT
2580:(Check!)
2485:(Check!)
2380:(Check!)
2341:(Check!)
2296:(Check!)
2219:(Check!)
2158:(Check!)
2126:(Check!)
1997:list RFC
1977:(Check!)
1957:(Check!)
1901:unsigned
1887:(Check!)
1878:WP:MUSIC
1854:unsigned
1825:(Check!)
1798:(Check!)
1782:WP:RFC/U
1713:(Check!)
1694:Stormbay
1607:(Check!)
1572:(Check!)
1563:this one
1527:Timneu22
1504:Robofish
1458:(Check!)
1412:(Check!)
1394:Codf1977
1382:(Check!)
1364:Codf1977
1349:KingR-IX
1316:(Check!)
1261:this URL
1231:contribs
1219:unsigned
1199:(Check!)
1171:Parthava
1128:(Check!)
1109:Kitfoxxe
1098:deletion
1010:(Check!)
963:(Check!)
921:WP:CHESS
900:WP:CHESS
882:notable?
776:de-sysop
682:(Check!)
636:Heads up
626:(Check!)
583:(Check!)
551:(Check!)
482:Chutznik
451:(Check!)
407:(Check!)
377:<<
306:contribs
294:unsigned
266:(Check!)
250:Reywas92
221:Havoddaa
205:(Check!)
110:I am an
2559:Barking
2066:deleted
1969:Zedbazi
1924:db-spam
1774:CAT:CSD
1743:regard.
1633:.......
994:quoting
925:Philcha
888:trouble
339:to your
2527:Bsherr
2473:expand
2446:expand
2407:WP:TFD
2403:at all
2322:Cunard
2273:Ryoung
1949:WP:DRV
1786:WP:A/R
1784:, and
1778:WP:ANI
1286:Thanks
1273:DarTar
1190:WP:SSI
992:I was
894:about
802:, or "
243:, and
164:VOTE 3
2436:think
1548:patsw
1478:talk
1186:WP:AN
1067:Okip
998:using
890:from
719:Focus
499:song
373:: -->
372:: -->
16:<
2615:talk
2564:Fish
2531:talk
2458:what
2326:talk
2174:talk
2111:talk
2088:talk
2010:talk
1909:talk
1862:talk
1698:talk
1677:talk
1592:talk
1552:talk
1533:talk
1508:talk
1442:talk
1398:talk
1368:talk
1352:talk
1300:talk
1292:this
1277:talk
1227:talk
1188:and
1175:talk
1153:and
1113:talk
1025:talk
983:talk
948:talk
929:talk
869:talk
830:here
804:none
666:talk
650:and
569:talk
486:talk
431:talk
389:Ikip
385:Ikip
302:talk
190:talk
173:poll
147:talk
2551:of
2462:why
2424:Why
2412:can
2398:you
2394:you
2276:122
2146:JJB
1473:DGG
1358:is
1336:was
1268:.
1076:AfD
878:Is
836:3)
800:90%
796:80%
732:CDA
41:me.
2661:,
2617:)
2533:)
2502:â
2476:}}
2470:{{
2449:}}
2443:{{
2419:So
2361:}}
2357:{{
2328:)
2320:.
2176:)
2113:)
2090:)
2072:.
2012:)
1927:}}
1921:{{
1911:)
1864:)
1780:,
1700:)
1679:)
1594:)
1554:)
1510:)
1502:.
1480:)
1444:)
1436:.
1400:)
1370:)
1302:)
1294:.
1279:)
1233:)
1229:âą
1177:)
1165:,
1161:,
1115:)
1027:)
985:)
950:)
931:)
871:)
832:.
822:2)
806:"?
798:,
748:1)
668:)
660:.
658:}}
652:{{
648:}}
642:{{
611:âĆ
571:)
507:):
488:)
433:)
366:.
308:)
304:âą
239:,
235:,
192:)
149:)
126:A
2613:(
2529:(
2464:.
2324:(
2172:(
2109:(
2086:(
2040:.
2008:(
1907:(
1860:(
1696:(
1675:(
1590:(
1550:(
1530:·
1506:(
1476:(
1440:(
1396:(
1366:(
1298:(
1275:(
1225:(
1173:(
1111:(
1023:(
981:(
946:(
927:(
867:(
716:m
713:a
710:e
707:r
704:D
664:(
567:(
503:(
484:(
429:(
300:(
188:(
145:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.