Knowledge:Village pump (proposals)/Archive R

9081:

That's something I am warning against. There are of course always those who desire to have more and more control over things - Bush administration is another good example of such - control freak is quite common phenomenon (by the way, also Bush administration is good to gain more control powers by creating and adding people's fears, by doomsday-scenarios and by spreading assumption that everyone is going to attack "the bastion", be it USA or Knowledge; certain writers above need to learn that others in Knowledge are also working to make it better, and that the only changes that are improvements, are not those made by the certain writer having the control freak attitude). Btw, we of course assume that Jtdirl is not going to move Irish Unionist Party to a place which is totally wrong - BUT, if Jtdirl so moves, I am willing to assume that sooner or later someone moves it to the right direction, and/or opens a move request - which will make the thing more visible and leads it towards being named in a good way. Perhaps each article deserves one renaming vote - at least then the name will be thought about. And if one has not enough time to do what (s)he wants to do, I remind this work is voluntary. But somehow Jtdirl anyway seems to have so much time at hands that those 6-hour sessions are quite regular - so I would not pity them, god to have a hobby for empty days. Instruction creepism regarding certain naming conventions has come to such a current situation that almost no one is committed to those conventions, either not bothering to make sense of such detailed and self-conflicting instructions or are opposing those. I understand that some initiation of this discussion has come from naming of biographies about royals and nobles, a convention which is actually absurdly twisted, and complicated. The worst thing in it is that some persons (possibly also writers above) proclaiming themselves experts, are actually relatively obstinate, but relatively ignorant of the historical grounds behind such. I would like to see those who pontificate about their "expertise" to actually show it, by telling in clear language where "historical naming of wives" come from and how it has been variously used in works of history, prosopography, heraldry and genealogy, and what prefix titles have been in real use in European history before most recent three centuries. I would bet they are sadly ignorant of such, presumably because the so-called expertise often seems to come from a zeal into Queen Victoria's extended family and next to nothing else. one of the sad things is that naming built upon what may fit to Victoria's various grandchildren, is not in all parts historically relevant in larger context, but still those Vicky-zealots are pushing their untenable namings, throddling over better experts. Funnily enough, Vicky-related biographies seem to be most "protected", there having been unduly long page protects and quite stupid edit wars, made by certain people who somehow try to pretend to be editors in "good standing". And, of course I repeat what I have expressed in other places: Jtdirl is no specialist on feudal and early modern historiography and their monarchies, so that the context of above initiative comes clearer to discussants here. There is the relatively easy way to move articles by making cut-and-paste moves, and some editor above who seems to want more control over movings, has actually done cut-and-paste moves, when it suited to one's interests. It is highly necessary to remember not to push towards cut-and-paste moves with denying the current more proper means to move.

2168:

The same is true for the Harvard Chart Method of Logical Equation Reduction. I traveled in 1991 up to Boston to both Harvard and MIT to search for a reference for the method and believe me when I say I found none. The version I posted was referenced in William L. Hunter's book "Digital/Logic Electronics Handbook" but I had since modified the method to handle multiple states. Consequently it had to come down as well in accordance with WP:NOR. So the point I am trying to make is that because the modification allowed me to explore and helped lead me to the understanding that God by definition is the only entity who can reduce an infinite number of equations having an infinite number of variables with an infinite number of states to minimum form instantaneously which was my real reason and intended purpose for doing the modification in the first place so that I could explore this point of view (although I assume it can be explored mathematically as well). But since I am unable to publish the modification in the Knowledge in reference to explaining how I came to a logical definition of God it must go without clarification. Its just that the irony is a bit overwhelming in that such policy would force me to go somewhere else in order to be able to include an original clarification without a violation of the rules that is why I made this suggestion regarding a place or at least an exception in the Knowledge for orignal research. Its not a problem for me because peer review and publication are no substitute for logic but rather my dismay that my fellow Wikipedians will in the present be deprived and may expire long before such ideas find themselves published here for no other reason than the WP:NOR..

5583:

good sound and video files that deserve recognition. I remember when I bought an old copy of Encarta that they had a tool to browse the media on the CD (which included videos, sound and pictures). Why didn't they separate them out into pictures, videos and movies ? Because all of that media serves the same purpose in the encyclopedia, to explain things in ways that words can't and to make the articles more interesting and relevant. This system also helps to alleviate the criticism of some users that too many "diagrams" are being promoted (at one point a "featured diagrams" was proposed, which would unnecessarily fragment the process). I also agree that a unified criteria for promotion could be created. For example, all media must be of high physical quality (with the exception of historical works) which everyone would interpret as "devoid of static, artifacts or other physical/technical blemishes and of a high bitrate and resolution". Anyways, even if all of the types are unified on one page, why must the criterion be the same? It's just more convenient to group them together and to put them all under one category. If we had featured sound, video and pictures running at full speed overhead would quite great. we would inevitably have, FPC, FPV and FPS boxes updated daily and demotion procedures for each...it just gets too complicated.

8934:

when WP was a small encyclopaedia. but with over one million articles all it would take would be twenty new users to engage in the wholescale moving of 20 articles to require 400 fixes. Many new users move a heck of a lot more than 20. (I came across one user who move 300 in four days!!!) Because the new names didn't show up on watchlists and they were rather specialised articles the moves weren't noticed (as happens, when the moves were going on, no-one with a specialist knowledge was on, and by the time they came on, so much else had happened that the changes were way down at the bottom of their watchlist or off it.). I only spotted it when I caught the user vandalising articles and looked at his edit history. At that stage I had no time to fix the complete mess that user created. I constantly get messages and emails from people saying "have you seen what user:x has done to such and such?" Or "where is article x gone to? I just keep getting redirects to redirects to redirects". Those of us working in specialist areas are getting a bit tired of spending most of our time on WP these days reverting vandalism and moving articles back to their original location as required by the manual of systle. For example, not that many people know about the

3131:

not designed for the cases where we actually block good editors and there does not seam to be any will in the community to help this situation, it is strange to me that we can not give revert buttons to very experienced users with e.g. 1000+ good edits, we are very strick in giving out admin privilidges, but it is very easy for admins to block without good reson and it is VERY hard to be unblocked, to me a block is much more serious than a revert. I have now reviewed the blocking policy and it does not say anything, it states that you can block when someone vandalises, but nothing about that you must warn first (recomends yes, but not must), nothing about that you should be carefull to block shared IPs, it even states that one admins should NOT unblock a block from another admin without talking to the first admin about it! So the blocking policy is broken often! Why not try to do something about it? Why not make it easier for me to report what I think is a wrong block.

1842:

learn here about the futures market and as a result be able to make a financial contribution to the Knowledge. You do not need to be a sysop to edit or to make article contributions but as a sysop you need to be responsible. The risk of financial loss keeps this in focus. Extending the idea to users might also encourage them to discuss their contributions in talk pages first before editing an article and would most likely terminate vandalism. Its not the amount of the fine that counts but rather its effect on your psyche. You are not the only one who is turned off about the prospect of being fined for doing something they should not do but the law no longer allows real spankings.

9450:

phrase "expected natural sphere of influence"--I wouldn't necessarily even vote on Afd's for fancruft I knew little about. The question is not "Do I as a Wikipedian editor find it important?" but rather "Does it appear that the community that naturally surrounds this thing thinks it is important?". Also note that people can still disagree about importance under a definition of "encyclopedic relevance"--it's merely a definition, but by nature it does not give the Afd reviewer an exact answer to their question of importance unless they actually research that question and find out. Under this new definition, we would hope to reduce snap decisions of "Delete" or "Keep". —

9630:"Deutsch"). To me, it only makes sense to show the native name for anons, because you have no idea what language they speak, and we want to help them get to their native language easily. But, if somebody is a registered user, than we can assume text is in their perferred langauge (because language is pickable in preferences). In some case (like codes "am" and "iu") I can't even see any characters, but get "????". I'm hoping this is something that could be changed, that doesn't involve a software change (in which case, it probably wouldn't be worth it). I suppose it's not essential to know that an article is in "Inuktitut", but it would be nice. -- 4628:. It would be good however to know how to make those templates default to hide instead of show and also make the background colour different for the External section as compared with See Also. I think it would be good to do this for reference sections at some point as well and maybe have a little icon in each template to represent the external link, See Also and Reference sections....that could be cool. Anyways if anybody thinks this is a good idea give some feedback and maybe we could make this a general feature of all featured articles in the future. Oh by the thanks for the link to the collapsable template by the way was very useful. 9026:. What I do think needs to be done, if possible, is a bar on moves by users with less than a certain number of edits. Between registering and reaching whatever that number is, it would be fairly evident whether the user is going to be a problem or not. If a user is found to be abusing the moving privilege, he or she can simply have it revoked or frozen for a certain amount of time, like a ban. Users such as the example you provided, who do not heed warnings, would ones eligible for a move ban. Many stop the nonsense after a warning. After a certain number of edits, if they haven't figured it out, then a move ban would be in order. 6500:, this isn't feasible as it would be pretty far from an accurate number. Also, if in fact something like this does go into practice, there should be some time-delimited factoring going on so that an old prolific vandal doesn't reflect badly on a new productive editor - it could be quite discouraging for that new editor (or group of editors) to constantly rub up against this reminder, even though they've been editing in good faith for a long time. I think the current practice of encouraging folks to create accounts is sufficient ... then following up by not biting the newbies and helping them out when possible. User:Ceyockey ( 9771:, that display when a person is signed in and is active. I have also noticed that there are a number of people on wikipedia that have a makeshift system of this, where they must edit their page to tell others that they are on the site. I was wondering if there was a way for the webmasters at wikipedia to get the necessay software/script/code in order for each user page to display whether the user is online or not. Please let me know what you think of my idea and if it can be implemented because I have wanted one on my page, but do not want to deal with the hassle of editing every time I get on or off. Thank you for your time. 9427:". I have seen many non-Wikipedians become angered or distressed with our system because their articles got deleted. Let those who will respect us respect us for our breadth as well as our reliability; don't shut out knowledge just because you don't think it's "important" enough. Look at the arguments for and against; weigh the demonstrable alienation and loss of readership on the one hand, and the ungrounded speculation about respect and maintainability on the other. Live and let live: you aren't hurt if someone writes verifiable articles on their favored fancruft, and neither is anyone else. — 1647:

can be voted on individually in the same manner as a jury ballot is designed to cover each and every legal issue in a case, 2.) the status of system operators, volunteers and ordinary users be subject to a running ballot similar to the feedback score eBay uses to continuously rate each seller, and 3.) that monetary fines be established and agreed upon for any misdeeds or misbehaviors in the exercise of one's duties similar to the method used by sports clubs to regulate the behavior of their members. i make these proposals in good faith and for the betterment of the Knowledge and of all Wikipedians.

4774:, it is likely to have so many footnotes as to interfere somewhat with readability. I'd like to see a choice of presentations for references. I think what I'd really like to see is one in which all the referenced material is given a slightly different text color than the rest of the article; perhaps a true black for referenced material and a slightly light, slightly tinted color (dark brown, perhaps) for unreferenced material. And a more subtle mechanism than superscripts for pointing to the note. For example, instead of putting the note numbers in the text itself, put them in the right margin. 9407:. Right now, we do have an AfD pending for a dead Anglican bishop who was the brother of someone famous, but that's an unusual case. Arguably, Knowledge's standards for notability are too strict for corporate figures and too loose for entertainment figures. Knowledge would normally accept as notable a performer with two bad albums available on Amazon.com. But the #2 executive at a Fortune 500 company normally wouldn't get in. Personally, I'd throw out every living musician below the platinum record level as non-notable, but the fans would scream. -- 6885:, would like to see Good article become part of wikipedia in the same way as Featured articles. In that way be able to assure that these GA articles are of a certain status which is somewhat lower than that of an FA, creating thus a step progression in the perfection of an article with FA status being the last step. The main reason for this proposal is that frustrated FA nominators who see their article get failed on FA tend to abandon their project and in that view, sending it to GA would allow them to already gain some importance and some stability. 2875:

taken it apon myself to check out what they all actually do. Some of them are agreeably useless (to me), but things like signing and redirect are just amazing! The amount of times I have searched for a redirect page just to copy and paste the template to create various new redirect pages is rediculas, and could have been helped only if the tags were sufficiently idiot-proof, and designed to fit in with this age of pretty shiny buttons (rather than fit in with the age of windows 95). I think age they are on

2157:

would have taken a Wikipedian to notice and repair the flaw in Wiles' elaborate proof of Fermat's Last Theorem? Considering only a handful of people in the world understand it at all, I don't see that happening. I'm not saying there couldn't be a wiki-based site for publication of original works - I think this is a great idea - but Knowledge is not that site. Our goal of documenting well-known and generally accepted topics is already far too ambitious a goal, no matter how high our article count becomes.

7771:. Knowledge already helps Google/Lycos/Altavista etc. by 'making the Internet not suck' as Jimbo puts it and encouraging searching. However, one of the main reasons Knowledge does not suck is the freedom from advertising - IMHO the Web when it first started was a useful academic resource, and only began to suck with the growth of advertising and wasted searching time. Google Groups, despite an irritating attempt to brand it, is merely a poor way of accessing Usenet and a useful archive of it. -- 8964: 8862: 4065: 4009: 4408:

to religious partiality of the users. These create articles that are filled with “not so important” facts or opinions. These facts, I guess, are generally added by different users to indirectly criticize the subject of the article. Thus, Knowledge must have a system wherein an article, after a review done by a person or a committee assigned by Knowledge and after that person or committee labeled the article as bias-free, cannot be edited by any user.

7744:

rather than alienating their Chinese users, they decided to make Google.cn with censored searches, to at least provide a search engine of reasonable quality to help open up the Internet in China. In the long run, it will benefit China, because some "inappropriate" pages might escape the censorship. Let's not forget that AOL, MSN, Yahoo!, Lycos and others also censor search results - and Google at least informs the user that searches are censored. --

8911:

realise whats happened (this can be a nightmare if vandals attempt to circumvent and move to "odd" names). Whilst taking away the function for most logged users would be a back step in the wrong direction certainly the move page could be better worded to make it clear that in cases of doubt or when it is not a clear-cut spelling mistake that a consensus is a must on the talk page. And that above all the move command is not a license to move.

1960:

question I have recently had the unfortunate experience of having to takedown an article because as it turns out there were no notable publication references anywhere to be found (although it was published on a home page and subjected to public scrutiny back in 1996) and has sufficient unique features to prevent it from being classified as something which has already been published in a notable publication. Why would you object?

4454:"Using Special:Random/Image goes to a random image, which could potentially be disgusting. I think that on these pages, users should have to click on a warning link (maybe javascript) before the disgusting image is shown. Kids using wikipedia therefore will be protected from unintentionally seeing disgusting images, but there is no "censorship" since the content is still available. Pcu123456789 21:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)" 8943:

With one million articles we simply cannot keep up with all the fixing. And on the evidence, the number of wild moving by new editors seems to have rocketed. I've come across five or six new users who in the last two weeks between them must have moved between 400 and 500 articles, many of them to rubbish names and away the name chosen because of the manual of style or naming conventions. At this stage that

8820:. That is just one user's move in the last couple of days. I am coming across mass moving of articles of late all the time, much of it by newbies. Some of the changes are correct, but often others here have no specialist knowledge to know if the change is correct, and no explanation is needed to justify the move. The moves could be to made-up names or may be complete bullshit for all we know. 2197:

criterion would be something like: Although not conforming to the policy pillars (in particular lacking citation of sources) or lacking verifiable indication of notability, and therefore deletable, this is deemed sufficiently potentially useful to let it stay alive. We have various cleanup tags now, but anyone can slap these on an article or remove them; there is no structured debate. --

7947:

place a wikipedia article at the top of their results(unless it was a sponsored result), but if the article is good and relevant then it would. If it was in a separate search, where you specifically make it search wikipedia (which does seem feasible) then it wouldnt introduce any new people, because those people would have to already have known about it to select to use it.

8620:

letting the few slip through the net but not having extra pages to look through to counter those ones that do slip through, versus hopefully keeping more pages clean but then having more time spent away from direct RC patrol. It depends on the balance of how much time this might cost to follow vs how many edits do slip past and taint articles, which I can only guess at. --

9203:

themselves or their organization--I'm saying that entities outside of a conflict of interest must demonstrate that they are relevant. I realize that it's difficult to understand what I'm saying, as there are fine points here. Let me rephrase a different way: I am not talking about how articles are created, but rather how their relevance is determined.

7730:

Knowledge can't rely on donations forever like any other charity. Anyway, google isn't "anti-corporate", that's just a pose that is rapidly losing its credibility. They sold out to the Chinese dictatorship, or have you forgotten about that already? How long would it be before they insisted that Knowledge did the same if it became dependent on them?

9148:

of sorts, you would have to ask yourself this question--"Excluding my contributions or bodies of work related to this subject as well as me or heavily linked organizations (e.g., publishers) talking about the subject, is there enough of a degree of common knowledge and reverence in the expected natural sphere of influence of that subject?" —

2153:: it's not useful to write about things that only affect very small numbers of people, partly because it's less likely a reader could derive benefit from them, and partly because often personal inventions are flawed in irreparable ways, and we lack the necessary expertise and motivation to be an effective first line of defense against these. 9138:. Authors often write about non-notable subjects which they're directly involved in, but that doesn't mean they should have to pass additional tests to qualify. I do like the first part, "there must be provable common knowledge and reverence of the article's subject within the subject's expected natural sphere of influence". 5828:. Right now there are way too many articles in that category and it is unrealistic for expect an expert in some specific area to figure out which pages (s)he could be of use to - this would involve reading the whole list. I suggest they be split up into some categories. There is no need to go into as much detail as the 2192:, at least for the areas of physics, mathematics, computer science and biology. Unlike Knowledge, not everyone can drop in and start to improve/vandalize your contributions, which is an obvious disadvantage/advantage. Another argument against allowing original research here is that (next to trolls) this would also attract 1424: 7814:, for example, our featured article would appear as a special result. "Knowledge has an article on Microsoft." This would introduce a lot of viewers to Knowledge. There are two infinite things: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Think AOL. Not everyone knows site:en.wikipedia.org. -- 6968:), a GA icon at the top right of the article is utterly useless to readers and of doubtful value for editors. Why would an encyclopedia need to tell its reader that the article he is currently reading "may not be as thorough and detailed as our featured articles, but should not omit any major facets of the topic"? 2984:. Now I have a suggestion, when this happens again, and it will happen again until the fix to wikipedia code is done so that logged in users can edit while their IP is blocked is implemented I would like to suggest that there is one more page that all blocked users can write to. This would be something like 1143:

then, scroll down to see the most recent comments. I keep leaving messages and forgetting where I left them and I leave so many messages in so many different places, it's difficult to continue discussions. I may very well not make it back here to read people's negative responses and argue my point... --

9190:

I don't see any reason why the references created by the author or people affiliated with the author should be disregarded. Does how notable something is depend on who's writing it? It's an objective quality that every reference contributes to. Let's not try to make this definition do too much all at

8827:

can't keep up with all the changes. Users constantly come to me saying "look what has been done now" and I find that someone has moved 20, 30, on one occasion 117 articles, in one go. The manual of style and naming conventions are being torn to shreds by naming that often is done without reference to

8775:

Possible, technically, but the developers' time would be better devoted to rewriting the current parser. Your proposal would require that either volunteers install PHP and hack their browser, or install PHP and use a specialized application for browsing Knowledge, or that someone rewrites the entire

8432:

I propose an automatic response on posts from unregistered users that contain common vandal words (fuck, penis, etc) - registered users would still be able to edit articles with no effect, but attempted vandalism by IP or new users would result in some kind of warning, automatic message to talk page.

7767:

Knowledge and Google are dissimilar, as one is primarily a content provider, and the other is primarily an index to content. Google/Lycos/Altavista etc. already help Knowledge as much as they can by providing better sorted, faster and less CPU-intensive (if somewhat out-of-date) searches to content,

7743:

Google have already issued a press release explaining this. There was a time when people could access Google.com from China. However, the Chinese government were already censoring searches on Google.com (from China-based IPs) and Google.com was becoming slow and unreliable in China. They decided that

7625:

As you can see, Knowledge has a lot to gain from a partnership with Google. As Knowledge expands to become one of the highest-trafficked sites on the Net, we should realize that we cannot stand alone while other companies and organizations unite and help each other. Google also has a lot to gain, and

7329:

Shouldn't trivia sections be trimmed down by consensus on an article-per-article basis? In a lot of areas, the trivia is the most important part, such as certain movies with lots of homages and references. I find some trivia sections to be as obnoxious as you, for sure, but an outright ban or hiding

7065:

Hi, I was wondering if you guys could insert a new language in wikipedia. The language is Romanized Persian. This would be a great idea because there are millions of iranians outside of Iran who grew up in a foregin country with no possibilities of learning how to read Persian. Romanized persian is

6550:

Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I bring it up because I've been burned yet again. Why can't past editors of something that is put up for deletion be notified when this happens? Certainly, these editors would have something to say with regards to whether something should be deleted or

5582:

I think moving all forms of media under one umbrella page would be a reasonable way to expand our featured categories into different formats. At the moment we don't have a high enough volume for a Featured Video, Featured Sound or any other media type (Are there any others?) page, yet we have lots of

4539:

After trawling through a few articles today i thought that a lot of these may benefit from a purely aesthetic perspective if the See Also, External Links and Reference sections were made collapsable. I proprose this as not only would it my mind make pages seem more aesthetically pleasing but it would

4428:

What if the last of the 5 edits is the worst of them? There would have to be an override system, from which many good editors would have to be excluded or nothing would have changed (but then if the override option wasn't widely available, many appropriate overrides wouldn't happen). This proposal is

3083:

scratepad page, like sandbox where I can communicate with a admin even when I am beeing blocked! Since admins should be able to read a history page they should be able to see my message even if the page have been vandalised. This is just to vent your frustration of blocks of shared IPs that many real

2941:

I was thinking perhaps having simply a discriptive word on each button with an "Insert..." written above their containing line. As for how they stand out against the skin, I hadn't thought of that, you make a good point. Although, I'm sure there are other ways of increasing their contrast, such as is

2893:

Unfortunately, it can be really hard to convey in an easy to understand manner what the buttons do, using only a simple image. I think most of are servicable, with the exception of the media file link button (what on earth is THAT?) and the redirect button. However, a redirect page is a pretty hard

2874:

Hi, not to be rude to the person who originally designed them, but I think the tags over the editing box are really quite ugly. Also not very discriptive, when they should be to screamingly obvious to highlight how helpful they really are. After activly editing for over 6 months now, I have only just

2156:

Journals are successful in publishing largely accurate material both because they are paid to do so (the publication's reputation depends on it) and because they've constructed a community of relevant experts around the journal who perform review before and after publication. How long do you think it

2072:

My point exactly! Who do you think edits those pages? Certainly not the original author of the previously published elsewhere publication. The point is that by opening any article up to editing by any random Internet user that you inherently open it up to "...crap spewed from the(ier] mind..." What I

9816:

Whether you're online is typically determined by how long ago your computer last made contact with the servers. A timeout of between five minutes and half an hour is typical. The servers have no idea whether your browser is open or not; HTTP is a pull protocol, so they only know about you when you

9664:

I strongly disagree with this proposal. If I am logged into a language that I don't know very well but still can read, I want to be able to see if there is a link in a language I can read better (e.g., I can follow Russian, but I can't recall the Russian word for English, much less know what the Wik

8942:

and it could sit there for months, because no-one would notice until they were went to the original article and found it at some nutty location. If only one hundred articles are moved every week to a nutty location, and not spotted, that could mean over 2000 articles have been moved this year alone.

8910:

Having seen some of the moves Jtdirl is talking about I am inclined to agree with some of his arguements that it is simply too easy to move a page. One of the most problematic issues is that a move in itself does not flag up in your watchlist - theirfore it might take some time and damage before you

8848:

The current move this page command is now too dangerous given that with Knowledge's size moves may not be spotted, or the scale of moves may be such that no one editor can wade through them all and check them out. We need to get this all under control before it does even more damage. It has done too

8744:

plugin), couldn't it decrease a lot of the CPU usage on WikiMedia servers? This would be a bit like "donating" but in very small increments by a very large group of people, hopefully Knowledge's most frequent users. The goal would be that new users would be less likely to experience (discouragingly)

7941:

Partnerships with a similar organization don't always make sense. You want to partner with an organisation that is strong in your weaknesses. I dont think a full partnership is a good idea, but just puting an optional ads might be. As long as it was off by default, and you had to actually go looking

7914:

corporate. They just have a different philosophy than most corporations. That doesn't make them compatible with Knowledge. Lastly, ads would not only halt donations, but would also drive away a substantial fraction of current editors. Losing experienced users in a big flood is the first stage in the

7827:

There are several flaws in the OP's logic. FIrst of all, wikipedia is a content provider, Google is expressly not. Google is also for profit, wikipedia is not. By the same token, I think ads on wikipedia would be disasterous. Google also does provide a search for wikipedia, just as they do for every

7809:

I'm sure you probably know of Google's special searches. For example, search Google for AAPL and it brings up Google Finance. Sometimes Google News articles will appear at the top of searches. A Google Knowledge search would be somewhere along these lines. If Google implements Knowledge search, when

6949:

I didn't mean to say that there are perfect articles neither that the FA status grants them perfection but it is as of now the last step in the progression of the articles (I have not seen any of these FA articles go back to PR for example. Raising awareness to these assessed GA articles was my sole

6899:

I fully support a little icon in the corner of good articles and an improved awarement/status of good articles. However, I disagree that FA status is the last step to the perfection of an article. Even once the articles reach FA status, they are not perfect, and future editing of featured articles

6888:

Associated to that idea it would be nice to have a template like the FA template that puts a star in the right hand corner who would place the + sign of a good article making it a nice way for users/readers to see the status of the articles their reading. Hope you guys consider this as a policy that

5296:

be a convenient way for users to specify what region of the globe they want in their snapshot though (i.e. The Wikimaps design page can parse googlemaps URLs for zoom/latlong and other info). Anyway, Wikimaps would also solve the problem if---hypothetical example here---Iraq were split up into three

4927:

I find a serif font much more readable (not disabled, just normal older vision) and I am using an alternate presentation for my preference, but this lacks the current layout. The problem is that the current default skin (sans serif) has no equivalent alternative with serif fonts. Only text body need

4424:

I agree that this might diminish wikipedia's adaptability to change, but he has a point in that this trashing/cleaning up of articles can make editors lose a lot of energy. An alternate system could be implemented in which after about 5 edits (?) within an hour, the article would be locked for 1 day

4407:

There are so many articles created in this website that are being edited many times in a single day by different users. Articles dealing with religions are the best examples. I propose that Knowledge should have an edit-locking system. Most of the edits being done in these articles are obviously due

2693:

Hopefully this suggestion would make Knowledge more friendly to IP editors. I think it is important that we encourage them to create accounts. This is because of another issue - shared IPs where an IP editor will receive welcomes or warnings meant for another IP editor using the same IP. However, it

2593:

It's also worth noting that we do try to have redirects from the more difficult-to-spell article names. If you do get to a page eventually after having initially not found it due to an incorrect spelling, it's worth considering adding a redirect from that incorrect spelling so that it doesn't happen

2568:

Whenever I go to search for something in which I am unsure of the spelling I just about never end up in the right place. Is there any way to make it so that if you search for something with no respective page because of a spelling error that there could be a list of "Did you mean..." sort of things.

2148:

Since PCE3/IMHO wants to start afresh I won't mention his motivations for initiating this discussion, but I'll talk about my feelings on original research. There are two sides to OR: on one hand, it's a means of excluding hoaxes and trolling, material that everyone knows to be false but your average

2112:

Unfortunately in many cases peer review can be and is insufficient due to preconceptions that may cloud the vision of peers versus giving them special insight. History is litterd with such examples although many times the expert knowledge that most peers have can help. Jealousy can be a real problem

1841:

You already benefit financially by not having to pay a subscription fee to view articles or to interact with other authors, editors and contributors. If you are in need of money the information you gain here at no cost should help you gain financially elsewhere. If you need more money then you might

1317:

I understand if you take that perspective, but really, while we may edit our own posts, or occasionally reformat threads, most of the time we treat it like a message board anyway - flexibility you don't use isn't useful. But the proof is in the pudding - eventually I'll get a prototype of this going

1269:

A forum would be user configurable so a person could choose whether to view recent or old posts at the top, how many recent posts to display, how deeply nested replies to view. It would allow them to watch threads of interesting to them (rather than just entire pages), highlight their own posts, get

1142:

Its difficult to continue discussions on wikipedia and some dedicated forums that kept a list of links ("subscriptions") where I had posted would be valuable and stop me from having to look for the page I'd posted on (usally a few clicks in itself), scroll down the TOC for the thread I posted on and

9588:

Mild oppose. It does make more sense, but it's been that way for so astonishingly long that it would cause major mindf**ks to all the more elder Wikipedias (such as myself), so for that reason, please don't do it. Also, it wouldn't be retroactive, so we'd have two conflicting versions, which would

9147:

I didn't mean to suggest suppression of autobiography in my attempt at a definition, but I believe autobiography is acceptable under my definition. My definition just says that there must be proof of relevance outside the article author's sphere of influence. So if you're writing an autobiography

8980:

But moves are undoable by anybody except an administrator if the page has been edited since the move. The original name exists as a redirect, and it is impossible (I think) for an ordinary editor to move a page back to its original name. An ordinary editor either has to ask an administrator to do

8465:

When an IP or new-user posts an edit that contains something matching a filter elsewhere (could be a page so things could be added, could be an internal list... only really worth discussing this detail if the rest of the proposal can be shaped into an acceptable form) ((Edit: if the diff contains a

7656:

Agreed. This is a non-starter as an idea. Google is a commercial entity. Knowledge is a non-profit. Google's motivation is profit. Knowledge's is public service. These are fundamentally incompatible. Now if Google wants to donate computers or money, fine. But it must be CHARITY, a DONATION, with no

7579:

We currently have talk pages on Knowledge. However, the system of talk pages has several major flaws. For example, discussion pages get very long because the discussions are not threaded - I don't like to scroll so much. The interface is decidedly user-unfriendly and difficult to navigate - I often

7011:

I totally support this. It is helpful to both the reader (as per Lincher's comments above), and the authors who have an extra initiative to try to improve their article. Featured atices are very demanding and very few articles can ever get there - having a second step just means more feedback and

6328:

The only reason we even bother uploading images in the first place, rather than just referencing external images, is so that they can be stored in a central place and accessed in a consistent way. Without this, the images would be constantly vanishing as servers go up and down, and trying to get an

5461:

Whether change is bad or not, the current process of nominating and promoting pictures will remain unchanged and uninterrupted. This is just an expansion -- except for some sound or video nominations, at this point very little actually changes except the name. In my opinion, the "amount of change

5304:

The answer is clear: a software extension that uses a free map rendering utility and a database of map data to produces maps on the fly given their location, zoom level, and stuff you want on them. In fact, if someone could come up with the rendering utility and database, writing an extension would

4412:

This is another one of those "ummm, no" proposals. Besides the fact that Knowledge is built on the freedom to edit and this value is cherished by its contributors, it would hardly be beneficial to the article to block out both positive and negative changes indefinitely, resulting in an article with

4310:

want people to be able to find what they want without having to be distracted by things they don't want. While yes, content labeling would make it easy for people to restrict others' viewing of Knowledge, it would also allow viewers to filter out things that they themselves don't want to see. For

3919:

I see. One solution would be to additionally upload and link the CSV files, but the software on En is configured to only permit media extensions (.jpg, .ogg, etc.) on uploaded files. You can include the CSV in the wiki source in HTML comments, but telling readers to edit the article and look around

3893:

Templates are great for displaying tables once they have been processed according to a user's needs. My proposal, however, is not to provide the processed data for display in Wiki table format but rather the raw data in its CSV or XLS file format such that a user can do whatever processing he needs

2916:

Could you please be a bit more specific? Which symbols could be more descriptive and how? The signature one is a picture of a signature, which I think is intuitive, although it could perhaps be placed furthest to the right as it is the last thing used when editing. '#R' is esoteric until you have

2736:

As for being lenient generally, realize that many people who "vandalize" Knowledge often don't realize how wikis work. They think "Wait a minute; if anyone can edit, then why can't people just add in random stuff?" and, being hands-on types, give it a try. Once they've been clearly told that what

2729:

No IP address is ever banned indefinitely, except open proxies and other anonymous (non-ISP-granted) addresses. This is for very good reason, having stood the test of time: if we banned every vandal address indefinitely, we'd shut out thousands upon thousands of legitimate contributors, especially

2685:

If you did not have an account (you were an IP editor), you would probably be surprised to see "You have new messages (last change)". An IP editor's reaction would be "I don't have an account with this website. How could I be receiving messages? Is something wrong with Knowledge?" They are unlikely

1646:

Since I have not been editing on the Knowledge for very long and I have plenty of work I can do to keep me busy I have included myself in the following proposal as a user. I have three ideas: 1.) that a ballot for electing a system operator be broken down into many attributes so that each attribute

1253:

It seems silly to assert that a discussion board is insecure (although phpBB might be) - it's just a different interface that provides useful functions for organizing and navigating discussions among people, which is what we do on talk pages and discussion pages. The current system is workable, but

9976:

It would be possible to limit the time period to be displayed and to set the sorting order (ascending/descending) and whether to include all results or only those that have been searched for more than once in this time. AFAIK the only problem (but a hard one) is that someone would have to take his

9931:

I don't know if this has been proposed before, but I'd like to suggest that a log of recently searched for and unfound items is added to Knowledge. By sorting them on the basis of times they were searched for and not found, we could more easily fill the gaps that still remain in the database. This

9107:

For the subject of an article to have encyclopedic relevance, there must be provable common knowledge and reverence of the article's subject within the subject's expected natural sphere of influence and a significant number of references outside the original article author's sphere of influence in

8361:

6), this is a problem. In circumstances like this, is it okay to split a section off an article unilaterally? I think rules are needed about this sort of thing — not just splits, but everything that can be done and undone by regular users — to say that the action can go ahead if there are no votes

8136:

Possibly, but with much stricter requirements. Many pages are protected not for vandalism, but because if they were edited in the wrong way, it could screw up so much. Perhaps no history of vandalism, no history of edit wars, 500 wikipedia-space edits, and 2000 total edits, but now we're getting

7592:

software. We can also discuss Knowledge topics which would be difficult to discuss on Knowledge itself - such as discussions about Knowledge in general (we tend to discuss specific issues in talk pages) and suggestions for Knowledge, as well as off-topic discussion and social interaction among the

7213:

I personally like the current layout better, because the fact of the matter is that more people want to see the languages with more articles than want to see the languages with less articles, so having them together would defy that purpose, even if they were "separated" by the size of the language

6702:

Wow, you guys are committed. I only watch maybe 0.1% of all articles I've ever edited. Whenever I go on "random page" editing campaigns or campaigns for disambiguation or correction of common mistakes in many articles, I watch nothing. I only watch articles that I'm deeply interested in or where I

4074:

You seem to saying that sterile photographs of gentilia, similiar to the kind one might find in a medical journal, are "disgusting". I assure you that this is a minority view, and that even those who wish to apply some sort of system to make potentially disturbing images optional would most likely

3130:

on my user page. This page would hopefully be on many admins watchlist and therefore be a faster way to be noticed. Nevermind, you do not understand the frustration of having a user account and beeing blocked for no reson except sharing a IP, the blocking system is made to protect wikipedia, it is

2167:

The very reason the article on Optimal Classification is no longer available is because there was an admitted need for clarification and in the course of providing such clarification I over stepped my bounds according to WP:NOR policy and used my own original research to provide the clarification.

1959:

Doing it just because it can be done would be silly but that is not the reason. It’s just that the Wiktionary method of dealing with new or just unpublished ideas serves as good example of how a problem that involves publication of unpublished work might be solved. To answer the other part of your

1158:

In my opinion this is but one of many problems that would be solved by modifying the software to organize talk pages as message boards. Our culture is already so strongly against editing or deleting the comments of others that it makes little sense to give us the flexibility to do so, and we spend

9517:

and other materials, I now realize I am not exactly breaking new ground with my proposal. I am humbled by the complexities involved, and thus believe that this isn't worth pursuing as yet another new proposal. However, I will take my views and use them to formulate my own policy with regards to

9493:

I don't know; I think we could have 100 million articles and cruft would still be cruft, to a large extent. There really are probably many more genuine encyclopedic topics than even Wikipedians generally give credit for. A real standard for notability would of course be Knowledge's (or at least

8933:

undoable "without too much grief". Some time ago I had to spend 6 hours over a number of days undoing screwed up moves by another user. It would take one user hours to untangle some of the moves, and verify the name changes, in the example I mentioned originally. They could be fixed easily enough

8844:

The idea would be a variant on the requested moves procedure used right now with admins doing the moves. It could work as follows: {{corrected name|existing name|new name|category|reason}} as in {{Corrected name|Cahal Brugha|Cathal Brugha|Ireland|Brugha spelt his name with a 'th' not a 'h' in the

7706:

The suggestion of Google Knowledge Search, I think, will not attract as much criticism as the other two. They have more information to "organize and make universally accessible and useful", and we will also get more users from Google. We currently have a partnership with Answers.com - we could do

6396:. This would allow a 'workshop' space, with a talk page, located in a logical place, and the template would also be a clear alert to other editors as to where to collaborate on the rewrite, rather than one user performing a large clean up on the article, only to have the temp version pasted over. 6313:

It would be interesting to see if people would donate storage space on their servers for Wiki images. Naturally the admin users of Knowledge would have the external server FTP password. The idea would allow for a huge amount of image data to be stored across the world - making webmasters and site

4446:

I think that something that would add a lot of value to wikipedia would be to have a stub filter in the Random article navigation option. That way, you wouldn't have to fall on a two-liner on some random person in Wisconsin or something while navigating. You should be able to filter off stubs, or

3879:

If you're talking about creating reusable tables that can be used in several articles, you could just create the table using wiki syntax and place it in a template, then transclude it wherever you want. The disadvantage of a CSV format is that it leaves no room for formatting, although really the

3222:

be created such that table contents would follow the common format of placing the name of the table in the upper leftmost cell, the names of the characteristics (independent variables) in the first row beginning with the second column, the names of the elements (dependent variables) listed in the

2993:

affects half of Singapores users, maybe 4 link spams is not a good enough reason to block all of those users. This then hopefully would be a page that some admins would check and be able to correct hasty blocks that other admins had done. Is it possible to create a page like that with the current

2006:

So you feel that if a Knowledge article has been previously published elsewhere in a notable reference and subjecting it to constant edits by anyone and everyone is what guarantees the reputability of the Knowledge but that publishing a previously unpublished article and subjecting it to the same

1724:

A reputability bond is simply what it sound like. You (or a bonding company) put up a financial guarantee (the bond) that your work will live up to your reputation. You may for instance be reputed or said to be the finest craftsman in the field of yacht repair but do the work while intoxicate. An

1307:

An idea isn't bad, just because its been suggested before. The current system of talk pages is a total mess. It's rediculously wasteful to have to watch a talk page with lots of unrelated edits, so that one can see the single reply to a message of interest. Plus, the current system, just can't

9989:

I don't think this would be difficult to code - at worst a new database table might be involved. I think it would be extremely helpful for learning where to create new articles, but even more importantly, redirects. I'm sure many topics searched for have articles but they're using terminology we

9325:

I like the idea in principle of providing a guideline on notability, but I'm not certain of your (Stevie's) proposed definition. I think that may be a little too narrow, and that it needs expanding, with discussion and illustrative examples. We would need to incorporate (and avoid contradicting)

9080:

Moves are fairly normal part of editorial work. There is firstly no good sense to build any more "privileged" positions in Knowledge, such as "privilege to move". I believe persons who are asking such additional privilege system to be built, are nearing the much-warned "instruction creep" stage.

8619:

Admittedly I'm beginning to have trouble reconciling the new backlog of paperwork this would create elsewhere; either removing categories when confirming an edit is valid, or cleaning a page elsewhere in the way that old vfd pages (for example) have to be cleaned up after. It's a balance between

8615:

I hadn't come across it - looks good though, and should probably be used as the basis for comparison for this proposal. Great word list too; the major difference between the two (and to the other RC tools) is that the tools rely on someone being there at the same time. That system does work very

7946:

of donating, if they otherwise would have, then it may be a bad idea. I believe there is a Firefox extension to make google search wikipedia, or at least you can add site:wikipedia.org to the search terms. Google may be anti-corporate, but they are Google Incorporated. Theres no way google would

7909:

threaded when people thread them, as has been done in this very thread above. Furthermore, someone screwing up the wikimarkup in Talk pages is getting necessary experience for learning how not to screw up the markup, and therefore be able to not screw up the markup when they're editing articles.

7714:

In short, I have found various flaws in parts of Knowledge - such as the search engine and talk pages - and I am suggesting how a partnership with Google could help alleviate these flaws. If there are better methods to deal with these flaws, I would be glad to hear them. And these are only three

7710:

The suggestion of a Knowledge forum on Google Groups is primarily intended to address various flaws in the current Knowledge talk page system (mentioned earlier). I would be happy to know other ways for Knowledge to fix the flaws. Remember, Google does not gain any money from our forum on Google

6528:

to a page would not change the article at all, but when the article or a section of it was edited, the template message would be displayed above the editing area. I really think this would help to cut down on the "just being a jackass" type of editing, for example when people go to vandalize the

5602:

This sounds like a great idea to me. Raul, why do you feel so strongly against it? It would save endless debates on whether maps & diagrams should be included (endless because fresh voters at FPC tend to raise the same objections) and give the scope for other media to be featured. Currently,

2413:

Like the American and English versions of English also for other languages have different versions. These differences are not enough to create a new wikipedia language, but some times they are annoying or just to big to ignore. One possible solution for this would by to create sub version of the

1882:

In many cases an article may start off as including no original research or being based on original research but after a few edits in response to editorial suggestions or requests for clarity or expressions of confusion on specific points there may simply be no way to accidentally or intentional

9449:

We definitely have different viewpoints about what should be included in the Knowledge, but let's be clear here: This definition is not about exactly defining what is important, but rather about creating a framework for helping Wikipedians conclude if something is important or not. Recall the

7670:

Wikimedia's goals are likely best served by remaining free of outside corporate influence & advertising. I'd rather they solicit me personally for money, and I think a lot of others feel the same way. If Google wants to implement something that serves out "Google Encyclopedia" pages using

4805:

I've noticed similar problems to dpbsmith when adding footnotes. If it comes immediately after a quotation then it is clear; otherwise, I tend to use them next to statements readers might doubt even if they apply the further text in the same paragraph. It's true that footnotes needn't be just

2707:

I'm sorry, I don't see why the hell anyone wouldn't click on something that said they had a message. I'd also like to add that Knowledge is faaaaar too lenient on vandalism. Whether they see the warnings or not, IP (or registered) users shouldn't be allowed to vandalize 10 times before they get

9470:

define it. As a growing body of work, Knowledge can't afford to have notability standards set in stone. What is notable for an encyclopedia with 10,000 articles is considerably different from what is notable for one with 100,000 articles, and different again from what is notable for one with a

4746:

Jack London desperately wanted to attend the University of California and, in 1896 after a summer of intense cramming, did so; but financial circumstances forced him to leave in 1897 and so he never graduated. Kingman says that "there is no record that Jack ever wrote for student publications"

2196:

and their theories. I've wondered though whether it might not be useful to have something like the antithesis of "Featured article", a status to be decided upon by community process less deadly than deletion, but indicating that the article is not up to the requirements of encyclopedicity. The

1201:

messages. I'm considering implementing a prototype of this sometime on my own Wikimedia server - maybe they'll take a patch from me. As for vandalism, I think letting admins delete messages is probably sufficient - it doesn't really matter how long it sits around on talk pages, they're not the

9228:

says Arby's is important. Other officers of the Arby's corporation (or its parent company) also cannot say Arby's is important. But they (as well as anyone else) can point to third-party entities (outside a conflict of interest) that say Arby's is important. I hope this clarifies things. —

9039:

I think a good feature that WP should consider is a tab specifically for the move history of a page. All too often, it is confusing to sift through the history to piece together what moves were made. That history should "travel" with the page whenever a move is made. Also, summaries should be

8840:

procedure could allow these requests to be categorised so that the request could be seen by someone who knows a bit about the topic/area, etc. If the admin sees that, yes, there is a problem, they could then do the move. If it is debatable, they could put it to requested moves to allow a full

7467:

Google's mission is to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful". Knowledge's mission is probably something similar, only worded differently. Knowledge's information is contributed directly by users, while Google's information is also contributed, albeit

5778:

I think this situation could and should be exploited: perhaps an automated bot could update wiktionary entries with translations from WP interwiki links through some sort of transwiki process? I think it would work very well and would make wiktionary far better than what it is today. The only

4483:

This has been a perennial proposal for years, ever since someone first said "stubs are bad". I really don't think it's going to happen. As for images, I doubt many people use Random Image, and it still requires classification of potentially offensive images versus non offensive which could be

4313:

Questions of other means of censorship could be largely avoided by not using a system like PICS, which includes info in the called page itself; attempted automatic filters other than the MediaWiki software itself would thus have to go to the appropriate Image: page and parse the idiosyncratic

9784:

I don't think that this would work, because (for example), I always am "online", but not always sitting at the computer. Sometimes, if I have to leave to go somewhere for a few hours, and I'm in the middle of something on WP, I will just minimize the WP browser window. So, according to the

7729:

for all the reasons mentioned above. Being indentified with a big business would be a disaster for a project that needs to be seen as impartial. The financial position seems to be fine (at least fine enough for the quarterly fundraiser to be two months late) and there is no reason to suppose

9879:

uses it and many other music oriented programs use it, so I was wondering if Knowledge could use it to help strengthen the album articles and help with WikiProject Albums. Leave comments here or relay this to someone who would be able to work this out. Thanks again for reading my two cents.

9629:

Regarding language names listed in "In other languages", it would be nice, if, for logged in users, the alternate languages of an article were displayed in English (or more precisely, the user's selected language), instead of the native name of the language (e.g. display "German" instead of

9202:

My position is that in determining relevance, we cannot use information that comes from a conflict of interest as I described above (that is, we cannot have someone basically saying "I am important, therefore you must include me"). I'm not saying that someone cannot create an article about

4810:<ref name="Werther" reference="Hoffmeister, Gerhart. [http://www.litencyc.com/php/sworks.php?rec=true&UID=5596 "Die Leiden des jungen Werthers (The Sorrows of Young Werther)"]. ''The Literary Encyclopedia''. 17-Jun-2004. The Literary Dictionary Company. Retrieved 17-Mar-2006": --> 1308:

scale properly. When lots of people are editing at the same time, you get those stupid "edit conflicts", which is silly. I'm not editing another person's text, so I shouldn't get an edit conflict. Also, we have absurd expectations of newbies, to be able to understand how things work. --

7753:

The did it for the money like every other company that collaborates with the Chinese regime; all the rest is just spin. I haven't forgotten about the others, but they don't claim to do no evil. Knowledge however has the honour of being the most popular global website to be banned in China.

6625:. I have a couple of thousand pages on my watchlist (I don't know if that is big or small, actually) and I'm pretty sure I'd see if a page I'm watching were to come up for deletion within the deletion timeframe ... unless it were speedied and deleted in less than 24 hours. User:Ceyockey ( 5800:

I think this is a good idea - you could write a bot that looks at a Wiktionary word listed in English Knowledge, retrieves the titles of each interwiki Knowledge version, and pastes them to the Wiktionary word's talk page with links. Interested contributors could then check and use them.

9785:

automated system, I'm "online" and any user can contact me, but I'm not really available to respond to messages. Another possibility would be to have an "active"/"inactive" status monitor (for example, when you make an edit, your status becomes "active" and after you haven't edited for

8554:

Basically, this is looking to be a list of things often used in vandal edits but rarely or never in valid edits. It is clear that the items in this proposed filter would very likely be subject to argument, nitpicking, etc. Hopefully it can be considered as a whole; the aim of this is to

2515:.IPA { font-family: Chrysanthi Unicode, Doulos SIL, Gentium, GentiumAlt, Code2000, TITUS Cyberbit Basic, DejaVu Sans, Bitstream Vera Sans, Bitstream Cyberbit, Arial Unicode MS, Lucida Sans Unicode, Hiragino Kaku Gothic Pro, Matrix Unicode; font-family /**/:inherit; } 8831:

Maybe it is time to remove the right to move pages unilaterally. We could either require all moves to go through the formal requested moves procedures, though that may be cumbersome where the move is merely to correct an error in naming. Another option might be to create an alternative

4938:

I tried to change the fonts using css, but for some reason it's not working. All other font atributes work, but not the actual font itself (for example, I had no trouble changing everything to bold, italics, changing the size or color, etc.). Maybe someone else knows how to do this?

3223:

first column beginning with the second row and cells that make up the body of the table containing the state of the characteristic for each element. A variety of file extension formats might be used with either a CSV (comma delimited) or an XLS (Excel Spreadsheet) format predominating.

7618:

While Knowledge can use Google Groups as a launchpad, Google Groups can also use Knowledge as a launchpad. We have about 1 million accounts on Knowledge. If several thousand join the Knowledge Google Group, and expand their horizons into other groups, the Google Groups userbase will

5055:

The different language Knowledge articles are independent, so sometimes articles in different languages might be a translation but quite often they are not. The interlanguage links simply indicate that an article on the same topic exists in the other language Knowledge. Please see

4888:

Is the issue you want to address errant links, or users entering "friedman, harvey" into the search box and hitting either "go" or "search"? If the latter, I'm not sure any change is necessary. I just tried it, and "go" doesn't go to the article but does end up doing a search and

8492:

The automation of this proposal - tieing it in with the software - reduces the chance of missing an article. By doing it serverside, traffic is reduced compared to botting; for mediawiki releases, the filter list can be empty, leaving it as an option for the owner of any specific

7711:

Groups - Knowledge and Google Groups only stand to gain users. As the owner of an active and successful Google group for teen chat, and a manager in two other large groups (and other groups), I will be happy to manage the Knowledge Google Group, unless Mr Wales wishes to step in.

5259:

Knowledge does need a map system. There are articles in Knowledge that are tied to a geographical location. Until we have one, there should be a uniform template used for location, so that at some future time, everything with a good location can be tied to the mapping system.

9735:

which shows the major settlements in Lincolnshire. I'd just like to know whether anyone thinks that it would be woth expanding such an idea to other counties. The only issue that I can forsee would be whether to use Ceremonial or traditional counties. Let me know what you think

9418:

Knowledge is not harmed by including non-notable content, but it can be helped. If you look at the costs and benefits, the latter clear predominate. The one and only possible cost is loss of respect—but frankly, I have yet to see anyone say "Knowledge must suck because it has

2368:

I was thinking that if you were to develop a Knowledge search toolbar (similar to Google's search toolbar), it would make it easier for users to access the information and perhaps even expand Knowledge's articles. I wanted to share this thought with you and see what you think.

2583:

has the ability to suggest alternative spellings, but this feature is turned off on Knowledge because it takes too much of our scarce server resources. You can get similar functionality by using Google to search Knowledge by adding "site:en.wikipedia.org" to your search query

9665:

Russian abbreviation is for English in case I know there is an English version and simply want to stick in an over-looked link.) On the other hand, if the name in the language of the Wik site being looked at were in the language of that site IN ADDITION, that would be nice.

6733:

75% of my edits are minor edits; I should have qualified my '10%' statement with that. Second, why are you so worried about things being deleted without your knowing it if you don't bother to monitor for vandalism, that being far far more common than deletion? User:Ceyockey

5603:

there isn't a way to get sounds featured because the page just wouldn't have enough traffic to establish consensus, and movies are acceptable only when converted to .gif format which makes for a huge non-optional download for someone viewing the article they are in (example:

4510:

Partly because no one's interested in developing it, partly because the requirements are so poorly defined that it's not clear how to go about it. No one really agrees on how the ideal random article mechanism would work, and uniformly random seems like a decent compromise.

2218:

Well the antithesis idea sounds good as well as structured and moderated debates but I still don't know how you would be able to exclude original research and conduct a worthwhile debate. Perhaps on the other hand I'm thinking of a siminar rather than a forum for debate.

1451:

Everybody probably still remembers me as the kid who screwed up on the Imperial Guard article, but I just thought it'd be neat if somebody ran an article on the big Dark Crusade campaign that started recently, like what it's about and a basic storyline... any volunteers?

5342:

do so far is encode vectorized mapping information, such as the course of a river, but only point data. We could build a 'vector' template on top of the point templates, simply connecting points, and it would then be up to external applications to display this properly.

8313:

It doesn't just accept articles that have been created but recently expanded stubs also. There's no reason for the topics to get more marginal until we have a full article on them all. And have you any idea what kind of backlog there would be if it allowed any factoid?

7374:

I am merely passing along an idea that came to my head when reading the articles for movies on wikipedia. Why not add a raitng system, where signed in users could rate once on a movie and the average vote for the movie woulf be visible in the table at the right for the

7492:

Knowledge will be able to earn more money from the ads, instead of relying on donations. Knowledge can use this money to upgrade their servers and for more useful things. Users who wish to help contribute money to Knowledge but lack cash to donate can do so with the

4145:

that was suitable for children to browse. Some opposed the idea, others were enthusiastic. The SOS Children's Charity actually did some work along this line, publishing a free version on CD with carefully selected Knowledge content. The free version can be found at

4311:

people who would like to use Knowledge at work, or around family, or in another setting where "dirty" images have to be avoided, a profile setting that would filter out undesired images would significantly increase the utility of Knowledge as an information source.

4759:

the source for all four facts and if someone decided that the fact that he didn't write for student publications was uninteresting, it is quite possible that they might delete the reference along with the text, thus removing the support for the other three facts.

8692:, where it could be used as a filter criterion, and on watchlists. Also, if the likelihood was very high, it might display a warning and require the editor to click "Save page" again in order to do so; vandals who ignored these warnings could be blocked sooner. 9364:

Sounds good to me. As a Wikipedian of over two years, I've long thought a fully fleshed-out discussion on this subject is long overdue. Perhaps it would be a good idea to start working on an official proposal that the community can begin marking up? —

2675:

I am impressed with Knowledge's methods of welcoming newcomers and warning vandals. I was warmly greeted when I first started editing as a registered user. However, I have spotted potential problems with these methods, when used to deal with IP editors.

8484:

Tthe edit link is pasted onto a page elsewhere rather than putting a template or category on the page. This is also feasible with an RC bot, but will probably be simpler with mediawiki source. This does not alert the poster but still flags the edit for

8446:

There are currently systems in place that catch a lot of them, but I use no tools and still come across some to remove by hand, proving that the bots in place by no means catch them all. A bot HAS to err on the side of caution so as not to revert valid

2495:

IN my IE6, the insert box below the edit panel shows a lot of squares, where I suspect the IPA phonetic symbols to be located. Could someone force a font that supports those symbols? In regular articles that can be achieved by enclosing the text in the

3045:

talk page, but not the blocked talk page. If I put the tag on my user page, the admin does not even know which IP I come from and what to unblock, but I will try next time. This is a issue of IP blocks overriding logged in user block and shared IPs.

1915:

If there is no legal reason why original research can not be published in the Knowledge so long as it is designated as such in the Knowledge article title or by placement in a special section then I think original research should be allowed just as

1386:

to note that you're taking up the bug, if you plan to seriously work on this (even if it's a long timeframe). I doubt the devs are going to suddenly take this up, but it's good to keep people informed to minimize the risk of duplication of effort.

4228:

goes to a random image, which could potentially be disgusting. I think that on these pages, users should have to click on a warning link (maybe javascript) before the disgusting image is shown. Kids using wikipedia therefore will be protected from

2689:

My suggestion would be to display the welcome or warning directly, instead of making the IP editor click on "You have new messages (last change)". An IP editor, after making an edit, would find it more logical to see the welcome or warning there.

9279:

It is quite true that the volume of Google hits and/or a subject's ranking in Alexa do not indicate that the subject is "encyclopedically relevant" (q.f. notable), but they do provide some evidence to include when there is nothing else to provide

9021:

function a fair bit in instances that are mostly non-controversial. I think I would lose a fair bit of editing time if I have to request moves for everything. Also, I fix a lot of absolutely terrible moves. That takes long enough without going to

2395:

It's also possible to add an address search keyword for Knowledge under IE. I can't remember how, but I once posted about it on VP. I think that Lalith is suggesting something more complex and featureful though than just a simple search function.

1423: 2510:

Yes the IPA characters are there, but IE isn't selecting a Unicode font. One workaround for this would be to use Firefox - My IE uses Copperplate Gothic for the monobook skin body text, which must be a bug somewhere. Common.css defines the IPA

5757: 4790:

information you want in the footnote. If you want to specify that these three external links supoort this whole paragraph, you can say so. Likewise, if you wish to say that this page in this book says "..." quoting a pragraph, then you can say

4751:

Does footnote 7 support four facts (wanted to attend; did so 1896 after cramming; left in 1897; didn't write for student publications) or only one? You can't tell at a glance whether the whole paragraph is supported, or only the last sentence.

6923:

The general consensus seems against adding a GA icon at the top right hand corner. However, I do support making Good Articles an integral part of Knowledge and ideas that will help raise awareness of the project. Please read my suggestions at

6472:

If this method prevents even 5% of vandalism without discouraging any newcomers from wholesome editing, I think it would be worth it. I would say that any page where over 25% of edits are eventually reverted, this message should be displayed.

9552:

the editor of the reverted-to revision). I think it's confusing to have the username link to contributions, when that's nothing like what we have for signatures and other "default" things: the name by itself almost always links to userpage.

9255:

I now agree with excluding tests for reliable sources, as simplicity is a good thing. But I still can't fathom why anyone would accept self-notability in any possible form, as if someone could assign importance or relevance to themselves. —

3040:

Read what I wrote again! This would be a page where you do not need to revert, it is a page where I have a chance to communicate with a admin when I'm beeing blocked, see it as a temporary scratch pad, not a normal wikipedia page. I can edit

8752:

I am a programmer but unfortunately my wiki expertise is very limited. If there is already a program that does this and if it already has widespread use, let me know. If you know of any reasons this couldn't work, I would also like to know.

7596:

We can use external communities about Knowledge as launchpads to attract users of other sites to join us. For example, in Google Groups, you can join and start groups about your interests. We could join RuneScape World (a Google group about

5426:

would guarantee that a well-established and frequently-visited apparatus is in place once there are enough sound files to warrant featured sounds. If sounds and other media become prevalent enough at a later date, they can be divorced from

4738:

One problem with the present system is that the tag is attached to a single point in the text, and it is therefore not clear what portion of the text is being supported. This gets worse if the text that's being tagged gets edited over time.

2858:

I agree with others - if a site tells me I have a message, I'm inclined to believe it. The false assumptions that a site can only give messages to registered users may be something you believe, but I doubt the population at large shares it.

6442:

For anon users (and possibly for users that have a block history and/or vandalism warnings) on commonly vandalized pages, I think it would help to have a message appear above the edit textarea on the Edit page, reading something like this:

9223:

Example: The President of Arby's can write an article about Arby's. If, for sake of argument, somebody challenges the Arby's article as not having encyclopedic relevance, the President of Arby's cannot provide for proof of relevance that

7707:

something similar with Google, where relevant search results from Knowledge appear in a seperate section. What objections are there? Once again, I have noticed flaws in Knowledge's search engine, and I think it should be powered by Google.

2637:

Usually POV and cleanup require rewrites of entire paragraphs or sections, so anything less than paragraph-specific tags would probably be unhelpful. You could go ahead and make such flags if you want, though: register an account, create

1470:, lighting a panic running through the French lines ("The Guard retreats. Save yourself if you can!"), thereby leading to the total French defeat? Anyway, that is history, and we're willing to forget it. Hopefully you've grown up since. -- 4203:

Indeed. Articles on human body parts should be illustrated with images of human body parts. There are instances on Knowledge where an inappropriate images are pushed into articles where it is tasteless or unhelpful (e.g. this happened on

2622:

Here's a suggestion for a new and/or additional way to cite POV, Cleanup, and other issues. Have a small tag after the infringing statement similar to the tag. That way the editors/readers know not only that there is an issue, but know

6421:

I just mentioned the same thing to someone. Perhaps a Category:Temp or Category:Temp articles could also work, and then just delete the articles after an X number of months of no edits on them. See here for a list of a bunch of them.

1265:

Pages become very large very quickly and have to be manually archived, requiring constant attention, otherwise they become too slow to edit. A forum interface would allow deeply nested replies to be hidden and only recent posts to be

1261:

It's annoying to painstakingly correctly format replies, especially with nontrivial formatting, or when the replies get deeply nested and the indenting has to be "reset". In large threads it's soon impossible to tell who is reply to

1552:

Who says Knowledge is moving towards "being a more and more finished encyclopedia"? Reminds me of the 19th century patent office official who proposed closing the patent office since everything possibly invented had already been.

5772: 4260:

capability for individual pages and images. Perhaps implemented through a template? Alternatively, since Knowledge is uncensored, every page and image should be given an adult content meta-tag so the parent filters can block it. —

3004:

I am also a StarHub user, and I keep getting blocked because of this as well. This is discouraging me from editing Knowledge. Please allow registered users to log in from banned IPs. Or better still, remove any kind of IP editing.

1257:

It's difficult for new users to use. How many times have you seen an anonymous user post something at the top of a talk page, or misformat a reply, or screw up merging an edit conflict, or forget to sign their post using the magic

1334:

How long until we can vote on it? I really think more people would welcome the change than oppose it. The discussion functions are the worst thing on wikipedia (or maybe co-worst with the slow page-loading that sometimes occurs).

8480:

The talk page of the poster has a template added sending a message to that poster that contains some medium that both thanks valid posters for their contributions and also warns vandals that their edit has been noted and will be

1487: 9057:. Editing the page-move message to be scarier would probably also be a good idea. Beyond that, restricting moves so much would add too much hassle to be justifiable. If you think they should be throttled, you can vote for 8990:

There's one exception to that rule: if the sole edit in the history of the target page is a redirect to the page being moved, a non-admin can overwrite it. This means that moves can typically be reverted by ordinary users.

2988:

or something which would be linked from the block page, here all users can always write, it would not need to be a page that is reverted because of vandalism, but a page where I can write and state that e.g. the block of IP

8273:

The purpose of the "did you know" section is to exhibit new articles. The format is largely irrelevant, and some people find it misleading or strange that the "new articles" section is written in this odd "factoid" format.

2101:

I apologize; my response was purely on the notion of storing original research a la neologisms, not to your specific example. However, being put on a website is not usually sufficient; being published in a peer journal is.

8811:

command is now causing more problems than it is worth. Of late a lot of new users seem to join WP and engage in vast numbers of page moves, often without any fixing. Examples of the virtual orgy of page moving can be seen

2313: 7942:

for it in preferences to find the option to turn it on, I dont think it would annoy people too much, since the only people that would get them would be people that wanted them. Although, if people decided to turn on ads

5240:

article we have the problem that someone from way back created PNG maps and uploaded them, but we want to update them. If the original creator of those images disappears, nobody wants to recreate them from scratch. The

2149:

troll is fully prepared to defend to the death using irreputable web sources of their own creation (I don't include your own works in this category). On the other hand, it's another aspect of the general requirement of

9893:

I don't think CDDB would work, because you have to pay an up-front fee, no other similar database can be accessed in addition to CDDB, and the CDDB logo must be displayed. Another alternative that could work would be

5271:

The "creator leaves" problem is solved excellently by SVG. Certainly, though, the consistency issue would be a good one to solve. Regardless, Google Maps is unacceptable unless they're willing to release them freely.

6393: 6318:

Disk space is not a problem for Knowledge. Coping with all the page requests is, especially given that our hardware budget is tiny compared to any other top 20 website, but we seem to be coping with that pretty well

2318:

Hello everyone over here at the proposal village pump. I thought I would request a few of you to give your input on a potential compromise (as well as help teach me how to formalize such) that I came up with over at

10001:

Back in the Stone Age (three years or so ago), this was a feature of Recent Changes. Recently searched-for terms that were not found were included in the list of changes. It was removed somewhere along the line.

8406:

Well, I think it should be less than a week for high-profile articles (where there should be plenty of users watching the article, and a lack of comment indicates a lack of opinion). If it takes a week just to get

2994:

wikipedia code? Today I can not even edit the blocked IP user page, since it is not mine, even though I share the IP (I guess I could if I logged out ...), I can update my user page but which admin would see that?

9296:

If there's nothing else to provide verifiability, then it is worth asking whether the subject is notable enough to belong in an encyclopaedia. It might be, but it should surely provoke some serious consideration.

4839: 4075:

disagree. In any case, until you clarify what exactly you're proposing, what kind of standard would exist etc. this will not be supported or implemented (largely because there's nothing to support or implement).--

7849:

article by Hildanknight. I'm sure Knowledge can make their own discussion group - by all means! However, Google Groups is easier to use, rather than spending months programming a discussion forum into MediaWiki.

7584:

is an idiotic mother f***ing b******", while leaving the Hildanknight signature in place, and an admin might block me, thinking I wrote the comment. (DISCLAIMER: This is not my opinion of Mr. Wales. I think he's

6565:

Note: I certainly have put up articles or whatever for deletion without notifying all their past editors. However, what I am talking about is that there needs to be some sort of automatic notification set up. —

5919:

Good plan (though obviously any "decided" categories would probably be subject to change again once we started the categorisation - but that pretty much goes without saying). If you start such a Project, can you

2768:

is severely restricting my ability to contribute to Knowledge. I find myself unable to edit a quarter of the time. My IP - 202.156.6.54 - is shared by practically the whole of Singapore - about 4 million people.

1438: 6232:

I personally think that when you have a numbered list (ol) you should indent the numbers a bit from the rest of the text so that they stand out. That's why I suggested a compromise with both at a 2.4em indent.

4730: 2686:

to click and read the message. In addition, they would have to scroll to the end to read the welcome/warning (if the talk page is long). Therefore, they would not receive our well-meaning welcomes and warnings.

3026:

to your talk page, which is always editable unless it's protected. Creating a separate page all blocked IPs can edit would be pointless because of all the frivolous edits legitimately blocked users would make.

5098:), I notice that there is a search text box on the left hand side. This is the only text box on the entire page, and a fairly important one, too (seeing as it links to all the articles one may want to visit). 1641: 1500: 8177:

Being an admin is not, nor should be a demanding job. We have hundreds of admins who haven't logged in in months. It's just a user with access to some extra software functions, it's not supposed to be a big

7828:

domain they index. In the search add "site:en.wikipedia.org" before your search terms, and it'll search just on the wikipedia domain. Lastly Google groups is nothing special - it's actually just a mirror of

2332: 8428:

This is apparently technically simple, but has met resistance in the past; hopefully putting this new angle on it will help. I'm sorry it's come out very long, but hopefully I've covered most of the bases.

8206:

Note that some pages are protected for legal reasons, such as the disclaimer and GFDL. In my opinion, not even admins should be permitted to edit these. We don't currently have a protection level for this.

7885:

One of many concerns that have been expressed about the Google interface is that novices may have difficulty realising that they are participating in a Usenet newsgroup rather than in a web forum hosted by

5451: 4565:

for instance. It can be set to be closed by default with a little tweaking. It's also fully compatible with non-Monobook skins, as they merely don't have the hide link and always see the sections expanded.

9402:

does cover most of the common cases. Most trouble in the individual notability area is related to lesser figures in the entertainment industry, and for those, we have reasonably objective standards, like

5222:

And why exactly would we need a Google Map for Bolivia in an encyclapedia, Knowledge and Google Maps are both great services but so is Dry Cleaning and Car Washing, and you don't see anyone offering both.

7529:

Google offers all kinds of searches, such as Google Blog Search for blogs. Google could offer a Knowledge Search allowing Google users to search Knowledge. This could extend to Knowledge's search engine.

4858:

Since Knowledge does not list biographical articles by last names (as most traditional encyclopedias do), new users might have trouble finding such articles. So I suggest that we create <last name: -->

9205:

Anyone should be able to create an article about any relevant subject, even if the author is the subject. But in determining relevance, the subject and intricately linked parties cannot be trusted as a

9168:

For the subject of an article to have encyclopedic relevance, there must be provable common knowledge and reverence of the article's subject within the subject's expected natural sphere of influence.

3894:

by using any number of methods available as built-in functions which Excel or other programs can provide in preparation for creation of his Wiki formatted table of the preocessed data to be displayed.

5611:

be very different — the most important remain (1) candidates must be a valuable contribution to the encyclopedia, and (2) they should represent Knowledge's best content. The procedure does

1290:

As a frequent user of forums and someone who programmed a barebones forum myself, I disagree - for our purposes on Knowledge, talk pages work better because they are organic. And as I alluded above,

4495:

Why do you think it isn't going to happen? No one willing to code it? I mean, at least the article rating thing can't be so bad since most are already "rated" Guitar George 11:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

3920:

for it is no good. Both these solutions have the problem of redundant representations. I'm afraid I don't have a really good answer, short of a software change - you can suggest software changes at

9940:. I'm thinking of posting this to Bugzilla, but would rather first hear the opinion of other users. Perhaps this has been talked about extensively already and found to be unfeasible or unusable. -- 1872: 1659: 8349:. I still have not received a single response, let alone enough to establish a consensus. If I wait, the split may never happen, even if it is the most popular and logical course of action. Since 4799: 6329:

image updated after a change could be really annoying. A good shared image serving protocol could deal with these issues elegantly, but an ad hoc approach would be a cure worse than the disease.

4781: 1350:

I don't think a mere vote is adequate for such a disruptive and difficult software change. It needs to be first established as effective in at least one case study external to English Knowledge.

6987:

It lets people know that if they didn't achieve FA status this time at least they are at GA status and they can still work on the article (because GA normally comments the articles they review).

4818: 2682:

As a registered user, seeing "You have new messages (last change)" makes sense. The messages are sent to my account - more specifically, my talk page. But it does not make sense for IP editors.

1539:, two similar but much broader proposals. Vandalism is a pain but usually quickly reverted - more problematic is well-meaning but misguided edits which degrade an article's quality over time. 8236: 2277:

Montenegro recent independence would require world maps to be updated and Knowledge is no differenent. Now is this going underway or should it? Also how many maps exist the need to be updated?

7845:

Many people think that Google Groups is just a mirror of Usenet. This is WRONG. The first version was a mirror of Usenet. However, we can now create and manage our own groups. Please read the

4834: 4188:

Seems to me that when one human being finds images of another (or part of another) "disgusting" that says far more about their state of mind than wikipedia, western culture or anything else.

2737:

they're doing is unacceptable, they get brief blocks to show them that there are consequences. And finally, they get blocked for up to a week or a month when it seems they're incorrigible. —

9381:

Note to all: I'm off on vacation for the next few days. On Thursday or thereabouts, if there's interest in working on this as a proposal, I will rejoin the discussion at that time. Thanks!

1942:

Of course there's no "legal reason" not to publish original thought -- what does that have to do anything? There's no "legal reason" to maintain a neutral point of view either. Why would we

6990:

If the article doesn't get the FA status often the major editor will depart from working on the article and thus this article will stay in oblivion and never be 'completed' or ameliorated.

2490: 7626:

they will probably be interested in the amount of information Knowledge has to offer. I do not think these suggestions will be difficult to implement. Your feedback is most appreciated.

6972: 5898:

Of course, I was just using those as an example. I think maybe I will start a Wikiproject for this. First the categories can be decided, and then all the existing ones can be sorted.--

5881:

I wouldn't use "Mathematician", "Computer Scientist" as separate things - "Mathematics" and "Computer Science" should encompass both people in the field and the field itself. I think. --

1569:

If we semi-protect our best (and most popular) articles (and the ones newbies are most likely to see), we may as well semi-protect the whole encyclopedia. Not necessarily a bad idea...

10016:

In response to Eleassar, my concern isn't that the page will mention the person's name / IP, but that people may not want even the misspelling of their search to be publicly available.

6876: 2558: 1816:

But what of financial gain? From what you say, it sounds like I can lose money by clicking the wrong thing, but no matter what, my coffers never grow. Sorry, but no thanks. I'm poor. --

1159:

altogether too much time dealing with manual archiving and formatting our responses with appropriate indentation and so on. Wiki just doesn't make sense for discussion pages like this.

8462:

When a registered user posts, nothing different. Registered users are more likely to be making valid posts, and this type of vandalism seems close to nonexistent from registered users.

8244:

everyday some very interesting "Did you know" facts are on the main page of Knowledge. But there is a strict rule saying that the facts cannot come from articles older than four days.

6293: 5774:

and thus using this dictionary "professional wrestling" would be translated as "profi birkózás", which is nonsense. So in this case, WP is more accurate than a professional dictionary.

2504: 5604: 9680:

I'm trying to revive my earlier proposal, and am looking for nominations, if not to "featured sound" status, then at least to something preliminarily like "good sounds". Please see

7715:

possible implementations of the proposed Knowledge-Google partnership. I am sure there are many more ways to implement such a partnership, and again, I would be glad to hear them. --

4932: 8381: 6893: 6559: 4922: 4425:(?). That's just an idea, the numbers aren't too proper I believe, but that could be an alternative to permanently shutting down the article. Guitar George 11:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 2379:

There is a Knowledge toolbar available for the Firefox browser, but if you use IE, you can use the Google search toolbar and just include "site:en.wikipedia.org" to your searches.

6981:

It tells readers that the article has been reviewed or at least been read through and it complies with the GA criterias (which is an easier version to achieve of the FA criterias).

2320: 1211:

I find that discussions on Knowledge are very difficult to follow and too long. I think there should be some sort of threading system. Or we could have a Knowledge forum hosted on

8267: 4928:

be serif - section titles san-serif are not a problem. So this is a request for a display preference that is always up-to date graphically but has this text preference. Thanks, -

2716:

ban; just perma-ban the bastards after 5 vandalisms -- it's not like that they a) give a crap about losing a chance to help the site or b) don't have a cycling IP address anyway.

9128: 4084:

I seriously doubt that is a minority view among users of all ages and all countries, as opposed to the right-on young Westerners who are massively over-represented on Knowledge.

8888:

I disagree, on the grounds that a user without the option to move may be tempted to copy-paste move instead, which would double the mess. Maybe we should consider modifying the

6423: 5104:

I think it would be of interest to consider making the search text box the default focus for the curser, to save even that little bit of time for frequent visitors to the site.

1492:

As Knowledge moves towards being a more and more finished encyclopedia in many of its articles; it would be useful not to waste as much energy fighting off vandals. i recommend

7639:

All I'm gonna say is, ummm, no. This proposal combines at least three radical ideas that most people reject. It has about as much chance of passing as a monkey does of getting

1725:

alternative is the performance bond wherein you guarantee that regardless of your reputation or credentials the job you do will meet or surpass expectations without complaint.

1614: 8440:

Shouldn't prevent the edit in the first place, as it is Against The Spirit of Knowledge. (ie, has to be a secondary action to the post, not preventing the post from happening)

6545: 4339:

After looking at the three articles listed by the original complaintant and seeing nothing that even remotely looks disgusting, it leads me to wonder what was used as a basis.

2788:

That's crap and you know it. I've seen plenty of users with 6+ warnings and not a sign of any intention to truly block them. It's a policy that clearly needs to be addressed.

2446: 9487: 9090: 8160:

Yes, though users like me will never go for adminship because it is too much of a demanding job and would maybe like to modify these vandal-free articles w/o being an admin.

3140:

You mean a list of "Wikipedias requesting to be unblocked", similar to a "Wikipedians looking for help" list? (Banned from using helpme tag by Commander Keane). Good idea. --

6300: 7412:

on anything whatsoever. If you would suggest that movie articles should mention aggregate user ratings from sites such as IMDB in infoboxes, that's a different question. —

6925: 5952: 5846:

Definitely. Perhaps just a few categories, so it doens't get too complicated. Some basic categories like mathematician, scientist, historian, etc. would really be nice. —

5840: 1430:

This is a proposal for the purpose of making it easier to identify the edit revision in an article's edit history at which point it has received/lost its featured status.--

9420: 7122: 6287: 5707: 4097:

a minority view. In any case, I was speaking about Knowledge editors, rather than the world at large, so I can be relatively certain that it is not a majority viewpoint.--

7657:

strings attached. No AdSense words on Wiki pages. No mandatory Gmail or Groups accounts, etc. etc. I can't even begin to describe what a morass this idea would create. --

5794: 5596: 5478: 5443: 4632: 4546: 2351: 4394: 2085: 2047: 7425: 5646: 4763:

I wish that the ref mechanism involved not only a pair of tags containing the reference, but a pair of tags delineating the entire range of text that it is supporting.

4681: 1197:

It's a lot of work yes, but it's one-time work by a few people that produces an ongoing benefit for many people. As for wiki markup, there's no reason it can't be used

7335: 5375: 4811:

Like some modern bestsellers, the book spawned a ] industry, with items like Werther eau de cologne and porcelain puppets depicting the main characters.</ref: -->

8477:

The article also has a category added to it or its talk page, flagging it for review. This would be a handy tool for the RC patrol, and would also be a Place To Help.

7339: 5484:

This is a horrible idea. If you want featured types of other media, set up a page for it, go out and find/generate some. Renaming the featured pictures is pointless.

5414:, an experimental initiative intended to feature sound files, died a quick death (not having nominated a single file) because there aren’t very many sound files (see 4215: 2813: 2720: 1629:. The system would be relatively easy to implement, if there is sufficient demand to justify it, although assistance from Wikipedians with bots would be appreciated. 8696: 8635: 8610: 8318: 7389: 7110:? Assuming it is straightforward to transliterate between Farsi and pseudo-Roman characters, maybe it would be possible to just have a Romanized skin on top of the 7060: 6537: 6509: 6389: 5439: 4702: 4570: 4378: 9391: 9348: 8616:

well, for the most part, and all credit to the other anti-vandals for being there to catch the vast majority. This proposes to catch those who slip through the net.

7401: 6574: 6431: 5117: 4600: 2845: 2792: 2750: 2655: 1543: 9856: 8776:

parser in Javascript. Realistically, probably 95%+ of resources are spent serving anonymous browsers, not editors, so it wouldn't make any significant difference.

6491: 5811: 4943: 4523: 2998: 1618: 1431: 10031: 9640:

This would require a software change. The meaning of language codes can be found by looking for the appropriate article, if you're interested; am stands for the

9458: 9440: 8646:

I think that could be taken a step further. Each time an edit was made, it would be rated for its likelihood of being vandalism, based on the following criteria:

7891: 7854: 7836: 7703:. However, I understand Wikipedians' objections to advertising. Advertising raises NPOV issues. Knowledge also might not wish to be involved in corporate affairs. 7633: 6868: 6851: 5615:

depend on specialists for each media type: IMO the impact of any media on the general reader is at least as important as the impression it makes on specialists ~

5568: 5285: 4893:

was listed as the first match. If you're creating a link, I'd think you'd notice pretty fast that the "last, first" form doesn't work but "first last" does. --

4101: 4088: 2773: 2260: 1517: 9170:

Further, all references provided for proof should rest outside the direct influence of the subject itself as well as intricately linked parties or organizations.

8062: 7922: 7818: 6647:

Ummm, no. I don't have the time in my life to monitor *all* articles I've ever edited. I only monitor a small subset thereof, you know, to keep myself sane. —

6522: 5390:, although I didn't change much. Since Knowledge aims to construct an encyclopedia, I think the first two criteria are the most important for featured content. 5138: 4999:, which I've tested. Specifying a particular font name with font-family works for me after refreshing. I don't know where proposals for skin changes go, maybe 2665: 2631: 1972: 1950: 1364: 1340: 1148: 50: 9920: 9811: 9740: 9526: 6815: 6681: 6655: 6634: 6384:, which means that there is no space to discuss the expansion of the article, or moving to user space, which can make it hard to find. I suggest a page such as 6292:

The mainpage captions for our daily featured pictured are generally in a sorry state, and often have little to nothing to do with the actual image. Please see

5155: 4970: 4654: 4237: 3941: 1757: 1633: 1248: 8057:

For instance. If I search for 'Special air serv' it will find nothing, but it would be good if it suggested that you try something like 'Special Air Service'.

7804: 7775: 7719: 7675: 7324: 7037: 7006: 6954: 6944: 4587: 4358: 4327: 4284:

That is censorship, pure and simple. It isn't directly censoring the images, but it helps others to censor the images, which still amounts to censorship, and

2639: 1526: 10070: 10040: 9657: 9004: 8920:

As long as moves are un-doable without too much grief, this is consistent with Knowledge's basic approach - anyone can edit, and anyone can undo the edit. --

7758: 7748: 7734: 6279: 6120: 6077: 5623: 5501: 5488: 4722: 4079: 3153: 3144: 3009: 2283: 2231: 2205: 1799: 1192: 10028: 9983: 9946: 9830: 9613: 9498:; I've often thought something quantitative might work out, if it was based on, say, an exhaustive micro-study of the possibilities in one small Ohio town.-- 9411: 9373: 9359: 8795: 8757: 7951: 7331: 7275:

We see this in a lot of pages around wikipedia. Lists that have got out of control and continue growing making the main article smaller than this list (e.g.

6608: 6587: 6357: 6255: 5928: 5902: 5264: 5107: 5028: 3988:

is nice because it uses drawings to illustrate the topic, no real images (thank god), and remmember, there are kids using wikipedia these days, thank you. --

3201: 3192: 2985: 2907: 2809:

They were warned, blocked, then, when the block expired, they vandalised again, were warned again and eventually were blocked again. That's my hypothesis. --

2789: 2717: 2662: 2628: 2125: 2019: 1989: 1854: 1820: 1737: 1707: 1690: 1669: 1540: 1312: 9669: 9264: 9250: 9237: 9218: 9195: 9185: 9156: 9142: 9074: 8718: 8283:

I think DYK needs to be kept under review and may require major reform at some point as new articles are inevitably about less and less substantial topics.

7647: 7360: 7284:

Why don't we make a template that would hide the trivia unless the user clicks show. An easy way applying it to an article is to make it possible by adding

7203:. This cloud makes even the smaller wikis noticeable and the alphabetical arrangement makes them searchable. Can we replace the current lists with this? -- 7016: 5868: 5534: 5513: 5309: 4904: 4372: 4192: 4179: 4134: 2928: 2863: 2535: 2531:

you should be able to see the IPA characters in the insert box. More generally, you could apply it to the 'body' class. Experts may have a better ideas. --

1770: 1560: 1223: 9573: 9471:

million articles. As th number of articles changes, so too must our levels of required notability. (For a more thorough explanation of this viewpoint, see

9318: 9291: 8905: 8130: 7935: 7699:

article to find a webmail provider. And they are surely better than all the spam links commonly added to articles. Knowledge can earn more money, like the

7309: 5885: 5662:

It could just be a list of things, for example the connection between a computer and a calculater would be binary code, and sometimes a lcd screen, our:

5361: 4940: 4814:

This would have little difference on the page output at the moment. Alternatively, notes could be left for future editors as HTML comments (also ugly). --

4301: 4069: 4026: 3928: 3906: 3135: 3115: 3088: 3074: 3050: 3035: 2950: 2627:

the issue is so as to better address it. This, of course, would be used in conjunction with the large tags already in use at the top of articles/sections.

2606: 1588: 1497: 1478: 1377: 1368: 1354: 1163: 10020: 9956: 9502: 8415: 8397: 8366: 8296: 8164: 7153: 6918: 5080: 5007: 4433: 4272: 2701: 2588: 2484: 2297: 1409: 1400: 1206: 1181: 8985: 8883: 8527:

Notifying valid editors that their edits are being taken notice of may scare them off; hopefully the wording of any notification could take care of this?

8151: 8002: 7293: 7245: 7232: 7168: 6969: 5455: 4672:

I suggest this not be implemented until there is an overwhelming consensus about that, as it is a very big style change to Knowledge articles. Comments?

4154: 4085: 2924:

6/7 chrome skin, and not Windows 95. The buttons stand out from the background of the monobook skin, which makes them more functional than aesthetic. --

2161: 1322: 1302: 1285: 9994: 9582: 9191:

once - I think it's better to depend on the reputability of the sources, as many crank theories are based on irreputable sources created by the author.

8915: 8376:. If you ask for comment, and no-one says anything for a week or so, that's plenty of evidence that no-one's going to object if you do it. If someone 8287: 8195: 6776: 6743: 6707: 6481: 5185: 4913: 4556: 2527:.plainlinks { font-family: Arial Unicode MS, Lucida Sans Unicode, Hiragino Kaku Gothic Pro, Matrix Unicode; font-family /**/:inherit; } 10009: 8924: 8869:

I don't think it is a problem, I think that it would be better to just have a few people randomly check the Page Moves log (which I do often, anyway) —

8182: 7447: 7379: 7089: 7030: 6965: 6333: 5110: 4861: 4413:

all the failings of a Brittanica article in its inability to rapidly adapt to new information and to receive fixes to factual errors post-publication.

4168: 3897: 2960: 2251: 2222: 2171: 2116: 2076: 2010: 1963: 1927: 1845: 1790: 1728: 1681: 1650: 1573: 1360: 1336: 1144: 9634: 9030: 8896: 8278: 8228: 8211: 8020: 7661: 9778: 9718: 9701: 8411:

comment, it could take months to get a quorum of opinions. I intend to make the split this afternoon (that's four days) if there's still no comment.

7990: 7690:

Their mission is to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful". Knowledge and Google would thus strike a chord.

5447: 9301: 9085: 9044: 8680:

An edit is much less likely to be vandalism if it is from an established account. ("Established" would mean a certain age and a certain edit count.)

7051: 9726: 8123:

However, the downside is that if a blocked user with this permission were to abuse their talk page, then protecting the page will not help at all.

7353: 7024: 6772:

Uh, what? I didn't say anything about deletion. Or vandalism. I only read the very last part of this conversation, I'm not trying to make a point.

6018:

The indention of them is quite different. Could this be modified so that the levels of both unordered and ordered lists are the same at each level?

5805: 4515: 4505: 2461: 2400: 1883:

avoid inclusion of original research in an article in order to make the clarification or to eliminate confusion by anyone who lacks the ability to

6415: 1456: 7564:

I have proposed this before, and if Knowledge and Google form a partnership, this will make even more sense. We will set up a Knowledge forum on

6381: 5552: 4417: 4161:

I'm sorry that images of the human body disgust you. Maybe you should consider configuring your browser so as not to be forced to view images.

4045: 3989: 2947: 2884: 5400:

Renaming a number of pages and updating a number of others to reflect the change requires a fair amount of work. Is it really worth the trouble?

5253: 5232:

I have a related suggestion: incorporate some form of map-colouring/labeling markup directly into Knowledge. The mechanism could work much like

2135:, an offshoot of Knowledge designed to allow original research and non-NPOV articles. These ideas are antithetical to Knowledge's principles. — 9898:, for two reasons: all of its content is under the GPL (so Knowledge could use it) and it accepts and returns UTF-8 data, which WP also uses. — 9887: 9789:

minutes your status becomes "inactive", but this would require a software change to MediaWiki, and is not something we could do on WP itself. —

8092: 7292:

in the end of the list. Anyone who can write such template for Knowledge, I think he would highly improve the quality of many many articles. --

6672:

I don't monitor all the articles I've edited either, only about 10% of them ... and I only actively monitor about 10% of those. User:Ceyockey (

2883:

editor, effort should be made to make them as perfect as possible. Just like the amount of time that clearly went on our wonderful Main Page --

2180: 1936: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1043: 1039: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1003: 999: 995: 991: 987: 983: 979: 975: 971: 967: 963: 959: 955: 951: 947: 943: 939: 935: 931: 927: 923: 919: 915: 911: 907: 903: 899: 895: 891: 887: 883: 879: 875: 871: 867: 863: 859: 855: 851: 847: 843: 839: 835: 831: 827: 823: 819: 815: 811: 807: 803: 799: 795: 791: 787: 783: 779: 775: 771: 767: 763: 759: 755: 751: 747: 743: 739: 735: 731: 727: 723: 719: 715: 711: 707: 703: 699: 695: 691: 687: 683: 679: 675: 9839:

In general, MediaWiki developers prefer to minimize frills like this that require database queries. You could file an enhancement request at

7066:

great, because then all the iranians from all over the world could read and understand the persian language, not only the migrated Iranians.

5698: 5397:

Portals, lists, and articles are featured through different processes. Why should different media types be featured through the same process?

1946:

to do this? What purpose does it serve? It seems to me like you're saying we should include this just because we can, which is rather silly.--

1892:

The problem of upholding the "no original research" policy here in the Knowledge is very much like a similar problem in the Wiktionary of "no

9962:

The personal data (IP numbers/usernames) should be available to developers only. The log for others users would contain the following data:

8038: 5829: 5356: 2365:

My name is Lalith Polepeddi and I am from Denver, Colorado. I use Knowledge often and I am very thankful for its services and availability.

2142: 671: 667: 663: 659: 655: 651: 647: 643: 639: 635: 631: 627: 623: 619: 615: 611: 607: 603: 599: 595: 591: 587: 583: 579: 575: 571: 567: 563: 559: 555: 551: 547: 543: 539: 535: 531: 527: 523: 519: 515: 511: 507: 503: 499: 495: 491: 487: 483: 479: 475: 471: 467: 463: 459: 455: 451: 447: 443: 439: 435: 431: 427: 423: 419: 415: 411: 407: 403: 399: 395: 391: 387: 383: 379: 375: 371: 367: 363: 359: 355: 351: 347: 343: 339: 335: 331: 327: 323: 319: 315: 273: 269: 265: 261: 257: 253: 249: 245: 241: 237: 233: 229: 225: 221: 217: 213: 209: 205: 10053:

make it difficult for things like this to be properly logged. If you would like support for this software to be added to MediaWiki, ask at

6323: 5227: 4488: 4013: 10049:

I suspect there might be database load issues involved with this, or impracticality due to the server setup; apparently the heavy usage of

8069: 5945: 5458:

times, and has established a weak (but existent) bias against non-pictures. I think eliminating the doubt is worth the trouble of renaming.

5415: 5323: 2832:

Exactly as I said, there is never any intention to "truly" block any IP address other than an open proxy. IP addresses are often shared. —

311: 307: 303: 299: 295: 291: 287: 283: 279: 201: 197: 193: 189: 185: 181: 177: 173: 165: 161: 157: 153: 149: 145: 141: 137: 133: 129: 125: 121: 117: 113: 109: 105: 101: 8041: 2106: 10037: 9991: 9247: 9192: 9139: 9041: 9027: 8893: 8724: 8275: 8208: 8179: 8054:

i think it would be excellent if Knowledge had a function like google were it offers alternates for your search, ones similiar to yours.

7644: 7588:

Creating a Google Group about Knowledge would enable us to have threaded conversations about Knowledge, circumventing limitations in the

7468:

indirectly, by users and webmasters. Google and Knowledge could easily co-operate to form the largest information database in the world.

7452: 7357: 7345: 7048: 7044: 6773: 6704: 6330: 5802: 5713: 5306: 5077: 4512: 4485: 4414: 3925: 3881: 2860: 2397: 2304: 2272: 2158: 1406: 1374: 1351: 1319: 1282: 1203: 1160: 9688: 7438: 7207: 6984:

It serves as a grading tool for the articles telling the readers that an article has gotten this status and is on his way to get better.

6037: 5071: 4872: 10036:

Some of this can be handled by automatic search. Some of it can't, if the proper article doesn't even mention the popular search term.

9926: 9867:

My father also introduced a new idea for me to inquire about. We have a project related to the albums that have articles on wikipedia,

9518:

notability, and use that in deletion discussion. I suppose that is what every Wikipedian does anyway, albeit in an informal manner. —

8098: 6369: 6226: 5786: 5206: 2887: 2386: 1596: 1240:.) Anyway, the current system works fine IMO. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Shouldn't this be among the perennial proposals anyway? 9644:, for instance. But really, why is an article written in a foreign language whose alphabet you can't understand interesting to you? — 9172:

Neither the volume of Google hits nor a subject's ranking in Alexa (if it's a website) provide sufficient evidence for these purposes.

8981:

something, or start a vote to move the page back. The present system makes it all too easy for new editors to make a mess of things.

8683:

Obscure articles (those which are rarely viewed and have few inbound links) are rarely vandalized once they've existed for a few days.

8577: 8504:

Is a useful duty that new admins can help with and (afaict) should tie in well with the admin tools to be able to block problem users.

7979: 4314:

plaintext image labeling before deciding whether to display the image, an unlikely feat for anyone to bother with for a single site. —

3984:

and other articles like that, but most of those pictures are taken at home of some fat guy's dick, that's just messed up. The article

1985:

Because we want to be a reputable encyclopedia, not just a place for people to host their essays. Wiktionary's rules are their own. --

8330: 7989:

I've proposed a future event template to cover future events that are mandated by law, but which might not actually take place. See

7610:

External communities will help Wikipedians expand their horizons and knowledge. They can then contribute this knowledge to Knowledge.

7296: 7070: 6999: 4806:

references, but sometimes mixing references and commments looks ugly. How would a variant on the system look? Perhaps something like

8705:

Is there any pressing reason to implement this software-side when Javascript and external applications do such a good job already? —

8250:

There are several interesting facts like "Egypt and Syria used to be one country" or "Inner Mongolia is actually in China" or "King

8051:

When one searches for an article, and makes some sort of grammatical error it just comes up with a screen saying: Thread not found.

7443:

Perhaps adding the ratings from various sites such as IMDB would be good and maybe even from prominent critics. It's just an idea --

5522:). I agree the people might be different, but they can choose which nominations to discuss based on their interest (as they must at 1344: 1152: 9681: 8507:

Does not need to err on the side of caution because it does not make any visible changes to the article, unless a category is added

7537:

Knowledge can use Google as a launchpad. Google will "refer" many users to Knowledge, and hopefully we will gain more contributors.

3197:

I did, long time ago, and as I said that proposal is beeing worked on as far as I know, but my proposal could be implemented NOW.

2617: 2573: 2434:

This would allow each community to changes the pages for their specific rules, but still maintaining and unified language version.

7180: 8729:

There are many people that read Knowledge pages quite a bit. I know I request at least 50 pages from en.wikipedia.org every day.

5825: 4254: 1168:

I have to agree, but it's going to be low-priority. It's just too much work for something that works now (albeit imperfectly). —

9763:

I have an idea for the webmasters on wikipedia, if they are interested. I know there are numerous websites out there, including

9758: 8103:

I'm proposing a new permission setting that allows users to edit any fully protected page, even if they are not administrators.

5169: 4766:

This could have other potential benefits, as well. Currently, if an article actually comes close to meeting the requirements of

1281:

In short, yes, it is broken. Yes, we should fix it. I barely even use forums but the advantages are painstakingly obvious here.

9532: 7984: 6314:

owners part of the Wiki project. I would wish to offer several hundred GBs towards this. Post here and I will get back to you.

3884: 1236:

The devs have rejected usage of a forum as too unsecure for our purposes. (Although maybe this was just specifically meant for

67: 8224:

and disclaimer are two pages — and the only two pages — for which OA protection might be justified for more than a few weeks.

1462:

We didn't know you were a kid then. Was that screw-up what started the infamous headlong retreat in disarray and chaos of the

8802: 4368:

I would like to see more examples of these allegedly disgusting pics before I make up my mind. Please post more links. :-)

4055: 3999: 1291: 87: 9990:

never thought of. It may be that large numbers of users are hitting certain common names and right now we just don't know.

8013: 8007: 5506:

Criteria for pictures and soundfiles are likely to be very different, and so will be the people interested in the process.

2440: 8513:

Yet another way to help, and brings similar problems together in the same way as stubs are together, projects are together

7784:

I think advertising sucks too, but I like targeted advertising - it "gives me what I want". For example, if I went to the

7241:

people to the small languages whose speakers may not even think that an encyclopedia in their native tongue is possible.--

5547:(media peer review)? I think not. People self select so having a review page for all media would be a logical analogue to 4617:

Have gone ahead and altered 3 articles and gave them a collapsable external links and see also section those articles are

9732: 9621: 8766:

and so on from there. It's been done, it's being worked on, it's impossible to do perfectly for various subtle reasons.

7580:

screw up with my formatting. Finally, other users can edit my comments. For example, someone could change my comment to "

7431:

Just about each country has their own ratings board. Want to list all of the ratings for every country on every movie?

6882: 6461:

of the edits to this article have been marked as vandalism and reverted. If you wish to make a test edit, please use the

5718:

I accidentally discovered (when I mixed up some of the scripts I wrote:)) that WP interwiki links can be just as good or

5163: 5057: 4593: 2670: 2073:

mean is that the only way to assure your steak is eatable is to not let the dog lick it between the grill and the table.

8533:

Possible difficulty with filter on talk pages; perhaps on talk pages anything goes so the filter would be unneeded here?

6807:

Ummm, we do have lives outside of the Knowledge. We cannot monitor *every* article we think is important to monitor. —

5783:

in other languages" to Wiktionary - but that could be solved by telling the bot not to create new entries in Wiktionary.

3066:

be a need to revert. If you've found a way to screen out vandals and legitimately blocked editors, I'd like to hear it.

9600:

Ark, you're right that it wouldn't be retroactive. That's a nuisance. No real point in changing it then, I suppose. —

6514:

Okay, skip the whole percentage thing then, and just make it so that users can add a special template to the page that

4479:

Might be added as something like the advanced search options in search engines. Guitar George 14:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

4402: 3173: 2694:

would still be logical to welcome the user, and the warning would also inform the IP editor what's wrong on Knowledge.

83: 45: 40: 17: 9040:

mandatory in order to complete a move. If insufficient or misleading summaries are made, it should warrant a warning.

8034: 7962: 6940:

and leave your comments. If the peer review is successful, I think the articles can be nominated for Good Article. --

6275: 6033: 5319:] that is relevant. I think its more about putting info for places on a map, rather than maps for info about places. 4354: 1522:

Also, featured articles are not strictly the ones on the Main Page, so this is even less desirable in that respect.--

57: 9952:

There may be privacy issues, in that some people may not want the whole world to know when they mis-spelled a word.

9862: 9053:

If the existing admin move-rollback function is inconvenient in some way, specify how and file a feature request at

8845:

middle}}{{Corrected name|John Wiki, 3rd Duke of nowhere|John Wiki, 3rd Duke of Nowhere|capitalisation wrong on N}}

3058:- use that. Paste your IP on your talk page. And explain how it would be a page where you do not need to revert? If 2414:

language, and new tags that would allow the writers to specified differences for the different versions, like this:

10066: 9852: 9826: 9653: 9609: 9569: 9436: 9210:

for that relevance, although they can indeed inform us of sources of relevance outside the conflict of interest. —

9070: 9000: 8791: 8714: 7421: 6847: 6353: 6222: 5694: 5281: 5181: 4323: 4093:

Really? I can't imagine that finding relatively sterile images of normal human body parts "disgusting" is anything

2841: 2746: 2651: 2554: 2480: 1396: 1177: 4976: 4246:

I like this, will put it forth in the Random Articles suggestion down there Guitar George 14:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

1273:

A forum would not have edit conflicts. The concurrent replies would just be simultaneously attached to the thread.

5669:

1. kingdom – Animal kingdom 2. distinct head 3. lims do not grow back 4. heart 5. can be the same size as humans

3209: 1446: 1216: 35: 9754:

The following were taken from my talk page so some of it may seem out of context such as my signaturess and such

6260:

It doesn't matter to me what the number is, what matters is that the ordered and unordered list levels match up.

5832:

do, but I think something like: "Mathematician", "Computer Scientist", "Botanist", "Engineer", etc. would be a

4795:. the solution is both more footnotes with sources and more information inside each footnote. I love footnotes. 2040:

Most people trust material from reliable sources more than crap spewed from the mind of a random internet user.

8075: 6340:

If you would like to donate servers to the Wikimedia Foundation, by all means, you're welcome to. Contact any

5089: 2542: 94: 7128: 7115: 2942:

present in Windows XP, when your attention is needed on a button, a complimentary colour is used (in the blue

8607: 8354: 8315: 8258:, never visited the country", that could be added there, but all of them are not from articles that young. 6388:

which centralises all these pages; placing a template on the talk page would automatically produce a link to

5754: 5076:

If you know both languages, a good idea is to translate any content found in one but not the other yourself.

4441: 7385:

I don't think that should be part of an encyclopedia, that's something for imdb and not for wikipedia imho.

5297:

countries (Shiastan, Sunnistan, and Kurdi...stan). Every map in Knowledge would to be updated automatically.

5236:

except it would be for specifying colours/labels for countries or continents. For example, right now in the

4975:

It should, but for me that moved the sidebar to the bottom of the page, and something similar happened with

2545:. A request has already been made and will probably be implemented as soon as an admin gets around to it. — 9937: 9868: 8665: 7093: 6437: 5237: 4212: 3873: 2044: 62: 8261:

I do understand that you wanna advertisements for new articles, but still...the toll is too high I think.

7500:

article, for example, the ads would introduce me to some free web hosting services. Someone may go to the

7496:

Google AdSense delivers targeted ads. This will help users find what they are looking for. If I go to the

5407:

In response to the potential objections above, I think renaming is a good idea for the following reasons.

5216:

How about embedding Google Maps into Knowledge pages? For example on place maps like this map of bolivia

8599: 8580:

PS I won't post this to bugzilla until a consensus is reached on whether it should be included or not. --

7905:

We already have a mailing list and IRC channel for discussing Knowledge outside of Knowledge. Talk pages

6535: 6479: 5965: 5367: 4996: 2946:, this corrisponds to orange). Perhaps a shiny dark button with a discriptive word would be appropriate? 2290: 9626:

I'm not sure if this is something within the control of admins in English Knowledge, but in case it is.

8688:

Then, MediaWiki would rate the edit for likelihood of being vandalism. The rating would be displayed on

8220:, where editing the article can result in indefinite blocking and de-adminship without warning. I think 7033:. I don't think it's been mentioned here at the pump yet and we could do with some more opinions on it. 6082:

Or actually, maybe a compromise between the bulleted and numbered list idents can be reached by setting

5607:

was promoted after being converted from a movie to a shorter, less informative gif). The criteria would

9748: 9711: 9243: 8423: 7551:

Knowledge contains a lot of information Google can organize and make universally accessible and useful.

7369: 6368:

Often, I've noticed that when users create a temporary page for rewriting an article, they'll place at

6308: 4285: 4147: 4020: 2248:

Addendum: Sounds like there needs to be if there is not already a Wikiuniversity project in the works.

86:. Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either 9242:

I still disagree. I think these sources should be included, but weighted according to the standard of

7867:

You are correct in that Google Groups is not a mirror of Usenet. It is a misleading combination of an

7832:. If we wanted to create a wikipedia discussion group, we could without any assistance from google. -- 8823:

I specialise in the areas of Irish history, politics, state institutions and monarchy. At this stage

8292:

I agree that we should focus on new articles, but I think an article up to 14 days old is still new.

8046: 8028: 6453:

Please contribute wholesomely to Knowledge. Your edits will be quickly reverted if they appear to be

6156:

This is a level 3 ordered list item (note this probably lines up with a level 6 unordered list item)

6005:

This is a level 3 ordered list item (note this probably lines up with a level 6 unordered list item)

5651: 5211: 4677: 4567: 3955: 2357: 1877: 1678:

Fines would not be collected by deduction from your paycheck but rather from your reputability bond.

1610: 1536: 6159:

This is a level 4 ordered list item (note this probably lines up with a level 8 unordered list item)

6008:

This is a level 4 ordered list item (note this probably lines up with a level 8 unordered list item)

1425:

User:Conrad Devonshire/Better means of identifying when an article receives or loses featured status

9108:

cases where the author has a significant real-world linkage to the subject. Neither the volume of

8085: 7797: 7540:

It will be easier to search for information on Knowledge. Knowledge's search engine has some flaws.

7497: 4949: 4824: 4384: 4295: 2920:

but readers don't encounter that symbol often either. As for the general design, it reminds me of

2901: 1532: 8380:

object, stop, of course, and discuss it, but waiting a week is plenty to make a trial of it. See

7695:

Targeted ads are better than the ads in, say, Yahoo! Mail. I mentioned an example of going to the

7330:

of them isn't the answer, especially with the obvious evidence that people are looking for it. --

4663:

I strongly disagree with collapsable sections and I believe the style employed above is very ugly.

9675: 8836:

procedure whereby a user could indicate that a name was flawed and request an admin move it. The

8674:

External links to sites associated with spam. (This could eventually replace the spam blacklist.)

8470:

on the article page, would probably work better --Firien)), one or more of the following happens:

7444: 7376: 7174: 7131:

will give you an opportunity to propose the new language, and then it will be voted upon there. —

6496:

In agreement with Centrx ... unless there were a consistent practice for tagging vandalism edits

6363: 5153: 4735:

I wish I had paid more attention when the current reference tagging system was being developed.

4652: 4209: 2041: 1506: 4118:

images are disgusting? They're far less disgusting than a lot of those on articles linking from

2408: 1868:

This isn't altogether dissimilar from the German Knowledge's "Web of Trust" system - see below.

9246:. I think it overextends the concept of notability to take conflict of interest intos account. 8889: 7196: 6835: 6530: 6487:

I don't think having a percentage of vandalistic edits is useful, or feasible to implement. --

6474: 6095: 6052: 5760: 29: 7800:

article because they are looking for a free web host. However, if you don't want ads, fine. --

1373:

I'm afraid it'll probably be a while. I'm just one person and got lots of other things to do.

9340:

I definitely think much more discussion is needed, and refinements are naturally expected. —

8689: 8624: 8584: 8566: 8339: 7548:

If Google Search powers Knowledge's search, they will gain market share in the search market.

6269: 6027: 5590: 5562: 5531: 5519: 5498: 5475: 5387: 5193: 4562: 4348: 4233:

seeing disgusting images, but there is no "censorship" since the content is still available.

3901: 3185: 3093:

How is this something that cannot be served by existing user talk pages? You can still stick

2255: 2226: 2175: 2120: 2080: 2014: 1967: 1931: 1849: 1794: 1732: 1685: 1654: 1186:

The advantage of the current system is that it does make that you have to learn wiki markup.

6600:

I totally agree. The last thing I want to happen is for the manual steps to be expanded. —

6341: 6153:

This is a level 2 ordered list item (note this lines up with a level 4 unordered list item)

6150:

This is a level 1 ordered list item (note this lines up with a level 2 unordered list item)

6002:

This is a level 2 ordered list item (note this lines up with a level 4 unordered list item)

5999:

This is a level 1 ordered list item (note this lines up with a level 2 unordered list item)

5422:, there might be enough for a few featured sounds via an existing process. And changing to 4854: 10062: 9848: 9822: 9649: 9605: 9565: 9534: 9495: 9432: 9066: 8996: 8935: 8787: 8732:

If all of the people that do this frequently used their computers to do the parsing (using

8710: 8454:

missed by current bots are not flagged in any way and rely on being caught by the RC patrol

7956: 7471:

After Knowledge and Google sign their partnership, there are some ways of implementing it.

7417: 7081: 6843: 6349: 6294:

Knowledge talk:Featured picture candidates#Mainpage caption as part of candidate nomination

6218: 6091: 6048: 5690: 5682: 5277: 5177: 5066: 4899: 4673: 4319: 4225: 3120:

Of course it can, but last I was blocked it took 2-3 hours before I got any response to my

2869: 2837: 2742: 2647: 2550: 2476: 2343: 2324: 1392: 1173: 6732:

First off, I don't consider a minor edit an edit that's worthy of being counted, and : -->

5753:: The "professional wrestling" entry at the (professional and reliable) dictionary of the 5118:

Knowledge:Main Page FAQ#Why doesn't the cursor appear in the search box, like with Google?

1276:

Discussion pages are ugly, which makes them even less pleasant and more difficult to read.

8: 9933: 9472: 8603: 7919: 7700: 7200: 7107: 6950:

point in adding a template and bringing the GA into the logical progression of articles.

6622: 5638: 5348: 5101:

However, when the page loads, I have to click on the text box to get a curser to appear.

5040: 3112: 3071: 3032: 2139: 1754: 1514: 1299: 1245: 5470:

would be flexible and could easily be expanded for any future media types. Thoughts? --

2679:

The main issue is that IP editors are unlikely to see or read the welcomes or warnings.

9884: 9775: 9481: 9103:. Please add your thoughts after mine. Here's my first attempt at such a definition: 8516:

Hopefully fits the Spirit Of Knowledge better than previous suggestions on word filters

8384:(I think that's the name) for details. We probably ought to make this more well-known. 7996: 6737: 6675: 6628: 6503: 6429: 5957: 5921: 5148: 4778: 4647: 4463:

Filters for stubs (or selection of different levels of articles, such as FA or A-Class)

4128: 3948: 2600: 1467: 1190: 9355:

I would be interested in working with you on this. How do others feel about doing so?

6703:

left comments or fear bad changes. Generally, the kind of articles that upset me. :-)

4552:

That's interesting...this could be up for discussion if it is technically possible. --

2943: 9915: 9806: 9519: 9451: 9384: 9366: 9341: 9311: 9257: 9230: 9211: 9178: 9149: 9121: 8878: 8146: 8066: 8017: 7974: 7851: 7815: 7801: 7745: 7716: 7630: 7161: 7148: 6993:

It also rates the articles that will be placed on the CDs and on the static versions.

6941: 6861: 6808: 6648: 6601: 6567: 6552: 6320: 6250: 6115: 6072: 5863: 5764: 5620: 5338:, which is good enough to use Knowledge in conjunction with any map service. What we 5250: 4597: 4584: 4580: 4234: 3141: 3006: 2990: 2810: 2770: 2698: 2585: 2563: 2449:

has a category for "scientific controversies". There are good examples of article in

2339: 2201: 1766: 1585: 1474: 1220: 9165:

and that a decoupling is needed. Here's a second attempt (italicizing the change):

7187:

to display the other language wikis. And there were two implementations one each by

5000: 4881: 2321:

Knowledge:Requests for comment/Tony Sidaway 3#Second outside view by Charlie Huggard

9641: 8817: 8763: 8632: 8592: 8574: 8012:

Since apparently no one looks at MediaWiki talk:Licenses anymore, I'll whine here.

6264: 6022: 5780: 5584: 5556: 5527: 5494: 5471: 4343: 4266: 3179: 3124: 3097: 3020: 1869: 1630: 9161:

On second thought, I think I now see the above definition creates a conflict with

7601: 5050:

whaling. The German talks about whaling in a sentence or two and then talks : -->

5045:

It would be very helpful, if the English article were TRANSLATED into German : -->

4877: 10058: 9903: 9844: 9818: 9794: 9645: 9601: 9594: 9561: 9428: 9062: 8992: 8783: 8767: 8737: 8706: 8385: 7932: 7888: 7833: 7769: 7413: 7344:

Can we please refrain from rehashing this discussion for the zillionth time? See

7219: 7136: 6926:

Wikipedia_talk:Good_articles/Nominations#Good_Article_Drive_and_other_suggestions

6905: 6839: 6345: 6238: 6214: 6103: 6060: 5851: 5821: 5716:

system is that we can find the corresponding articles in other languages quickly.

5686: 5510: 5383: 5273: 5173: 5147:

Agreed. But I'm still wondering about the username edit box, in the login form. —

5125: 5061: 5025: 4957: 4929: 4894: 4890: 4865: 4831: 4719: 4699: 4625: 4430: 4391: 4315: 4098: 4076: 2918: 2833: 2738: 2643: 2546: 2472: 1947: 1606: 1523: 1388: 1169: 7485:

ads on the left side. For certain groups of users, these ads could be optional.

5656:

I have an idea that could make wikipedia a much better source for information.

1908:) is to allow them but require that they be posted on a special page called the 1488:

Proposal: Articles with featured article status are automatically semi-protected

9404: 9162: 9135: 9113: 9082: 9058: 8902: 8733: 8221: 7916: 7482: 7409: 7253: 7102:

Sounds good to me. Is this for people who have learned or are learning spoken

7013: 6385: 6377: 5949: 5899: 5837: 5634: 5344: 5049:

For instance: MAKAH: The English talks about the archeological finds and : -->

4909:

To me this looks like a solution in search of a problem. Why is this needed? --

4796: 4771: 4695: 4643: 4290: 3108: 3067: 3028: 2896: 2501: 2454: 2136: 1751: 1665:

Monetary fines only work if we are paid as well. I await your first payment. --

1626: 1510: 1463: 1383: 1295: 1241: 1137: 8963: 8861: 5551:(where people are free to request peer review for lists, even though it isn't 5249:. Maybe the Google Maps API would help with this, or maybe something else? -- 5247:

This would make the look & feel of maps consistent across all of Knowledge

3972:, maybe some of you guys don't care about seeing pictures in articles such as 10007: 9978: 9941: 9699: 9666: 9631: 9514: 9476: 9399: 9334: 9327: 9289: 8982: 8951:

to go, before it reduces whole parts of the encyclopaedia to a tangled mess.

8779: 8394: 8284: 8192: 7880: 7872: 7846: 7569: 7565: 7436: 7394: 7317: 7307: 7279:). The following could be quite a challenge, but I know verrry little HTML.: 6426: 5925: 5882: 5790: 5544: 5540: 5423: 5419: 5411: 5332: 5242: 5224: 4775: 4503: 4369: 4205: 4189: 4176: 4166: 4123: 2765: 2731: 2595: 2384: 2314:

Signature Policy + Software Change Proposal Resulting from RfC/Tony Sidaway 3

2278: 1909: 1622: 1602: 1570: 1558: 1453: 1309: 1212: 1187: 8346: 8187:

How about de-admining them then? And at the same time de-admining those who

7002:

where the idea of placing a star like the FAs would be a step below the FA.

5434:

That maps, diagrams, animations, and other images are eligible for featured

4868:

article. Of course, this tedious task can be given to bots. Any thoughts? --

4208:), and I think that can be opposed. But this is not one of those instances. 3880:

formatting should be able to be divided from the data in the table somehow.

9908: 9900: 9799: 9791: 9579: 9023: 8871: 8754: 8217: 8161: 8139: 7967: 7948: 7915:

theoretical process that most people have theorised Knowledge could die. —

7772: 7672: 7513: 7386: 7321: 7226: 7216: 7188: 7141: 7133: 7119: 7074: 7003: 6951: 6937: 6912: 6902: 6890: 6462: 6454: 6403: 6243: 6235: 6108: 6100: 6065: 6057: 5856: 5848: 5616: 5548: 5523: 5485: 5467: 5428: 5379: 5371: 5320: 5203: 5132: 5122: 5004: 4964: 4954: 4815: 4629: 4543: 4023: 3985: 2925: 2570: 2532: 2497: 2346: 2327: 2198: 1763: 1471: 7671:

cached versions of our GFDL content, though, all the more power to them!

6583:

If done, this has to be automatic. AfD has too many manual steps now. --

10017: 9953: 9715: 9685: 9578:

Sounds better, I wonder where you got the idea (uh maybe your name. lol.

9510: 9499: 9281: 8952: 8912: 8850: 8693: 8629: 8621: 8589: 8581: 8571: 8563: 8412: 8363: 8293: 8264: 8225: 8127: 8089: 7785: 7755: 7731: 7658: 7581: 7398: 7242: 7204: 7192: 7165: 7085: 6488: 6297: 5386:, such as sound files, video files, or maybe even PDF. I've developed a 5046:

When I click on "German", I get a completely different sub-subject, : -->

4910: 4869: 4767: 4621: 4262: 3198: 3150: 3132: 3085: 3047: 2995: 2294: 2188:

If the point is to make your original research accessible, there is also

2103: 1986: 1921: 1901: 1817: 1704: 1666: 8778:

Anyway, for future reference, proposals like this should probably go at

5438:

status is a recurrent cause of confusion, has been questioned at least (

5094:

I know this sounds like a minor thing, but when I get on the Main Page (

4731:

Reference tagging that marks the SPAN of text supported by the reference

4175:

If one goes to those articles, one should expect to see those pictures.

2917:

created a redirect, and it then becomes recognisable; it could resemble

10054: 9840: 9737: 9408: 9356: 9298: 9099:

I propose that the Knowledge community seek a community definition for

9054: 8921: 8892:

template to more strongly recommend seeking consensus prior to a move.

7929: 6584: 5518:

I don't think the criteria would differ substantially (see what I have

5507: 5317:

i have mixed opinions either way, but there is a site called wikimapia

5261: 4828: 4716: 4553: 4498:

They are? Who's doing all this rating that I've seen no evidence of?

4388: 4151: 4064: 4008: 3228: 1642:

A system of continuous approval for sysops, volunteers and users alike.

8247:

I personally think this is an unnecessary extremely strict condition.

5732: 5633:

that is featured. "featured files" maybe. Text is also a medium, btw.

4281:

this is indeed a very good idea Guitar George 14:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

1494:

Articles with featured article status are automatically semi-protected

9768: 9694:

Isn't there a proposal to change Featured Images to Featured Media?

8559:

the filter, and the precise items to have in can be argued on later.

8251: 7811: 7604: 7598: 7593:

Knowledge community (which hopefully will not become over-extensive).

7589: 7516:

in the advertising industry will grow, and they will make more money.

7457: 7184: 7034: 5972:

The list items of unordered and ordered lists do not align properly.

5292:

Hmm yeah maybe we should forget google maps integration; google maps

4618: 4032:

I know it's not censored, that's why i said "there is a line between

2580: 2458: 2450: 1917: 1905: 1897: 1893: 1621:. The obvious extension of this system would be to be alerted of any 10050: 8828:

them; indeed is done by people who don't know we have them at all.

8813: 4148:

http://www.soschildrensvillages.org.uk/charity-news/education-cd.htm

10003: 9695: 9285: 9116:(if it's a website) provide sufficient evidence for these purposes. 8358: 7432: 7303: 7276: 7127:

Yes, the Knowledge vilage pump is not for new language proposals.

4849:

_redirects_for_biographical_articles-2006-06-08T21:50:00.000Z": -->

4842:

_redirects_for_biographical_articles-2006-06-08T21:50:00.000Z": -->

4499: 4257: 4162: 3977: 2921: 2429:{pt-PT:connosco|pt-BR:conosco} ou {pt-PT:mil milhões|pt-BR:bilhões} 2419:{en-EN:aluminium|en-~US:aluminum} ou {en-EN:routeing|en-US:routing} 2380: 2193: 1554: 8901:

Ditto Deco, he said exactly what I would have in different words.

8063:

Knowledge:Village_pump_(perennial_proposals)#Better_search_feature

7687:

They are anti-corporate. That's why they are my favourite company.

6518:

displays when in editing mode. For example, adding something like

5605:

Knowledge:Featured picture candidates/2004 Indian Ocean earthquake

2569:

I think that this would help unexperienced searchers also. Thanks

2453:

which could justify inclusion in this category, including that on

8746: 8741: 8350: 8080:

I was surprised wiki search had no returns on the above subject.

7696: 7501: 7103: 6933: 5743:

interwiki links to other languages whereas Wiktionary lists only

5198:

Why not make a group and make a project something higher than web

4540:

make a page look more manageable and less dense to a new reader.

2132: 5493:

Fair enough. But why are multiple processes better than one? --

3172:

and once youre unblocked you might like to add some comments at

1750:

We punish bad volunteers by banning them. Is that not enough? —

9895: 9876: 9109: 8443:

Registered users should be unaffected (technically very simple)

7876: 7829: 7568:, owned by...guess who - hildanknight@gmail.com, writer of the 7461: 6929: 6834:

Automatic notification might be done by bot. You could ask at

4860:

redirects for biographical articles. For example, the redirect

1584:

Only semi-protect those articles linked to from the Main Page.

10027:

Isn't there a better way to optimize the search on Knowledge?

9200:

I agree with you, especially because that's not my position.

7320:. Plus it does not meet the criterias for neither GAs or FAs. 6900:

should not be cut down because they are already "perfected". —

2307:

would help you guys with this, feel free to make suggestions.

8255: 6043:

After some experimenting, this can be easily fixed by adding

5736: 4471:

Filters for area (random article in Mathematics, for example)

3981: 3973: 2189: 1237: 1215:(I wrote the Google Groups article - please give feedback at 90:

a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.

4840: 2491:

Insert box below edit panel should force IPA supporting font

2372:

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your comments

1615:

alternative proposal for a personalized opt-in alerts system

82:

This page contains discussions that have been archived from

9872: 8530:

Vandals may realise to remove categories, unflagging a page

6877:

Good articles to become a real step in articles progression

3960:

hey there, I just want to say that there is a line between

2468: 9969:

their frequency (how many times they have been looked for)

8602:, which filters any edits which match any of the words on 8237:

Proposing abolition of strict time rule for 'did you know'

8191:

thing it's a big deal - there are quite a few of them too.

7768:

using site:en.wikipedia.org or one of the Firefox plugins

6978:

There are five uses I mainly see for a GA star or status.

4450:

What do you think? Guitar George 14:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

9764: 7111: 6373: 5233: 4639: 4477:

That might complicate things a little, but it is useful.

4119: 7789: 4694:

I agree. Big change that needs more discussion. Take to

3055: 2467:

Go ahead and add one, if you think it fits. That's the

8655:

Specific characteristics of newly added text, such as:

8120:

Any bureaucrat would be able to grant this permission.

7871:

of Usenet and its own "Google Groups". Please read the

7029:

There's currently a proposal going on about this here.

2007:

scrutiny would undermine Knowledge reputability. …umm.

8652:

The removal of large amounts of text from the article.

6546:

Notifying editors of thing that is put up for deletion

5245:

potentially has the same problem, as do many others.

4141:

We had some discussion here recently about forming a

2982:

share the same IP as probably 500.000 other ISP users

2342:

so people can discuss, dissect, and edit it. Regards

9972:

the date of the first search and of the last search.

9714:

instead, an idea of mine that might actually work.--

8664:

repeating the same short phrase several times, e.g.

6288:

Improving Featured Picture captions on the Main Page

5708:

Exploit WP interwiki links to make Wiktionary better

5629:"featured media" is nonsense, because it is not the 4847: 4387:— I think this is the right place to post this :) - 8807:I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the 7793: 7302:Why not spin off the trivia into its own article? 7237:Yes, but the purpose of the box is in many ways to 5659:Have a column for the connection between articles! 5095: 3921: 2965:I have just been blocked for 30 minutes, again!!!! 1601:There has been debate about a system of alerts for 1359:

When do you estimate your prototype to be ready? --

9558:Reverted edits by ] (] • ]) to last version by $ 1 9306:I am just saying that this kind of information is 8393:It sounds good to me. What do you suggest for X? 7464:are very similar. A partnership would make sense. 7031:Knowledge:Neologisms as a Speedy Deletion Category 5418:).While there aren’t enough sounds for a separate 5170:MediaWiki talk:Monobook.css#diff style suggestions 9540:Currently, when an edit is reverted, the text is 8510:Should flag far more vandal edits than valid ones 8501:Is better than searching for each individual word 8014:MediaWiki talk:Licenses#Changing NoRightsReserved 7991:Knowledge talk:Current and future event templates 7928:Do not want (in the strongest possible terms). - 7504:article, for example, to find a webmail provider. 7061:A new language should be added, Romanized Persian 6394:Knowledge:Temp/Village pump (proposals)/Archive R 5217: 4379:Suggested changes to Knowledge Footnotes/Cite.php 3079:Obviously I can not describe what I mean. I want 2519:Having experimented a little, if you go to "User: 8669:consisting of a single sentence or bullet point. 7354:Knowledge talk:Avoid trivia sections in articles 5416:Knowledge talk:Featured sound candidates#Not yet 4823:There is a discussion of suggested improvements 4524:Collapsable external links and see also sections 4253:I don't know why wikipedia can't just adopt the 9593:this problem, with popups, etc. But still...) 8677:Using a recently blocked account or IP address. 7316:Why don't we delete it in the first place. See 5382:etc.) and allowing for the nomination of other 4923:Alternate current "skin" requested (serif font) 2303:If the world-map-markup-language idea proposed 9875:to generate the infoboxes that are requested? 9871:. Is there a way that Knowledge could use the 9542:Reverted edits by ] (]) to last version by $ 1 8137:closer to the requirements for adminship.... — 1219:). I will be happy to own/manage the group. -- 6881:I, and probably a few who are working on the 5948:your help and feedback will be appreciated.-- 2338:I've put an initial formalization of this at 6964:As has been pointed out numerous times (see 5946:Knowledge:WikiProject Expert Request Sorting 5362:Renaming Featured pictures to Featured media 1787:else including current Socialist countries. 9589:be less than nice. (Of course, we already 9466:To refer back to the original title, let's 8782:, where the devs will see them, not here. — 8745:slow page loads, especially the ones using 8035:MediaWiki_talk:Edittools#Reorder_Characters 7346:Knowledge:Avoid trivia sections in articles 7045:Knowledge talk:Criteria for speedy deletion 6380:. The alternatives are either moving it to 5666:The connection between a human and a squid 5539:I agree, would people disagree with moving 1270:e-mail notifications of updates, and so on. 8658:being at the top or bottom of the article. 5672:and ofcourse the list could go on and on. 4883:_redirects_for_biographical_articles": --> 4879:_redirects_for_biographical_articles": --> 4874:_redirects_for_biographical_articles": --> 4856:_redirects_for_biographical_articles": --> 4642:guidelines? (I guess you know about this: 2961:How to get shared IP blocked revoked fast? 2293:that over time will need to be updated. - 1617:: to express an interest in this, sign up 7114:? You might also want to mention this on 7000:Knowledge talk:Good article establishment 5779:possible problem is adding entries like " 5393:A few potential objections to this idea: 4447:select only random articles who are FAs. 9731:Hi there. I have created this template, 9727:Templates, Major settlements in counties 9682:Knowledge talk:Featured sound candidates 7025:Neologisms as a Speedy Deletion Category 6296:for a proposal to reform this process.-- 5924:so I can sign up and join in? Cheers. -- 5051:about two legends of the Makah Indians. 4638:Has anyone carefully checked it against 3084:wikipedia users suffers from, like AOL. 1924:) are given a place in the Wikitionary. 1762:No. We should burn them at the stake. -- 1405:Thanks for the link and the suggestion. 8106:Reasonable requirements would include: 6344:to get info on how to get it to them. — 5826:Category:Pages needing expert attention 3942:Renaming "stubs" to "Ready references". 14: 7350:please direct all further conversation 6176:This is a level 3 unordered list item 6173:This is a level 2 unordered list item 6170:This is a level 1 unordered list item 6136:This is a level 3 unordered list item 6133:This is a level 2 unordered list item 6130:This is a level 1 unordered list item 6055:). Perhaps some admin can fix this? — 5985:This is a level 3 unordered list item 5982:This is a level 2 unordered list item 5979:This is a level 1 unordered list item 4561:The technology's certainly there, see 2894:concept to convey in a single image.-- 2323:. Thanks in advance and many regards. 2113:in terms of constructive peer review. 6372:, which is not actually a subpage of 6179:This is a level 4 unordered list item 6139:This is a level 4 unordered list item 5988:This is a level 4 unordered list item 5767:, which is an accurate translation. " 4979:. The simplest thing would be to add 9710:Scratch that; please have a look at 6889:will make WP become a better place. 6860:OK, I'll look into that. Thanks. — 6196:This is a level 3 ordered list item 6193:This is a level 2 ordered list item 6190:This is a level 1 ordered list item 4977:m:Gallery of user styles#Ultrawaffle 3231: 2543:MediaWiki talk:Edittools#{{unicode}} 9733:Template:Major settlements in Lincs 8841:discussion and decision by users. 8725:Widespread client-side wiki parsing 7910:Google is not anti-corporate, they 7603:) and ask them to help us with the 7559:Official Google Group for Knowledge 7453:Knowledge & Google partnership. 6199:This is a level 4 ordered list item 5058:Knowledge:Multilingual coordination 4846:redirects for biographical articles 4594:user:pcu123456789/templates/hidebox 3107:talk page. (Not the IP's, though.) 2642:or something, and start using it. — 2289:Quite a few I'm sure. We also have 2273:Montenegro independence - Wiki maps 1597:Automatic, personalized RfA alerts 1292:this is indeed a perennial proposal 23: 9927:List of recently not found results 9134:Notability has nothing to do with 8849:much already in specialist areas. 8547:certain slang eg GNAA, niggaz, etc 8099:new user permission: editprotected 7476:Google AdSense on Knowledge pages. 6928:. I have just sent two articles - 4987:body { font: x-small serif; } 3174:Knowledge:Blocking policy proposal 1896:". The way the Wiktionary handles 1703:What is this reputability bond? -- 24: 18:Knowledge:Village pump (proposals) 10082: 8436:Issues I'm trying to get around: 8331:Unilaterally splitting an article 7684:I picked Google for two reasons: 5096:http://en.wikipedia.org/Main_Page 4306:But on the other hand, Knowledge 4056: 4046: 4000: 3990: 1613:. Demand is being weighed for an 1609:is seeking collaborators for his 9112:hits nor a subject's ranking in 8962: 8860: 8550:multiple consecutive punctuation 7408:Knowledge's goal is not to be a 7012:encouragement for the writers.-- 6936:- for peer review. Please go to 6529:article of a rival sports team. 4063: 4007: 3062:blocked user can edit it, there 2618:Idea for POV, Cleanup, etc. Tags 78:Village pump (proposals) archive 9548:is obviously the revertee, and 9337:, and possibly other policies. 8382:Knowledge:Revert, discuss cycle 7576:How does it benefit Knowledge? 7534:How does it benefit Knowledge? 7489:How does it benefit Knowledge? 5812:Categorize requests for expert 5462:to benefit" ratio is very good. 5218:http://en.wikipedia.org/Bolivia 5047:instead of a translation. : --> 1910:Wiktionary:List of protologisms 1254:has an array of disadvantages: 1217:Knowledge:Article Feedback Desk 8353:is such an important article ( 7985:Proposed future event template 7183:a WikiLang Cloud similar to a 7069:For more information, visit: 5771:" (simply) would be "birkózás" 4952:. That should do the trick. — 4948:Yes, try copying the css from 2879:edit page, and are visable to 1889:engage in original thinking. 13: 1: 9904: 9817:initiate contact with them. — 9795: 9556:So, I think it should become 8929:The problem is that they are 7220: 7137: 6906: 6445: 6424:User:Bluemoose/old temp pages 6239: 6104: 6061: 5852: 5755:Hungarian Academy of Sciences 5126: 4958: 4467:Filters for offensive content 4040:and somthing being completly 3968:and somthing being completly 2579:The search engine built into 2441:List of controversial issues 1783:Risk of financial loss works 1432: 9938:Knowledge:Requested articles 9869:Knowledge:WikiProject Albums 9595:JesseW, the juggling janitor 8768:JesseW, the juggling janitor 8466:word on the list that isn't 8386:JesseW, the juggling janitor 8008:Change in MediaWiki:Licenses 7788:article, the ads might show 7615:How does it benefit Google? 7545:How does it benefit Google? 7509:How does it benefit Google? 7129:m:Proposals for new projects 7116:m:Proposals for new projects 7043:This should be mentioned on 6446: 5238:adoption by same-sex couples 4646:) And what about printing? — 4579:COLLAPSIBLE IS GREAT -- see 2447:List of controversial issues 2131:You're possibly looking for 7: 9622:naming languages in English 8600:User:Lupin/Anti-vandal tool 8524:Will still flag valid edits 7481:Knowledge pages could have 5966:Mediawiki talk:Monobook.css 5374:etc.) and related pages to 5164:Stylesheet change for diffs 4997:Special:Mypage/monobook.css 4458:My ideas are the following: 4019:See the relavant policy at 2671:IP warning/welcome proposal 2445:I wish to propose that the 2409:Different language versions 10: 10087: 9932:would be complementary to 9712:Knowledge:Sound of the day 9597:09:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9244:Knowledge:Reliable sources 5712:One huge advantage of the 4864:should be created for the 4403:edit-locking system please 3214:I would like to propose a 3149:Yes, something like that! 1904:) the Wiktionary name for 1611:new RfA publicity campaign 10071:05:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 10041:06:48, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 10032:04:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 10021:02:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 10010:21:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC) 9995:20:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC) 9984:15:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC) 9957:13:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC) 9947:13:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC) 9921:16:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9888:01:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 9857:05:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9831:05:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9812:16:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9779:17:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 9741:15:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9719:14:57, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 9702:15:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 9689:02:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 9670:10:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9658:05:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 9635:22:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 9614:22:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9583:19:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 9574:05:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 9527:19:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC) 9503:09:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9488:06:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9459:04:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC) 9441:05:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9412:02:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9392:01:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9374:22:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9360:21:18, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9349:22:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9319:22:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9302:21:18, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9292:21:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9265:19:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC) 9251:01:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9238:00:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9219:00:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9196:00:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 9186:22:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9157:22:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9143:20:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9129:19:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC) 9086:22:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9075:22:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9045:01:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9031:01:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 9005:22:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8986:01:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8925:17:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8916:17:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8906:02:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8897:21:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 8884:21:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 8796:22:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8770:09:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8758:07:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8719:22:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8697:18:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8636:16:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8611:15:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8578:13:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8416:10:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8398:10:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8388:09:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8367:18:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8335:Three days ago, I posted 8319:18:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8297:10:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8288:03:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8279:20:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8268:20:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8229:10:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8212:01:31, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8196:03:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8183:01:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8165:01:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8152:23:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8131:23:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC) 8093:18:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8070:21:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC) 8042:01:23, 22 June 2006 (UTC) 8021:18:47, 22 June 2006 (UTC) 8003:02:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC) 7980:22:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC) 7952:08:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC) 7727:Absolute total nonstarter 7662:07:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7448:02:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7439:16:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 7426:05:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 7402:20:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 7390:20:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 7380:20:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 7361:19:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7340:19:12, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7325:19:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7310:15:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7297:14:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC) 7246:04:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 7195:. Have a look at them at 7169:03:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 7154:11:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 7123:11:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 7052:19:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 7038:17:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 7017:23:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 7007:22:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6973:16:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 6869:16:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6852:05:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6816:16:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6777:02:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6744:22:56, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 6708:04:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 6682:00:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 6656:22:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6635:21:08, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6609:21:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6588:20:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6575:20:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6560:20:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6538:16:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6510:00:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 6492:23:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6482:22:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 6432:02:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6416:18:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC) 6358:05:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6334:02:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6324:00:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6301:19:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 6280:00:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 6256:13:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 6227:05:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 6121:03:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 6078:03:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5953:00:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 5929:18:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 5903:00:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC) 5886:14:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5869:03:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5841:02:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5824:and the related category 5806:02:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 5795:18:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC) 5763:has an interwiki link to 5699:05:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 5647:17:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5624:17:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5403:Change is inherently bad. 5357:18:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5324:08:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC) 5207:05:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5186:23:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC) 5156:18:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC) 5081:07:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC) 5072:00:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC) 5060:for more information. -- 4286:Knowledge is not censored 4021:Knowledge is not censored 3807: 3769: 3731: 3693: 3655: 3617: 3576: 3535: 3497: 3459: 3421: 3383: 3345: 3307: 3269: 2764:I'd like to mention that 1537:Knowledge:Stable versions 8940:Unionist Party of Hawaii 8803:'Move this page' command 8649:Words, as you mentioned. 8086:Islam in the Philippines 7936:13:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 7923:06:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 7892:07:36, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 7855:04:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 7852:J.L.W.S. The Special One 7837:01:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC) 7819:04:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 7816:J.L.W.S. The Special One 7805:04:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 7802:J.L.W.S. The Special One 7798:Free web hosting service 7776:23:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 7759:15:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 7749:04:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 7746:J.L.W.S. The Special One 7735:15:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 7720:10:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 7717:J.L.W.S. The Special One 7676:08:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 7648:08:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 7643:right on his first try. 7634:04:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 7631:J.L.W.S. The Special One 7498:Free web hosting service 7233:19:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 7208:06:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 6955:14:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 6945:03:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 6942:J.L.W.S. The Special One 6919:02:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 6894:21:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 6621:This is one use of your 6213:. I like, personally. — 6088:ol {margin-left: 2.4em;} 6084:ul {margin-left: 2.4em;} 6045:ul {margin-left: 3.2em;} 6038:10:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC) 5877:Agreed, very sensible - 5724:Some examples. Compare: 5675:What do you guys thing? 5597:01:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 5569:01:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 5535:22:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 5514:22:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 5502:22:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 5489:22:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 5479:22:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 5388:set of expanded criteria 5310:07:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 5286:22:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 5265:21:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 5254:21:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 5228:00:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC) 5139:19:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 5111:19:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 5029:04:23, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 5008:19:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4971:18:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4950:User:Tillwe/monobook.css 4944:18:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4933:17:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4914:01:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 4905:00:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 4875:21:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4835:13:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4819:14:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 4800:15:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 4782:00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 4723:13:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4703:07:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 4682:17:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 4655:15:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 4633:14:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 4601:01:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 4588:01:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 4571:07:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 4557:01:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 4547:22:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC) 4516:19:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4506:16:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4489:17:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC) 4434:18:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4418:10:57, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4395:10:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC) 4373:23:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 4359:07:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 4328:22:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 4302:16:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 4273:20:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 4238:21:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC) 4216:18:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC) 4193:05:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC) 4180:05:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC) 4169:23:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 4155:21:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 4135:08:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 4102:05:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC) 4089:02:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC) 4080:07:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 4070:07:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 4027:06:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 4014:06:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC) 3929:20:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 3907:17:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 3885:17:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC) 3867: 3865: 3863: 3861: 3859: 3857: 3855: 3853: 3851: 3849: 3847: 3845: 3264: 3261: 3258: 3255: 3252: 3249: 3246: 3243: 3240: 3237: 3234: 3202:01:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 3193:19:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 3154:00:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 3145:09:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 3142:J.L.W.S. The Special One 3136:09:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 3116:11:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 3089:02:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 3075:10:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 3051:01:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 3036:16:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 3010:15:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 3007:J.L.W.S. The Special One 2999:14:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 2951:12:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2929:09:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2908:04:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2888:23:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 2864:17:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2846:23:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2814:11:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2811:J.L.W.S. The Special One 2793:10:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2774:11:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2771:J.L.W.S. The Special One 2751:20:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2721:08:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2702:04:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2699:J.L.W.S. The Special One 2666:10:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2656:20:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2632:08:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2607:05:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC) 2589:23:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2574:21:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2559:20:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2536:00:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2505:21:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 2485:20:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2462:08:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2401:04:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2387:02:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2352:07:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2333:05:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2298:00:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC) 2284:21:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 2261:10:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 2232:16:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 2206:13:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 2181:16:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 2162:12:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 2143:06:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 2126:22:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 2107:22:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 2086:21:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 2048:21:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 2020:20:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1990:18:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1973:08:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1951:08:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1937:07:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1873:16:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1855:22:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1821:00:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1800:15:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 1771:13:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 1758:06:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 1738:23:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1708:22:32, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1691:20:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1670:18:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1660:18:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1634:05:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 1589:01:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 1574:17:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 1561:01:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 1544:01:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 1533:Knowledge:Static version 1527:17:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1518:16:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1501:15:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1479:13:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 1457:11:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1439:04:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC) 1410:23:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 1401:05:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC) 1382:I'd suggest you post at 1378:23:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 1369:11:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 1355:08:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC) 1345:14:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 1323:12:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 1318:and see how that works. 1313:10:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 1303:10:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC) 1286:21:04, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1249:16:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1224:15:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1221:J.L.W.S. The Special One 1207:00:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC) 1193:22:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 1182:22:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 1164:21:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 1153:17:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC) 84:Village pump (proposals) 9977:time to code this ;) -- 9843:if you like, however. — 9398:As a practical matter, 8938:. I could move that to 8254:, the private owner of 8113:no history of edit wars 8110:no history of vandalism 7961:Please see my proposal 7879:article, in particular 7524:Google Knowledge Search 6390:Knowledge:Temp/PAGENAME 4742:For example, consider: 3220:Database of User Images 3216:Database of User Tables 3210:Database of User Tables 1507:User:Raul654/protection 1447:For Warhammer 40,000... 9310:to prove relevance. — 9101:encyclopedic relevance 9093:encyclopedic relevance 8890:Mediawiki:Movepagetext 8661:being in ALL CAPITALS. 8076:Muslims in Phillipines 8033:See my proposition at 7197:User:R. Koot/Languages 6998:Please take a look at 6836:Knowledge:Bot requests 6376:, and can be found by 6096:Mediawiki:monobook.css 6053:Mediawiki:monobook.css 5759:is empty, whereas the 5090:Main Page Search Focus 4530:Open to see discussion 2523:/monobook.css" and add 2291:133 lists of countries 95:< Older discussions 9759:Online/Offline Status 8690:Special:Recentchanges 7875:article and also the 7796:. Some may go to the 7790:http://getfirefox.com 5785:What do you think? -- 5739:. The WP article has 4882:,_<first_name: --> 4878:,_<first_name: --> 4873:,_<first_name: --> 4859:, <first name: --> 4855:,_<first_name: --> 4848:,_<first_name: --> 4845:, <first name: --> 4841:,_<first_name: --> 4563:Template:Zelda series 4442:Random Article Filter 3056:http://whatismyip.com 9560:. Any objections? — 9535:MediaWiki:Revertpage 8936:Irish Unionist Party 7881:Usenet#Google_Groups 7810:someone Googles for 7288:in the begining and 6438:Vandalism prevention 6211:"margin-left: 1.5em" 6092:Mediawiki:common.css 6049:Mediawiki:common.css 5683:Knowledge:Categories 5024:That works! Thanks, 4226:Special:Random/Image 2972:any page, I did not 2640:Template:NPOV needed 9934:Special:Wantedpages 9496:philosopher's stone 9473:meta:Incrementalism 8608:Cherry blossom tree 8316:Cherry blossom tree 7701:Mozilla Corporation 7201:User:Pharos/Sandbox 7108:Perso-Arabic script 5526:, for example). -- 5366:I propose renaming 5305:be almost trivial. 4596:based on cold War. 3232:product/ingredients 2986:Knowledge:AdminHelp 2980:, I just happen to 9749:My Knowledge ideas 9522:Stevie is the man! 9454:Stevie is the man! 9387:Stevie is the man! 9369:Stevie is the man! 9344:Stevie is the man! 9326:relevant parts of 9314:Stevie is the man! 9260:Stevie is the man! 9233:Stevie is the man! 9214:Stevie is the man! 9181:Stevie is the man! 9152:Stevie is the man! 9124:Stevie is the man! 8540:Suggested Filter: 8347:Pac-Man#Atari 2600 7370:Ratings For Movies 6864:Stevie is the man! 6811:Stevie is the man! 6651:Stevie is the man! 6604:Stevie is the man! 6570:Stevie is the man! 6555:Stevie is the man! 6309:Sharing the images 5820:I am referring to 5722:than a dictionary. 4844:<last name: --> 4300: 4210:Christopher Parham 4036:so kids can't see 3964:so kids can't see 3949:Template talk:Stub 3922:MediaWiki bugzilla 2991:User: 202.156.6.54 2906: 2042:Christopher Parham 1468:Battle of Waterloo 9912: 9803: 9484: 8875: 8355:400 inbound links 8143: 8047:Article searching 8029:Reorder Charcters 8000: 7993:. User:Ceyockey ( 7971: 7338: 7231: 7162:Chinese Knowledge 7145: 7098: 7084:comment added by 6966:this talk archive 6917: 6741: 6679: 6632: 6507: 6469: 6468: 6247: 6112: 6069: 5940:I have created a 5860: 5652:Connection Column 5645: 5368:Featured pictures 5355: 5212:Using Google Maps 5137: 5070: 4969: 4903: 4613: 4612: 4581:template:cold War 4289: 4131: 3956:Disgusting images 3905: 3871: 3870: 3191: 3016:You can just add 2895: 2603: 2358:Knowledge Toolbar 2281: 2259: 2230: 2203: 2179: 2124: 2084: 2018: 1971: 1935: 1878:Original research 1853: 1798: 1768: 1736: 1689: 1658: 1476: 1434:Conrad Devonshire 10078: 9919: 9910: 9906: 9810: 9801: 9797: 9642:Amharic language 9524: 9482: 9456: 9421:424 articles on 9389: 9371: 9346: 9316: 9262: 9235: 9216: 9183: 9154: 9126: 8966: 8960: 8882: 8873: 8864: 8858: 8736:and, perhaps, a 8627: 8587: 8569: 8344: 8338: 8150: 8141: 8126:Any thoughts? -- 7994: 7978: 7969: 7794:http://opera.com 7334: 7286:{{start trivia}} 7230: 7224: 7152: 7143: 7139: 7097: 7078: 6916: 6910: 6866: 6813: 6735: 6673: 6653: 6626: 6606: 6572: 6557: 6533: 6527: 6521: 6501: 6477: 6457:. Historically, 6447: 6414: 6410: 6402: 6278: 6272: 6254: 6245: 6241: 6212: 6209:The latter uses 6119: 6110: 6106: 6089: 6085: 6076: 6067: 6063: 6046: 6036: 6030: 5867: 5858: 5854: 5781:John Forbes Nash 5637: 5347: 5337: 5331: 5151: 5136: 5130: 5064: 4968: 4962: 4897: 4884: 4880: 4862:Friedman, Harvey 4857: 4850: 4843: 4650: 4535: 4534: 4357: 4351: 4298: 4293: 4143:Knowledge Junior 4129: 4067: 4060: 4058: 4050: 4011: 4004: 4002: 3994: 3895: 3580: 3539: 3229: 3188: 3182: 3177: 3129: 3123: 3102: 3096: 3025: 3019: 2904: 2899: 2601: 2349: 2330: 2279: 2249: 2220: 2202: 2169: 2114: 2074: 2008: 1961: 1925: 1843: 1788: 1767: 1726: 1679: 1648: 1475: 1436: 79: 54: 10086: 10085: 10081: 10080: 10079: 10077: 10076: 10075: 9929: 9899: 9865: 9863:CDDB for albums 9790: 9761: 9751: 9729: 9678: 9676:Featured sounds 9624: 9538: 9520: 9452: 9385: 9367: 9342: 9312: 9258: 9231: 9212: 9179: 9150: 9122: 9097: 9095:(or notability) 9059:Mediazilla:1454 8983:Noel S McFerran 8953: 8870: 8851: 8805: 8727: 8625: 8585: 8567: 8426: 8342: 8336: 8333: 8239: 8138: 8101: 8078: 8049: 8031: 8010: 7987: 7966: 7959: 7455: 7372: 7256: 7177: 7175:WikiLang Cloud? 7132: 7112:Farsi Knowledge 7079: 7063: 7027: 6879: 6862: 6809: 6649: 6602: 6568: 6553: 6548: 6531: 6525: 6519: 6475: 6470: 6440: 6412: 6404: 6397: 6366: 6364:Temporary pages 6311: 6290: 6274: 6268: 6234: 6210: 6099: 6087: 6083: 6056: 6044: 6032: 6026: 5960: 5942:New WikiProject 5847: 5822:Template:Expert 5818: 5710: 5654: 5364: 5335: 5329: 5214: 5200:(Live projects) 5196: 5166: 5149: 5092: 5043: 5001:m:Skin projects 4988: 4925: 4891:Harvey Friedman 4866:Harvey Friedman 4852: 4812: 4733: 4715:Do not like. - 4674:Oleg Alexandrov 4648: 4626:Antarctic Krill 4615: 4614: 4532: 4526: 4444: 4429:a non-starter. 4405: 4381: 4353: 4347: 4296: 4291: 4231:unintentionally 4061: 4054: 4005: 3998: 3958: 3944: 3876: 3578: 3537: 3218:similar to the 3212: 3187:kiss the lizard 3186: 3180: 3127: 3121: 3100: 3094: 3023: 3017: 2963: 2902: 2897: 2872: 2673: 2620: 2566: 2528: 2516: 2493: 2443: 2411: 2360: 2347: 2328: 2316: 2275: 1880: 1644: 1607:User:ShortJason 1599: 1490: 1449: 1428: 1384:Mediazilla:1234 1140: 1135: 80: 77: 74: 48: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 10084: 10074: 10073: 10046: 10045: 10044: 10043: 10029:66.229.182.113 10024: 10023: 10013: 10012: 9998: 9997: 9974: 9973: 9970: 9967: 9960: 9959: 9928: 9925: 9924: 9923: 9864: 9861: 9860: 9859: 9836: 9835: 9834: 9833: 9760: 9757: 9750: 9747: 9745: 9728: 9725: 9724: 9723: 9722: 9721: 9705: 9704: 9677: 9674: 9673: 9672: 9661: 9660: 9623: 9620: 9619: 9618: 9617: 9616: 9559: 9551: 9547: 9543: 9537: 9531: 9530: 9529: 9509:After reading 9506: 9505: 9464: 9463: 9462: 9461: 9444: 9443: 9415: 9414: 9395: 9394: 9378: 9377: 9376: 9353: 9352: 9351: 9323: 9322: 9321: 9304: 9277: 9276: 9275: 9274: 9273: 9272: 9271: 9270: 9269: 9268: 9267: 9221: 9175: 9174: 9173: 9159: 9118: 9117: 9096: 9089: 9078: 9077: 9050: 9049: 9048: 9047: 9034: 9033: 9017:I utilise the 9014: 9013: 9012: 9011: 9010: 9009: 9008: 9007: 8973: 8972: 8971: 8970: 8969: 8968: 8945:move this page 8908: 8899: 8886: 8838:corrected name 8834:corrected name 8809:move this page 8804: 8801: 8800: 8799: 8772: 8771: 8734:Special:Export 8726: 8723: 8722: 8721: 8702: 8701: 8700: 8699: 8686: 8685: 8684: 8681: 8678: 8675: 8672: 8671: 8670: 8667: 8662: 8659: 8653: 8650: 8641: 8640: 8639: 8638: 8617: 8598:Have you seen 8552: 8551: 8548: 8545: 8538: 8537: 8534: 8531: 8528: 8525: 8518: 8517: 8514: 8511: 8508: 8505: 8502: 8495: 8494: 8489: 8488: 8487: 8486: 8482: 8478: 8472: 8471: 8463: 8456: 8455: 8450:Articles that 8448: 8444: 8441: 8425: 8422: 8421: 8420: 8419: 8418: 8401: 8400: 8390: 8389: 8362:after X days. 8332: 8329: 8328: 8327: 8326: 8325: 8324: 8323: 8322: 8321: 8304: 8303: 8302: 8301: 8300: 8299: 8238: 8235: 8234: 8233: 8232: 8231: 8216:Well, we have 8204: 8203: 8202: 8201: 8200: 8199: 8198: 8170: 8169: 8168: 8167: 8155: 8154: 8118: 8117: 8114: 8111: 8100: 8097: 8096: 8095: 8077: 8074: 8073: 8072: 8048: 8045: 8030: 8027: 8025: 8009: 8006: 7986: 7983: 7958: 7955: 7940: 7926: 7925: 7899: 7898: 7897: 7896: 7895: 7894: 7860: 7859: 7858: 7857: 7840: 7839: 7824: 7823: 7822: 7821: 7807: 7779: 7778: 7765: 7764: 7763: 7762: 7761: 7738: 7737: 7724: 7723: 7722: 7712: 7708: 7704: 7693: 7692: 7691: 7688: 7679: 7678: 7667: 7666: 7665: 7664: 7651: 7650: 7623: 7622: 7621: 7620: 7613: 7612: 7611: 7608: 7594: 7586: 7562: 7561: 7555: 7554: 7553: 7552: 7549: 7543: 7542: 7541: 7538: 7527: 7526: 7520: 7519: 7518: 7517: 7507: 7506: 7505: 7494: 7483:Google AdSense 7479: 7478: 7454: 7451: 7429: 7428: 7410:primary source 7405: 7404: 7392: 7371: 7368: 7366: 7364: 7363: 7342: 7332:badlydrawnjeff 7327: 7313: 7312: 7290:{{end trivia}} 7283: 7273: 7272: 7271:Blah blah blah 7269: 7268:Blah blah blah 7266: 7265:Blah blah blah 7263: 7262:Blah blah blah 7260: 7259:Blah blah blah 7255: 7252: 7251: 7250: 7249: 7248: 7176: 7173: 7172: 7171: 7158: 7157: 7156: 7106:, but not the 7062: 7059: 7057: 7055: 7054: 7047:if it hasn't. 7026: 7023: 7022: 7021: 7020: 7019: 6996: 6995: 6994: 6991: 6988: 6985: 6982: 6962: 6961: 6960: 6959: 6958: 6957: 6878: 6875: 6874: 6873: 6872: 6871: 6855: 6854: 6831: 6830: 6829: 6828: 6827: 6826: 6825: 6824: 6823: 6822: 6821: 6820: 6819: 6818: 6792: 6791: 6790: 6789: 6788: 6787: 6786: 6785: 6784: 6783: 6782: 6781: 6780: 6779: 6757: 6756: 6755: 6754: 6753: 6752: 6751: 6750: 6749: 6748: 6747: 6746: 6719: 6718: 6717: 6716: 6715: 6714: 6713: 6712: 6711: 6710: 6691: 6690: 6689: 6688: 6687: 6686: 6685: 6684: 6663: 6662: 6661: 6660: 6659: 6658: 6640: 6639: 6638: 6637: 6616: 6615: 6614: 6613: 6612: 6611: 6593: 6592: 6591: 6590: 6578: 6577: 6551:not, right? — 6547: 6544: 6543: 6542: 6541: 6540: 6494: 6467: 6466: 6439: 6436: 6435: 6434: 6386:Knowledge:Temp 6378:Special:Random 6365: 6362: 6361: 6360: 6337: 6336: 6326: 6310: 6307: 6305: 6289: 6286: 6285: 6284: 6283: 6282: 6261: 6207: 6206: 6205: 6204: 6203: 6202: 6201: 6200: 6187: 6186: 6185: 6184: 6183: 6182: 6181: 6180: 6167: 6166: 6165: 6164: 6163: 6162: 6161: 6160: 6147: 6146: 6145: 6144: 6143: 6142: 6141: 6140: 6124: 6123: 6080: 6019: 6016: 6015: 6014: 6013: 6012: 6011: 6010: 6009: 5996: 5995: 5994: 5993: 5992: 5991: 5990: 5989: 5970: 5969: 5959: 5956: 5938: 5937: 5936: 5935: 5934: 5933: 5932: 5931: 5910: 5909: 5908: 5907: 5906: 5905: 5891: 5890: 5889: 5888: 5872: 5871: 5817: 5810: 5809: 5808: 5784: 5776: 5775: 5748: 5737:its WP article 5723: 5717: 5709: 5706: 5704: 5702: 5701: 5678: 5665: 5653: 5650: 5627: 5626: 5580: 5579: 5578: 5577: 5576: 5575: 5574: 5573: 5572: 5571: 5466:And, finally, 5464: 5463: 5459: 5432: 5405: 5404: 5401: 5398: 5376:Featured media 5363: 5360: 5315: 5314: 5313: 5312: 5299: 5298: 5289: 5288: 5268: 5267: 5213: 5210: 5195: 5192: 5190: 5165: 5162: 5161: 5160: 5159: 5158: 5142: 5141: 5108:205.188.116.69 5091: 5088: 5086: 5084: 5083: 5074: 5042: 5039: 5038: 5037: 5036: 5035: 5034: 5033: 5032: 5031: 5015: 5014: 5013: 5012: 5011: 5010: 4986: 4985: 4984: 4983: 4982: 4981: 4980: 4924: 4921: 4919: 4917: 4916: 4907: 4851: 4838: 4809: 4808: 4807: 4749: 4748: 4732: 4729: 4728: 4727: 4726: 4725: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4707: 4706: 4705: 4687: 4686: 4685: 4684: 4667: 4666: 4665: 4664: 4658: 4657: 4611: 4610: 4608: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4603: 4576: 4575: 4574: 4573: 4533: 4528: 4527: 4525: 4522: 4521: 4520: 4519: 4518: 4508: 4492: 4491: 4478: 4475: 4474: 4473: 4472: 4469: 4468: 4465: 4464: 4459: 4456: 4455: 4443: 4440: 4439: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4421: 4420: 4404: 4401: 4399: 4380: 4377: 4376: 4375: 4364: 4362: 4361: 4340: 4336: 4335: 4334: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4282: 4276: 4275: 4250: 4249: 4248: 4247: 4241: 4240: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4218: 4198: 4197: 4196: 4195: 4183: 4182: 4172: 4171: 4158: 4157: 4138: 4137: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4105: 4104: 4053: 4038:"dirty images" 3997: 3966:"dirty images" 3957: 3954: 3943: 3940: 3938: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3931: 3912: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3888: 3887: 3875: 3872: 3869: 3868: 3866: 3864: 3862: 3860: 3858: 3856: 3854: 3852: 3850: 3848: 3846: 3843: 3842: 3839: 3836: 3833: 3830: 3827: 3824: 3821: 3818: 3815: 3812: 3809: 3805: 3804: 3801: 3798: 3795: 3792: 3789: 3786: 3783: 3780: 3777: 3774: 3771: 3767: 3766: 3763: 3760: 3757: 3754: 3751: 3748: 3745: 3742: 3739: 3736: 3733: 3729: 3728: 3725: 3722: 3719: 3716: 3713: 3710: 3707: 3704: 3701: 3698: 3695: 3691: 3690: 3687: 3684: 3681: 3678: 3675: 3672: 3669: 3666: 3663: 3660: 3657: 3653: 3652: 3649: 3646: 3643: 3640: 3637: 3634: 3631: 3628: 3625: 3622: 3619: 3615: 3614: 3611: 3608: 3605: 3602: 3599: 3596: 3593: 3590: 3587: 3584: 3581: 3574: 3573: 3570: 3567: 3564: 3561: 3558: 3555: 3552: 3549: 3546: 3543: 3540: 3533: 3532: 3529: 3526: 3523: 3520: 3517: 3514: 3511: 3508: 3505: 3502: 3499: 3495: 3494: 3491: 3488: 3485: 3482: 3479: 3476: 3473: 3470: 3467: 3464: 3461: 3457: 3456: 3453: 3450: 3447: 3444: 3441: 3438: 3435: 3432: 3429: 3426: 3423: 3419: 3418: 3415: 3412: 3409: 3406: 3403: 3400: 3397: 3394: 3391: 3388: 3385: 3381: 3380: 3377: 3374: 3371: 3368: 3365: 3362: 3359: 3356: 3353: 3350: 3347: 3343: 3342: 3339: 3336: 3333: 3330: 3327: 3324: 3321: 3318: 3315: 3312: 3309: 3305: 3304: 3301: 3298: 3295: 3292: 3289: 3286: 3283: 3280: 3277: 3274: 3271: 3267: 3266: 3263: 3260: 3257: 3254: 3251: 3248: 3245: 3242: 3239: 3236: 3233: 3226: 3211: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3170: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3162: 3161: 3160: 3159: 3158: 3157: 3156: 3013: 3012: 2974:revert 4 times 2962: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2944:luna interface 2934: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2911: 2910: 2871: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2819: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2790:66.229.182.113 2781: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2766:Mediazilla:550 2757: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2732:Mediazilla:550 2724: 2723: 2718:66.229.182.113 2672: 2669: 2663:66.229.182.113 2659: 2658: 2629:66.229.182.113 2619: 2616: 2614: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2565: 2562: 2539: 2538: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2514: 2513: 2512: 2492: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2455:parapsychology 2442: 2439: 2437: 2432: 2431: 2422: 2421: 2410: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2390: 2389: 2359: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2315: 2312: 2310: 2301: 2300: 2274: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2165: 2164: 2154: 2129: 2128: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1954: 1953: 1879: 1876: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1740: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1673: 1672: 1643: 1640: 1638: 1598: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1564: 1563: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1541:Worldtraveller 1489: 1486: 1484: 1482: 1481: 1464:Imperial Guard 1448: 1445: 1443: 1427: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1332: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1315: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1274: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1259: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1195: 1139: 1136: 92: 76: 75: 73: 72: 71: 70: 65: 60: 55: 43: 38: 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 10083: 10072: 10068: 10064: 10060: 10056: 10052: 10048: 10047: 10042: 10039: 10035: 10034: 10033: 10030: 10026: 10025: 10022: 10019: 10015: 10014: 10011: 10008: 10005: 10000: 9999: 9996: 9993: 9988: 9987: 9986: 9985: 9982: 9981: 9971: 9968: 9965: 9964: 9963: 9958: 9955: 9951: 9950: 9949: 9948: 9945: 9944: 9939: 9935: 9922: 9917: 9913: 9907: 9902: 9897: 9892: 9891: 9890: 9889: 9886: 9885:WillMak050389 9881: 9878: 9874: 9870: 9858: 9854: 9850: 9846: 9842: 9838: 9837: 9832: 9828: 9824: 9820: 9815: 9814: 9813: 9808: 9804: 9798: 9793: 9788: 9783: 9782: 9781: 9780: 9777: 9776:WillMak050389 9772: 9770: 9766: 9756: 9755: 9746: 9743: 9742: 9739: 9734: 9720: 9717: 9713: 9709: 9708: 9707: 9706: 9703: 9700: 9697: 9693: 9692: 9691: 9690: 9687: 9683: 9671: 9668: 9663: 9662: 9659: 9655: 9651: 9647: 9643: 9639: 9638: 9637: 9636: 9633: 9627: 9615: 9611: 9607: 9603: 9599: 9598: 9596: 9592: 9587: 9586: 9585: 9584: 9581: 9576: 9575: 9571: 9567: 9563: 9557: 9554: 9549: 9545: 9541: 9536: 9528: 9525: 9523: 9516: 9512: 9508: 9507: 9504: 9501: 9497: 9492: 9491: 9490: 9489: 9486: 9485: 9478: 9474: 9469: 9460: 9457: 9455: 9448: 9447: 9446: 9445: 9442: 9438: 9434: 9430: 9426: 9424: 9417: 9416: 9413: 9410: 9406: 9401: 9397: 9396: 9393: 9390: 9388: 9382: 9379: 9375: 9372: 9370: 9363: 9362: 9361: 9358: 9354: 9350: 9347: 9345: 9339: 9338: 9336: 9333: 9329: 9324: 9320: 9317: 9315: 9309: 9305: 9303: 9300: 9295: 9294: 9293: 9290: 9287: 9283: 9278: 9266: 9263: 9261: 9254: 9253: 9252: 9249: 9245: 9241: 9240: 9239: 9236: 9234: 9227: 9222: 9220: 9217: 9215: 9209: 9204: 9199: 9198: 9197: 9194: 9189: 9188: 9187: 9184: 9182: 9176: 9171: 9167: 9166: 9164: 9160: 9158: 9155: 9153: 9146: 9145: 9144: 9141: 9137: 9133: 9132: 9131: 9130: 9127: 9125: 9115: 9111: 9106: 9105: 9104: 9102: 9094: 9091:Let's define 9088: 9087: 9084: 9076: 9072: 9068: 9064: 9060: 9056: 9052: 9051: 9046: 9043: 9038: 9037: 9036: 9035: 9032: 9029: 9025: 9020: 9016: 9015: 9006: 9002: 8998: 8994: 8989: 8988: 8987: 8984: 8979: 8978: 8977: 8976: 8975: 8974: 8965: 8961: 8959: 8958: 8950: 8946: 8941: 8937: 8932: 8928: 8927: 8926: 8923: 8919: 8918: 8917: 8914: 8909: 8907: 8904: 8900: 8898: 8895: 8891: 8887: 8885: 8880: 8876: 8868: 8867: 8866: 8863: 8859: 8857: 8856: 8846: 8842: 8839: 8835: 8829: 8826: 8821: 8819: 8815: 8810: 8798: 8797: 8793: 8789: 8785: 8781: 8774: 8773: 8769: 8765: 8762: 8761: 8760: 8759: 8756: 8750: 8748: 8743: 8739: 8735: 8730: 8720: 8716: 8712: 8708: 8704: 8703: 8698: 8695: 8691: 8687: 8682: 8679: 8676: 8673: 8668: 8666: 8663: 8660: 8657: 8656: 8654: 8651: 8648: 8647: 8645: 8644: 8643: 8642: 8637: 8634: 8631: 8628: 8623: 8618: 8614: 8613: 8612: 8609: 8605: 8601: 8597: 8596: 8595: 8594: 8591: 8588: 8583: 8579: 8576: 8573: 8570: 8565: 8560: 8558: 8549: 8546: 8543: 8542: 8541: 8535: 8532: 8529: 8526: 8523: 8522: 8521: 8515: 8512: 8509: 8506: 8503: 8500: 8499: 8498: 8491: 8490: 8483: 8479: 8476: 8475: 8474: 8473: 8469: 8464: 8461: 8460: 8459: 8453: 8449: 8445: 8442: 8439: 8438: 8437: 8434: 8430: 8424:Word 'Filter' 8417: 8414: 8410: 8405: 8404: 8403: 8402: 8399: 8396: 8392: 8391: 8387: 8383: 8379: 8375: 8371: 8370: 8369: 8368: 8365: 8360: 8356: 8352: 8348: 8341: 8320: 8317: 8312: 8311: 8310: 8309: 8308: 8307: 8306: 8305: 8298: 8295: 8291: 8290: 8289: 8286: 8282: 8281: 8280: 8277: 8272: 8271: 8270: 8269: 8266: 8262: 8259: 8257: 8253: 8248: 8245: 8242: 8230: 8227: 8223: 8219: 8215: 8214: 8213: 8210: 8205: 8197: 8194: 8190: 8186: 8185: 8184: 8181: 8176: 8175: 8174: 8173: 8172: 8171: 8166: 8163: 8159: 8158: 8157: 8156: 8153: 8148: 8144: 8135: 8134: 8133: 8132: 8129: 8124: 8121: 8116:good standing 8115: 8112: 8109: 8108: 8107: 8104: 8094: 8091: 8087: 8083: 8082: 8081: 8071: 8068: 8064: 8060: 8059: 8058: 8055: 8052: 8044: 8043: 8040: 8036: 8026: 8023: 8022: 8019: 8015: 8005: 8004: 7999: 7998: 7992: 7982: 7981: 7976: 7972: 7964: 7954: 7953: 7950: 7945: 7938: 7937: 7934: 7931: 7924: 7921: 7918: 7913: 7908: 7904: 7901: 7900: 7893: 7890: 7887: 7882: 7878: 7874: 7873:Google Groups 7870: 7866: 7865: 7864: 7863: 7862: 7861: 7856: 7853: 7848: 7847:Google Groups 7844: 7843: 7842: 7841: 7838: 7835: 7831: 7826: 7825: 7820: 7817: 7813: 7808: 7806: 7803: 7799: 7795: 7791: 7787: 7783: 7782: 7781: 7780: 7777: 7774: 7770: 7766: 7760: 7757: 7752: 7751: 7750: 7747: 7742: 7741: 7740: 7739: 7736: 7733: 7728: 7725: 7721: 7718: 7713: 7709: 7705: 7702: 7698: 7694: 7689: 7686: 7685: 7683: 7682: 7681: 7680: 7677: 7674: 7669: 7668: 7663: 7660: 7655: 7654: 7653: 7652: 7649: 7646: 7642: 7638: 7637: 7636: 7635: 7632: 7627: 7617: 7616: 7614: 7609: 7606: 7602: 7600: 7595: 7591: 7587: 7583: 7578: 7577: 7575: 7574: 7573: 7571: 7570:Google Groups 7567: 7566:Google Groups 7560: 7557: 7556: 7550: 7547: 7546: 7544: 7539: 7536: 7535: 7533: 7532: 7531: 7525: 7522: 7521: 7515: 7511: 7510: 7508: 7503: 7499: 7495: 7491: 7490: 7488: 7487: 7486: 7484: 7477: 7474: 7473: 7472: 7469: 7465: 7463: 7459: 7450: 7449: 7446: 7441: 7440: 7437: 7434: 7427: 7423: 7419: 7415: 7411: 7407: 7406: 7403: 7400: 7396: 7393: 7391: 7388: 7384: 7383: 7382: 7381: 7378: 7367: 7362: 7359: 7355: 7351: 7347: 7343: 7341: 7337: 7333: 7328: 7326: 7323: 7319: 7315: 7314: 7311: 7308: 7305: 7301: 7300: 7299: 7298: 7295: 7291: 7287: 7280: 7278: 7270: 7267: 7264: 7261: 7258: 7257: 7247: 7244: 7240: 7236: 7235: 7234: 7229: 7228: 7225: 7223: 7218: 7212: 7211: 7210: 7209: 7206: 7202: 7198: 7194: 7190: 7186: 7182: 7170: 7167: 7163: 7160:See also the 7159: 7155: 7150: 7146: 7140: 7135: 7130: 7126: 7125: 7124: 7121: 7117: 7113: 7109: 7105: 7101: 7100: 7099: 7095: 7091: 7087: 7083: 7076: 7072: 7067: 7058: 7053: 7050: 7046: 7042: 7041: 7040: 7039: 7036: 7032: 7018: 7015: 7010: 7009: 7008: 7005: 7001: 6997: 6992: 6989: 6986: 6983: 6980: 6979: 6977: 6976: 6975: 6974: 6971: 6967: 6956: 6953: 6948: 6947: 6946: 6943: 6939: 6935: 6931: 6927: 6922: 6921: 6920: 6915: 6914: 6911: 6909: 6904: 6898: 6897: 6896: 6895: 6892: 6886: 6884: 6870: 6867: 6865: 6859: 6858: 6857: 6856: 6853: 6849: 6845: 6841: 6837: 6833: 6832: 6817: 6814: 6812: 6806: 6805: 6804: 6803: 6802: 6801: 6800: 6799: 6798: 6797: 6796: 6795: 6794: 6793: 6778: 6775: 6771: 6770: 6769: 6768: 6767: 6766: 6765: 6764: 6763: 6762: 6761: 6760: 6759: 6758: 6745: 6740: 6739: 6731: 6730: 6729: 6728: 6727: 6726: 6725: 6724: 6723: 6722: 6721: 6720: 6709: 6706: 6701: 6700: 6699: 6698: 6697: 6696: 6695: 6694: 6693: 6692: 6683: 6678: 6677: 6671: 6670: 6669: 6668: 6667: 6666: 6665: 6664: 6657: 6654: 6652: 6646: 6645: 6644: 6643: 6642: 6641: 6636: 6631: 6630: 6624: 6620: 6619: 6618: 6617: 6610: 6607: 6605: 6599: 6598: 6597: 6596: 6595: 6594: 6589: 6586: 6582: 6581: 6580: 6579: 6576: 6573: 6571: 6564: 6563: 6562: 6561: 6558: 6556: 6539: 6536: 6534: 6524: 6517: 6513: 6512: 6511: 6506: 6505: 6499: 6495: 6493: 6490: 6486: 6485: 6484: 6483: 6480: 6478: 6464: 6460: 6456: 6452: 6449: 6448: 6444: 6433: 6430: 6428: 6425: 6420: 6419: 6418: 6417: 6411: 6409: 6408: 6400: 6395: 6391: 6387: 6383: 6382:Talk:Foo/Temp 6379: 6375: 6371: 6359: 6355: 6351: 6347: 6343: 6339: 6338: 6335: 6332: 6327: 6325: 6322: 6317: 6316: 6315: 6306: 6303: 6302: 6299: 6295: 6281: 6277: 6271: 6267: 6266: 6259: 6258: 6257: 6252: 6248: 6242: 6237: 6231: 6230: 6229: 6228: 6224: 6220: 6216: 6198: 6197: 6195: 6194: 6192: 6191: 6189: 6188: 6178: 6177: 6175: 6174: 6172: 6171: 6169: 6168: 6158: 6157: 6155: 6154: 6152: 6151: 6149: 6148: 6138: 6137: 6135: 6134: 6132: 6131: 6129: 6128: 6127: 6122: 6117: 6113: 6107: 6102: 6097: 6093: 6081: 6079: 6074: 6070: 6064: 6059: 6054: 6050: 6042: 6041: 6040: 6039: 6035: 6029: 6025: 6024: 6007: 6006: 6004: 6003: 6001: 6000: 5998: 5997: 5987: 5986: 5984: 5983: 5981: 5980: 5978: 5977: 5976: 5973: 5968: 5967: 5962: 5961: 5955: 5954: 5951: 5947: 5943: 5930: 5927: 5923: 5918: 5917: 5916: 5915: 5914: 5913: 5912: 5911: 5904: 5901: 5897: 5896: 5895: 5894: 5893: 5892: 5887: 5884: 5880: 5876: 5875: 5874: 5873: 5870: 5865: 5861: 5855: 5850: 5845: 5844: 5843: 5842: 5839: 5835: 5831: 5827: 5823: 5815: 5807: 5804: 5799: 5798: 5797: 5796: 5793: 5792: 5788: 5782: 5773: 5770: 5766: 5762: 5758: 5756: 5752: 5749: 5747:translations. 5746: 5742: 5738: 5734: 5730: 5727: 5726: 5725: 5721: 5715: 5705: 5700: 5696: 5692: 5688: 5684: 5681: 5680: 5679: 5676: 5673: 5670: 5667: 5663: 5660: 5657: 5649: 5648: 5644: 5642: 5636: 5632: 5625: 5622: 5618: 5614: 5610: 5606: 5601: 5600: 5599: 5598: 5595: 5593: 5589: 5587: 5570: 5567: 5565: 5561: 5559: 5554: 5550: 5546: 5542: 5538: 5537: 5536: 5533: 5529: 5525: 5521: 5517: 5516: 5515: 5512: 5509: 5505: 5504: 5503: 5500: 5496: 5492: 5491: 5490: 5487: 5483: 5482: 5481: 5480: 5477: 5473: 5469: 5460: 5457: 5453: 5449: 5445: 5441: 5437: 5433: 5430: 5425: 5421: 5417: 5413: 5410: 5409: 5408: 5402: 5399: 5396: 5395: 5394: 5391: 5389: 5385: 5381: 5377: 5373: 5369: 5359: 5358: 5354: 5352: 5346: 5341: 5334: 5326: 5325: 5322: 5318: 5311: 5308: 5303: 5302: 5301: 5300: 5295: 5291: 5290: 5287: 5283: 5279: 5275: 5270: 5269: 5266: 5263: 5258: 5257: 5256: 5255: 5252: 5251:Andrew Delong 5248: 5244: 5243:AIDS pandemic 5239: 5235: 5230: 5229: 5226: 5220: 5219: 5209: 5208: 5205: 5201: 5194:Group project 5191: 5188: 5187: 5183: 5179: 5175: 5171: 5157: 5154: 5152: 5150:Gennaro Prota 5146: 5145: 5144: 5143: 5140: 5135: 5134: 5131: 5129: 5124: 5119: 5115: 5114: 5113: 5112: 5109: 5105: 5102: 5099: 5097: 5087: 5082: 5079: 5075: 5073: 5068: 5063: 5059: 5054: 5053: 5052: 5030: 5027: 5023: 5022: 5021: 5020: 5019: 5018: 5017: 5016: 5009: 5006: 5002: 4998: 4994: 4993: 4992: 4991: 4990: 4989: 4978: 4974: 4973: 4972: 4967: 4966: 4963: 4961: 4956: 4951: 4947: 4946: 4945: 4942: 4941:Smiles4you914 4937: 4936: 4935: 4934: 4931: 4920: 4915: 4912: 4908: 4906: 4901: 4896: 4892: 4887: 4886: 4885: 4876: 4871: 4867: 4863: 4837: 4836: 4833: 4830: 4826: 4821: 4820: 4817: 4804: 4803: 4802: 4801: 4798: 4794: 4789: 4784: 4783: 4780: 4777: 4773: 4769: 4764: 4761: 4758: 4755:Worse, if it 4753: 4745: 4744: 4743: 4740: 4736: 4724: 4721: 4718: 4714: 4713: 4712: 4711: 4704: 4701: 4697: 4693: 4692: 4691: 4690: 4689: 4688: 4683: 4679: 4675: 4671: 4670: 4669: 4668: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4656: 4653: 4651: 4649:Gennaro Prota 4645: 4641: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4634: 4631: 4627: 4623: 4620: 4609: 4602: 4599: 4595: 4591: 4590: 4589: 4586: 4582: 4578: 4577: 4572: 4569: 4564: 4560: 4559: 4558: 4555: 4551: 4550: 4549: 4548: 4545: 4541: 4537: 4536: 4531: 4517: 4514: 4509: 4507: 4504: 4501: 4497: 4496: 4494: 4493: 4490: 4487: 4482: 4481: 4480: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4453: 4452: 4451: 4448: 4435: 4432: 4427: 4426: 4423: 4422: 4419: 4416: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4400: 4397: 4396: 4393: 4390: 4386: 4374: 4371: 4367: 4366: 4365: 4360: 4356: 4350: 4346: 4345: 4338: 4337: 4330: 4329: 4325: 4321: 4317: 4309: 4305: 4304: 4303: 4299: 4294: 4287: 4283: 4280: 4279: 4278: 4277: 4274: 4270: 4269: 4264: 4259: 4256: 4252: 4251: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4239: 4236: 4232: 4227: 4223: 4222: 4217: 4214: 4211: 4207: 4206:Nicole Kidman 4202: 4201: 4200: 4199: 4194: 4191: 4187: 4186: 4185: 4184: 4181: 4178: 4174: 4173: 4170: 4167: 4164: 4160: 4159: 4156: 4153: 4149: 4144: 4140: 4139: 4136: 4133: 4132: 4125: 4121: 4117: 4113: 4103: 4100: 4096: 4092: 4091: 4090: 4087: 4083: 4082: 4081: 4078: 4073: 4072: 4071: 4066: 4059: 4051: 4049: 4043: 4039: 4035: 4031: 4030: 4028: 4025: 4022: 4018: 4017: 4016: 4015: 4010: 4003: 3995: 3993: 3987: 3983: 3979: 3975: 3971: 3967: 3963: 3953: 3952: 3950: 3939: 3930: 3927: 3923: 3918: 3917: 3916: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3908: 3903: 3899: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3889: 3886: 3883: 3878: 3877: 3844: 3840: 3837: 3834: 3831: 3828: 3825: 3822: 3819: 3816: 3813: 3810: 3806: 3802: 3799: 3796: 3793: 3790: 3787: 3784: 3781: 3778: 3775: 3772: 3768: 3764: 3761: 3758: 3755: 3752: 3749: 3746: 3743: 3740: 3737: 3734: 3730: 3726: 3723: 3720: 3717: 3714: 3711: 3708: 3705: 3702: 3699: 3696: 3692: 3688: 3685: 3682: 3679: 3676: 3673: 3670: 3667: 3664: 3661: 3658: 3654: 3650: 3647: 3644: 3641: 3638: 3635: 3632: 3629: 3626: 3623: 3620: 3616: 3612: 3609: 3606: 3603: 3600: 3597: 3594: 3591: 3588: 3585: 3582: 3575: 3571: 3568: 3565: 3562: 3559: 3556: 3553: 3550: 3547: 3544: 3541: 3534: 3530: 3527: 3524: 3521: 3518: 3515: 3512: 3509: 3506: 3503: 3500: 3496: 3492: 3489: 3486: 3483: 3480: 3477: 3474: 3471: 3468: 3465: 3462: 3458: 3454: 3451: 3448: 3445: 3442: 3439: 3436: 3433: 3430: 3427: 3424: 3420: 3416: 3413: 3410: 3407: 3404: 3401: 3398: 3395: 3392: 3389: 3386: 3382: 3378: 3375: 3372: 3369: 3366: 3363: 3360: 3357: 3354: 3351: 3348: 3344: 3340: 3337: 3334: 3331: 3328: 3325: 3322: 3319: 3316: 3313: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3299: 3296: 3293: 3290: 3287: 3284: 3281: 3278: 3275: 3272: 3268: 3230: 3227: 3224: 3221: 3217: 3203: 3200: 3196: 3195: 3194: 3190: 3189: 3183: 3175: 3171: 3155: 3152: 3148: 3147: 3146: 3143: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3134: 3126: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3114: 3110: 3106: 3099: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3087: 3082: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3073: 3069: 3065: 3061: 3057: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3049: 3044: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3034: 3030: 3022: 3015: 3014: 3011: 3008: 3003: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2997: 2992: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2978:I did nothing 2975: 2971: 2968:No I did not 2966: 2952: 2949: 2945: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2930: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2909: 2905: 2900: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2886: 2882: 2878: 2865: 2862: 2857: 2856: 2847: 2843: 2839: 2835: 2831: 2830: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2815: 2812: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2794: 2791: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2775: 2772: 2767: 2763: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2753: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2733: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2722: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2700: 2695: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2680: 2677: 2668: 2667: 2664: 2657: 2653: 2649: 2645: 2641: 2636: 2635: 2634: 2633: 2630: 2626: 2615: 2608: 2605: 2604: 2597: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2587: 2582: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2572: 2561: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2548: 2544: 2537: 2534: 2530: 2529: 2522: 2518: 2517: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2503: 2499: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2470: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2438: 2435: 2430: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2420: 2417: 2416: 2415: 2402: 2399: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2388: 2385: 2382: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2373: 2370: 2366: 2363: 2353: 2350: 2345: 2341: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2331: 2326: 2322: 2311: 2308: 2306: 2299: 2296: 2292: 2288: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2282: 2262: 2257: 2253: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2233: 2228: 2224: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2207: 2204: 2200: 2195: 2191: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2177: 2173: 2163: 2160: 2155: 2152: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2141: 2138: 2134: 2127: 2122: 2118: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2105: 2087: 2082: 2078: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2049: 2046: 2043: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2021: 2016: 2012: 2005: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1991: 1988: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1974: 1969: 1965: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1952: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1933: 1929: 1923: 1919: 1913: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1890: 1888: 1887: 1875: 1874: 1871: 1856: 1851: 1847: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1822: 1819: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1801: 1796: 1792: 1786: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1772: 1769: 1765: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1756: 1753: 1749: 1748: 1739: 1734: 1730: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1709: 1706: 1702: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1692: 1687: 1683: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1671: 1668: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1656: 1652: 1639: 1636: 1635: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1605:nominations. 1604: 1590: 1587: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1575: 1572: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1562: 1559: 1556: 1551: 1545: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1525: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1505: 1504: 1503: 1502: 1499: 1498:4.250.132.134 1495: 1485: 1480: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1455: 1444: 1441: 1440: 1437: 1435: 1426: 1411: 1408: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1385: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1376: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1353: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1324: 1321: 1316: 1314: 1311: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1284: 1280: 1275: 1272: 1268: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1255: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1247: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1234: 1225: 1222: 1218: 1214: 1213:Google Groups 1210: 1209: 1208: 1205: 1200: 1196: 1194: 1191: 1189: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1162: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1150: 1146: 1134: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1001: 997: 993: 989: 985: 981: 977: 973: 969: 965: 961: 957: 953: 949: 945: 941: 937: 933: 929: 925: 921: 917: 913: 909: 905: 901: 897: 893: 889: 885: 881: 877: 873: 869: 865: 861: 857: 853: 849: 845: 841: 837: 833: 829: 825: 821: 817: 813: 809: 805: 801: 797: 793: 789: 785: 781: 777: 773: 769: 765: 761: 757: 753: 749: 745: 741: 737: 733: 729: 725: 721: 717: 713: 709: 705: 701: 697: 693: 689: 685: 681: 677: 673: 669: 665: 661: 657: 653: 649: 645: 641: 637: 633: 629: 625: 621: 617: 613: 609: 605: 601: 597: 593: 589: 585: 581: 577: 573: 569: 565: 561: 557: 553: 549: 545: 541: 537: 533: 529: 525: 521: 517: 513: 509: 505: 501: 497: 493: 489: 485: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 461: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 437: 433: 429: 425: 421: 417: 413: 409: 405: 401: 397: 393: 389: 385: 381: 377: 373: 369: 365: 361: 357: 353: 349: 345: 341: 337: 333: 329: 325: 321: 317: 313: 309: 305: 301: 297: 293: 289: 285: 281: 278: 275: 271: 267: 263: 259: 255: 251: 247: 243: 239: 235: 231: 227: 223: 219: 215: 211: 207: 203: 199: 195: 191: 187: 183: 179: 175: 171: 167: 163: 159: 155: 151: 147: 143: 139: 135: 131: 127: 123: 119: 115: 111: 107: 103: 99: 96: 91: 89: 85: 69: 68:Miscellaneous 66: 64: 61: 59: 56: 52: 47: 44: 42: 39: 37: 34: 33: 32: 31: 27: 26: 19: 9979: 9975: 9961: 9942: 9930: 9882: 9866: 9786: 9773: 9762: 9753: 9752: 9744: 9730: 9684:. Thanks.-- 9679: 9628: 9625: 9590: 9577: 9555: 9539: 9521: 9480: 9467: 9465: 9453: 9422: 9386: 9380: 9368: 9343: 9331: 9313: 9307: 9259: 9232: 9225: 9213: 9207: 9201: 9180: 9169: 9151: 9123: 9119: 9100: 9098: 9092: 9079: 9018: 8956: 8954: 8948: 8944: 8939: 8930: 8854: 8852: 8847: 8843: 8837: 8833: 8830: 8824: 8822: 8808: 8806: 8777: 8751: 8731: 8728: 8561: 8556: 8553: 8539: 8519: 8496: 8467: 8457: 8451: 8435: 8431: 8427: 8408: 8377: 8373: 8340:splitsection 8334: 8263: 8260: 8249: 8246: 8243: 8240: 8188: 8125: 8122: 8119: 8105: 8102: 8079: 8056: 8053: 8050: 8032: 8024: 8011: 7995: 7988: 7960: 7957:Span.texhtml 7943: 7939: 7930:FrancisTyers 7927: 7911: 7906: 7902: 7884: 7868: 7726: 7640: 7628: 7624: 7563: 7558: 7528: 7523: 7514:market share 7480: 7475: 7470: 7466: 7456: 7442: 7430: 7373: 7365: 7349: 7294:Alexignatiou 7289: 7285: 7281: 7274: 7238: 7221: 7215: 7189:User:R. Koot 7178: 7080:— Preceding 7075:Romanization 7068: 7064: 7056: 7028: 6970:82.170.1.248 6963: 6907: 6901: 6887: 6880: 6863: 6810: 6736: 6674: 6650: 6627: 6603: 6569: 6554: 6549: 6523:commonvandal 6515: 6502: 6497: 6471: 6458: 6450: 6441: 6406: 6405: 6398: 6367: 6342:Board member 6312: 6304: 6291: 6263: 6208: 6125: 6021: 6017: 5974: 5971: 5963: 5941: 5939: 5878: 5833: 5819: 5813: 5789: 5777: 5768: 5765:hu:Pankráció 5750: 5744: 5740: 5728: 5719: 5711: 5703: 5677: 5674: 5671: 5668: 5664: 5661: 5658: 5655: 5640: 5630: 5628: 5612: 5608: 5591: 5585: 5581: 5563: 5557: 5465: 5435: 5406: 5392: 5365: 5350: 5339: 5327: 5316: 5293: 5246: 5231: 5221: 5215: 5199: 5197: 5189: 5167: 5127: 5121: 5106: 5103: 5100: 5093: 5085: 5044: 4959: 4953: 4926: 4918: 4853: 4829:FrancisTyers 4822: 4813: 4792: 4787: 4786:You can put 4785: 4765: 4762: 4756: 4754: 4750: 4741: 4737: 4734: 4717:FrancisTyers 4616: 4607: 4598:Pcu123456789 4585:Pcu123456789 4542: 4538: 4529: 4476: 4457: 4449: 4445: 4406: 4398: 4389:FrancisTyers 4382: 4363: 4342: 4312: 4307: 4267: 4235:Pcu123456789 4230: 4142: 4127: 4115: 4094: 4086:62.31.55.223 4047: 4041: 4037: 4033: 3991: 3986:Masturbation 3969: 3965: 3961: 3959: 3946: 3945: 3937: 3225: 3219: 3215: 3213: 3178: 3104: 3080: 3063: 3059: 3042: 2981: 2977: 2973: 2969: 2967: 2964: 2880: 2876: 2873: 2870:Editing tags 2735: 2713: 2709: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2684: 2681: 2678: 2674: 2661:Good point. 2660: 2624: 2621: 2613: 2599: 2567: 2540: 2520: 2498:IPA template 2494: 2444: 2436: 2433: 2428: 2423: 2418: 2412: 2374: 2371: 2367: 2364: 2361: 2317: 2309: 2302: 2276: 2166: 2150: 2130: 2100: 1943: 1922:protologisms 1914: 1902:protologisms 1891: 1885: 1884: 1881: 1867: 1784: 1645: 1637: 1600: 1586:Pcu123456789 1493: 1491: 1483: 1450: 1442: 1433: 1429: 1333: 1198: 1141: 276: 169: 97: 93: 81: 30:Village pump 28: 10055:Mediazilla: 9841:Mediazilla: 9055:Mediazilla: 8544:swear words 8372:Basically, 7786:Web browser 7582:Jimbo Wales 7193:User:Pharos 6392:, like so: 6265:Lady Aleena 6023:Lady Aleena 5922:let me know 5720:even better 5528:bcasterline 5495:bcasterline 5472:bcasterline 5384:media types 5041:translation 4622:World War 1 4383:Your input 4344:Lady Aleena 3181:BL Lacertae 2976:, actually 1870:TheGrappler 1631:TheGrappler 1361:Username132 1337:Username132 1202:"product". 1145:Username132 10059:Simetrical 9845:Simetrical 9819:Simetrical 9646:Simetrical 9602:Simetrical 9562:Simetrical 9533:Change to 9429:Simetrical 9409:John Nagle 9308:not enough 9063:Simetrical 8993:Simetrical 8922:John Nagle 8784:Simetrical 8707:Simetrical 8458:Proposal: 8037:. Thanks, 7997:talk to me 7889:Carcharoth 7834:Bachrach44 7414:Simetrical 6883:GA project 6840:Simetrical 6738:talk to me 6676:talk to me 6629:talk to me 6585:John Nagle 6504:talk to me 6498:accurately 6401:murrayinch 6346:Simetrical 6319:recently.- 6262: 6215:Simetrical 5958:List items 5944:for this: 5836:of help.-- 5830:Stub Types 5761:WP article 5733:wikt:Earth 5687:Simetrical 5274:Simetrical 5262:John Nagle 5174:Simetrical 5062:Rick Block 5026:Leonard G. 4930:Leonard G. 4895:Rick Block 4700:Carcharoth 4484:divisive. 4431:Piccadilly 4316:Simetrical 4114:You think 4099:Sean Black 4077:Sean Black 4042:disgusting 4034:censorship 3970:disgusting 3962:censorship 3732:double qrt 3618:double chz 3607:little pad 3525:little pad 3487:little pad 3449:little pad 2834:Simetrical 2739:Simetrical 2644:Simetrical 2547:Simetrical 2473:Simetrical 2340:WP:SIGTYPE 2280:- Tutmosis 2151:notability 1948:Sean Black 1918:neologisms 1906:neologisms 1898:neologisms 1894:neologisms 1785:everywhere 1524:Sean Black 1389:Simetrical 1266:displayed. 1170:Simetrical 100:Archives: 51:persistent 9083:Shilkanni 8903:Nihiltres 8764:WP:POPUPS 8604:this list 8252:Leopold 2 7917:Saxifrage 7812:Microsoft 7605:RuneScape 7599:RuneScape 7590:MediaWiki 7572:article! 7512:Google's 7458:Knowledge 7282:Proposal: 7185:tag cloud 7181:suggested 7014:Konstable 6623:Watchlist 6455:vandalism 6126:Compare: 5975:Example: 5950:Konstable 5900:Konstable 5838:Konstable 5769:Wrestling 5714:interwiki 4797:WAS 4.250 4619:Enceladus 4292:digital_m 3947:Moved to 3803:split top 3577:cheseburg 3536:double ha 3498:hamburger 3109:Johnleemk 3068:Johnleemk 3029:Johnleemk 2970:vandalise 2898:digital_m 2734:is fixed. 2714:temporary 2710:suggested 2581:MediaWiki 2564:Searching 2502:Woodstone 2451:Knowledge 2194:crackpots 2137:Saxifrage 1752:Saxifrage 1531:See also 1511:Johnleemk 1296:Johnleemk 1242:Johnleemk 46:Proposals 41:Technical 10067:contribs 10004:User:Zoe 9980:Eleassar 9943:Eleassar 9853:contribs 9827:contribs 9769:Nohomers 9696:User:Zoe 9667:Kdammers 9654:contribs 9610:contribs 9570:contribs 9477:Grutness 9437:contribs 9425:episodes 9423:Simpsons 9286:User:Zoe 9071:contribs 9001:contribs 8947:command 8792:contribs 8715:contribs 8481:checked. 8395:Kdammers 8359:PageRank 8285:Honbicot 8193:Honbicot 7607:article. 7445:DoomsElf 7433:User:Zoe 7422:contribs 7397:IMDB. -- 7377:DoomsElf 7375:movie?-- 7304:User:Zoe 7277:the O.C. 7094:contribs 7082:unsigned 6848:contribs 6427:Garion96 6370:Foo/Temp 6354:contribs 6276:contribs 6223:contribs 6034:contribs 5926:JennyRad 5883:JennyRad 5816:requests 5814:opinions 5729:Quantity 5695:contribs 5328:we have 5282:contribs 5225:Deathawk 5182:contribs 4788:whatever 4776:Dpbsmith 4500:User:Zoe 4370:Captainj 4355:contribs 4324:contribs 4258:meta tag 4177:Ardric47 4163:User:Zoe 4124:Grutness 3978:clitoris 3874:Comments 3645:2 little 3566:2 little 3460:mac heel 3422:mac club 2948:mastodon 2922:Netscape 2885:mastodon 2842:contribs 2747:contribs 2652:contribs 2596:Grutness 2555:contribs 2521:Username 2481:contribs 2381:User:Zoe 1627:WP:RFARs 1625:or even 1571:Captainj 1555:User:Zoe 1454:Sqrlaway 1397:contribs 1188:Garion96 1178:contribs 58:Idea lab 9966:strings 9765:Myspace 9580:Lincher 9544:(where 9494:AFD's) 9405:WP:BAND 9332:WP:AUTO 9163:WP:AUTO 9136:WP:AUTO 9042:Charles 9028:Charles 8957:ÉIREANN 8855:ÉIREANN 8755:Stellis 8747:dial-up 8738:Firefox 8485:review. 8468:already 8351:Pac-Man 8222:WP:GFDL 8162:Lincher 8067:gadfium 8018:Rory096 7949:Kaldosh 7944:instead 7886:Google. 7869:archive 7773:Cedders 7697:webmail 7673:Warrens 7619:expand. 7502:webmail 7387:Erwin85 7322:Lincher 7239:attract 7214:name. — 7120:Cedders 7104:Persian 7071:UniPers 7004:Lincher 6952:Lincher 6934:NeoPets 6891:Lincher 6463:sandbox 6321:gadfium 5751:Quality 5617:Veledan 5486:Raul654 5436:picture 5321:Kaldosh 5005:Cedders 4816:Cedders 4772:WP:CITE 4696:WP:CENT 4644:WP:HIDE 4630:Yakuzai 4592:I made 4568:Garrett 4544:Yakuzai 4052:-- ( | 4024:Raul654 3996:-- ( | 3735:mustard 3721:big pad 3697:mustard 3694:quarter 3683:big pad 3621:mustard 3583:mustard 3542:mustard 3501:mustard 3332:.5 amer 3270:Mcgrill 3238:condo 2 3235:condo 1 3125:unblock 3098:unblock 3021:unblock 2926:Cedders 2594:again. 2586:gadfium 2584:there.- 2571:Brendan 2533:Cedders 2375:Lalith 2362:Hello, 2199:Lambiam 2133:Wikinfo 1764:Lambiam 1623:WP:RfCs 1472:Lambiam 1466:at the 1258:tildes? 10051:Squids 10018:Andjam 9954:Andjam 9896:freedb 9877:Itunes 9716:Pharos 9686:Pharos 9515:WP:IMP 9500:Pharos 9400:WP:BIO 9335:WP:BIO 9328:WP:NOT 9208:source 9110:Google 8913:Djegan 8780:WP:VPT 8694:Seahen 8497:Pros: 8413:Seahen 8364:Seahen 8294:Seahen 8265:Evilbu 8226:Seahen 8128:Ixfd64 8090:Pharos 8039:Mwhorn 7877:Usenet 7830:usenet 7756:Osomec 7732:Osomec 7659:Valwen 7641:Hamlet 7585:cool.) 7462:Google 7399:Golbez 7395:WP:NOT 7318:WP:NOT 7254:Trivia 7243:Pharos 7205:Sundar 7166:Pharos 7086:Sorriz 6930:Yahoo! 6489:Centrx 6298:Pharos 5631:medium 5553:WP:LPR 5545:WP:MPR 5541:WP:PPR 5424:WP:FMC 5420:WP:FSC 5412:WP:FSC 5340:cannot 4911:Golbez 4870:Ixfd64 4779:(talk) 4747:there. 4224:Using 4213:(talk) 4190:Graham 3841:sesimi 3791:pepper 3765:sesimi 3756:2 amer 3738:catsup 3727:sesimi 3718:2 amer 3700:catsup 3689:sesimi 3680:2 amer 3668:tomato 3665:2 prem 3662:catsup 3642:2 amer 3624:catsup 3586:catsup 3545:catsup 3504:catsup 3455:sesimi 3417:sesimi 3379:sesimi 3358:tomato 3355:2 prem 3346:crispy 3311:tartar 3303:sesimi 3282:tomato 3279:2 prem 3262:bottom 3256:cheeze 3253:season 3199:Stefan 3151:Stefan 3133:Stefan 3086:Stefan 3048:Stefan 2996:Stefan 2730:until 2712:for a 2511:fonts: 2471:way. — 2344:Charli 2325:Charli 2295:SimonP 2104:Golbez 2045:(talk) 1987:Golbez 1818:Golbez 1705:Golbez 1667:Golbez 1603:WP:RfA 1199:within 1138:Forums 36:Policy 9738:Lofty 9357:Jakew 9299:Jakew 9114:Alexa 9024:WP:RM 8520:Cons 8447:edits 8256:Congo 8218:WP:OA 8178:deal. 7227:ts501 7118:. -- 6938:WP:PR 6913:ts501 6451:Note: 5964:From 5588:roken 5560:roken 5549:WP:PR 5524:WP:PR 5508:Kusma 5468:WP:FM 5448:three 5431:then. 5429:WP:FM 5380:WP:FM 5372:WP:FP 5294:might 5204:tejas 5133:ts501 5048:: --> 4965:ts501 4554:Osbus 4116:those 4057:#info 4001:#info 3982:vulva 3974:penis 3835:crisp 3797:steak 3794:swiss 3770:steak 3759:2 big 3744:2 pik 3706:2 pik 3674:3 pik 3651:plain 3630:1 pik 3627:dried 3613:plain 3592:1 pik 3589:dried 3572:plain 3551:1 pik 3548:dried 3531:plain 3510:1 pik 3507:dried 3469:shred 3463:sauce 3434:2 pik 3431:shred 3425:sauce 3411:spice 3393:shred 3384:spicy 3373:crisp 3341:plain 3308:filet 3297:grill 3250:veg 4 3247:veg 3 3244:veg 2 3241:veg 1 2881:every 2877:every 2625:where 2305:below 2190:arXiv 1238:phpBB 88:start 16:< 10063:talk 10038:Deco 9992:Deco 9936:and 9916:talk 9873:CDDB 9849:talk 9823:talk 9807:talk 9767:and 9650:talk 9606:talk 9591:have 9566:talk 9511:WP:N 9483:wha? 9433:talk 9330:and 9282:WP:V 9248:Deco 9193:Deco 9140:Deco 9067:talk 9019:move 8997:talk 8955:Fear 8894:Deco 8879:talk 8872:Mets 8853:Fear 8818:here 8816:and 8814:here 8788:talk 8711:talk 8622:Firi 8606:? -- 8582:Firi 8564:Firi 8557:have 8493:wiki 8378:does 8276:Deco 8241:Hi, 8209:Deco 8180:Deco 8147:talk 8140:Mets 8084:See 8061:See 8016:. -- 7975:talk 7968:Mets 7963:here 7792:and 7645:Deco 7493:ads. 7460:and 7418:talk 7358:Deco 7348:and 7336:talk 7199:and 7191:and 7179:I'd 7149:talk 7090:talk 7073:and 7049:Deco 7035:Ydam 6932:and 6844:talk 6774:Deco 6705:Deco 6516:only 6413:ster 6350:talk 6331:Deco 6270:talk 6251:talk 6219:talk 6116:talk 6098:). — 6094:(or 6086:and 6073:talk 6051:(or 6028:talk 5864:talk 5803:Deco 5691:talk 5621:Talk 5594:egue 5566:egue 5532:talk 5520:here 5511:(討論) 5499:talk 5476:talk 5456:five 5452:four 5333:coor 5307:Deco 5278:talk 5178:talk 5168:See 5116:See 5078:Deco 5067:talk 5003:. -- 4900:talk 4827:. - 4825:here 4793:that 4770:and 4768:WP:V 4757:were 4678:talk 4624:and 4513:Deco 4486:Deco 4415:Deco 4385:here 4349:talk 4320:talk 4308:does 4268:talk 4255:PICS 4152:Dave 4130:wha? 4120:here 4044:" -- 3926:Deco 3902:Talk 3898:IMHO 3882:Deco 3838:heel 3832:parm 3829:none 3826:none 3823:none 3820:none 3817:none 3814:none 3811:none 3808:parm 3800:club 3788:none 3785:none 3782:none 3779:none 3776:none 3773:mayo 3762:heel 3753:salt 3750:none 3747:none 3741:ring 3724:heel 3715:salt 3712:none 3709:none 3703:ring 3686:heel 3677:salt 3671:ring 3659:mayo 3656:bigx 3648:heel 3639:salt 3636:none 3633:none 3610:heel 3604:amer 3601:salt 3598:none 3595:none 3569:heel 3563:none 3560:salt 3557:none 3554:none 3528:heel 3522:none 3519:salt 3516:none 3513:none 3493:heel 3490:heel 3484:amer 3481:none 3478:none 3475:none 3472:none 3466:none 3452:club 3446:none 3443:none 3440:none 3437:none 3428:none 3414:heel 3408:none 3405:none 3402:none 3399:none 3396:none 3390:none 3387:mayo 3376:heel 3370:none 3367:none 3364:none 3361:none 3352:none 3349:mayo 3338:heel 3335:fish 3329:salt 3326:none 3323:none 3320:none 3317:none 3314:none 3300:heel 3294:none 3291:none 3288:none 3285:none 3276:none 3273:mayo 3259:meat 3113:Talk 3105:your 3072:Talk 3064:will 3033:Talk 2861:Deco 2838:talk 2743:talk 2648:talk 2602:wha? 2551:talk 2541:See 2477:talk 2469:wiki 2459:ACEO 2398:Deco 2256:Talk 2252:IMHO 2227:Talk 2223:IMHO 2176:Talk 2172:IMHO 2159:Deco 2121:Talk 2117:IMHO 2081:Talk 2077:IMHO 2015:Talk 2011:IMHO 1968:Talk 1964:IMHO 1944:want 1932:Talk 1928:IMHO 1920:(or 1900:(or 1850:Talk 1846:IMHO 1795:Talk 1791:IMHO 1733:Talk 1729:IMHO 1686:Talk 1682:IMHO 1655:Talk 1651:IMHO 1619:here 1535:and 1515:Talk 1407:Deco 1393:talk 1375:Deco 1365:talk 1352:Deco 1341:talk 1320:Deco 1300:Talk 1283:Deco 1262:who. 1246:Talk 1204:Deco 1174:talk 1161:Deco 1149:talk 10057:. — 9911:501 9802:501 9632:Rob 9550:$ 1 9546:$ 2 9479:... 9475:). 9468:not 9284:. 9061:. — 8949:has 8931:not 8874:501 8740:or 8452:are 8409:one 8374:yes 8345:on 8142:501 8088:.-- 7970:501 7965:. — 7912:are 7907:are 7903:No. 7352:to 7164:.-- 7144:501 7077:. 6838:. — 6532:JEK 6476:JEK 6459:29% 6374:Foo 6246:501 6111:501 6090:in 6068:501 6047:to 6020:-- 5879:but 5859:501 5834:lot 5791:(t) 5787:Zoz 5735:vs 5685:? — 5635:dab 5613:not 5609:not 5555:). 5543:to 5444:two 5440:one 5345:dab 5234:SVG 5172:. — 4995:to 4640:WAI 4341:-- 4288:.-- 4263:RJH 4126:... 4095:but 3896:... 3265:top 3103:on 3081:ONE 3060:any 2598:... 2500:. − 2424:or 2250:... 2221:... 2170:... 2115:... 2075:... 2009:... 1962:... 1926:... 1886:not 1844:... 1789:... 1727:... 1680:... 1649:... 1310:Rob 1132:214 1128:213 1124:212 1120:211 1116:210 1112:209 1108:208 1104:207 1100:206 1096:205 1092:204 1088:203 1084:202 1080:201 1076:200 1072:199 1068:198 1064:197 1060:196 1056:195 1052:194 1048:193 1044:192 1040:191 1036:190 1032:189 1028:188 1024:187 1020:186 1016:185 1012:184 1008:183 1004:182 1000:181 996:180 992:179 988:178 984:177 980:176 976:175 972:174 968:173 964:172 960:171 956:170 952:169 948:168 944:167 940:166 936:165 932:164 928:163 924:162 920:161 916:160 912:159 908:158 904:157 900:156 896:155 892:154 888:153 884:152 880:151 876:150 872:149 868:148 864:147 860:146 856:145 852:144 848:143 844:142 840:141 836:140 832:139 828:138 824:137 820:136 816:135 812:134 808:133 804:132 800:131 796:130 792:129 788:128 784:127 780:126 776:125 772:124 768:123 764:122 760:121 756:120 752:119 748:118 744:117 740:116 736:115 732:114 728:113 724:112 720:111 716:110 712:109 708:108 704:107 700:106 696:105 692:104 688:103 684:102 680:101 676:100 63:WMF 10069:) 10065:• 9909:ts 9883:-- 9855:) 9851:• 9829:) 9825:• 9800:ts 9774:-- 9656:) 9652:• 9612:) 9608:• 9572:) 9568:• 9513:, 9439:) 9435:• 9383:— 9226:he 9177:— 9120:— 9073:) 9069:• 9003:) 8999:• 8794:) 8790:• 8753:-- 8749:. 8742:IE 8717:) 8713:• 8562:-- 8357:, 8343:}} 8337:{{ 8314:-- 8189:do 8065:.- 8001:) 7883:: 7850:-- 7629:-- 7424:) 7420:• 7356:. 7142:ts 7096:) 7092:• 6850:) 6846:• 6742:) 6680:) 6633:) 6526:}} 6520:{{ 6508:) 6465:. 6356:) 6352:• 6244:ts 6225:) 6221:• 6109:ts 6066:ts 5857:ts 5741:86 5731:: 5697:) 5693:• 5619:• 5530:• 5497:• 5474:• 5454:) 5450:, 5446:, 5442:, 5336:}} 5330:{{ 5284:) 5280:• 5260:-- 5202:-- 5184:) 5180:• 4698:? 4680:) 4583:. 4326:) 4322:• 4271:) 4150:-- 4122:! 4068:) 4062:| 4048:mo 4029:. 4012:) 4006:| 3992:mo 3980:, 3976:, 3924:. 3579:er 3184:- 3176:. 3128:}} 3122:{{ 3111:| 3101:}} 3095:{{ 3070:| 3043:my 3031:| 3024:}} 3018:{{ 3005:-- 2844:) 2840:• 2769:-- 2749:) 2745:• 2697:-- 2654:) 2650:• 2557:) 2553:• 2483:) 2479:• 2457:. 2102:-- 1912:. 1513:| 1509:. 1496:. 1399:) 1395:• 1367:) 1343:) 1335:-- 1298:| 1294:. 1244:| 1180:) 1176:• 1151:) 1130:, 1126:, 1122:, 1118:, 1114:, 1110:, 1106:, 1102:, 1098:, 1094:, 1090:, 1086:, 1082:, 1078:, 1074:, 1070:, 1066:, 1062:, 1058:, 1054:, 1050:, 1046:, 1042:, 1038:, 1034:, 1030:, 1026:, 1022:, 1018:, 1014:, 1010:, 1006:, 1002:, 998:, 994:, 990:, 986:, 982:, 978:, 974:, 970:, 966:, 962:, 958:, 954:, 950:, 946:, 942:, 938:, 934:, 930:, 926:, 922:, 918:, 914:, 910:, 906:, 902:, 898:, 894:, 890:, 886:, 882:, 878:, 874:, 870:, 866:, 862:, 858:, 854:, 850:, 846:, 842:, 838:, 834:, 830:, 826:, 822:, 818:, 814:, 810:, 806:, 802:, 798:, 794:, 790:, 786:, 782:, 778:, 774:, 770:, 766:, 762:, 758:, 754:, 750:, 746:, 742:, 738:, 734:, 730:, 726:, 722:, 718:, 714:, 710:, 706:, 702:, 698:, 694:, 690:, 686:, 682:, 678:, 674:, 672:99 670:, 668:98 666:, 664:97 662:, 660:96 658:, 656:95 654:, 652:94 650:, 648:93 646:, 644:92 642:, 640:91 638:, 636:90 634:, 632:89 630:, 628:88 626:, 624:87 622:, 620:86 618:, 616:85 614:, 612:84 610:, 608:83 606:, 604:82 602:, 600:81 598:, 596:80 594:, 592:79 590:, 588:78 586:, 584:77 582:, 580:76 578:, 576:75 574:, 572:74 570:, 568:73 566:, 564:72 562:, 560:71 558:, 556:70 554:, 552:69 550:, 548:68 546:, 544:67 542:, 540:66 538:, 536:65 534:, 532:64 530:, 528:63 526:, 524:62 522:, 520:61 518:, 516:60 514:, 512:59 510:, 508:58 506:, 504:57 502:, 500:56 498:, 496:55 494:, 492:54 490:, 488:53 486:, 484:52 482:, 480:51 478:, 476:50 474:, 472:49 470:, 468:48 466:, 464:47 462:, 460:46 458:, 456:45 454:, 452:44 450:, 448:43 446:, 444:42 442:, 440:41 438:, 436:40 434:, 432:39 430:, 428:38 426:, 424:37 422:, 420:36 418:, 416:35 414:, 412:34 410:, 408:33 406:, 404:32 402:, 400:31 398:, 396:30 394:, 392:29 390:, 388:28 386:, 384:27 382:, 380:26 378:, 376:25 374:, 372:24 370:, 368:23 366:, 364:22 362:, 360:21 358:, 356:20 354:, 352:19 350:, 348:18 346:, 344:17 342:, 340:16 338:, 336:15 334:, 332:14 330:, 328:13 326:, 324:12 322:, 320:11 318:, 316:10 314:, 310:, 306:, 302:, 298:, 294:, 290:, 286:, 282:, 274:AR 272:, 270:AQ 268:, 266:AP 264:, 262:AO 260:, 258:AN 256:, 254:AM 252:, 250:AL 248:, 246:AK 244:, 242:AJ 240:, 238:AI 236:, 234:AH 232:, 230:AG 228:, 226:AF 224:, 222:AE 220:, 218:AD 216:, 214:AC 212:, 210:AB 208:, 206:AA 204:, 200:, 196:, 192:, 188:, 184:, 180:, 176:, 172:, 168:, 164:, 160:, 156:, 152:, 148:, 144:, 140:, 136:, 132:, 128:, 124:, 120:, 116:, 112:, 108:, 104:, 10061:( 10006:| 9918:) 9914:( 9905:e 9901:M 9847:( 9821:( 9809:) 9805:( 9796:e 9792:M 9787:x 9698:| 9648:( 9604:( 9564:( 9431:( 9288:| 9065:( 8995:( 8991:— 8967:\ 8881:) 8877:( 8865:\ 8825:I 8786:( 8709:( 8633:§ 8630:n 8626:e 8593:§ 8590:n 8586:e 8575:§ 8572:n 8568:e 8536:? 8149:) 8145:( 7977:) 7973:( 7933:· 7920:✎ 7435:| 7416:( 7306:| 7222:e 7217:M 7151:) 7147:( 7138:e 7134:M 7088:( 6908:e 6903:M 6842:( 6734:( 6407:e 6399:s 6348:( 6273:/ 6253:) 6249:( 6240:e 6236:M 6233:— 6217:( 6118:) 6114:( 6105:e 6101:M 6075:) 6071:( 6062:e 6058:M 6031:/ 5866:) 5862:( 5853:e 5849:M 5745:6 5689:( 5643:) 5641:ᛏ 5639:( 5592:S 5586:B 5564:S 5558:B 5378:( 5370:( 5353:) 5351:ᛏ 5349:( 5276:( 5272:— 5176:( 5128:e 5123:M 5120:— 5069:) 5065:( 4960:e 4955:M 4902:) 4898:( 4832:· 4720:· 4676:( 4502:| 4392:· 4352:/ 4318:( 4297:e 4265:( 4165:| 3951:. 3904:) 3900:( 3538:m 2903:e 2836:( 2741:( 2646:( 2549:( 2475:( 2383:| 2348:e 2329:e 2258:) 2254:( 2229:) 2225:( 2178:) 2174:( 2140:✎ 2123:) 2119:( 2083:) 2079:( 2017:) 2013:( 1970:) 1966:( 1934:) 1930:( 1852:) 1848:( 1797:) 1793:( 1755:✎ 1735:) 1731:( 1688:) 1684:( 1657:) 1653:( 1557:| 1391:( 1387:— 1363:( 1339:( 1172:( 1147:( 312:9 308:8 304:7 300:6 296:5 292:4 288:3 284:2 280:1 277:· 202:Z 198:Y 194:X 190:W 186:V 182:U 178:T 174:S 170:R 166:Q 162:P 158:O 154:N 150:M 146:L 142:K 138:J 134:I 130:H 126:G 122:F 118:E 114:D 110:C 106:B 102:A 98:· 53:) 49:(

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

Knowledge

:Village pump (proposals)/Archive R - Knowledge

Index