User talk:Belovedfreak/Archive 15

1557:

studying for hours on a test, and then bombing it. It really does give you a heart sinking feeling. I would just really appreciate if you could do this one thing for me. Just one thing. Please, this information is meant to help the site not hurt it. I am in no way trying to cause trouble here, but it would just mean a lot. You won't hear from me again, I promise. My problem is that I have become too addicted to this site. I was used to coming on every night, and fixing up a Days article or two. That's why I kept making sock puppets, I really couldn't help it. I liked it here too much, it's a good operation. I wish I could take back some of the actions I have done ,but I can't and I take responsibility for them. It just hurts to see my hard work reverted, especially on Kim's article. It was a stub with two tags on the front, and I fixed it up and added at least 6 new references.

1847:

luck finding them. I've raised the issue at a couple of Israeli music forums and I've left a message on the WikiProject Israel, but I haven't received much feedback. This is why I have had to be vague in some of my descriptions. I've tried to include at least some documentation to clarify the article. I know for a fact that "Milim" was number one on the Reshet Gimmel chart for five weeks because I checked the charts on a weekly basis, but if I were to include a link to a reputable website, it would just show the current chart. It's the same problem with the annual charts.

1605:(understandably). Reviewing gives you a whole new perspective on writing articles, I think, and vice versa. GA nominators are perfectly entitled to disagree with your suggestions. It's up to you to either persuade them (linking to relevant policies or guidelines helps), or decide whether the point is something that is a GA requirement or not, and so whether or not it is something to fail the article over. Of course, the trouble is that many of Knowledge's guidelines are open to interpretation. 2237: 1987: 344: 31: 1479:

editing Knowledge seriously. Your actions here show that you either don't understand the policies and guidelines here, or you're not interested in following them. I don't mean to be patronising, but maybe your age is the problem at the moment. I honestly think that you'd be better off somewhere else, for your own sake as much as anyone else's. If you're at the point where Knowledge is making you cry, that's got to tell you something. Anyway, if you could link to where

665:. Both use the line, "The character is still part of the current storylines." Both mention the character's debut twice in the opening paragraph. Both mention that the characters were created by the series creator, "as one of the original characters" (the second edit contains an apparent typo, and says "as one of the original series"). I also noticed that the new editor missed an apostrophe, which was a tendency of Sami's as well, if I recall correctly. 400: 605: 714:

familiar with policies. Plus I think they're more into video games than soap operas. Could be wrong, but I think that's a red herring. Interesting that HGraphite used the same words in your GA review "Now, I'm gonna need a second reviewer to review the prose, but until then, I will put this article on hold." But, she does seem to pick up bits of phrases and code from other editors.

1222: 1804:"Skaat has frequently appeared at the Zappa Club, popular rock night clubs in Tel Aviv and Herzliya." - this isn't grammatically correct; I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say. Is it missing an "and"? I'm also not sure why this sentence requires three citations.... Skaat has taken part... Again, does this sentence need 3 citations? 812:. The mention of you above was purely a result of the sockmaster in question previously passing GA nominations that she had nominated herself, so I think James26 was just covering all bases. After a look at your contributions, I didn't think you were involved, so I didn't list you in the case, Regards, -- 1866:

I had intentions to write several articles on well-known Israeli singers on Knowledge because many are non-existent (Rami Kleinstein) or seriously underrepresented but I've faced an aggravating problem. It turns out that English and Hebrew don't easily mix. Seriously, they repel, the Hebrew letters

1833:

As a major celebrity in Israel, Skaat has been the subject of much gossip by the media and public; however, he has been reluctant to discuss issues related to his private life" - this sentence isn't really telling me anything, it's kind of a non-event. Also, it almost implies (inadvertently I'm sure)

1384:

as they are. I spent two whole days working on these articles. Please. I promise to never come back, and I sincerely mean that. Have a heart, please. I'm begging you. I poured two whole days for those articles, and look at how much better they are. I promise to leave this site right now if you do so.

1257:

I really want to thank you for helping me overcome my fear of reviewing. There are still some areas that are out of my comfort zone. There was an article that I could have reviewed, and not passed, for example, instead I just made a lot of suggestions, because I was chicken to not pass it. I don't

1193:

of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page.

517:

i can see that you are a tremendously busy person, but if you'd looked beyond my empty talk page, and taken a little time to check my overall contributions, you would have noticed that i never edit "randomly". in this particular instance i was certainly wrong, having misread the paragraph, but to the

2855:

Ok, well disagreement is, fine, of course! If you want to outline what you disagree with or what is out of your control on the peer review page, that might help. I could either point you to relevant policies or guidelines that led me to make certain suggestions, or see if I could help, or maybe even

2326:

Thank you for agreeing to take part in the WikiProject on Disability, and for the comments you left on the article on Merrick there. I agree that the article should not refer to Merrick as a freak - although I did think some of the language was a little too florid for an encyclopaedia article in the

1846:

They all charted, and I believe at least five have gone to number one on one of the two major radio charts in Israel (Reshet Gimmel and Galgalatz). The problem is I haven't been able to find any reliable archived Israeli music charts for either of the stations. I'm sure they exist but I've had no

1795:

The two audio files need work on their fair use rationales. One of them has been tagged for being a non-standard format. I'm not sure how important that is, you could perhaps ask the person that tagged it for clarification. File:Mashehu M'meni.ogg's rationale starts off by mentioning the wrong song

1774:

I want to thank you for your detailed comments about the article on Harel Skaat. I realize it took a lot of time and I appreciate your effort. I've tackled most of the problems you've identified and hopefully have fixed the majority them, but there are a few things you identified I don't know how

1095:

Thanks! Ok, good start. I have dropped a note to ThinkBlue so she can get started if she wants. I will finish the review over the next couple of days, I am limited on time and internet connection, (it's taken me about 15 mins to post this!) but will do my best. I'll point out the things I look for

2434:

infoboxes. But, yes I think you're right. I hadn't really paid much attention to it anyway up until a few minutes ago and really, it doesn't add much. His parents' names don't mean much in the grand scheme of things, and his occupations don't need to be listed. I do like having the birth and death

2401:

As an aside, would it make sense to get rid of the infobox and just have a larger lead image? There's nothing in the infobox that isn't already in the lead anyway so it doesn't add anything, and the usual justification for them ("they help people compare articles on similar topics") doesn't really

2342:

Thanks for your comments; I will be interested to hear what you think when you've finished. Any suggestions are very much appreciated. I've been taking a mini-break from it a bit but hope to push it to GA and FA, with additional sources which it's taking me a little while to get hold of. Frederick

1645:

That was me that wrote that. I was at the hospital with my friend, who just had CA surgery. When I just peeked in right now I got the message that there was a message for me and I followed the links back here and found that my signature came out as Dana Fabers IP address. Just weird. oops still

1630:

I don't think that it was your influence that made me take that point of view, I think you and I just have the same POV when it comes to the lead. We the person said Josephine wasn't mentioned in Napoleon's lead, I didn't even bother checking it. I figured it was probably not a lead I would have

1622:

need to be summarised. (I hope I didn't give you the wrong impression about that previously.) The trouble then is deciding which details are "important aspects". With this article (and I haven't read all the way through it, so I'm not really qualified here!) I would like to see some info about his

1437:

Please. I'm going to cry, that was my hard work. I spent long hours of research to write Kimberly's article, and Maggie's I was fixing from the Peer Review. I'm not going to war with you over this, but it's important to me. I was strictly told when blocked, that I would be allowed to edit under an

1400:

Contrary to what you may think, I do have a heart. I think it's a genuine shame that your behaviour here went down the route that it did as you obviously have an interest in improving certain articles. However, your deceptive editing caused disruption here and rather than raising the standards of

1556:

I never intentionally meant to break so many rules here. Yes, I am really young, but I did my best here. And I might have exaggerated a little when I said I was going to cry, but that was my hard work and it kind of hurts when you see hours of research and writing thrown down the drain. It's like

1079:

hi, I'm all done. I found some problems with the prose. I did not find any other problems. I did not put it on hold. I thought I would wait until you have a chance to look at it. Now I think I have the reviewer bug. Thanks for making you proposal. I think it worked out well. Love your talk

713:

suspicious that it was a sock, but in my tired state, it didn't even occur to me that it was Gabi Hernandez. By the way, I think the other editor is probably not related. They've been around since 2008 with no userpage (not Gabi's style!), and looking at their contribs, they seem to be a bit more

159:

Ok, thanks I found it. To be honest, although the BBC is reliable in general, and that's a perfectly usable review for the article, I'm not sure where they got the technical details from, or exactly what criteria they use to designate a nationality. I think in this case it's probably better to go

2637:

I think it must, although I can't find anything to confirm this in Knowledge terms. After all, we're talking about a building that is, at the very least, "nationally important and of special interest" in order to qualify for the basic Grade II status. I don't see how that wouldn't be accepted as

2506:

You recently reviewed a couple of articles at GAN that I nominated, about Indigenous Australian artists. I have recently nominated another one there - still an Indigenous artist but unrelated to the series from which the other two came - and I wondered if you would be interested in reviewing it:

2754:

You're very welcome! I think that's the point of barnstars, both to say, "job well done", and to motivate you by reminding you of what you've already achieved. You really seem to be getting through those Beatrix Potter articles! I think "very young children" would be fine. As I say, it's partly

1604:

I'm sorry it didn't work out too well, but I hope you don't let it knock your confidence. Quite aside from the review in question (and with no reflection on the article or nominator), it can be tricky reviewing and making suggestions because people can be very attached to what they have written

1478:

Ok, I know you've worked on it, and I know you're young, but Knowledge is just a website. It's seriously not worth getting so upset over or having a "deep heart sinking feeling". None of the editors that you have come into contact with are "evil", or want to make you cry, it's just that we take

2652:

Forgive my intrusion, but I agree. The definition given above should be enough to refute any challenge against deletion. That does not necessarily means that every listed building merits an article; there's often not enough material to make one worthwhile, but if there's enough material, the

1588:

Seriously, my first solo attempt to review blew up in my face. I put the article on hold because there was a lot of stuff mentioned in the article that was not even hinted at in the lead. I made a lot of other minor edits myself. It sat on hold for a while, then the nominator got back from

1438:

IP, but that I could not be granted access under my account for six months. The blocker himself told me that. I promise I will leave Knowledge, in a heartbeat if you just leave my hard work undedited. I swear, i will be gone. No socks, no strings, no nothing. It's just very important to me.

2738:

Thank you for the Barnstar! I was overwhelmed! I'm going to move it to my user page where I can see it every day. It's the kind of thing that is motivating and makes me want to do my best! Again, thanks! And I will find something else besides 'tots'. How about 'very young children'? :)

1589:

vacation and said he would rather have the article failed than to take my suggestions. I've never really been in an edit war until I tried to review that article. I think Knowledge is a very weird place and I think I'm going to chill off of it. But thanks anyway for trying with me.--

2098:

Well, I must admit it looks quite good so I'll probably have to get the DVD box set at some point. I'll just have to leave it long enough that I forget the stories of the ones I've reviewed! I expect I'll get onto another one of yours before long, perhaps after a couple of others for

775:

Well, I don't know if there's precedent here but I guess you could leave the review page and strike the review (maybe once the SPI is closed?), or perhaps explain the situation to an admin and ask them to delete it. I'm not sure. Anyway, thanks again for letting me know of the

2364:

The film called him John; as that's almost certainly where most readers will know him from, the Joseph/John thing needs to be explained early on. Otherwise, it will get constant well-intentioned "corrections" from people who know his name was John because they saw it in a

518:

best of my recollection you are supposed to assume good faith here. your snarky self-important comments are symptomatic of all that's off-putting to genuine contributors to wikipedia, and the kind of attitude that deters more people from wanting to join in constructively

851:, and I've never written or reviewed an article psecifically about a TV series, so I don't think I'd be able to comment confidently about GA criterion no. 3. At a glance, a couple of links don't seem to work, I don't think the lead adequately summarises the article (per 2347:

calls him John, although I've only looked at that book once, quite some time ago and need to get hold of it again. I'm not sure how many sources refer to him thus, so "a number" may be overstating it; I will have to work that one out. Anyway, thanks again for the

1799:

I've tried to address this but my understanding of what constitutes a compelling fair use rationale is not clear. I've read other examples (Michael Jackson) and tried to use this as a model. I've eliminated the link to the Mashehu M'meni.ogg in the article.

2327:

early stages, and I do not know of any sources that refer to him as "John Merrick". I see the article is rather long, so I have not finished reading it yet - I hope to give a fuller assessment when I have finished the article. Many thanks for your interest,

1825:

I've tried to stick with the most reputable sites in Israel (Ynet, Haaretz, etc.). I think it would be great if someone with expertise in Israeli culture and language would review my article. There are different ways of translating the language.

114:. The reason I added UK to country list and British drama films category is because BBC and answers.com, as well as some other sites, list this as a US/UK film. Maybe that isn't very good evidence, I'm sorry for the edits. Thanks for correcting my mistake. 2067:

it's been explained and stuff. Yeah, there are a couple of websites that have the episodes available, but you have fill out surveys and stuff. If you go to the NBC website they'll have recaps of the episodes. The fourth season did air overseas cause of

1808:

I've reworded the sentence. I felt the references were needed to support my statement that Skaat appeared frequently and that he has appeared at three Festigals I haven't found a source that directly states that he's appeared in three Festigals.

1116:

I'm done with this one review, and will await what you have to say. You know, maybe I should wait until you do your review, cause if you bring up something that Ishtar brought up, ex. change this to that, I just don't want to deal with that, you know.

1796:

title. I'm also not sure that the commentary in the article warrants the files being used under fair use. There seems to be more song information in the rationales than is in the article. Try and add some of that to the article, with WP:RS of course.

2406:

on his appearance and reactions to it, a larger photo would probably benefit readers more than a repetition of his birthdate and parents' names. (Articles of this kind can get on fine without infoboxes; compare probably the closest related article,

1858:

I've read a lot of articles on him and I've yet to read any writer claiming he can't sing, and even some of his detractors have mentioned that he's a charismatic performer. I've added more information on this. Hopefully this helps balance things

1413:

which doesn't sound the same at all. Please take advice you've already been given and find some other website to edit. There are lots of wikis out there to cater for all kinds of interests that have different standards to Knowledge (for example:

760:

Basically, I don't want any attention or promotion for the article to come about under these circumstances (assuming the sock suspicions are correct). I want it to be 100% fair and honest. Anyway, thanks for starting the investigation. --

1691:), so I would just take this as a learning experience, take a break from WP altogether if you need to, and maybe focus on writing for a bit rather than reviewing. It'll always be there if and when you decide to give it another shot.-- 2451:

The MOS says a maximum width of 300px, but it's quite a blurry image so it might look bad at that size. Play about and see how it looks at various settings. (Daniel Lambert is at 300px, if you want an idea of how big that's going to

2695:

You've taken on quite a challenge — there are many more listed buildings in Blackpool than in Runcorn! And as my birthplace was Preston I shall be interested in your progress. If you want any help, let me know and I'll do what I

927:

That's O.k. I can understand. I'm guessing that was maybe because I don't have a userpage. Me not having a userpage can throw people off. Though if you click on the redlink, it'll show that it was salted per my request.

996:

Well, I hope she does this time. Thanks again James26 for noticing in the first place. I'm sure you guys that work on her favourite articles will be keeping an eye out! I will also now be taking notice of suspicious GA

1851:

You mention that he has been widely praised. Are there no detractors? That would seem strange. Certainly in other countries, reality TV stars tend to have quite a lot of negative criticism from serious music

2468:

I think I'll leave it at 200px, 300px seems to big. I think the Daniel Lambert one works fine, not just because of his stature, but because it's a painting, and of a decent quality. The Merrick photo's not

828:

Yeah. I was shocked that she used the same line in that review. Also, we're not the same people, to make this all clear. I've been around since 2008, I made two good articles and such. Now, can you look at

2035:

You're welcome for the review, I'm just doing my part, cause I got some nominations and because my "job" requires it, and also because you reviewed my episode articles, and I'm just repaying the favor. :)

1623:

family in the lead. However, it is true that there's not much on it in the article, so I think that other editors would disagree with me there. And with regard to an example mentioned in that GA review,

1867:

literally scrambles around and I have to use all kinds of tricks to make it work. A lot of my edits were due to this. It looks fine in the edit box but scrambles when it transfers to the main page.

2827:

Okay, I've amended it again, as per some of your suggestions. I respectfully disagree with some suggestions you've made, and some other matters are out of my control. Still, it's getting better. -

2653:

notability requirement is IMO covered. And they must of course all be included in lists. Good luck with them. What area(s) are you intending to cover? (You can reply here; I'll watch the page).--

2063:

You're welcome, I just follow what the reviewer tells me to do. :) It's alright, you're not the first one to be confused with what I write. I try to explain to them was written, but they get it

691:

an article that HGraphite worked on. The blocked user, Sami50421, used her other account (Gabi) to gain a GA promotion. Again, my suspicions could be off, but I thought it was worth noting. --

373:

up to the mark so that does not get deleted. Please have a look at the page I have redone the whole thing from scratch and it is completely different. Thanks a lot, I look forward to a reply.

1464:, and even if you edit anonymously until then you will never be unblocked until the time ends". He says there, that I can edit anomynously, and says that my ip is not indeffinetley blocked. 1417:). I genuinely wish you no harm, but you have been indefinitely blocked from editing, you're not allowed to edit here, and your edits are so obvious that they will be spotted very quickly.-- 723:

Unfortunately, I think this will mess up your GA review, if it does turn out to be her. It looks to be in good shape though, so hopefully will be picked up by someone else and will pass.--

668:

Of course, the editor could simply be a well-meaning newcomer, and this whole thing could be a coincidence. I just thought you might want to see for yourself so we can clarify this. --

239:

Thanks; glad you like it! It still needs a fair bit of work, more references, a decent lead and of course vigilance to keep on top of the non-notable entries that periodically appear!--

1688:

a weird place in many ways, and it shouldn't ever get to the point where it's stressing you out in real life. It doesn't look like there are any hard feelings from the other editor (

1272:

You're more than welcome, and thanks for the star! As I say let me know if you ever need any help. Just stick with reviewing articles you're comfortable with, and you'll be fine!

350: 343: 303: 2194:

Just to let you know, I'm still planning to get back to work on the LOL fixes, and reply to the personal question. Just don't want you to think i've dropped the ball yet lol!

1289: 1323: 2638:

proof of notability. Let me know if you run into difficulties with deletionists! Thanks for the GA pass, btw - there's a lot more to go, but I'm making good progress.

1651: 1409:; if you can point me to such a discussion, I will stop reverting you. As far as I am aware, there is no such provision. From an administrator on your user talkpage: 1405:

attempted to degrade one of the processes we have of assessing articles (GA), as well as mislead other editors who tried to assume good faith and help you. You said

1189: 808:

Sorry, I didn't inform you because it didn't occur to me that you'd want to be informed. By all means, you can submit evidence, if you have any, (for or against) at

578: 519: 2872:

If we're going to put any work into disagreeing, I'd prefer we took that time and spent it editing the article instead. You're welcome to go over what I've done. -

2675:. I've worked on it a bit offline already, just want to add a few more details before creating the article. One example of a building without an article yet is the 250: 129:

Answers.com, no. BBC is generally reliable. Could you point me to a particular webpage where they say that? It's hard to say for sure without seeing it. Thanks, --

306:

of Love in Motion. I think I have attended to all the issues you have raised. Would you please be able to give it one quick last scan for errors/problems? Thanks

855:) and there are issues with stability. It might be that there are just a few small issues that can be fixed and so it might be worth listing it for a community 2172:

I'll reply to the other fixes needed to be made soon, but about the heading and the charts, most music editors use other GA's and particularly music FA's like

547: 2796:

Okay. I've gone through your peer review and edited the article, and I'm exhausted. Would you like to take another look at this? Also, could you grade it? -

201: 185: 171: 154: 140: 1655: 2850: 2780: 2766: 2721: 2705: 2690: 2565: 1954: 1945: 1935: 1926: 1910: 1671: 1347: 1148: 2897: 2881: 2867: 2836: 2822: 2662: 2626: 2581: 2551: 2537: 1970: 1856:

Yes there are. He has many, but most have focused on his conservative song selection, his sometimes overly emotional singing style, and other things.

1363: 1566: 1551: 1532: 1494: 1473: 1447: 1428: 859:, stating the problem. If you do that though, you should probably wait to see what the SPI says so that we know one way or the other if this is a sock.-- 2359: 1896: 1063: 1047: 533: 503: 2480: 2463: 2446: 2422: 2396: 2376: 2250: 2004: 1640: 953: 886: 870: 842: 823: 809: 803: 706: 357: 289: 2110: 1702: 1283: 1142: 1107: 638: 596: 325:

Sorry, I didn't notice this message at first due to the one below following in quick succession! I have left a few more comments at the peer review.--

2219: 2189: 2167: 370: 2278:

Sorry for the delay, I'm working on a featured article and that has absorbed most of my energy on here. I ended up removing all DJBooth references.

1761: 1747: 1410: 967: 787: 770: 734: 559: 233: 2093: 1267: 1258:

like reviewing as much as I like editing, so I might not do a lot of it. But, I had to start at some point and you definitely helped me do that.--

1172: 336: 2520: 1008: 937: 2805: 2309: 2291: 2273: 2203: 2151: 1207: 1147:

Thanks for the review, I appreciate it. Sorry for not waiting for your review, the WikiCup started and I kinda wanted get the review done, and

1089: 700: 319: 577:

That's ok, I didn't realise that you had only just blanked the page and then thought maybe I'd got caught in the middle of your edits! Does

527: 385: 2526:

No problem, I've had my eye on it for a while. Wasn't sure if you'd want yet another review from the same editor, but I'm happy to do it!--

743:

this person's recommendation from the list of nominees. Now that an investigation has begun, I'm also going to remove the review from the

2609: 2136: 2382: 2336: 912:

Just to clarify things myself, GamerPro, I was indeed just trying to be thorough due to the previous matters. Sorry for any offense. --

467: 123: 1585:

Hi there, I was going to tell you a weird story, but then I read the thread above this and figured it wasn't so weird after all,lol.

794:

Excuse me. Why haven't I been told about this? Can I be involved with this in some way? I mean, I'm shocked about this investigation.

2841:

I nominated it as a good article, as well. We'll see what becomes of that. The more people who have input, the better it will get. -

1722: 2646: 1598: 2668: 740: 295: 1919: 1684:

page, and see what other experienced reviewers think. But I understand if you want to take a break from it for a while. Knowledge

1394: 2748: 1538: 1406: 272: 2556:

I am grateful for the review, the suggestions, the GA pass and of course for the barnstar. See you next time perhaps. Regards,

1071: 1879: 423:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page 2498: 1182: 1030: 921: 677: 439:

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

2788: 1647: 990: 2025: 1950: 1931: 1915: 1632: 1341: 1317: 1290: 1248: 486: 2343:

Treves first referred to Merrick as John, (as you will read!) and the mistake was repeated. As far as I know, Montagu's

2069: 2000: 1870:

Thank you once again for your valuable feedback. It's made me aware of things I hadn't thought of before. Take care.

1614:

quite strictly, and that is something I've had to let go of a little myself lately. This aspect of the manual of style

1558: 1465: 1439: 1386: 621: 571: 390: 1885:

You're very welcome. I've copied the above to the review page, as discussed, and will continue the discussion there.--

2118: 1203: 97: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 2435:

dates listed there under the image, but I'm happy to sacrifice that. How big do you think I should have the image?--

2057: 1838:

The gossip and speculation regards his perceived sexual preference. I've decided to eliminate any mention of it.

406: 296: 229: 1618:

a GA requirement, but of course how it is interpreted may vary. Not every detail needs to be in the lead, but the

2072:. Maybe you can rent the DVD when it comes out. Anyways, thanks for another review, it is most appreciated. ;) -- 1729: 381: 688: 2676: 1708: 215: 1689: 650: 649:

I've noticed some similarity between the edits of a possible new user and the edits of a recently banned one.

2672: 2615:

You're welcome. Let me know if you want anything clarifying or if you'd like me to have another look later.--

2321: 2085: 2049: 1164: 1134: 833:? I'm quite afraid that I did something wrong, like giving it a Good Article pass when it wasn't ready yet. 2593: 658: 523: 2755:

personal taste, me not liking "tots", but I also think it's best to avoid colloquialisms where possible.--

1631:

passed. Oh, well. The whole think is in the past for me. I am going to chill for a while. Take Care.--

1580: 225: 1302: 1294: 847:

To be honest, I wouldn't feel comfortable giving this article a full review. I'm not that famliar with

512: 440: 426: 377: 181: 150: 119: 38: 1610:

As far as the issue of the lead goes, I'm afraid that that may be slightly my fault as I do interpret

1036:

You're welcome. Just sorry that your nomination that's been waiting so long has to go back up there!--

2632: 1680:

Don't forget that when reviewing GAs, you can ask for a second opinion, either informally or on the

261:

I'll do some more work on it later see if I can iron out the last few points made. Hope that's okay?

2776: 2744: 2701: 2658: 2243: 2236: 2208:

No problem at all. Let me know when you're ready, otherwise I'll have another look in a few days.--

2173: 1713:

Is it true that lists are not allowed for GA? I looked at the criteria but I wasn't sure. Thanks,

105: 1834:

that he has something to hide and there might be something scandalous lurking in his private life.

2877: 2846: 2832: 2801: 2605: 2561: 2547: 2516: 1636: 1336: 1312: 877:

Alright. I'll wait. Besides, I think I found evidence of sockpuppetry, so I got something to do.

364: 2892: 2862: 2817: 2761: 2716: 2685: 2621: 2576: 2532: 2475: 2441: 2391: 2354: 2214: 2162: 2127:

I've made fixes to what needed, and left comments. I'll reduce the image and audio files soon.

2105: 1965: 1891: 1742: 1697: 1666: 1562: 1546: 1527: 1489: 1469: 1443: 1423: 1390: 1358: 1278: 1102: 1042: 1003: 948: 865: 818: 782: 729: 644: 633: 591: 542: 498: 331: 284: 256: 245: 221: 196: 166: 135: 47: 17: 2886:

Ok, that's fine. Was just worried I might not have explained something properly. No problem!--

399: 2642: 2332: 1902: 1875: 1371: 1199: 1061: 1028: 482: 411: 177: 146: 115: 2789: 2594: 2458: 2417: 2371: 1783: 933: 882: 838: 799: 269: 8: 2772: 2740: 2697: 2671:

that has inspired me to do this! The first foray into this area that I'm thinking of is

2654: 2080: 2044: 1769: 1594: 1263: 1244: 1159: 1129: 1085: 617: 567: 145:

Yeah, just google search: BBC films review The Elephant Man, and it should come up first.

2873: 2842: 2828: 2797: 2733: 2601: 2557: 2543: 2512: 2303: 2285: 2267: 2199: 2185: 2147: 2132: 2023: 1993: 1986: 1331: 1307: 1301:

Hello, again! This message is just to let you know that I have started a GA review of "

1014: 436: 418: 1925:

I believe your concerns have all been addressed. Could you double-check? Thank you. —

176:

Ok, sounds good. I promise I won't add UK to country list again. Thanks for your help.

2887: 2857: 2812: 2756: 2711: 2680: 2616: 2571: 2527: 2470: 2436: 2386: 2349: 2209: 2157: 2100: 1960: 1886: 1757: 1737: 1718: 1692: 1661: 1541: 1522: 1484: 1418: 1353: 1273: 1097: 1037: 998: 978: 963: 943: 917: 860: 813: 777: 766: 724: 709:

again. Very suspicious. I must admit, I noticed the GA nomination last night and was

696: 673: 628: 586: 537: 493: 326: 279: 240: 191: 161: 130: 2542:

Thanks for your help. I've had a run through all your comments. See what you think.

430: 2639: 2328: 2180:, that use particular tweaks such as the heading, and written-out chart movements. 1980: 1871: 1221: 1212: 1195: 1053: 1020: 830: 744: 478: 460: 313: 2856:

agree with you! No problem if you don't want to. Good luck with it at GA anyway.--

2453: 2412: 2366: 2120: 1461: 986: 929: 878: 834: 795: 684: 262: 46:

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

2408: 2073: 2037: 1611: 1590: 1381: 1259: 1240: 1152: 1122: 1081: 977:

Thanks for keeping me informed, I was pinged right away when she/he redirected

852: 662: 654: 613: 563: 553: 472: 1460:

What my blocker was saying is that, "You will only be allowed back here under

2508: 2500: 2298: 2280: 2262: 2195: 2181: 2177: 2143: 2128: 2012: 1903: 1681: 1518: 1514: 1480: 1377: 856: 1411:"if you even edit anonymously during that time, you will never be unblocked" 2600:

Thanks heaps for your thorough review of this article. I'll get to work! -

1753: 1714: 1415: 959: 913: 762: 692: 669: 582: 2667:

Thanks for your intrusion Peter, it is most welcome! It was actually your

1909:

Thank you for your comments. I'll address them over the next day or so. —

1821:

The actual sources used need to be checked to make sure they are reliable.

1329:

Passed after a few minor adjustments. Meets the criteria. Excellent work!

2030: 451: 307: 2402:

apply since he's not part of a series. Given that his notability rests

1624: 1376:

Please. I promise to leave Knowledge, and never come back if you leave

982: 747:(and if you know of any way to delete the review, that would be fine). 220:

Hi there, just wanted to say thanks for the great work you did on the

160:

with what the IMDb says unless something clearer contradicts that. --

2511:. I'm hoping to take it to FAC, so would welcome feedback. Regards, 1239:

Thanks for helping and encouraging me get started with GAN reviews.

278:

Sure, I don't want to leave it too long, but see what you can do. --

2771:

I'll keep that in mind about colloquialisms. Good advice! Thanks!

1627:, I would personally put a lot more in the lead for that article. 1073: 2011:

Okay; sorry 'bout that. I was just reading the filters on IRC

1096:

too so that you can see the process I go through. Well done! --

351:

Knowledge:Peer review/Love in Motion (Anika Moa album)/archive2

110:

Hello, this is jordancelticsfan regarding my recent edits to

2679:, which I think I should be able to find out enough about.-- 2253:

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

2007:

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

1813:

Is there a reason the article is in a non-existent category?

360:

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

1483:

said you could edit anonymously, that would be helpful.--

2142:

The files are reduced now, so everything should be done!

1352:

Thanks so much, and thanks for the copyedits you made.--

2260:

I've replied to the only outstanding issue, I believe.

1407:

I AM ALLOWED TO EDIT UNDER AN IP ADRESS, MY BAN SAID SO

1829:

I would like to comment on a few of your suggestions.

739:

In regards to my GA review, I actually went ahead and

369:

May I please have your advice on what I need to do to

2156:

Ok, thanks, I'll look at it in detail this evening.--

1752:

Oh, ok. That's clear but I didn't catch it! Thanks.

1775:to address, so I'm hoping you can help me out. 810:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Gabi Hernandez 707:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Gabi Hernandez 356:Message added 07:58, 28 June 2010 (UTC). You can 1513:(After edit conflict) I don't think that's what 2242:Hello, Belovedfreak. You have new messages at 1992:Hello, Belovedfreak. You have new messages at 1019:Thanks for dealing with the sockpuppetry case. 349:Hello, Belovedfreak. You have new messages at 1842:Did any of the singles from this album chart? 1112:Thanks for the notice, I'll get the concerns 1305:", which I hope to conclude later on today. 2710:Thanks, I will let you know how I get on!-- 1736:: "Lists, portals, sounds, and images..."-- 1537:"I'm not going to war with you over this"? 2570:You're welcome, I'll look forward to it!-- 2345:The Elephant Man: A Study in Human Dignity 1660:No problem, guess you're not logged in! -- 562:. I forgot to add the template :). Thanks, 1219: 415:was updated with a fact from the article 2669:Listed buildings in Runcorn (urban area) 14: 1646:coming up as an IP address. Istar456-- 1052:Oh well, you win some, you lose some. 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2296:Alright, thanks for the assistance! 1401:certain articles, your actions have 1233:The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar 1119:I hope you catch my drift with this. 394: 25: 23: 2235: 1985: 1151:... if you know what I mean. :) -- 342: 24: 2919: 2811:Sure, I will take another look.-- 981:. She doesn't give up, does she? 1220: 603: 398: 297:Love in Motion (Anika Moa album) 29: 1730:Knowledge:Good article criteria 1521:that blocked you, by the way.-- 13: 1: 2673:Listed buildings in Blackpool 1183:WP:FILMS June 2010 Newsletter 942:HGraphite has been blocked.-- 1817:I'm not sure what you mean. 7: 1734:What is not a good article? 10: 2924: 1303:The Post-Modern Prometheus 1295:The Post-Modern Prometheus 391:DYK for Lord George Sanger 2898:16:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC) 2882:10:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC) 2868:10:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC) 2851:05:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC) 2837:04:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC) 2823:13:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC) 2806:06:58, 18 July 2010 (UTC) 2781:16:16, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 2767:16:01, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 2749:15:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 2722:12:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC) 2706:16:09, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2691:13:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2677:Miners' Convalescent Home 2663:13:09, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2647:12:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2627:08:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2610:00:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC) 2582:11:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 2566:11:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 2552:00:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC) 2538:17:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2521:10:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2481:22:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2464:22:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2447:21:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2423:21:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2397:21:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2377:21:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2360:21:37, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2337:21:27, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2310:20:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC) 2292:19:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC) 2274:14:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC) 2220:12:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC) 2204:04:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC) 2190:18:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2168:08:42, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2152:02:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2137:17:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 2111:18:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2094:18:13, 14 July 2010 (UTC) 2058:18:58, 12 July 2010 (UTC) 2026:21:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC) 2001:21:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC) 1229: 1143:17:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1108:17:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1090:14:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1064:12:04, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1048:08:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1031:03:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 1009:08:08, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 991:00:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 968:00:15, 30 June 2010 (UTC) 954:23:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 938:13:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 922:13:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 887:13:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 871:13:40, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 843:12:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 824:12:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 804:12:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 788:10:10, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 771:10:01, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 735:09:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 701:07:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 678:06:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC) 653:was made by blocked user 639:14:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC) 622:14:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC) 597:14:42, 28 June 2010 (UTC) 572:14:37, 28 June 2010 (UTC) 548:14:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC) 528:14:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC) 504:13:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC) 487:12:26, 27 June 2010 (UTC) 468:00:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC) 386:10:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC) 337:16:31, 27 June 2010 (UTC) 320:10:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC) 290:11:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC) 273:10:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC) 251:07:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC) 234:02:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC) 202:22:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 186:22:08, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 172:21:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 155:21:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 141:20:15, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 124:19:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 2244:Talk:LOL Smiley Face/GA1 2174:4 Minutes (Madonna song) 1971:20:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC) 1955:20:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC) 1936:17:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC) 1920:20:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC) 1897:15:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC) 1880:04:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC) 1762:20:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1748:20:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1723:20:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1703:19:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1672:17:06, 7 July 2010 (UTC) 1656:03:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC) 1641:21:25, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1599:12:30, 6 July 2010 (UTC) 1567:22:52, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1552:22:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1533:22:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1495:22:43, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1474:22:40, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1448:22:31, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1429:22:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1395:22:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC) 1364:19:58, 4 July 2010 (UTC) 1348:19:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC) 1324:03:30, 4 July 2010 (UTC) 1284:12:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC) 1268:14:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 1249:14:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 1208:05:29, 1 July 2010 (UTC) 1173:19:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 534:replied at your talkpage 1072:Done with my review of 705:Thanks, I have started 579:Louisa Dresser Campbell 441:Did you know? talk page 2240: 1990: 1709:Lists are not allowed? 347: 226:ScarTissueBloodBlister 222:List of tattoo artists 216:List of tattoo artists 18:User talk:Belovedfreak 2322:Joseph Merrick artice 2239: 1989: 683:Also of note is that 581:need to be listed at 378:Thehelpinghandforwiki 346: 42:of past discussions. 2790:The Matty Johns Show 2595:The Matty Johns Show 1994:1234r00t's talk page 1784:Talk:Harel Skaat/GA2 1149:speed up the process 1581:first review failed 1517:was saying. It was 958:Got it. Thanks. -- 2251:remove this notice 2241: 2005:remove this notice 1991: 1959:You're welcome! -- 520:HieronymousCrowley 513:Lord George Sanger 492:You're welcome. -- 419:Lord George Sanger 358:remove this notice 348: 2633:Notable buildings 2381:As I see someone 1864: 1863: 1254: 1253: 1194:--Happy editing! 979:Stephanie Johnson 447: 446: 434: 190:No problem. :) -- 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2915: 2895: 2890: 2865: 2860: 2820: 2815: 2764: 2759: 2719: 2714: 2688: 2683: 2624: 2619: 2579: 2574: 2535: 2530: 2499:Another artist: 2478: 2473: 2461: 2456: 2444: 2439: 2420: 2415: 2394: 2389: 2374: 2369: 2357: 2352: 2308: 2306: 2301: 2290: 2288: 2283: 2272: 2270: 2265: 2254: 2217: 2212: 2165: 2160: 2108: 2103: 2091: 2083: 2077: 2055: 2047: 2041: 2021: 2008: 1968: 1963: 1894: 1889: 1786:to respond there 1778: 1777: 1745: 1740: 1700: 1695: 1669: 1664: 1549: 1544: 1530: 1525: 1492: 1487: 1426: 1421: 1361: 1356: 1344: 1339: 1334: 1320: 1315: 1310: 1281: 1276: 1224: 1217: 1216: 1170: 1162: 1156: 1140: 1132: 1126: 1120: 1105: 1100: 1059: 1045: 1040: 1026: 1006: 1001: 951: 946: 868: 863: 831:Glee (TV series) 821: 816: 785: 780: 732: 727: 636: 631: 611: 607: 606: 594: 589: 545: 540: 501: 496: 477:Thanks so much! 466: 463: 424: 402: 395: 361: 334: 329: 316: 310: 287: 282: 266: 248: 243: 199: 194: 178:Jordancelticsfan 169: 164: 147:Jordancelticsfan 138: 133: 116:Jordancelticsfan 112:The Elephant Man 106:The Elephant Man 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2923: 2922: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2893: 2888: 2863: 2858: 2818: 2813: 2794: 2762: 2757: 2736: 2717: 2712: 2686: 2681: 2635: 2622: 2617: 2598: 2577: 2572: 2533: 2528: 2504: 2476: 2471: 2459: 2454: 2442: 2437: 2418: 2413: 2392: 2387: 2372: 2367: 2355: 2350: 2324: 2304: 2299: 2297: 2286: 2281: 2279: 2268: 2263: 2261: 2255: 2248: 2215: 2210: 2163: 2158: 2125: 2121:LOL Smiley Face 2106: 2101: 2086: 2081: 2075: 2050: 2045: 2039: 2033: 2013: 2009: 1998: 1983: 1966: 1961: 1953: 1934: 1918: 1907: 1892: 1887: 1860: 1787: 1772: 1743: 1738: 1711: 1698: 1693: 1667: 1662: 1583: 1547: 1542: 1528: 1523: 1490: 1485: 1424: 1419: 1374: 1359: 1354: 1342: 1337: 1332: 1318: 1313: 1308: 1299: 1279: 1274: 1215: 1190:June 2010 issue 1185: 1165: 1160: 1154: 1135: 1130: 1124: 1118: 1103: 1098: 1077: 1054: 1043: 1038: 1021: 1017: 1004: 999: 949: 944: 866: 861: 819: 814: 783: 778: 730: 725: 647: 634: 629: 604: 602: 592: 587: 556: 543: 538: 515: 499: 494: 485: 475: 461: 449: 393: 371:Social Populism 367: 365:Social populism 362: 355: 332: 327: 314: 308: 300: 285: 280: 264: 259: 246: 241: 218: 197: 192: 167: 162: 136: 131: 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2921: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2874:Richard Cavell 2843:Richard Cavell 2829:Richard Cavell 2798:Richard Cavell 2793: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2773:Susanne2009NYC 2741:Susanne2009NYC 2735: 2732: 2731: 2730: 2729: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2724: 2698:Peter I. Vardy 2655:Peter I. Vardy 2634: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2602:Richard Cavell 2597: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2503: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2409:Daniel Lambert 2383:tried to today 2323: 2320: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2247: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2124: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2032: 2029: 1999:Message added 1997: 1984: 1982: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1949: 1939: 1938: 1930: 1914: 1906: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1862: 1861: 1854: 1853: 1844: 1843: 1836: 1835: 1823: 1822: 1815: 1814: 1806: 1805: 1792: 1789: 1788: 1781: 1771: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1710: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1648:24.128.175.127 1643: 1607: 1606: 1582: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1535: 1504: 1503: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1432: 1431: 1382:Kimberly Brady 1373: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1298: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1270: 1252: 1251: 1236: 1235: 1230: 1228: 1226: 1214: 1211: 1184: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1076: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1016: 1013: 1012: 1011: 997:nominations.-- 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 910: 909: 908: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 896: 895: 894: 893: 892: 891: 890: 889: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 718: 717: 716: 715: 646: 645:Possible issue 643: 642: 641: 600: 599: 555: 552: 551: 550: 514: 511: 509: 507: 506: 481: 474: 471: 445: 444: 435:and add it to 403: 392: 389: 366: 363: 354: 341: 340: 339: 299: 294: 293: 292: 258: 257:Bianca Jackson 255: 254: 253: 217: 214: 213: 212: 211: 210: 209: 208: 207: 206: 205: 204: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2920: 2899: 2896: 2891: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2879: 2875: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2866: 2861: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2821: 2816: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2803: 2799: 2791: 2782: 2778: 2774: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2765: 2760: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2746: 2742: 2723: 2720: 2715: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2703: 2699: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2689: 2684: 2678: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2660: 2656: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2645: 2644: 2641: 2628: 2625: 2620: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2596: 2583: 2580: 2575: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2563: 2559: 2558:hamiltonstone 2555: 2554: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2544:hamiltonstone 2541: 2540: 2539: 2536: 2531: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2518: 2514: 2513:hamiltonstone 2510: 2509:Minnie Pwerle 2502: 2501:Minnie Pwerle 2482: 2479: 2474: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2462: 2457: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2445: 2440: 2433: 2429: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2421: 2416: 2410: 2405: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2395: 2390: 2384: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2375: 2370: 2363: 2362: 2361: 2358: 2353: 2346: 2341: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2334: 2330: 2311: 2307: 2302: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2289: 2284: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2271: 2266: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2252: 2245: 2238: 2231: 2221: 2218: 2213: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2201: 2197: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2178:Irreplaceable 2175: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2166: 2161: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2149: 2145: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2134: 2130: 2122: 2112: 2109: 2104: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2092: 2089: 2084: 2079: 2078: 2071: 2066: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2056: 2053: 2048: 2043: 2042: 2028: 2027: 2024: 2022: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2006: 2002: 1995: 1988: 1972: 1969: 1964: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1952: 1947: 1946:Malik Shabazz 1944:Thank you. — 1943: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1937: 1933: 1928: 1927:Malik Shabazz 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1917: 1912: 1911:Malik Shabazz 1905: 1904:Betty Shabazz 1898: 1895: 1890: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1877: 1873: 1868: 1857: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1827: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1797: 1791: 1790: 1785: 1780: 1779: 1776: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1746: 1741: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1704: 1701: 1696: 1690: 1687: 1683: 1679: 1673: 1670: 1665: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1644: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1633:155.52.208.80 1629: 1628: 1626: 1621: 1617: 1613: 1609: 1608: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1596: 1592: 1586: 1568: 1564: 1560: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1550: 1545: 1539: 1536: 1534: 1531: 1526: 1520: 1519:User:Tim Song 1516: 1515:User:Bwilkins 1512: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1496: 1493: 1488: 1482: 1481:User:tim Song 1477: 1476: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1430: 1427: 1422: 1416: 1412: 1408: 1404: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396: 1392: 1388: 1383: 1379: 1378:Maggie Horton 1372:Have a heart. 1365: 1362: 1357: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1346: 1345: 1340: 1335: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1316: 1311: 1304: 1296: 1292: 1285: 1282: 1277: 1271: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1256: 1255: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1237: 1234: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1218: 1210: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1192: 1191: 1174: 1171: 1168: 1163: 1158: 1157: 1150: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1141: 1138: 1133: 1128: 1127: 1115: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1106: 1101: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1075: 1065: 1062: 1060: 1058: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1046: 1041: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1029: 1027: 1025: 1010: 1007: 1002: 995: 994: 993: 992: 988: 984: 980: 969: 965: 961: 957: 956: 955: 952: 947: 941: 940: 939: 935: 931: 926: 925: 924: 923: 919: 915: 888: 884: 880: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 869: 864: 858: 854: 850: 846: 845: 844: 840: 836: 832: 827: 826: 825: 822: 817: 811: 807: 806: 805: 801: 797: 793: 792: 791: 790: 789: 786: 781: 774: 773: 772: 768: 764: 759: 758: 757: 756: 755: 754: 746: 742: 738: 737: 736: 733: 728: 722: 721: 720: 719: 712: 708: 704: 703: 702: 698: 694: 690: 686: 682: 681: 680: 679: 675: 671: 666: 664: 660: 656: 652: 640: 637: 632: 626: 625: 624: 623: 619: 615: 610: 598: 595: 590: 584: 580: 576: 575: 574: 573: 569: 565: 561: 549: 546: 541: 535: 532: 531: 530: 529: 525: 521: 510: 505: 502: 497: 491: 490: 489: 488: 484: 480: 470: 469: 464: 458: 457: 455: 442: 438: 432: 428: 422: 421: 420: 414: 413: 412:Did you know? 408: 407:June 27, 2010 404: 401: 397: 396: 388: 387: 383: 379: 374: 372: 359: 352: 345: 338: 335: 330: 324: 323: 322: 321: 317: 311: 305: 298: 291: 288: 283: 277: 276: 275: 274: 271: 268: 267: 252: 249: 244: 238: 237: 236: 235: 231: 227: 223: 203: 200: 195: 189: 188: 187: 183: 179: 175: 174: 173: 170: 165: 158: 157: 156: 152: 148: 144: 143: 142: 139: 134: 128: 127: 126: 125: 121: 117: 113: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2795: 2737: 2643: 2636: 2599: 2505: 2452:display.) – 2431: 2427: 2403: 2344: 2325: 2126: 2099:variation!-- 2087: 2074: 2064: 2051: 2038: 2034: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2010: 1908: 1869: 1865: 1855: 1845: 1837: 1828: 1824: 1816: 1807: 1798: 1794: 1773: 1733: 1712: 1685: 1619: 1615: 1587: 1584: 1559:24.34.144.92 1466:24.34.144.92 1440:24.34.144.92 1402: 1387:24.34.144.92 1375: 1330: 1306: 1300: 1232: 1225: 1188: 1186: 1166: 1153: 1136: 1123: 1113: 1080:page, btw.-- 1078: 1056: 1023: 1018: 976: 911: 857:reassessment 848: 776:situation!-- 710: 667: 661:was made by 648: 608: 601: 557: 516: 508: 476: 453: 452: 448: 417: 416: 410: 375: 368: 301: 265:RAIN the ONE 263: 260: 219: 111: 109: 78: 43: 37: 2640:Bencherlite 2348:comments!-- 2329:ACEOREVIVED 1872:Hjquazimoto 1770:Harel Skaat 1620:main points 1196:Nehrams2020 711:immediately 627:Cool. :) -- 479:Staxringold 431:quick check 302:Thanks for 36:This is an 2734:Thank You! 2430:... but I 2076:ThinkBlue 2040:ThinkBlue 2003:. You can 1782:Copied to 1625:Napoleon I 1403:repeatedly 1155:ThinkBlue 1125:ThinkBlue 1015:Hard Candy 930:GamerPro64 879:GamerPro64 835:GamerPro64 796:GamerPro64 685:GamerPro64 427:here's how 98:Archive 20 90:Archive 17 85:Archive 16 79:Archive 15 73:Archive 14 68:Archive 13 60:Archive 10 1591:Ishtar456 1291:GA review 1260:Ishtar456 1241:Ishtar456 1082:Ishtar456 745:talk page 687:recently 663:HGraphite 659:this edit 655:Sami50421 651:This edit 614:Acather96 564:Acather96 224:page. :) 2469:great.-- 2404:entirely 2365:film… – 2249:You can 2196:Candyo32 2182:Candyo32 2144:Candyo32 2129:Candyo32 2017:Mr. R00t 1981:Talkback 1732:, under 1728:It's in 1462:WP:OFFER 689:promoted 657:, while 437:DYKSTATS 2889:Beloved 2859:Beloved 2814:Beloved 2792:(again) 2758:Beloved 2713:Beloved 2682:Beloved 2618:Beloved 2573:Beloved 2529:Beloved 2472:Beloved 2438:Beloved 2388:Beloved 2351:Beloved 2211:Beloved 2159:Beloved 2102:Beloved 1962:Beloved 1888:Beloved 1793:*Files 1754:MacDaid 1739:Beloved 1715:MacDaid 1694:Beloved 1663:Beloved 1612:WP:LEAD 1543:Beloved 1524:Beloved 1486:Beloved 1420:Beloved 1355:Beloved 1275:Beloved 1204:contrib 1099:Beloved 1074:I Do Do 1057:Legolas 1039:Beloved 1024:Legolas 1000:Beloved 960:James26 945:Beloved 914:James26 862:Beloved 853:WP:LEAD 815:Beloved 779:Beloved 763:James26 741:removed 726:Beloved 693:James26 670:James26 630:Beloved 588:Beloved 539:Beloved 495:Beloved 328:Beloved 304:your PR 281:Beloved 242:Beloved 193:Beloved 163:Beloved 132:Beloved 39:archive 2696:can.-- 2176:, and 2123:review 1682:WP:GAN 1380:, and 1213:Thanks 554:Thanks 473:Review 309:Adabow 270:(Talk) 2894:Freak 2864:Freak 2819:Freak 2763:Freak 2718:Freak 2687:Freak 2623:Freak 2578:Freak 2534:Freak 2477:Freak 2460:scent 2455:iride 2443:Freak 2419:scent 2414:iride 2393:Freak 2373:scent 2368:iride 2356:Freak 2300:Candy 2282:Candy 2264:Candy 2216:Freak 2164:Freak 2107:Freak 2065:after 1967:Freak 1951:Stalk 1932:Stalk 1916:Stalk 1893:Freak 1852:press 1744:Freak 1699:Freak 1668:Freak 1548:Freak 1529:Freak 1491:Freak 1425:Freak 1360:Freak 1338:Mario 1333:Super 1314:Mario 1309:Super 1280:Freak 1114:after 1104:Freak 1044:Freak 1005:Freak 983:Rm994 950:Freak 867:Freak 820:Freak 784:Freak 731:Freak 635:Freak 593:Freak 583:WP:CP 544:Freak 500:Freak 456:levse 333:Freak 286:Freak 247:Freak 198:Freak 168:Freak 137:Freak 16:< 2878:talk 2847:talk 2833:talk 2802:talk 2777:talk 2745:talk 2702:talk 2659:talk 2606:talk 2562:talk 2548:talk 2517:talk 2432:like 2428:Sigh 2411:) – 2333:talk 2200:talk 2186:talk 2148:talk 2133:talk 2088:BLUE 2082:(Hit 2070:this 2052:BLUE 2046:(Hit 1876:talk 1859:out. 1758:talk 1719:talk 1652:talk 1637:talk 1595:talk 1563:talk 1470:talk 1444:talk 1391:talk 1293:of " 1264:talk 1245:talk 1200:talk 1187:The 1167:BLUE 1161:(Hit 1137:BLUE 1131:(Hit 1086:talk 987:talk 964:talk 934:talk 918:talk 883:talk 849:Glee 839:talk 800:talk 767:talk 697:talk 674:talk 618:talk 609:Done 568:talk 560:this 558:for 524:talk 483:talk 462:Talk 382:talk 315:talk 230:talk 182:talk 151:talk 120:talk 2305:o32 2287:o32 2269:o32 2119:RE: 2031:Re: 1343:Man 1319:Man 585:?-- 536:.-- 405:On 318:) 2880:) 2849:) 2835:) 2804:) 2779:) 2747:) 2704:) 2661:) 2608:) 2564:) 2550:) 2519:) 2385:! 2335:) 2202:) 2188:) 2150:) 2135:) 2036:-- 1878:) 1760:) 1721:) 1686:is 1654:) 1639:) 1616:is 1597:) 1565:) 1540:-- 1472:) 1446:) 1393:) 1266:) 1247:) 1206:) 1202:• 1121:-- 1088:) 1055:-- 1022:-- 989:) 966:) 936:) 920:) 885:) 841:) 802:) 769:) 699:) 676:) 620:) 612::) 570:) 526:) 465:• 459:• 450:— 429:, 409:, 384:) 376:-- 232:) 184:) 153:) 122:) 94:→ 64:← 2876:( 2845:( 2831:( 2800:( 2775:( 2743:( 2700:( 2657:( 2604:( 2560:( 2546:( 2515:( 2331:( 2246:. 2198:( 2184:( 2146:( 2131:( 2090:) 2054:) 1996:. 1948:/ 1929:/ 1913:/ 1874:( 1756:( 1717:( 1650:( 1635:( 1593:( 1561:( 1468:( 1442:( 1389:( 1297:" 1262:( 1243:( 1198:( 1169:) 1139:) 1084:( 985:( 962:( 932:( 916:( 881:( 837:( 798:( 765:( 695:( 672:( 616:( 566:( 522:( 454:R 443:. 433:) 425:( 380:( 353:. 312:( 228:( 180:( 149:( 118:( 50:.

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

Index