User talk:Belovedfreak/Archive 21

889:(which your website seems to be, you may be able to correct me), but when we do, they need to be from someone who is reliably considered an expert in their field. One thing that helps us to evaluate that a source (self-published or otherwise) is reliable is if their work has been cited by another source that has already been established to be reliable. Determining reliability of sources on Knowledge can be even more complicated than I've gone into, and is an exact science, but my questioning the "reliability" of your website is certainly not a declaration that your work "sucks" or is unimportant. I'm well aware of the many, many important pieces of work in all fields that have been done by amateurs, yet would not be considered "reliable" for use here. Knowledge itself is an example. A great deal of work is done to Knowledge articles, some of it by people who are eperts in their own field, and editors are proud of our best work. But no matter hw much work goes into out articles, or how well-written they may be, no Knowledge article would ever be considered a reliable source for another Knowledge article. There are a few different reasons for this, but hopefully you get the point I'm making. 1099:

policy-based issue, but it's still a content dispute and is not vandalism or (I believe) being intentionally disruptive, so I was hoping that making the other person see it's not just me against him/her would help. If this was a high profile article, I think (unless I'm really missing the point here) that other editors would be agreeing with me in discussion and reverting the other editor. Of course I could be wrong and am happy to see alternative opinions, but at the moment it's just an edit war that's going nowhere because no one else is watching. --

1768:(especially below GA) are for organising articles, especially in Wikiprojects. It can be useful if you're looking for articles at a certain level to improve, or working out how many articles of a certain level a project covers, but it's not really a "status" as such. The important thing is the quality of the content. If you think the article is at "B" standard, go ahead and change it, but you might be waiting for GAN for a little while, so I'd just move on to the next thing to work on, and try to get that to B/GA! -- 1981: 31: 1362:

cover all your community expenses plus up to about $ 300 per month. Some members may also be eligible for profit sharing at the end of the year." from the official GANAS website. I have removed this. As far as I can tell, the other bit I noticed has been fixed. I can't speak for the rest of the article as it stands, and to be honest, I am disinclined to have anything to do with it (which you may understand if you read the talkpage :) ) All I can say is that I am not

1514: 2302: 225: 2194: 838:

reviews. But I would caution you against declaring writers such as myself as "amateurs," when some of us have been working at our craft for a very long time. After all, not every author of a book gets published by a major house, and not every person who plays an organized sport makes it to the professional leagues. That doesn't make their contributions any less important.

834:

same pabulum that we are force-fed on the radio. We are extremely selective about who we bring onto the review panel - it's a rather elite group. Other Knowledge articles have included links to our reviews (even if we didn't get the kind of call-out that I did in this particular article). And, one doesn't survive for as long as we have if our work sucks, methinks.

1083:

need to follow policies here. I'm concerned that 'jumping on the bandwagon' might lead to something of a siege mentality, but I'm happy to chime in if you still want. I can see where (s)he's coming from but it's not really reconcilable with the function of wikipedia. Drop me a line if you like. Regards,

2059:

Thankyou both for the vote of confidence! :) I would definitely be interested in this. I do like to flit arond the project a bit, but this is an area that I'd like to help out in more. I just had a look at the "advice for clerks" and that's already a very useful page. So yes, please do put my name up

1740:

Oh I didn't know that you can give yourself a B status, I thought it had to be reviewed (I'm still learning about things on here lol). Thing is, I know I have really improved the S&M article and I know it can't be a C anymore, because of how much I have expanded and improved it. Do you think I am

1214:

Hi thanks for the reply. derivativeFX seected it for me, and the only other option seemed to be Cc-by-sa-3.0, and I didn't think that would be right. I find derivativeFX very handy to use, so I guess the answer is to just continue as usual and then manually replace the license part afterwards. Thanks

833:

Are all of our writers "professional music reviewers"? Honestly, no... but we are made up of people who are passionate about music, to the point that every single one of us - myself included - donates our efforts in the name of educating people about music of all kinds that is out there, not just the

1960:

of the WikiProject Film 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.

281:

1680:

page. Before, it looked like someone was reviewing it, so other people might have been put off starting a review, thinking it was already happening. That's why the page would have been deleted and that's why I removed the "onreview" note. Someone will review it, it just might take a bit of time as

829:

in terms of popularity or readership, but I also believe that this works to our benefit, as we don't kiss any industry behinds, and unlike reviewers who dare to slag Jann Wenner's favorite artists (Jim DeRogatis, anyone?), writers for our site are free to express their honest beliefs, no matter how

824:

one selected. However, you should know some background before you condemn me as an "amateur". I have 25 years' experience writing music reviews - the last 14 of which have been focused on "The Daily Vault," which I founded in 1997. (Granted, I've never been employed by any mainstream publication in

2243:

to help it move towards Featured status, and I was wondering if you would be able to weigh in on it if you had the time. I know that the lack of pre-DVD home media is an issue with it for now, but if you could see anything else, then that would be a tremendous help. Thanks again for the first time

1361:

In my opinion, problems still remain, eg. "Full time work is 35 hours a week, and wages cover all community expenses plus a $ 300/mo stipend. Profit sharing opportunities may be available to some members." from the Knowledge article and "Full time work is 35 hours a week. Your wages are enough to

909:. If you just wanted to make it clear how annoyed you were at me calling your website "amateur" - fair enough. As I say, it was nothing personal and nothing to do with how "good" or "bad" your work might be. I hope I've made it a bit clearer why I was questioning the use of that source. Regards, -- 1098:

Hi, thanks. I can see your point, but what else would you suggest at this point? I agree that we should try to avoid a siege mentality, I don't want to put them off completely and they are making a good point about our responsibility to living subjects. However, this is clearly (in my opinion!) a

1082:

I'm in the middle of writing a third opinion that you asked for, I agree that the source can't be included and I was hoping to make that point somewhat diplomatically but the other user's latest post indicates that(s)he might not be willing to engage in reasonable discussion and/or accept that we

894:

Note that there are many thousands of Knowledge articles that do not conform to our core policies. Knowledge is a work in progress, and unfortunately, just because your website is still being used in some articles, does not mean it has been officially approved as such. You might be interested in

2022:

would pitch in). Basically, CP clerks assess listings at the CP board, as they do at SCV (with slightly different codes). You're already very experienced in that kind of thing. Since I'm working and not able to pitch in during the week and since the only other admin who really works at CP at the

1596:

with little progress, and as you are somewhat familiar with the article etc. etc. The user in question has admitted to being a Ganas resident but it has been redacted by oversight. They keep making the same edits, mostly eliminating anything controversial from the summary, and lately they have

1414:

Nice catch. There's been a few like that recently - some connected to User:Moore Physics and his socks. Keep an eye out for similar things. Thanks for putting the talk page comment - you've no idea how much that helps when faced with an article that looks on the face of it to be quite normal and

837:

Anyhow, I'm not here to change your mind (nor would I probably do so), nor am I looking at starting a flame war over this, as I rarely delve this deep into Knowledge - plus, I'm probably reflecting a rather thin skin that it's believed some bands have been alleged to have when they read negative

1715:

B status is more informal. Anyone can decide that an article is B-standard, although many editors prefer not to assess articles they have written themselves. It's up to you though. Someone can always come along later and disagree with you & change it. Articles should be assessed against the

1767:

that haven't been assessed yet, or still have a "stub" assessment on the talkpage. To be honest, I wouldn't even worry about assessing S&M if you've nominated it for GA anyway. Assuming (let's hope!) it makes it to GA, it doesn't really matter what it is in between. Really, the assessments

811:

or a major daily newspaper, and I freely admit that not everyone who spews their opinion on a record is important enough to be called a "music reviewer". (Lord knows I saw enough argument against calling Robert Christgau that - or even considering his humanity - on the discussion of

939:

and I'd just like to say thanks for all of your comments and suggestions on this article which helped me greatly in finally getting the article promoted. I'm hoping I'll have a little spare time over the summer to see if I can make some changes to the article and try and run it for

604:

of "President of Ghana" and "Presidents of Ghana"? Is there a difference? Should there be? As a reader, I would be very confused by the two titles and have no idea what information to expect at which. I really think it would be better to keep to one article of that sort, and one

859:

Thanks for this message. I'm sorry if that review caused any offense. Although I meant nothing personal towards you or your work, I can understand your unhappiness with your work being called "amateur". That said, I was speaking within the very specific context of a Knowledge

2331:

or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our

1801:

Right ok thanks! lol. What do u mean maintenance tags? Like the "vague" one? I carried out SO many searches looking for the list of 11 countries where it got banned, but nowhere online has given a list, just that it was 11 countries, so I don't know what to do about that.

563:? I think the new one got tagged for speedy deletion because it contains a lot of duplicated info about that one president, although it's clear to me that you intend it to be much more. It seems to me though that the kind of article you are envisioning would work at 985:

Hi, I hope you're well. Awhile ago you commented on my FAC of the above article. With that in mind, I was hoping you could review the article with FA standards in mind, and share that review with me on my talk page? If you could, that'd be much appreciated.

825:

that role... but this has remained a labor of love for me.) Over that time, I've covered numerous shows and interviewed music personalities from Christopher Cross to Steve Hogarth of Marillion. Yes, the little site that I started back in 1997 will never be

819:

I am not here to argue whether or not my review of this album should be included in this or any other Knowledge article - honestly, when I first discovered I had been quoted in this article, I wondered why, of the thousands of reviews I've written, was

357:

Hi, that looks much better, good job. :) I can't see any obvious problems now, but I'll leave it for someone else to review who might need something to review to make their nomination (if that makes sense!). Don't worry though, it'll be looked at soon!

544:

I looked at the List of Presidents before I started but I say that there was no background info about their term of office etc. I intend for this one article to be more than a list so that extra info about their rule and stuff like that can be

1675:

That's ok, it happens sometimes. The page has been deleted so that when someone decides to review it, they can start the page themselves. It might seem a bit silly but it's important because of how the GA bot works and how it shows up on the

1231:

Actually on second thoughts, looking at RHaworth‎‎'s reply, and the diff of how he has fixed the most recent one, it's a bit more complicated than that. It may be easier in future to do it by hand rather than use derivativeFX. Thanks anyway!

1685:. I noticed you asking someone elsewhere if you're allowed to "look" at the review. You are, of course, once someone has started it. If you have the page watchlisted, you will find out when the review starts and will be able to look then. -- 1331:

I'm a copyright-issue helper. You raised concerns in the GAN (which, by the way, was admirably patient) about close paraphrasing. Could you revisit it, to see whether that particular concern has been addressed. I ask becuase you may be more

1784:

By the way, just glancing at that article, I see it has a couple of maintenance tags which should be dealt with one way or another. Otherwise, there is the risk that the article will be "quick failed" at GAN, and not be put on hold for

2323:

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

864:" review. I certainly didn't mean to imply that you work "sucks"! In fact, to be honest, I probably did't evaluate your review so much as the website itself. When we review articles at a higher standard (what we call "good" or " 305:

Hello, I'm sorry to be doing this but I would humbly ask if you could review my DYK, it is titled "2011 New Patriotic Party Primaries". I posted it yesterday but so far no review has been made on it. I have posted the link here

1816:

Well I wouldn't worry about it then. If it's not in the sources, there's not a lot you can do, just be prepared to argue your point to a GA reviewer if they question it. There's also a massive "cleanup" banner at the top. :)

234:

I just saw all those African portals you've made, I like them a lot, and since portals are a part of the wiki I've never got into yet you've given me some ideas. As a token of gratitude please accept a handfull of balloons

2035:. You would, of course, be welcome to come by my talk page with any questions you have; NortyNort has also gotten quite familiar with the processes there. Please let me know if you have any interest in this new pie.:D -- 2129: 671:

So so happy, can you believe that I kept going though my first DYK was still hanging. I took your advice that it would come through. I add two more and today they all came through!!!!! The other two were:

720: 876:, I'm again speaking in this very specific context. It's not a personal jusgement that I can make about your work, how accurate or well-written it is. I just look at how well it meets this guideline: 880:. We try to rely on sources that have a good reputation as a high-quality source, that have a reputation for fact-checking, that are published by major publishing companies, newspapers, journals etc. 390:

Five days yet no review yet? Belovedfreak, I am still waiting and checking everything to see as to what is happening on DYK. Still no one seem to come around to check it. I'm very sad about it. --

1269:

Thanks Peter, fingers crossed... it's a bit of a test case for me - my first architectural GAN! I've been quite lucky with the amount of material there is on the church, so hopefully... :) --

675: 1491: 253:

Ah... thanks very much! :) Portal work can be quite satisfying until you realise how little traffic they get. It's still a nice way to showcase articles on a certain topic though. --

471:

when it was tagged for speedy deletion. It had the right content with references and tag to show that it was being expanded. Could you please look at if for me. Thanks as always.--

2010:

in the newly created "clerk" role. If so, I'd like to bring you up to a few other copyright admins in the kind of informal review process we've yet to test drive (I would imagine

1597:

attributed their version to you. I've asked for semi-protection which has been denied due to little activity. Would like to get other recent editors involved. Thanks much,

144:

Thanks for this article. My best man lives in the the house just to the west of the vicarage! Hope you are coping OK with the National Heritage List for England. Cheers. --

772: 744: 1908:

By the way, Grammy Award for Best Zydeco or Cajun Music Album is also at GAN if you are interested in reviewing a similar article. If not, no worries. Thanks again!! --

1755:

No, whether it is classed as a B or C or stub, or not assessed at all, will make absolutely no difference to a GA review. The reviewer will look at the article and the

1530: 703: 277: 2218: 1886: 2184: 2086: 1956: 896: 343:

Thanks for the help so far, I have looked at the errors you talked about in the article and corrected the hook too. Could you please review it again. THANK YOU.

1717: 2006:

Hi. :) You have your fingers in a lot of pies, but I've long appreciated your work at SCV, and I'm wondering if you would have any interest in pitching in at

2093: 1939: 1923: 1903: 1724:. If you decide that an article meets those points, you can just change the template on the talkpage. Formal assessment takes place for GA, A-class and FA.-- 727: 495: 400: 2176: 2158: 2109: 2080: 1314: 1298: 1280: 1116: 1084: 1071: 970: 789: 646: 630: 616: 595: 578: 554: 539: 480: 438: 416: 385: 369: 352: 338: 170: 1578: 1160:

on this subject. (That page just happens to be on my watchlist.) I'm no expert on this, but I suspect the problem is that "geograph" is incompatible with

1124: 1110: 1030: 1016: 1141: 500:

Hi, looking at similar articles for other countries, we seem to have "President of X" and "List of presidents of X" articles. Right now, we already have

213: 2054: 1994: 1866: 1612: 1553: 920: 853: 2071: 1842: 1828: 1811: 1796: 1779: 1750: 1735: 1710: 1696: 1670: 1656: 1401: 1377: 2031:

doesn't get anywhere near the volume that SCV does, but cases are sometimes more complex. (Sometimes not.) You can read more about clerking there at

845: 1661:

It wasn't a review, it was something i wrote, i didn't know i wasn't allowed to write on it. The page still exists, just no one has reviewed on it.

1547: 1445: 1243: 1226: 2288: 1482: 1054: 730:, Nana Konadu Agyeman Rawlings former first lady of Ghana, was the first person to pick up nomination form to contest the leadership of the party ? 153: 2240: 2232: 682: 2263: 295: 264: 1974: 196: 795: 462: 317: 600:

Perhaps that's all it says now, but it could say more, right? It's not "complete". What I'm trying to get at is, what is the difference in

405:

Don't be sad, someone will get to it. :) Sometimes, they are reviewed at the last minute as someone is choosing hooks for the DYK queue.--

1620: 1208: 1045:

You certainly follow my life around. This church, which you have just categorised, is the burial place of my father-in-law's ashes! --

1606: 1115:

Yeah okay, I'll make some comments then, to be honest I hadn't noticed how persistently they'd been edit-warring. Give me a minute.

995: 905:. If you want to start a discussion with other editors about the use of your website as a source, the place to do that would be the 132: 2337: 1592:

article, in particular the edit warring begun by Marelstrom in April of this year? I've tried to engage them in discussion on the

1518: 807:

I respectfully take offense at this generalization. Not everyone is fortunate enough to have landed jobs writing music reviews for

1465: 1038: 953: 2349: 2223: 2039: 1336:

with the sources, and what suspicions had been raised at the time (partially repaired paraphrasing is difficult to spot). Thanks

517: 137: 2147:

Brilliant, great work as usual! At a glance, it looks good, but I will have a better look and comment if I notice anything. --

270: 183:

I thought you might be interested to know that I run a backup copy of CorenSearchBot's code which does the exact same job at

1428: 666: 2141: 2098:

Great, thanks—I'll keep going as usual, but with more WP:CP work. No doubt I'll come looking for advice at some point! --

2032: 2023:

moment is only able to pitch in a couple of times a week, most of the work is falling on the back of the inaugural clerk

1949: 1504: 1497: 1263: 635:

Ok. I do think you can work on the same info you wanted to, I just think it would be better in one overall article. :) --

804:

and found that you had objections to the use of my review as it was, if I remember the wording, from an "amateur site".

1508: 1092: 176: 1355: 1970: 291: 97: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 1639: 111: 1928:

Yeah, I saw that and was already thinking of reviewing it in the near future, if someone doesn't get there first.--

1151: 2206: 1396: 1350: 505: 247: 1039: 525: 513: 300: 2336:

for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see

2202: 800:

I happened to stumble upon the discussion you and user Chase had regarding review sources for Hillary Duff's

138: 868:" standard, we look very carefully at the sources that are used in the article. One of our core policies is 1583: 1451: 900: 686: 559:

Lists often have a section of prose too, in fact, for featured lists, that is a requirement. What about

2198: 2186: 1916: 1879: 1366:

aware of any close paraphrasing left, although there may be. Sorry I can't help any more than that. --

177: 159:

Really? Small world! I started it offline ages ago, thought it was about time to get it on here. :-) --

38: 1416: 2345: 2239:

that helped to successfully bring it to Good Article status. The article is currently undergoing a

2172: 2137: 2076:

Whoot! I will do, as soon as I'm done with dinner. Thank you for the willingness to pitch in. :D --

1294: 1259: 1050: 949: 769: 740: 699: 626: 591: 550: 491: 476: 435: 381: 348: 324: 313: 149: 105: 1254:

You should get a fair review from Pyrotec. Good luck. I think the article's just about there. --

903: 2328: 2205:

with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going

1645:

Well, there's no review on the review page, which has been deleted, so it doesn't look like it.--

1120: 1088: 1026: 991: 976: 869: 110:

Hi. I've added some thoughts on the Heritage Gateway links situation at Peter's talk page: see

2153: 2104: 2066: 1934: 1898: 1823: 1791: 1774: 1730: 1691: 1651: 1542: 1477: 1440: 1372: 1309: 1275: 1238: 1221: 1145: 1105: 1066: 1021:

Thanks very much for your feedback, which is much appreciated. I'll definitely act on it soon.

1011: 965: 915: 872:. To help articles fulfil that, we need to make sure all sources used are reliable. When I say 784: 641: 611: 573: 534: 411: 364: 333: 259: 208: 192: 165: 123: 47: 17: 2214: 1966: 1909: 1872: 1616: 1409: 528:; for both of these countries, "Presidents of..." redirects to one of the other articles.) -- 521: 287: 1833:

Yeah I know, I removed the cleanup banner :). It's not in the state that it used to be lol.

2333: 926: 849: 2317: 8: 2341: 2309: 2294: 2279: 2254: 2168: 2133: 2090: 2077: 2050: 2036: 2001: 1838: 1807: 1746: 1706: 1666: 1635: 1392: 1346: 1290: 1255: 1046: 945: 760: 736: 695: 622: 587: 546: 509: 487: 472: 468: 426: 391: 377: 344: 309: 145: 308:]. It is my first DYK so I am a little anxious as to how it goes. Thank you very much.-- 1602: 1569: 1157: 1022: 987: 583: 564: 560: 501: 2148: 2099: 2061: 2019: 2011: 1929: 1893: 1818: 1786: 1769: 1725: 1686: 1646: 1537: 1526: 1472: 1435: 1424: 1367: 1304: 1270: 1233: 1216: 1200: 1182: 1100: 1061: 1006: 960: 910: 779: 636: 606: 568: 529: 406: 359: 328: 254: 203: 188: 184: 160: 116: 2231:

Hi, Belovedfreak. Back in February, you gave some very helpful advice for me in the

2236: 2224: 2210: 1962: 1721: 1461: 283: 2130:

List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in Southeast England

1987: 1980: 1756: 978: 219: 1701:

Ok thanks. Btw, can you nominate articles for B status? Or does it start at GA?

1456:

I have grabbed the article you obtained for me. Thank you very much for this. -

759:

Thank you so very much for how far you have mentored me. Will always remember.--

508:. Would this news article provide anything different? I'm thinking that perhaps 46:

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

2270: 2245: 2046: 2024: 1834: 1803: 1742: 1702: 1662: 1631: 1388: 1342: 2167:

Thanks for your support; it made it! That completes the set of five lists. --

1764: 1760: 1682: 1677: 1598: 1559: 1324: 1191:

automatically generate the licence for you, or did you select it yourself? --

1174: 1163: 906: 886: 187:, so hopefully one of the two bots will be up and running at any given time. 2028: 2007: 1522: 1493: 1420: 1193: 1002: 941: 936: 932: 877: 865: 861: 241: 2313: 2295: 2123: 2015: 1625: 1457: 1249: 689:

won 77.92% of total votes cast to be elected as flag bearer for the NPP?

1077: 512:

should redirect to one of those. What do you think? (Some comparisons:

1513: 899:, as well as these two reviews where the website has been questioned: 621:

Thanks for the advice. Will just have to work on other stuff for now.

1871:

Thank you SO MUCH for your time and assistance. Much appreciated! --

1588:

Would you be willing to give a third opinion or other assistance at

1001:

Sure, I will try to have a look. In the meantime, why don't you try

959:

I'm really please it got there; well done for all your hard work! --

236: 2209:, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. 2193: 1593: 224: 1325: 1289:

Just back from a few days in Geneva. Told you! Congrats. --

1997:

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

1140:

thanks for the guidelines that you'd given, now i know, :))

778:

Hey, that's great, I'm glad it all worked out. Well done! --

2316:, and it appears to include material copied directly from 2132:, the last in the series of five lists, is now at FLC. -- 1415:

reasonable. (Some genuine ones look quite unlikely, like

1558:

You are certainly welcome. :) Good work on the article!

586:

only talks about the criteria for becoming president. --

2318:

http://famousdiamonds.tripod.com/blackorlovdiamond.html

486:

whiles the issue is hanging, do I stop the expansion?--

2312:. I have performed a web search with the contents of 1135: 728:

2011 National Democratic Party presidential primaries

721:

2011 National Democratic Party presidential primaries

2327:If substantial content is duplicated and it is not 2197:An article that you have been involved in editing, 2045:

I second the above motion and vote of confidence.--

1434:No problem, and I will look out for similar. :) -- 1741:more likely to achieve GA if it is a B over a C? 1986:Hello, Belovedfreak. You have new messages at 1589: 683:2010 New Patriotic Party Presidential Primaries 676:2010 New Patriotic Party Presidential Primaries 1521:for comments about the article. Well done! 2027:. He could really use some assistance. :) 1867:Grammy Award for Best Hawaiian Music Album 1554:Re: Beyond the Sea (The X-Files) GA review 841:Thanks for taking the time to read this. 2338:Knowledge:Donating copyrighted materials 1759:, that's all. Articles frequently go to 1611:Another request for involvement :-) -- 223: 1519:Talk:St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde 1156:I just noticed the message you left at 518:List of Presidents of the United States 14: 1630:Is the S&M article not on review? 1187:(copied from the original image). Did 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1171:So the answer is probably to replace 796:Santa Claus Lane - re: review sources 463:Could you please look at this for me? 467:I was in the writing my new article 202:Oh, thanks - that's good to know! -- 25: 2128:You may be interested to know that 2033:Knowledge:Copyright problems/Clerks 23: 2308:This is an automated message from 2300: 1979: 1720:. A detailed list of points is at 1505:St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde 1498:St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde 24: 2360: 844:Respectfully, Christopher Thelen 2192: 1681:there is quite a big backlog at 1512: 1005:to get a few more eyes on it? -- 29: 506:List of heads of state of Ghana 2269:Thanks, man, I appreciate it. 526:List of Presidents of Tanzania 514:President of the United States 13: 1: 1040:St James' Church, Longborough 271:WP:FILM April 2011 Newsletter 1148:) 19: 49, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 907:reliable sources noticeboard 878:Identifying reliable sources 667:3 came through in one day!!! 139:St Cuthbert's Church, Lytham 7: 1950:WP:FILM May 2011 Newsletter 1536:Yay! Thanks very much... -- 687:Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo 10: 2365: 2201:, has been proposed for a 2199:Alternative gender systems 2187:Alternative gender systems 265:12:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC) 248:06:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC) 214:14:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC) 197:14:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC) 178:User:CorenSearchBot/manual 171:14:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC) 154:14:20, 22 April 2011 (UTC) 133:21:15, 17 April 2011 (UTC) 2350:18:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC) 2289:23:45, 11 June 2011 (UTC) 2264:03:42, 10 June 2011 (UTC) 2177:09:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC) 1621:05:44, 13 June 2011 (UTC) 1417:Bobble-head doll syndrome 944:. Again, many thanks! :) 2219:02:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 2159:16:10, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 2142:13:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC) 2110:17:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 2094:11:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 2081:21:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC) 2072:16:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 2055:12:17, 6 June 2011 (UTC) 2040:10:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC) 1975:01:40, 2 June 2011 (UTC) 1940:15:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 1924:15:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 1904:23:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC) 1887:23:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC) 1843:16:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 1829:23:54, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1812:22:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1797:22:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1780:22:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1751:22:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1736:21:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1711:21:29, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1697:13:08, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1671:11:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1657:20:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC) 1640:16:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC) 1607:13:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC) 1579:16:18, 26 May 2011 (UTC) 1548:15:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC) 1531:15:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC) 1483:16:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC) 1466:16:13, 25 May 2011 (UTC) 1446:22:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1429:22:04, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1402:17:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1378:16:00, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1356:13:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1315:20:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1299:16:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 1281:12:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 1264:12:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC) 1244:09:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC) 1227:08:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC) 1209:23:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC) 1177:|Cc-by-sa-2.0|Geograph}} 1152:Cropping Geograph images 1125:18:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC) 1111:18:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC) 1093:17:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC) 1072:11:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC) 1055:10:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC) 1031:23:44, 14 May 2011 (UTC) 1017:11:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 996:18:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC) 971:21:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC) 954:21:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC) 325:User talk:Crosstemplejay 1060:I'm stalking you! :) -- 921:21:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 870:Knowledge:Verifiability 854:20:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 830:unpopular they may be. 790:17:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 773:17:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 745:10:33, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 704:01:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 647:18:34, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 631:18:11, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 617:17:14, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 596:17:11, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 579:16:57, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 555:16:54, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 540:16:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 496:16:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 481:16:42, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 439:12:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 417:10:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC) 401:16:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC) 386:20:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC) 376:Thank you so so much.-- 370:18:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC) 353:15:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC) 339:15:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC) 318:12:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC) 296:22:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC) 2305: 1984: 1185:|1238022|Geoff Royle}} 935:was today promoted to 887:self-published sources 726:... that prior to the 301:Could you please help? 228: 18:User talk:Belovedfreak 2304: 2185:Merge discussion for 2060:for consideration. -- 2018:and, if he's around, 1983: 522:President of Tanzania 227: 42:of past discussions. 2340:for the procedure.) 1584:Please help at Ganas 1452:Recent JSTOR request 1158:User talk:RHaworth‎‎ 885:We do sometimes use 1507:you nominated as a 510:Presidents of Ghana 469:Presidents of Ghana 2306: 2241:second peer review 1995:remove this notice 1985: 1892:You're welcome! -- 1471:You're welcome. -- 931:Hi. My article on 584:President of Ghana 565:President of Ghana 561:President of Ghana 502:President of Ghana 229: 2285: 2276: 2260: 2251: 2053: 2020:User:TheLeftorium 2012:User:VernoWhitney 1988:Nthep's talk page 1961:--Happy editing! 1576: 1204: 802:Santa Claus Lane, 747: 706: 282:--Happy editing! 185:User:VWBot/manual 128: 127:(tickets please!) 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2356: 2334:copyright policy 2303: 2286: 2281: 2277: 2272: 2261: 2256: 2252: 2247: 2237:Manhunter (film) 2225:Manhunter (film) 2196: 2156: 2151: 2107: 2102: 2069: 2064: 2049: 1998: 1937: 1932: 1919: 1912: 1911:Another Believer 1901: 1896: 1882: 1875: 1874:Another Believer 1826: 1821: 1794: 1789: 1777: 1772: 1733: 1728: 1718:assessment scale 1694: 1689: 1654: 1649: 1575: 1570: 1567: 1545: 1540: 1516: 1480: 1475: 1443: 1438: 1400: 1375: 1370: 1354: 1312: 1307: 1278: 1273: 1241: 1236: 1224: 1219: 1207: 1205: 1202: 1198: 1186: 1178: 1167: 1108: 1103: 1069: 1064: 1014: 1009: 968: 963: 918: 913: 787: 782: 767: 766: 743:). Self nom at 734: 702:). Self nom at 693: 681:... that in the 644: 639: 614: 609: 576: 571: 537: 532: 433: 432: 414: 409: 398: 367: 362: 336: 331: 278:April 2011 issue 262: 257: 244: 239: 211: 206: 168: 163: 131: 129: 126: 121: 106:Heritage Gateway 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2364: 2363: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2301: 2299: 2280: 2271: 2255: 2246: 2229: 2190: 2154: 2149: 2126: 2105: 2100: 2067: 2062: 2004: 1999: 1992: 1952: 1935: 1930: 1922: 1917: 1910: 1899: 1894: 1885: 1880: 1873: 1869: 1824: 1819: 1792: 1787: 1775: 1770: 1731: 1726: 1692: 1687: 1652: 1647: 1628: 1586: 1571: 1564: 1560: 1556: 1543: 1538: 1501: 1478: 1473: 1454: 1441: 1436: 1412: 1386: 1373: 1368: 1340: 1329: 1310: 1305: 1276: 1271: 1252: 1239: 1234: 1222: 1217: 1201: 1194: 1192: 1180: 1172: 1161: 1154: 1138: 1106: 1101: 1080: 1067: 1062: 1043: 1012: 1007: 983: 979:Enter the Grave 966: 961: 929: 916: 911: 897:this discussion 798: 785: 780: 762: 761: 723: 678: 669: 642: 637: 612: 607: 574: 569: 535: 530: 465: 428: 427: 412: 407: 395:CrossTemple Jay 392: 365: 360: 334: 329: 303: 273: 260: 255: 242: 237: 222: 209: 204: 181: 166: 161: 142: 124: 117: 115: 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2362: 2342:CorenSearchBot 2310:CorenSearchBot 2298: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2228: 2227:at peer review 2222: 2189: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2169:Peter I. Vardy 2162: 2161: 2134:Peter I. Vardy 2125: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2091:Moonriddengirl 2078:Moonriddengirl 2037:Moonriddengirl 2025:User:NortyNort 2003: 2000: 1991: 1978: 1957:May 2011 issue 1951: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1942: 1914: 1877: 1868: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1785:improvement.-- 1782: 1627: 1624: 1585: 1582: 1562: 1555: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1500: 1496:nomination of 1490: 1488: 1486: 1485: 1453: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1411: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1328: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1291:Peter I. Vardy 1284: 1283: 1256:Peter I. Vardy 1251: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1229: 1153: 1150: 1137: 1134: 1132: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1079: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1047:Peter I. Vardy 1042: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 982: 975: 974: 973: 946:Meetthefeebles 928: 925: 924: 923: 891: 890: 882: 881: 797: 794: 793: 792: 764:CrossTempleJay 758: 756: 755: 754: 753: 737:Crosstemplejay 732: 731: 722: 719: 717: 715: 714: 713: 712: 696:Crosstemplejay 691: 690: 677: 674: 668: 665: 664: 663: 662: 661: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 649: 623:CrossTempleJay 588:CrossTempleJay 547:CrossTempleJay 488:CrossTempleJay 473:CrossTempleJay 464: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 454: 453: 452: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 442: 441: 430:CrossTempleJay 378:CrossTempleJay 345:CrossTempleJay 310:CrossTempleJay 302: 299: 272: 269: 268: 267: 221: 218: 217: 216: 180: 175: 174: 173: 146:Peter I. Vardy 141: 136: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2361: 2352: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2330: 2329:public domain 2325: 2321: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2297: 2290: 2287: 2284: 2278: 2275: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2262: 2259: 2253: 2250: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2226: 2221: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2195: 2188: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2160: 2157: 2152: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2139: 2135: 2131: 2111: 2108: 2103: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2079: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2070: 2065: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2052: 2048: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2038: 2034: 2030: 2026: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 1996: 1989: 1982: 1977: 1976: 1972: 1968: 1964: 1959: 1958: 1941: 1938: 1933: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1920: 1913: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1902: 1897: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1883: 1876: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1827: 1822: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1809: 1805: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1795: 1790: 1783: 1781: 1778: 1773: 1766: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1753: 1752: 1748: 1744: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1734: 1729: 1723: 1719: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1695: 1690: 1684: 1679: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1655: 1650: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1623: 1622: 1618: 1614: 1609: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1595: 1591: 1581: 1580: 1577: 1574: 1568: 1566: 1549: 1546: 1541: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1520: 1515: 1510: 1506: 1499: 1495: 1489: 1484: 1481: 1476: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1447: 1444: 1439: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1426: 1422: 1418: 1410:Collin thingy 1403: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1385: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1376: 1371: 1365: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1339: 1335: 1327: 1316: 1313: 1308: 1303:Thanks! :) -- 1302: 1301: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1282: 1279: 1274: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1261: 1257: 1245: 1242: 1237: 1230: 1228: 1225: 1220: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1206: 1199: 1197: 1190: 1184: 1176: 1169: 1165: 1159: 1149: 1147: 1143: 1133: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1117:Bob House 884 1114: 1113: 1112: 1109: 1104: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1085:Bob House 884 1073: 1070: 1065: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1041: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1023:LuciferMorgan 1020: 1019: 1018: 1015: 1010: 1004: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 993: 989: 988:LuciferMorgan 981: 980: 972: 969: 964: 958: 957: 956: 955: 951: 947: 943: 938: 934: 922: 919: 914: 908: 904: 901: 898: 893: 892: 888: 884: 883: 879: 875: 871: 867: 863: 858: 857: 856: 855: 851: 847: 842: 839: 835: 831: 828: 827:Rolling Stone 823: 817: 815: 810: 809:Rolling Stone 805: 803: 791: 788: 783: 777: 776: 775: 774: 771: 768: 765: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 746: 742: 738: 729: 725: 724: 718: 711: 710: 709: 708: 707: 705: 701: 697: 688: 684: 680: 679: 673: 648: 645: 640: 634: 633: 632: 628: 624: 620: 619: 618: 615: 610: 603: 599: 598: 597: 593: 589: 585: 582: 581: 580: 577: 572: 566: 562: 558: 557: 556: 552: 548: 543: 542: 541: 538: 533: 527: 523: 519: 515: 511: 507: 503: 499: 498: 497: 493: 489: 485: 484: 483: 482: 478: 474: 470: 440: 437: 434: 431: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 418: 415: 410: 404: 403: 402: 399: 396: 389: 388: 387: 383: 379: 375: 374: 373: 372: 371: 368: 363: 356: 355: 354: 350: 346: 342: 341: 340: 337: 332: 326: 323:Commented at 322: 321: 320: 319: 315: 311: 307: 298: 297: 293: 289: 285: 280: 279: 266: 263: 258: 252: 251: 250: 249: 245: 240: 232: 226: 215: 212: 207: 201: 200: 199: 198: 194: 190: 186: 179: 172: 169: 164: 158: 157: 156: 155: 151: 147: 140: 135: 134: 130: 122: 120: 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: 2326: 2322: 2307: 2282: 2273: 2257: 2248: 2230: 2191: 2127: 2005: 1955: 1953: 1870: 1629: 1610: 1587: 1572: 1561: 1557: 1509:good article 1503:The article 1502: 1487: 1455: 1413: 1383: 1363: 1337: 1333: 1330: 1253: 1195: 1189:derivativeFX 1188: 1170: 1155: 1142:Russart_1999 1139: 1131: 1081: 1044: 984: 977: 933:Sheriff Hill 930: 927:Sheriff Hill 873: 862:good article 843: 840: 836: 832: 826: 821: 818: 814:Achtung Baby 813: 808: 806: 801: 799: 763: 757: 735:Created by 733: 716: 694:Created by 692: 670: 601: 466: 429: 394: 304: 276: 274: 243:(Talk to me! 233: 230: 189:VernoWhitney 182: 143: 118: 109: 78: 43: 37: 2314:Black Orlov 2296:Black Orlov 2233:peer review 2211:Lagrange613 2016:User:MLauba 2002:CP clerking 1963:Nehrams2020 1757:GA criteria 1613:Flyswatting 1511:has passed 1003:peer review 545:expanded.-- 284:Nehrams2020 36:This is an 846:Dailyvault 98:Archive 25 90:Archive 23 85:Archive 22 79:Archive 21 73:Archive 20 68:Archive 19 60:Archive 15 2087:thank you 2047:NortyNort 1835:calvin999 1804:calvin999 1763:and even 1743:calvin999 1722:WP:BCLASS 1703:calvin999 1663:calvin999 1632:calvin999 1594:talk page 1384:Grandiose 1338:Grandiose 1215:again, -- 1993:You can 1599:Eroberer 1573:comment! 1397:contribs 1351:contribs 1196:Dr Greg 1183:geograph 874:reliable 866:featured 119:Hassocks 2274:GRAPPLE 2249:GRAPPLE 2244:round! 2150:Beloved 2101:Beloved 2089:. :) -- 2063:Beloved 2051:(Holla) 1971:contrib 1931:Beloved 1895:Beloved 1820:Beloved 1788:Beloved 1771:Beloved 1727:Beloved 1688:Beloved 1648:Beloved 1565:uby2010 1539:Beloved 1523:Pyrotec 1474:Beloved 1437:Beloved 1421:Peridon 1369:Beloved 1334:au fait 1306:Beloved 1272:Beloved 1235:Beloved 1218:Beloved 1102:Beloved 1063:Beloved 1008:Beloved 962:Beloved 912:Beloved 781:Beloved 638:Beloved 608:Beloved 605:list.-- 570:Beloved 531:Beloved 425:Thanks. 408:Beloved 361:Beloved 330:Beloved 292:contrib 256:Beloved 220:Portals 205:Beloved 162:Beloved 39:archive 1765:WP:FAC 1761:WP:GAN 1683:WP:GAN 1678:WP:GAN 1517:; see 1458:Sitush 1382:Sure. 1136:Thanks 2203:merge 2155:Freak 2106:Freak 2068:Freak 2029:WP:CP 2008:WP:CP 1936:Freak 1900:Freak 1825:Freak 1793:Freak 1776:Freak 1732:Freak 1693:Freak 1653:Freak 1590:Ganas 1544:Freak 1492:Your 1479:Freak 1442:Freak 1419:...) 1374:Freak 1326:Ganas 1311:Freak 1277:Freak 1240:Freak 1223:Freak 1179:with 1107:Freak 1068:Freak 1013:Freak 967:Freak 942:WP:FA 937:WP:GA 917:Freak 786:Freak 643:Freak 613:Freak 602:scope 575:Freak 536:Freak 413:Freak 366:Freak 335:Freak 261:Freak 210:Freak 167:Freak 16:< 2346:talk 2320:. 2215:talk 2207:here 2173:talk 2138:talk 2085:And 1967:talk 1954:The 1918:Talk 1881:Talk 1839:talk 1808:talk 1747:talk 1707:talk 1667:talk 1636:talk 1617:talk 1603:talk 1527:talk 1462:talk 1425:talk 1393:talk 1347:talk 1295:talk 1260:talk 1203:talk 1175:self 1164:self 1146:talk 1121:talk 1089:talk 1051:talk 1027:talk 992:talk 950:talk 850:talk 822:this 770:talk 741:talk 700:talk 627:talk 592:talk 551:talk 504:and 492:talk 477:talk 436:talk 382:talk 349:talk 327:. -- 314:talk 288:talk 275:The 231:Hi, 193:talk 150:talk 125:5489 112:here 2235:of 2124:FLC 1626:Why 1364:now 1250:GAN 816:.) 567:.-- 114:. 2348:) 2217:) 2175:) 2140:) 2014:, 1973:) 1969:• 1841:) 1817:-- 1810:) 1749:) 1709:) 1669:) 1638:) 1619:) 1605:) 1529:) 1494:GA 1464:) 1427:) 1399:) 1395:, 1391:, 1389:me 1353:) 1349:, 1345:, 1343:me 1297:) 1262:) 1232:-- 1181:{{ 1173:{{ 1168:. 1166:}} 1162:{{ 1123:) 1091:) 1078:Hi 1053:) 1029:) 994:) 952:) 902:, 852:) 685:, 629:) 594:) 553:) 524:, 520:, 516:, 494:) 479:) 384:) 358:-- 351:) 316:) 294:) 290:• 246:) 238:Pi 195:) 152:) 94:→ 64:← 2344:( 2283:X 2258:X 2213:( 2171:( 2136:( 1990:. 1965:( 1921:) 1915:( 1884:) 1878:( 1837:( 1806:( 1745:( 1705:( 1665:( 1634:( 1615:( 1601:( 1563:R 1525:( 1460:( 1423:( 1387:( 1341:( 1293:( 1258:( 1144:( 1119:( 1087:( 1049:( 1025:( 990:( 948:( 860:" 848:( 739:( 698:( 625:( 590:( 549:( 490:( 475:( 397:← 393:→ 380:( 347:( 312:( 286:( 191:( 148:( 50:.

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

Index