1181:
1865:
1614:
272:
2650:
3017:
31:
1596:
258:
2778:
authorised by the arbitration committee to consider discretionary sanctions (since the disruption is within the AP2 topic). It is on that basis that, having concluded that there was neither consensus to unblock nor to site ban, I still felt I had to consider whether the outcome of the discussion adequately protected the project. I thought it did, but clearly some disagree and I'm not going to claim to be Right on that point, only to have my opinion.
1722:
330:
381:
1657:
283:
2774:
one hand that I should have "discerned" a consensus, either to site ban or to unblock, where in fact I can see none (and the subsequent site-ban discussion I think is showing that I was right about that) because we need a decision that puts the whole thing to rest, and on the other that I should just be summarising the consensus as I see it without considering whether the close adequately protects the project.
1585:
247:
1577:
233:
536:
justified at this point. Tnguyen4321, I think the best option would be for you to voluntarily keep away from the subject of that battle completely, on all pages, with a reinstatement of the block if you violate your agreement. If you don't accept that, the alternative would be to seek a community ban, so I think it would look better for you if you did accept it voluntarily.
495:. It's unclear to me if this violates the terms of their unblock. Given that it's unclear to me, I politely suggest (and obviously, you are free to ignore my suggestion) that you warn rather than reblock them, if they are indeed prohibited from the talk page, too. Note that I am a native English speaker; I suspect Tnguyen4321 is not. --
2879:
of consensus there. I haven't discussed the interaction with DS above because that factored into my reading of consensus, but because, having formed my view of the consensus, I felt I also had to ask myself, "Should I be using DS to do anything else in this situation?" I thought the answer was "no", so I didn't.
2773:
I don't really want to argue the point in a public venue, but "the job of a closer is not to evaluate whether a solution is adequate" seems a bit rich from someone who reverted that close because it "does not provide that decision" - ie. you think the solution is inadequate. You seem to argue on the
2529:
Could you please consider asking for a global lock to INeverCry and their sock accounts / IPs? They have been so deceitful that there is no reason to assume that this user can be trusted not to create a new account on another project and edit from there. They know how to game the system, they were
2057:
Yes, that RfA came very close to presenting a potentially disastrous outcome! I can understand if you're feeling a bit aggrieved at the moment, and I really do think it would be best for you not take further part in that AN discussion right now. And I do honestly think that continuing the 2-way IBAN,
2896:
The options are unblock or don't unblock. If there's a consensus to retain the block then there's an implicit community ban (which is defined by the community saying they should not be unblocked, and lasts until a later community decision says to unblock) and if there isn't then there isn't. I think
2881:
I'd certainly agree that a closer shouldn't IAR to impose a close contrary to consensus; I meant that the point of policy is one which should in this case be ignored. And I still can only see three options here: Either we find "no consensus to unblock" and unblock anyway; or we find "no consensus
2878:
Yes, as I've said elsewhere, the panel seems a good idea to me and if I'd spotted that there was one forming then I'd have left it alone. I didn't close that discussion as (essentially) "no consensus to site ban and no consensus to unblock" because I thought that's what was best; it was my reading
2587:
That previous decline was on 11 Aug, the same day INeverCry was blocked here. Since then, all I've seen here is that unblock request, and I doubt that would be seen as an escalation of cross-wiki abuse. Personally, I think he should indeed get a global lock, but the indef-able abuse really seems to
840:
And no I am not a part of some "organized disruption". All the examples you gave were made by clearly puppet accounts with almost no previous contributions, while I have a list of wikipedia contributions going back years. Seriously, use your head; if I want to start socking, I make fake accounts, I
2810:
That's not at all the same as saying I personally disagree with the community's decison and I did not revert your close because of that - I reverted because I thought a better job of analysing the community decision could be done (and I knew others were putting together a panel to do it). Also, as
117:
THIS is why I'm stressed. Because if I try to report something, no matter what I do - no matter how hard I try to follow wikipedia's crappy and contradictory policies and the instructions given by people like
MelanieN - I get attacked for it while the abusers who are just following me page to page
2827:
It may be that there's no consensus after all other than for a topic ban, but given the massive time already spent on it I think we should see if those currently working on it can extract anything - the alternative seems to me that we'll be right back at the same position very quickly. But either
810:
make legitimate contributions to the page instead of "unconstructive...vandalism"? (and I saw you kept them while removing the "autograph nonsense".) And regarding the "autograph nonsense": no I did not happen to make exactly the same addition purely by coincidence, because I copied and pasted it
550:
Thanks for the clarification. Although I think it's kind of harsh, I have no problem of accepting it. That said, I have to add that I am under the impression that you think my participation and contribution to the subject cause more harm than good to
Knowledge to impose such a drastic restriction
2863:
for itself - just evaluate what there is and what there is not a consensus for. If the consensus does not produce an effective solution, it might indeed be that further judgment is needed later, but the consensus closure itself is not the place for that - judging consensus is one of the areas in
2807:
I felt your close was actually faulty for a number of reasons, of which I only explicated one - I also knew others were planning to work on a close. If you were not able to discern a consensus, I thought it better to let someone else try and see if they could - after all, Mrjulesd had previously
2253:
by email at the time, who should probably be consulted before that daunting task is taken on. I did wonder if a community discussion to seek wider consensus would be a good move first, and I still think it would be (though I expect it would not be without drama - I can understand someone getting
1091:
Hello Boing! It seems that semi-protection is unfortunately not enough. These meat or sock puppets appear to create a bunch of accounts, sometimes months in advance, waiting until they're autoconfirmed to finally make the same edits here again... Evidence of puppetry being that edits on other
2939:
I don't know if this is helpful or not, but I'll say it anyways. I don't think the options here need to be limited to "unblock" or "site ban". I know that the policy says this is a de-facto, and thus per WP's governance, a de-jure site ban, but I also know that IAR is a policy page. I think the
2843:
Thanks for your response. I know my close seemed contradictory when you take into account the relevant policy, yet that's how I read the consensus and I think the way the discussion has developed since then bears that out. If we're going to abide by that policy in this situation then the only
2675:
Goats are good, yes. I was approached by a fine specimen once in Macau (a genuinely superb looking beast - I could believe it was a show specimen), which seemed to want to share my lunch. I gave it some, which it readily ate, and then it sneezed on me - goat snot is very sticky and very smelly.
1269:
Both editors were well over 3RR, and so I've blocked them both for 24 hours. Under other circumstances I may have considered protection, but
Anmcaff has had a previous edit-warring block and was at at least 5 reverts, while the IP received and removed a warning and then proceeded to revert some
2777:
I didn't really want to spell this out at AN as I felt it would lead to a whole new can of worms, but it happens that in this particular case, I disagree with you anyway, because any admin closing that discussion is inevitably wearing two hats - one as the closer of the discussion, and another
2508:
Oh, there's nothing to apologise for. There's really no right and wrong and it's very much open to individual interpretation - and in many cases, hatting parts of discussions like that can make sense. It's just that in this particular case, I can't help thinking that anything that looks like
535:
My intention was that
Tnguyen4321 should keep away from the article completely, including the talk page, and don't discuss it anywhere - and go find something else to do that is unconnected with that subject. But I worded it badly, and because of that I don't think any sanction or warning is
2041:
I appreciate your change in heart, but had your opinion carried the day, I'd be indef'd by a newly minted Admin long ago. I've strickly followed the restrictions and the result is tighter restrictions on me, and a batch of MfDs closed against me today because of continued harassment.
2882:
to site ban" and site ban anyway; or we ignore the policy that says the only options are an unblock or a site ban (assuming the character of the discussion doesn't dramatically change between now and whenever this is finally closed). Can you see some option that I'm missing?
2254:
upset if a lot of their work is removed). But after all that, I'm not sure I want to take part in it myself - there have been changes for me here, I'm taking a temporary break from adminiship, and I'm not sure how much enthusiasm I'm going to have for
Knowledge from now on.
2220:
As long as he doesn't resume his genealogical work, we should be OK - and he certainly won't get a concensus for his notions. But, of course, there's still the huge amount he's already done that will need to be dealt with - do let me know when you've sorted it all out ;-)
2844:
possible outcomes are obtuse - either that a discussion with no consensus to unblock results in an unblock or that a discussion with no consensus to site ban results in a site ban. Doesn't that make this a situation in which we should ignore that particular rule?
2108:
With that close placing me on notice, I fully expect to be indef'd in due course with no discussion by some trigger happy admin over some imagined violation. I should just quit
Knowledge now and save the drama. I've requested the close be amended. Will see.
2823:
provides a good further explanation (it's only an essay, but I think it captures the essence of the policy quite well). Opining on the adequacy of the consensus rather than simply determining the facts of the consensus would be adding the closer's personal
1677:
2967:
I really think the site ban thing is a red herring and can be forgotten, with no need to mention it in any close - a decline to unblock just means a future unblock will need community consensus, and that's all that is meant by a community ban (as per
2858:
As I say, whether there actually is a consensus (and what it says) is under dispute, and in such cases (especially lengthy and emotive ones), a panel of closers is a common approach (and, I think, a good one). But that panel must not judge the best
303:
2979:
I remain unmoved from my position that all the closers need to determine is whether there is a consensus to unblock and whether there is a consensus for a topic ban. Answer those, and all other currently relevant questions are answered too.
1925:
2573:, that rquest was made 5 weeks ago. In the light of more recent evidence, desysoped on both projects, former CU on Commons, and new idef blocks, perhaps this request should be renewed. This user is particularly egregious and deceitful.
1429:
I'm unavailable for an indeterminate time, so please ask someone else if you need any help - as always, any admin is welcome to revert or modify any admin action of mine according to their own judgment without needing to check with me.
859:
It's OK, I have your talk page watched. And there actually is a notification system (though an automatic one would indeed be nice) - just add {{ping|Boing! said
Zebedee}} at the time you sign your comment and I'll get a notification.
926:
Zebedee had a red face and large upturned moustache, was dressed in a yellow jacket ... In most episodes he appeared, usually summoned by
Florence, with a loud "boing" sound, and he usually closed the show with the phrase "Time for
1395:
I'm unavailable for a little while, so please ask someone else if you need any help - as always, any admin is welcome to revert or modify any admin action of mine according to their own judgment without needing to check with me.
2492:
The amount of personal commentary we allow unrelated to content (or in this case to the appeal) is frustrating. I read the guidelines on "hatting" before I did it but if your revert means I didn't follow them then I apologize.
2818:
seems quite clear - the closer's balance of policy-based arguments made in the discussion is what is needed, and not the closer's opinion on whether a consensus-based decision is an adequate resonse to the issue itself.
2377:
I'm the only one who seems to find these socks now (esp since Bbb23 is on vacay), and I get tired of linking them at every sock's page, so I put in the template at the master's page and noted it at the last SPI. cheers.
715:
having the drafts creation protected might be a good thing, since they're very good honeypots, and how I spotted the latest couple of attempts to recreate the articles (by seeing them pop up in my watchlist...). Cheers
428:
2731:
If the majority choose to ignore (or misinterpret, or twist) policy in their !voting, that must stand then? In that case, who needs uninvolved closers, let alone admin closers? Pretty much anybody can count !votes.
166:
Sorry to see your retirement, but after a quick look (admittedly not in depth, because I do have a life of my own to lead and I am genuinely busy with personal things), I really don't see
MelanieN attacking you.
137:
Sorry to hear it's not going well. I'm afraid I don't have the time to investigate this current problem, as I'm busy this evening and I'll be away all day tomorrow - but I've always found
MelanieN to be fair.
1947:
2994:
As an additional thought, I suppose it would be harmless to add "There is no consensus for a site ban", which would leave an effective CBAN there anyway but not explicit and nothing in addition to that.
2205:
Ha! Well, if mine is being spoiled then I see no reason why I shouldn't spread it around a little. I've got doubts about that thread going anywhere, tbh, because the NOR board looks to be very quiet. -
1053:
2076:
I'm not blaming you of course, but I feel run over and despised because of all these restrictions. Various editors say an indef is in order, but the responses to a suggested indef are just
1872:
393:
2911:
I understand their reasoning, but it still seems to me an outcome that will just cause more drama. Not that my efforts worked out any better, so maybe other heads are wiser than mine.
773:
I did think of that, and I'm always torn - whether to try maximum denial in the hope they'll go away, or just keep catching them? As you're happy watching the drafts, I've unprotected.
370:
299:
1110:
One possible strategy is to leave the article as it is and then block them on sight - I've blocked the most recent two, and might start an SPI to ask a Checkuser to look for sleepers.
2753:
Closers are supposed to evaluate with respect to policy, yes, and I didn't say otherwise. Closers are not allowed to decide whether a community consensus is for an adequate solution.
655:
641:
619:
1801:
456:
400:
186:
2685:
2235:
You are in an impish mood ;) I thought it best to wait until they came off their block but I wasn't expecting them to go back to their old arguments. This could be messy. -
1699:
879:
869:
2974:
The community says you are not allowed to edit anywhere on Knowledge without a future community consensus, but you're not banned so in the meantime you will be able to...
2509:
preventing people from saying what they want might not be such a good idea. Just a difference of opinion between us, that's all (and others might well disagree with me).
3004:
2989:
2123:
I note Iridescent's modification, and his comments at his and Godsy's talk pages. If you just carry on as you're doing, there's no way you should be at risk of a block.
1380:
1356:
993:
942:
2940:
standard offer should certainly be considered as a solution that both reflects the fact that the community clearly doesn't want to unblock, but also that the community
2405:
2391:
2372:
766:
307:
1161:
1136:
1119:
204:
152:
Lesson learned. MelanieN is looking for an excuse to attack me, you asked me to stay but you're "too busy" to look. It's clear I won't get fair treatment from anyone.
2811:
others have suggested, your close was contradictory - the community does not support unblock, but an admin can unblock if they wish, appears contrary to policy to me.
690:
669:
572:
545:
176:
161:
147:
2920:
2906:
2891:
2873:
2853:
2837:
2793:
I realise that seems quite hostile and I don't quite mean it like that so please don't take it that way. I would value your thoughts on what I've written, though.
1316:
1238:
2132:
2118:
2103:
2089:
2067:
1565:
1338:
1219:
979:
2762:
2518:
1603:
1475:
892:
782:
319:
2638:
2597:
2326:
833:
I was not aware of the existence of a bloody wiki editing war (seriously look at that page who would even bother having an editing war there? About an autograph?)
220:
2477:
2277:
2263:
2244:
2230:
2215:
2193:
2179:
2024:
1996:
1982:
1532:
1518:
1504:
1306:
1279:
1080:
2958:
2713:
2699:
2588:
have been on Commons and they don't seem prepared to lock for just that. Should we get any more socking here, or other abuse, I think that would change things.
1458:
1241:? I'm completely convinced this is the same guy, but the technical evidence isn't enough, it'll take an admin to look at the behavioral stuff and make a call.
1041:
1490:
854:
227:
1931:
1846:
1546:
2802:
2582:
2565:
131:
604:
2461:
414:
Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Knowledge – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago
1645:
519:
315:
311:
1681:
2094:
Oh, I do understand. But with this latest episode, I do think the moral high ground has shifted. And I think this is a "last chance" before an indef.
1688:
107:
1065:
961:
2015:
Ah, sorry - it's late and I'm getting tired here ;-) But I did actually think better of the "bridge" thing after I wrote it, as it was unnecessary.
2010:
1703:
610:
One block log entry is the extension of an existing block from one to two weeks, which I considered just one block - perhaps that's the difference?
2051:
1320:
1149:
192:
2668:
1778:
433:
1915:
1889:
1673:
1509:
Turns out it was created by a sock of the same editor who created the first version. I think it's been improved by others, might pass AfD now.
1439:
1906:
were battles, - I don't believe it. (Even if so, 2 in a year would be bearable.) The closest thing to a war scene is mentioned in my RfA q. --
1783:
1405:
1047:
438:
1599:
2815:
2787:
1256:
1894:
Thank you for "take the high ground and be the first person to stop talking about it". That might be a recipe for the infobox-wars also.
1537:
Even if we don't, regularly seeing updates on my watchlist about the creation of coherent catastrophe, has lightened several of my days.
788:
362:
275:
2729:
2036:
2170:
Hmm, you know how to spoil a chap's evening, don't you? ;-) Actually, I see no need for me to reply there, but I'll keep an eye on it.
1773:
1607:
1104:
1934:
and suggesting me to propose it for deletion. thank you for your advice. I will try to learn from it and proceed with care in future.
1347:
Hi. I'm really sorry, but I'm dealing with real-life emergency things right now - and I don't know when I'll have time for Knowledge.
955:
918:
2539:
2747:
1649:
730:
3080:
3072:
3067:
3055:
3050:
3045:
1967:
1453:
1092:
articles are few, when editing here it's always to remove the same information, usually with the same source and edit summary... —
94:
86:
81:
69:
64:
59:
2428:
348:, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding
1895:
1419:
2164:
265:
2357:
1270:
more...I've other things to do now, so if you take issue with any of this please feel free to modify things without asking me.
1026:
504:
261:
112:
1692:
1230:
First, is there a noticeboard for edit-warring IPs? There's one edit warring quite a bit (at least two past 3RR right now) at
794:
Hi, this is just in case you didn't see my reply on my own talk page (Knowledge really needs a talk reply notification system)
113:
https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:MelanieN#https:.2F.2Fen.wikipedia.org.2Fwiki.2FUser_talk:Seraphim_System.23Reverts_under_DS
2623:
1570:
239:
2502:
2489:
2311:
2549:
1797:
1641:
1637:
1633:
1629:
1625:
1621:
1617:
1200:
452:
1831:
582:
2768:
2420:
I saw in the logs that you were just resysopped. It's good to see you back, and I hope things are going well for you :-)
2363:
Ah, I declined it that way because I couldn't find the ban - I didn't realise it was linked from the sockmaster's page.
1852:
888:
757:
632:
595:
415:
477:
488:
485:
3000:
2985:
2902:
2869:
2833:
2758:
2709:
2681:
2634:
2593:
2514:
2473:
2401:
2368:
2322:
2259:
2226:
2189:
2175:
2128:
2099:
2063:
2020:
1978:
1943:
1793:
1711:
1435:
1401:
1352:
1231:
1215:
1157:
1115:
1076:
1037:
989:
938:
865:
778:
686:
651:
615:
541:
448:
404:
216:
172:
143:
2644:
2524:
2341:
2337:
122:
and miscellaneous harassment, including getting attacked for even trying to get stuff written up the right way.
746:
510:
My understanding is I am prohibited to edit the article page not the talk page. Let me know if I misunderstood.
1953:
3033:
2664:
875:
850:
750:
625:
588:
47:
17:
2723:
2415:
211:
Just spotted this in my archive, and I knew I'd forgotten something here - busy weekend, so I'll look soon.
1740:
to the English Knowledge. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
2001:
I think you misunderstood. I meant the indeffed editor's actions! I agree fully with the "troll" comment.
2340:
is actually a community site ban, I've linked the ban on the SPI and the master's user page. The account
1495:
Hi, yes, I'm away from my admin account for a couple of weeks too, so I'm not able to see deleted pages.
1264:
740:
366:
341:
2146:
118:
get off scot fucking free. I took your advice to reconsider quitting and look what it's gotten me: more
3024:
1669:
1424:
1225:
706:
38:
874:
Jesus, I've had my run-ins with Knowledge admins, but you're the fastest replying one I've ever seen.(
1086:
1009:
Various relevant pages happened to be on my watchlist, and the way things were unfolding was getting
1001:
2808:
thought he could discern a consensus but his close was overturned purely because he is not an admin.
1733:
2996:
2981:
2952:
2898:
2865:
2829:
2754:
2705:
2677:
2660:
2630:
2589:
2510:
2469:
2397:
2364:
2318:
2255:
2222:
2185:
2171:
2124:
2095:
2059:
2016:
1974:
1939:
1842:
1837:
Got it, thanks, and just replied - weekend went on longer than expected and only just back online.
1528:
1500:
1444:
I hope everything is well. Enjoy your break and if you happen to be coming this way, let me knowi.
1431:
1410:
I hope everything is well. Enjoy your break and if you happen to be coming this way, let me knowi.
1397:
1390:
1374:
1348:
1332:
1300:
1250:
1211:
1153:
1111:
1072:
1033:
985:
973:
952:
934:
915:
861:
845:. And yeah I'm pissed because I got banned indefinitely with pretty much no explanation or warning.
774:
682:
647:
611:
537:
462:
418:. Since that time, the English Knowledge has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.
212:
168:
139:
624:
Heh. I think you're probably right- cheers! -still, that's why you're on the salary you are :) —
195:. I trust your judgement implicitly so if you think I'm off my rocker, don't be afraid to say so.
2560:
2385:
2351:
1756:
1691:, regarding articles created as a result undisclosed paid editing, is currently being discussed (
492:
2607:
2455:
1920:
1911:
1885:
1459:
1130:
1098:
906:
846:
119:
2293:
1515:
1487:
1472:
1275:
1052:
I'm not sure if you will remember this but some months ago you asked to be notified if I did
665:
568:
515:
471:
157:
127:
2483:
2916:
2887:
2849:
2798:
2783:
2434:
Seconded! And now that you're back I have a list of about 200 editors I want you to block,
930:
884:
408:
1903:
8:
2945:
2820:
2114:
2085:
2047:
1938:
Happy to help - it was just a technical thing about the applicability of A7, that's all.
1838:
1560:
1524:
1496:
1367:
1325:
1293:
1243:
1193:
966:
949:
912:
2814:
Finally, on to "the job of a closer is not to evaluate whether a solution is adequate".
2332:
2742:
2570:
2555:
2498:
2379:
2345:
2344:
that they were a sock. Just in case the history wasn't easy for you to see :) cheers. —
2200:
1807:
1748:
1365:
No problem, I'll go pester someone else. Good luck and well-wishes with the emergency.
724:
481:
2941:
2616:
2578:
2535:
2448:
2307:
1907:
1881:
1827:
1542:
1449:
1415:
1143:
1125:
1093:
200:
102:
2612:
Hi Boing, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated!
2273:
2240:
2211:
2184:
Actually, as he's posting links on other biog talk pages, I might add a few words.
2160:
2006:
1992:
1963:
1510:
1482:
1467:
1315:
Boing, I hate to be a pain in the ass, but could I ask you again to take a look at
1291:
I wasn't aware that Anmcaff had gone over, but I still appreciate the looking out!
1286:
1271:
1171:
1061:
661:
564:
530:
511:
467:
345:
295:
153:
123:
2897:
Bishonen has explained it well enough in closing that latest "Site ban?" section.
2155:
and also opened another section there - this is the rugby league/FreeBMD stuff. -
1737:
1013:
close to some of the How-Dare-You-Question-My-Authority crap I've seen too often.
2912:
2883:
2845:
2794:
2779:
2695:
1020:
500:
3032:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1864:
1760:
681:
Nah, there's nothing crats do that I'd want to do - but thanks for the thought.
411:. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
2969:
2110:
2081:
2077:
2043:
1188:
484:
completely. They agreed to that and were unblocked. Since being unblocked, the
2299:
1926:
Thank you for giving advice to propose for deletion instead of Speedy deletion
1755:, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on
1180:
2733:
2704:
Glad you liked it - I should tell you some of my toilet stories some time :)
2494:
2152:
1707:
721:
1958:
Thanks for cleaning up. I wasn't sure if I should have blanked that myself.
2613:
2574:
2545:
2531:
2303:
2250:
1899:
1823:
1613:
1538:
1445:
1411:
1186:
Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful.
358:. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
271:
196:
2151:
Just so you know, DynamoDegsy has replied to your comment of 10 August at
2649:
2421:
2269:
2236:
2207:
2156:
2002:
1988:
1959:
1237:
Second, do you think you could take a look at the behavioral evidence at
1057:
799:"the only difference is you tried to hide it among some other additions."
1595:
257:
2691:
1523:
If we get a worthwhile article out of it, I guess that's a success :-)
1466:
Do you see a significant difference between this and the deleted page?
1015:
526:
496:
554:
1481:
Sorry, missed your post saying you were away, I've taken it to AfD.
660:
Does that mean you're considering an RFB, Boing? I'd support you...
811:
from a previous edit I saw while scanning through history. Because:
371:
Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old
1684:. The exact start date of the experiment has yet to be determined.
911:
Where exactly did your name come from? I'm quite curious to know.
587:-I made it the sixth, as it goes. Not important though. Cheers, —
355:
1721:
380:
329:
1752:
407:
by using a unique password for Knowledge, and consider enabling
396:
can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
1710:
to include all drafts, even if they weren't submitted through
1656:
399:
A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to
282:
1747:
is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes
1744:
1584:
1576:
246:
232:
480:) was unblocked on the condition they refrain from editing
2816:
Knowledge:Closing discussions#How to determine the outcome
1239:
Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Perfect Orange Sphere
1007:
2080:. Think hard, really hard, about how this looks to me.
1930:
thank you for removing the speedy deletion request on
1032:
Yeah, when I re-examined it I got a hint of that too.
646:I'm putting in for at least a 50% raise this year!
2629:'Twas deserved, welcome to the evil inner circle.
1682:meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial
2690:This story made my day. Thanks for sharing. :) --
187:To review or not to review - that is the question
1987:Agree with ST or not, there's no call for that.
1680:. You can learn more about the research plan at
1150:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Simon Mugava
2268:Alas, Dweller is not around much now either. -
2828:way, I hope this explains my thoughts better.
1676:as a research experiment, similar to the one
1706:) is currently open that proposes expanding
1672:, the WMF is helping implement a controlled
1071:Ah, a vague memory - I'll watch it, thanks.
1863:
1668:Following a series of discussions around
1006:I admire your willingness to reconsider.
2436:about 2000 IPs that need rangeblocking,
2058:at least for now, will benefit you too.
1566:Administrators' newsletter – August 2017
561:incidents of edit warring at any article
2488:I read those edits right after reading
806:Cool. So at least you now admit that I
676:...man, that would blow the wages bill!
300:WMF essay about paid editing and outing
14:
3030:Do not edit the contents of this page.
228:Administrators' newsletter – July 2017
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
3011:
1674:autoconfirmed article creation trial
1319:? The sock has now turned to filing
984:My life is dogged by the paparazzi!
25:
1571:News and updates for administrators
369:unused file versions from files in
240:News and updates for administrators
23:
2648:
1575:
231:
108:You want to know why I'm stressed?
24:
3094:
1973:And thanks for your efforts too.
1573:from the past month (July 2017).
242:from the past month (June 2017).
3015:
2942:clearly doesn't want a site ban.
2864:which I think IAR has no place.
1812:In case you didn't get the mail
1759:and provide general feedback at
1720:
1655:
1612:
1594:
1583:
1179:
1048:RfD, as discussed some time ago.
962:Please don't block me for outing
379:
328:
281:
270:
256:
245:
29:
1232:Religious views of Adolf Hitler
1148:I've added a new SPI report at
350:
304:the ArbCom noticeboard archives
3005:13:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2990:12:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2959:12:22, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2921:10:02, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2907:09:52, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2892:09:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2874:09:35, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2854:09:27, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2838:09:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2803:08:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2788:08:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2763:06:35, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2748:06:32, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
2714:23:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
2700:22:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
2686:21:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
2669:21:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
2639:21:03, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
2624:21:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
2598:18:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
2583:02:45, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
2566:01:27, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
2540:01:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
2519:21:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
2503:21:51, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
2478:08:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
2462:02:03, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
2429:23:30, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2406:12:23, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2392:12:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2373:12:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2358:12:01, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2327:09:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2312:09:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
2278:02:13, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
2264:18:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2245:17:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2231:17:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2216:17:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2194:17:49, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2180:17:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2165:17:39, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2133:08:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2119:08:35, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2104:08:20, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2090:08:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2068:07:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2052:07:47, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
2025:00:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
2011:00:18, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
1997:00:13, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
1983:00:11, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
1968:00:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
789:About that Jeff Dujon business
403:. Please practice appropriate
191:Relax for 15 minutes and read
13:
1:
2396:Bbb23 is sorely missed, yes.
1948:12:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
1916:14:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
1689:new speedy deletion criterion
294:The RFC discussion regarding
18:User talk:Boing! said Zebedee
2438:50 RfC's that need closing,
7:
2972:). What else can it mean? "
2656:Because goats are awesome.
2037:/* undefined */ new section
1890:07:02, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
1210:It didn't go too badly ;-)
948:Oh cool! I really like it.
830:it's an interesting trivia;
10:
3099:
1847:13:20, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
1832:07:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
1802:00:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
1794:MediaWiki message delivery
491:they've made have been to
449:MediaWiki message delivery
1871:
1862:
1661:Guideline and policy news
1547:19:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
1533:16:24, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
1519:14:36, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
1505:07:36, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
1491:13:10, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
1476:17:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1454:10:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1440:10:12, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1420:10:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1406:10:12, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
1381:14:10, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
1357:14:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
1339:13:13, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
1307:18:59, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
1280:17:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
1257:17:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
1220:16:21, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
1201:16:16, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
1162:10:41, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
1137:18:53, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
1120:16:55, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
1105:16:42, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
1081:13:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
1066:12:51, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
1042:13:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
1027:12:37, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
994:17:02, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
980:15:59, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
956:16:01, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
943:16:00, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
919:15:56, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
880:15:53, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
870:15:47, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
855:15:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
783:14:16, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
767:12:56, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
731:12:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
691:14:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
670:13:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
656:11:44, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
642:11:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
620:11:34, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
605:11:32, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
573:11:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
546:09:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
520:00:29, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
409:two-factor authentication
318:received support; so did
287:Guideline and policy news
205:13:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
1749:administrator statistics
505:21:51, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
457:20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
356:Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1
221:01:45, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
177:17:16, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
162:16:41, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
148:16:38, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
132:15:47, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
1774:Discuss this newsletter
827:a well-known person, so
493:Talk:Battle of Ia Drang
429:Discuss this newsletter
2653:
1580:
1460:Coherent catastrophism
801:
344:will soon be added to
236:
3028:of past discussions.
2954:Tell me all about it.
2652:
2457:Tell me all about it.
2442:74 pages to delete...
2440:250 edits to revdel,
1816:Arr. Nok 12:50 8.8.17
1712:Articles for Creation
1604:GeneralizationsAreBad
1589:Administrator changes
1579:
1376:Tell me all about it.
1334:Tell me all about it.
1302:Tell me all about it.
1252:Tell me all about it.
975:Tell me all about it.
843:my own actual account
797:
583:Who's counting eh ;)
251:Administrator changes
235:
42:of past discussions.
1898:People tell me that
1896:... and nobody came.
1853:Precious five years!
931:The Magic Roundabout
749:to me, Boing ;) —
354:to the URL, as with
320:concrete proposal #1
2997:Boing! said Zebedee
2982:Boing! said Zebedee
2899:Boing! said Zebedee
2866:Boing! said Zebedee
2830:Boing! said Zebedee
2821:Knowledge:Supervote
2755:Boing! said Zebedee
2706:Boing! said Zebedee
2678:Boing! said Zebedee
2661:The Quixotic Potato
2631:Boing! said Zebedee
2590:Boing! said Zebedee
2511:Boing! said Zebedee
2470:Boing! said Zebedee
2398:Boing! said Zebedee
2365:Boing! said Zebedee
2319:Boing! said Zebedee
2256:Boing! said Zebedee
2223:Boing! said Zebedee
2186:Boing! said Zebedee
2172:Boing! said Zebedee
2125:Boing! said Zebedee
2096:Boing! said Zebedee
2060:Boing! said Zebedee
2017:Boing! said Zebedee
1975:Boing! said Zebedee
1940:Boing! said Zebedee
1932:Aruviyur Nagarathar
1859:
1743:The new version of
1432:Boing! said Zebedee
1398:Boing! said Zebedee
1349:Boing! said Zebedee
1212:Boing! said Zebedee
1154:Boing! said Zebedee
1112:Boing! said Zebedee
1073:Boing! said Zebedee
1034:Boing! said Zebedee
986:Boing! said Zebedee
935:Boing! said Zebedee
862:Boing! said Zebedee
775:Boing! said Zebedee
683:Boing! said Zebedee
648:Boing! said Zebedee
612:Boing! said Zebedee
538:Boing! said Zebedee
365:will automatically
213:Boing! said Zebedee
169:Boing! said Zebedee
140:Boing! said Zebedee
2654:
1857:
1581:
1462:has been recreated
551:which goes beyond
482:Battle of Ia Drang
237:
3086:
3085:
3040:
3039:
3034:current talk page
2955:
2769:The closer's role
2552:which was denied.
2548:there has been a
2530:a CU on Commons.
2458:
2446:
2445:
2444:
2443:
2249:I was talking to
2204:
1904:Requiem (Duruflé)
1878:
1877:
1804:
1377:
1335:
1303:
1265:talk page stalker
1253:
1207:
1206:
976:
896:
887:comment added by
847:The 51st Division
820:I know it's true;
770:
769:
745:...sounds like a
744:
741:talk page watcher
678:
677:
459:
392:A newly revamped
223:
100:
99:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
3090:
3064:
3042:
3041:
3019:
3018:
3012:
2957:
2953:
2950:
2745:
2740:
2621:
2563:
2558:
2550:previous request
2525:Socks by admins
2460:
2456:
2453:
2441:
2439:
2437:
2435:
2425:
2388:
2382:
2354:
2348:
2198:
1954:SwisterTwister
1867:
1860:
1856:
1791:
1738:soon be deployed
1724:
1678:proposed in 2011
1670:new pages patrol
1659:
1616:
1598:
1587:
1513:
1485:
1470:
1379:
1375:
1372:
1337:
1333:
1330:
1321:relatiatory SPIs
1305:
1301:
1298:
1290:
1268:
1255:
1251:
1248:
1203:
1198:
1196:Let's discuss it
1183:
1176:
1175:
1147:
1133:
1128:
1101:
1096:
1023:
1018:
978:
974:
971:
882:
764:
755:
738:
737:
736:
675:
674:
639:
630:
602:
593:
558:
534:
446:
405:account security
383:
353:
352:
346:Special:Undelete
332:
285:
274:
260:
249:
210:
78:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
3098:
3097:
3093:
3092:
3091:
3089:
3088:
3087:
3060:
3016:
2946:
2944:
2771:
2743:
2734:
2726:
2647:
2645:A goat for you!
2617:
2610:
2575:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
2561:
2556:
2532:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
2527:
2486:
2449:
2447:
2423:
2418:
2386:
2380:
2352:
2346:
2335:
2304:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
2296:
2149:
2039:
1956:
1928:
1923:
1855:
1824:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
1810:
1805:
1789:
1788:
1626:Rambo's Revenge
1568:
1563:
1511:
1483:
1468:
1464:
1446:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
1427:
1412:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
1393:
1368:
1366:
1326:
1324:
1294:
1292:
1284:
1262:
1244:
1242:
1228:
1194:
1187:
1174:
1141:
1131:
1126:
1099:
1094:
1089:
1050:
1021:
1016:
1004:
967:
965:
909:
791:
758:
751:
709:
633:
626:
596:
589:
585:
552:
524:
465:
460:
444:
443:
416:on 29 June 2007
401:request resysop
394:database report
367:revision delete
349:
230:
197:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง
189:
120:WP:WIKIHOUNDING
110:
105:
74:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
3096:
3084:
3083:
3078:
3075:
3070:
3065:
3058:
3053:
3048:
3038:
3037:
3020:
3010:
3009:
3008:
3007:
2992:
2977:
2962:
2961:
2936:
2935:
2934:
2933:
2932:
2931:
2930:
2929:
2928:
2927:
2926:
2925:
2924:
2923:
2880:
2770:
2767:
2766:
2765:
2725:
2722:
2721:
2720:
2719:
2718:
2717:
2716:
2671:
2646:
2643:
2642:
2641:
2609:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2602:
2601:
2600:
2553:
2526:
2523:
2522:
2521:
2485:
2482:
2481:
2480:
2468:Thanks folks.
2465:
2464:
2417:
2414:
2413:
2412:
2411:
2410:
2409:
2408:
2334:
2331:
2330:
2329:
2295:
2292:
2291:
2290:
2289:
2288:
2287:
2286:
2285:
2284:
2283:
2282:
2281:
2280:
2182:
2148:
2145:
2144:
2143:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2139:
2138:
2137:
2136:
2135:
2078:victim blaming
2071:
2070:
2038:
2035:
2034:
2033:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2029:
2028:
2027:
1955:
1952:
1951:
1950:
1927:
1924:
1922:
1921:September 2017
1919:
1876:
1875:
1869:
1868:
1854:
1851:
1850:
1849:
1839:Boing! on Tour
1821:
1820:
1819:Dep. Nok 17:00
1817:
1809:
1806:
1790:
1787:
1786:
1781:
1776:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1761:mw:Talk:XTools
1751:, an improved
1741:
1726:Technical news
1718:
1717:
1716:
1715:
1696:
1685:
1653:
1652:
1610:
1567:
1564:
1562:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1525:Boing! on Tour
1497:Boing! on Tour
1463:
1457:
1426:
1423:
1392:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1360:
1359:
1342:
1341:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1227:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1205:
1204:
1184:
1173:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1088:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1049:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1003:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
996:
946:
945:
908:
905:
904:
903:
902:
901:
900:
899:
898:
897:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
831:
828:
821:
813:
812:
790:
787:
786:
785:
771:
708:
705:
704:
703:
702:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
694:
693:
584:
581:
580:
579:
578:
577:
576:
575:
559:'s mention of
464:
461:
445:
442:
441:
436:
431:
425:
424:
423:
422:
421:
420:
419:
412:
397:
377:
376:
375:
374:
359:
334:Technical news
326:
325:
324:
323:
279:
278:
268:
266:Dragons flight
229:
226:
225:
224:
188:
185:
184:
183:
182:
181:
180:
179:
109:
106:
104:
101:
98:
97:
92:
89:
84:
79:
72:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3095:
3082:
3079:
3076:
3074:
3071:
3069:
3066:
3063:
3059:
3057:
3054:
3052:
3049:
3047:
3044:
3043:
3035:
3031:
3027:
3026:
3021:
3014:
3013:
3006:
3002:
2998:
2993:
2991:
2987:
2983:
2978:
2975:
2971:
2966:
2965:
2964:
2963:
2960:
2956:
2951:
2949:
2943:
2938:
2937:
2922:
2918:
2914:
2910:
2909:
2908:
2904:
2900:
2895:
2894:
2893:
2889:
2885:
2877:
2876:
2875:
2871:
2867:
2862:
2857:
2856:
2855:
2851:
2847:
2842:
2841:
2840:
2839:
2835:
2831:
2825:
2822:
2817:
2812:
2806:
2805:
2804:
2800:
2796:
2792:
2791:
2790:
2789:
2785:
2781:
2775:
2764:
2760:
2756:
2752:
2751:
2750:
2749:
2746:
2741:
2739:
2738:
2730:
2724:Clarification
2715:
2711:
2707:
2703:
2702:
2701:
2697:
2693:
2689:
2688:
2687:
2683:
2679:
2674:
2673:
2672:
2670:
2666:
2662:
2657:
2651:
2640:
2636:
2632:
2628:
2627:
2626:
2625:
2622:
2620:
2615:
2599:
2595:
2591:
2586:
2585:
2584:
2580:
2576:
2572:
2571:Berean Hunter
2569:
2568:
2567:
2564:
2559:
2557:Berean Hunter
2551:
2547:
2544:
2543:
2542:
2541:
2537:
2533:
2520:
2516:
2512:
2507:
2506:
2505:
2504:
2500:
2496:
2491:
2479:
2475:
2471:
2467:
2466:
2463:
2459:
2454:
2452:
2433:
2432:
2431:
2430:
2427:
2426:
2416:Welcome back!
2407:
2403:
2399:
2395:
2394:
2393:
2390:
2389:
2383:
2376:
2375:
2374:
2370:
2366:
2362:
2361:
2360:
2359:
2356:
2355:
2349:
2343:
2339:
2328:
2324:
2320:
2316:
2315:
2314:
2313:
2309:
2305:
2301:
2279:
2275:
2271:
2267:
2266:
2265:
2261:
2257:
2252:
2248:
2247:
2246:
2242:
2238:
2234:
2233:
2232:
2228:
2224:
2219:
2218:
2217:
2213:
2209:
2202:
2201:edit conflict
2197:
2196:
2195:
2191:
2187:
2183:
2181:
2177:
2173:
2169:
2168:
2167:
2166:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2134:
2130:
2126:
2122:
2121:
2120:
2116:
2112:
2107:
2106:
2105:
2101:
2097:
2093:
2092:
2091:
2087:
2083:
2079:
2075:
2074:
2073:
2072:
2069:
2065:
2061:
2056:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2049:
2045:
2026:
2022:
2018:
2014:
2013:
2012:
2008:
2004:
2000:
1999:
1998:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1985:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1971:
1970:
1969:
1965:
1961:
1949:
1945:
1941:
1937:
1936:
1935:
1933:
1918:
1917:
1913:
1909:
1905:
1901:
1897:
1892:
1891:
1887:
1883:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1861:
1848:
1844:
1840:
1836:
1835:
1834:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1818:
1815:
1814:
1813:
1803:
1799:
1795:
1785:
1782:
1780:
1777:
1775:
1772:
1771:
1762:
1758:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1742:
1739:
1735:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1723:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1694:
1690:
1686:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1658:
1651:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1627:
1623:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1609:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1590:
1586:
1578:
1574:
1572:
1548:
1544:
1540:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1526:
1522:
1521:
1520:
1517:
1514:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1489:
1486:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1474:
1471:
1461:
1456:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1442:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1422:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1408:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1382:
1378:
1373:
1371:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1358:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1340:
1336:
1331:
1329:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1313:
1308:
1304:
1299:
1297:
1288:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1277:
1273:
1266:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1254:
1249:
1247:
1240:
1235:
1233:
1226:two questions
1221:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1208:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1192:
1191:
1185:
1182:
1178:
1177:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1145:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1102:
1097:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1043:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1025:
1024:
1019:
1012:
1008:
995:
991:
987:
983:
982:
981:
977:
972:
970:
963:
960:
959:
958:
957:
954:
951:
944:
940:
936:
932:
928:
923:
922:
921:
920:
917:
914:
894:
890:
886:
881:
877:
873:
872:
871:
867:
863:
858:
857:
856:
852:
848:
844:
839:
832:
829:
826:
822:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
809:
805:
804:
803:
802:
800:
796:
795:
784:
780:
776:
772:
768:
765:
763:
762:
756:
754:
748:
742:
735:
734:
733:
732:
729:
728:
727:
723:
719:
714:
707:Ogando/Ground
692:
688:
684:
680:
679:
673:
672:
671:
667:
663:
659:
658:
657:
653:
649:
645:
644:
643:
640:
638:
637:
631:
629:
623:
622:
621:
617:
613:
609:
608:
607:
606:
603:
601:
600:
594:
592:
574:
570:
566:
562:
556:
549:
548:
547:
543:
539:
532:
528:
523:
522:
521:
517:
513:
509:
508:
507:
506:
502:
498:
494:
490:
487:
483:
479:
476:
473:
469:
458:
454:
450:
440:
437:
435:
432:
430:
427:
426:
417:
413:
410:
406:
402:
398:
395:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
385:Miscellaneous
382:
372:
368:
364:
360:
357:
347:
343:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
331:
321:
317:
313:
309:
305:
302:(see more at
301:
297:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
284:
277:
273:
269:
267:
263:
259:
255:
254:
253:
252:
248:
243:
241:
234:
222:
218:
214:
209:
208:
207:
206:
202:
198:
194:
178:
174:
170:
165:
164:
163:
159:
155:
151:
150:
149:
145:
141:
136:
135:
134:
133:
129:
125:
121:
115:
114:
96:
93:
90:
88:
85:
83:
80:
77:
73:
71:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
3061:
3029:
3023:
2973:
2948:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
2947:
2860:
2826:
2813:
2809:
2776:
2772:
2736:
2735:
2727:
2658:
2655:
2618:
2611:
2528:
2487:
2451:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
2450:
2422:
2419:
2384:
2350:
2336:
2297:
2251:User:Dweller
2150:
2040:
1957:
1929:
1908:Gerda Arendt
1900:Harry Lauder
1893:
1882:Gerda Arendt
1879:
1822:
1811:
1753:edit counter
1725:
1719:
1660:
1654:
1634:TexasAndroid
1588:
1582:
1569:
1465:
1443:
1428:
1409:
1394:
1370:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
1369:
1328:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
1327:
1296:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
1295:
1246:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
1245:
1236:
1229:
1195:
1189:
1144:PaleoNeonate
1090:
1087:Uebert Angel
1051:
1014:
1010:
1005:
1002:Good for you
969:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
968:
947:
925:
910:
889:125.34.50.17
883:— Preceding
842:
824:
823:Brady Haran
807:
798:
793:
792:
760:
759:
752:
726:
725:
717:
712:
710:
635:
634:
627:
598:
597:
590:
586:
560:
474:
466:
384:
378:
342:Fuzzy search
333:
327:
308:now archived
286:
280:
250:
244:
238:
190:
116:
111:
75:
43:
37:
3022:This is an
2824:preference.
2147:DynamoDegsy
1873:Five years!
1757:Phabricator
1734:LoginNotify
1650:Ad Orientem
1638:Chuck SMITH
1561:August 2017
1512:Doug Weller
1484:Doug Weller
1469:Doug Weller
1425:Unavailable
1391:Unavailable
1287:Vanamonde93
565:Tnguyen4321
531:Tnguyen4321
512:Tnguyen4321
468:Tnguyen4321
463:Tnguyen4321
154:Morty C-137
124:Morty C-137
36:This is an
3081:Archive 35
3073:Archive 30
3068:Archive 29
3062:Archive 28
3056:Archive 27
3051:Archive 26
3046:Archive 25
2913:GoldenRing
2884:GoldenRing
2846:GoldenRing
2795:GoldenRing
2780:GoldenRing
1646:Crazytales
1622:Rockpocket
953:Wonderland
916:Wonderland
841:don't use
761:velut luna
636:velut luna
599:velut luna
312:Milieus #3
95:Archive 35
87:Archive 30
82:Archive 29
76:Archive 28
70:Archive 27
65:Archive 26
60:Archive 25
2342:confirmed
2111:Legacypac
2082:Legacypac
2044:Legacypac
1779:Subscribe
1704:permalink
1693:permalink
1642:MikeLynch
1608:Cullen328
1600:Anarchyte
1272:Vanamonde
1124:Thanks, —
907:Your Name
747:honeytrap
662:Vanamonde
434:Subscribe
296:WP:OUTING
262:Happyme22
103:July 2017
2861:solution
2737:Mandruss
2495:D.Creish
2424:~Oshwah~
2381:Spaceman
2347:Spaceman
1858:Precious
1792:Sent by
1317:that SPI
950:Dinah In
913:Dinah In
885:unsigned
722:Thomas.W
478:contribs
447:Sent by
351:?fuzzy=1
3025:archive
2976:" what?
2970:WP:CBAN
2608:Thanks!
2546:Kudpung
1784:Archive
1736:should
1618:Cprompt
1539:MPS1992
1132:Neonate
1100:Neonate
753:fortuna
711:Hello.
628:fortuna
591:fortuna
439:Archive
39:archive
2562:(talk)
2294:Thanks
2270:Sitush
2237:Sitush
2208:Sitush
2157:Sitush
2153:WP:NOR
2003:Meters
1989:Meters
1960:Meters
1745:XTools
1708:WP:G13
1630:Animum
1190:Cullen
1058:Sitush
361:A new
2692:Yamla
2663:))) (
2490:this.
2484:Sorry
2387:Spiff
2353:Spiff
1127:Paleo
1095:Paleo
1011:awful
527:Yamla
497:Yamla
489:edits
306:) is
276:Zad68
16:<
3001:talk
2986:talk
2917:talk
2903:talk
2888:talk
2870:talk
2850:talk
2834:talk
2799:talk
2784:talk
2759:talk
2710:talk
2696:talk
2682:talk
2665:talk
2635:talk
2614:ansh
2594:talk
2579:talk
2536:talk
2515:talk
2499:talk
2474:talk
2402:talk
2369:talk
2338:This
2323:talk
2317::-)
2308:talk
2300:this
2298:For
2274:talk
2260:talk
2241:talk
2227:talk
2212:talk
2190:talk
2176:talk
2161:talk
2129:talk
2115:talk
2100:talk
2086:talk
2064:talk
2048:talk
2021:talk
2007:talk
1993:talk
1979:talk
1964:talk
1944:talk
1912:talk
1902:and
1886:talk
1843:talk
1828:talk
1808:BKKK
1798:talk
1543:talk
1529:talk
1516:talk
1501:talk
1488:talk
1473:talk
1450:talk
1436:talk
1416:talk
1402:talk
1353:talk
1276:talk
1216:talk
1158:talk
1116:talk
1077:talk
1062:talk
1056:. -
1054:this
1038:talk
990:talk
939:talk
929:" -
927:bed"
893:talk
876:talk
866:talk
851:talk
779:talk
687:talk
666:talk
652:talk
616:talk
569:talk
555:Only
542:talk
529:and
516:talk
501:talk
486:only
472:talk
453:talk
314:and
298:and
217:talk
201:talk
193:this
173:talk
158:talk
144:talk
128:talk
2728:Re
2667:)
2659:(((
2619:666
2333:FYI
1700:RfC
1698:An
1234:.
1172:RfA
1022:Eng
964:;)
808:did
718:Tom
713:Not
363:bot
3077:→
3003:)
2988:)
2919:)
2905:)
2890:)
2872:)
2852:)
2836:)
2801:)
2786:)
2761:)
2712:)
2698:)
2684:)
2637:)
2596:)
2581:)
2554:—
2538:)
2517:)
2501:)
2476:)
2404:)
2371:)
2325:)
2310:)
2302:.
2276:)
2262:)
2243:)
2229:)
2214:)
2192:)
2178:)
2163:)
2131:)
2117:)
2102:)
2088:)
2066:)
2050:)
2023:)
2009:)
1995:)
1981:)
1966:)
1946:)
1914:)
1888:)
1880:--
1845:)
1830:)
1800:)
1695:).
1687:A
1648:•
1644:•
1640:•
1636:•
1632:•
1628:•
1624:•
1620:•
1606:•
1602:•
1545:)
1531:)
1503:)
1452:)
1438:)
1418:)
1404:)
1355:)
1323:.
1278:)
1218:)
1160:)
1152:.
1135:-
1118:)
1103:-
1079:)
1064:)
1040:)
992:)
941:)
933:.
895:)
878:)
868:)
853:)
825:is
781:)
720:|
716:-
689:)
668:)
654:)
618:)
571:)
544:)
518:)
503:)
455:)
316:#4
310:.
264:•
219:)
203:)
175:)
160:)
146:)
130:)
91:→
3036:.
2999:(
2984:(
2915:(
2901:(
2886:(
2868:(
2848:(
2832:(
2797:(
2782:(
2757:(
2744:☎
2732:―
2708:(
2694:(
2680:(
2633:(
2592:(
2577:(
2534:(
2513:(
2497:(
2472:(
2400:(
2378:—
2367:(
2321:(
2306:(
2272:(
2258:(
2239:(
2225:(
2210:(
2203:)
2199:(
2188:(
2174:(
2159:(
2127:(
2113:(
2098:(
2084:(
2062:(
2046:(
2019:(
2005:(
1991:(
1977:(
1962:(
1942:(
1910:(
1884:(
1841:(
1826:(
1796:(
1763:.
1714:.
1702:(
1541:(
1527:(
1499:(
1448:(
1434:(
1414:(
1400:(
1351:(
1289::
1285:@
1274:(
1267:)
1263:(
1214:(
1156:(
1146::
1142:@
1114:(
1075:(
1060:(
1036:(
1017:E
988:(
937:(
924:"
891:(
864:(
849:(
777:(
743:)
739:(
685:(
664:(
650:(
614:(
567:(
563:.
557::
553:@
540:(
533::
525:@
514:(
499:(
475:·
470:(
451:(
373:.
322:.
215:(
199:(
171:(
156:(
142:(
126:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.