User talk:DGG/Archive 3 Mar.-Apr. 2007

364:. This screen has a search box, where you can type in the standard journal abbreviation, and hit 'Search'. You then get back the full name of the journal. I also managed to download (by ftp) a plain text file called J_Entrez.txt (4 megabytes in size) that has both the abbreviation and the full name for every journal I checked. You could do a 'Find' on the abbreviation, and get the answer. So if you need help converting those references, I'd be available. EdJohnston 02:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Don't you think our readers would put up with the 'clutter' that would be caused by spelling out these not totally self-explanatory abbreviations? EMBO J, Cell Death Differ (my favorite), Mol Cell, FEBS Lett, PLoS Biol. I know that 'J Biol Chem' looks easy but not all of them are. EdJohnston 02:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the offer. I doubt it would take long to convert this article - anybody who's done biology work probably knows 80% of them anyway - but I'm strongly inclined not to set that as a standard for future articles, not least because there are screen-scraper scripts for importing PubMed references that would need to be extensively modified. I realize they're not all intuitive (my personal favorite official "abbreviation" is J Phys Chem B Condens Matter Mater Surf Interfaces Biophys) but as far as I've ever known, it's actually better for searching to have the abbreviation than the full name, because almost every database uses the abbreviations. Do you know of any common databases or search methods where that's not the case? I asked Circeus on the FAC page to elaborate why/where he had had trouble, but he hasn't responded yet. Opabinia regalis 03:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Right - the problem is not *this* article (which I'll help do, if that what it takes to get rid of the object) rather the sheer volume of manual work that would be required across all Wiki articles, with little benefit. I would also strenuously object to the change in policy, since it requires manual intervention for every journal, to replace the info PubMed provides. Just wanted you to know I could help if needed, but agree it should not be needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC) 309:

this, I know how to figure out anything in a latin or cyrillic alphabet, from 1800 on, and I know the places to check for anything older; as a beginner, with only a MLS and a molecular biology doctorate, I relied on persistence and study of journal lists, especially for anything out of the way to a molecular biologist. Second, as a teacher of librarianship. The ability of present-day incoming librarians, even science specialists, to find printed material is deplorable. For newer material, they can acquire the patience to keep trying things on Google until they find something. For print material, it will soon be a specialty, like manuscrip[t librarianship is now. Third, I have been responsible for organizing lists of print and then online journals; the peak was a computer-assisted but manually input list of 10,000 print titles. I and others always did these lists by full title. Although it startled some of the catalog librarians, we did add some abbreviations to help those who did know them.

296:(Speaking only about journals in the sciences), I think that full journal names are essential for WP users, particularly for older material. The abbreviations are enough for experts. WP articles are not written for experts. WP is written for a range of users, ranging from the beginner to the near expert; judging from user pages and user comments, this may correspond from junior high school students to graduate students in allied fields. Journal references serve several roles: even without looking them up, they give some idea of the nature of the evidence--and this is probably as far as many users get. To serve this function for new or for old, the title must be understood, and all users not graduate students in the field are more likely to make sense of the full title. 305:

For all other users, they must look for the material in an online catalog. It is unfortunately not the practice in standard cataloging to make added entries for abbreviations as a routine practice, although they are sometimes made if they appear on the cover of a journal. It is not possible in many cases to guess the right title, especially if one is unfamiliar with the sort of titles that exist. The less experienced user will be much more likely to find the material by full title. If the user must go through an ILL service in a school or public library, the librarian there will probably be much more comfortable with the full title as well.

1243:. (Um, that sounds weird now that I've written it...but anyway...) As I said in the AfD, it's not really something I have a personal interest in or even know a lot about (though I know more now from my search for sources) but I at least knew that it was something real and fairly prolific, deserving of at least a brief article as it seems to be a significant subculture. I'm preaching to the choir, here, though, and my babbling is probably ruining the smiley glow. So, have a good day and keep up the great work! 2586:

journals from (non peer-revieweed) magazines, with Scientific American being an example of the latter. Both meaning are in simultaneous use, and people are not usually clear about which they have in mind. :So if you look at the items in category journals, there are many which do indeed fall into the category of academic journals, but there are also some which don't. The actual terminology used in WP articles is similarly confusing--people have called the publications almost any of the various possibilities.

2704:, and again includes many references by him to my Chinese ethnocentrism, sockpuppets etc. Meanwhile Ma has had something of a Pauline conversion on woodblock printing on textiles, after finding another, rather throwaway, quote from an author I referenced (A Hyatt Mayor). Having spent a lot of energy trying to remove all references to textiles, he is now going around adding them everywhere, when not adding pics of Gatling guns to the 4 Great Inventions (no kidding). All the best 1799:. It is said that this book (published in the 60s) was "banned" or "pulled" from public libraries because it was "dangerous" (presumably because it tells kids how to make chlorine, chloroform, hydrogen, hydrogen sulfide, all that smelly, toxic, or flammable stuff...) It is a fascinating story, but unfortunately I haven't been able to find any evidence for it yet. What is a fact is that the book is out of print and used copies sell for hundreds of dollars! Cheers, 907:

of original thought. The threshold for inclusion in Knowledge is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether it is true. Knowledge is not the place to publish your opinions, experiences, or arguments." Original thought that had congregated on the internet elsewhere is treated the same as original thought that generated impromptu on a wikipedia page. That is the difference between self published and published by reputable sources.

277:. In particular, it would be helpful to know how and where you are searching for articles or journals that the use of abbreviations is an impediment to successfully locating a reference. If you really think this is something that's worth pursuing as a proposed style standard for scientific articles, I believe a larger venue than an obscure FAC nomination is needed, as this would affect a large number of editors and articles; I'd suggest starting a thread on 3301:

deletion, please add: {{hangon}}. I do it about two times a day, after explaining on the talk p. and edit summary why it was wrongheaded, or after improving it, sometimes to the point of rewriting. Once a month or so, whoever put on the speedy objects, and then it goes to AfD. People who are not admins also have been known to remove speedies I put on, and I usually feel that this shows I was probably wrong to have added it.

322:

myself, I'd do them one at a time with a bot, and then look for non-matches. But it could be done more ambitiously, and if we ever want to undertake such a transformation I would help as well. There are some interface problems in the conversion--the length of articles and tables especially would be affected. I think we would want to try a number of careful trials and we would want help from some of the WP programmers.

3382:

school asked for one source where a lot of information about Dr. Medici could be drawn. In fact, a lot of people that I know have used that article as a reference to get to more article about him and obtain the titles of some of his major papers. If you do have any suggestions please feel free to let me know. Hopefully you won't recommend it to be deleted anymore since it is very useful to many students. Thanks!

2248:

then people will join the overall effort to clean-up notability rather than fort-up in their own little domains. Right now a few editors have a lot of influence at WP:N and a few editors have a lot of influence at the individual permutations, but if the proponents of inclusion who work at the permutations get involved in the central effort, the project will become more open and simpler to understand. --

1216: 2495: 3822:. Banned users are not permitted to edit Knowledge. The whole point of reverting their edits and deleting any pages they create is to enforce the ban, particularly in the case of prolific sockpuppeteers such as this one. He's at well over 200 sockpuppets now, and 3 today alone. If the pages stay up it encourages them to keep editing, when they are not permitted to do so. 355:

than a thread in an obscure FAC nomination. IMO it would be a bad precedent for future science-related FACs to make that change in response to one user's opinion without collecting some wider input. I don't know of an intelligent automated way to get this information, other than clicking through PubMed's journals link and screen-scraping the equivalents of pages like

3471:

volume of cases), I always respect your thought process. From my point of view, an inclusionist is someone who thinks carefully and doesn't just vote to delete when he/she sees something suspicious. By that standard, you qualify. If after careful thought you decide to delete, that's cool. I hope my respect for your work here is leaking from between the lines.

3029:

That's what prod is for. But of course if you think it is notable as it stands, just nominate it according to WP:AFD, and I will go by the consensus as always. I'll nominate it for you if you prefer. So it's up to you. (Some eds. I know would just have speedied and not even notified you, but I don't like to do things that way.) Further discussion welcome.

1534:

one of them. That particular citation references an article which he published describing a modification to an existing membrane oxygenator. His earlier work on a pump was prefigured by a 1948 patent for artificial blood circulation (U.S. Patent 2556043). In other words, he was working on this stuff early on but he was by no means a pioneer.

3088:. Several peer-reviewed journals from Emerald, which as far as I can tell is a reputable publisher (my university subscribes to it), have been nominated for deletion. The articles look a bit spammy, but I guess that this could be fixed. (It seems that an article on Emerald has already been speedily deleted as advertising.) 391:, as well, so you can use OpenURL tools on the references section of articles. I'll expand it to other citation templates if it goes over well, and add it to the "Cite this article" page, too, as soon as they figure out which format would be appropriate for Knowledge articles... — Omegatron 01:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC) 2612:

academic journals. I think we would not get consensus on either, or for that matter on using both--it would by 1/3 1/3 1/3. When I came to WP I though it could be straightened out, but if you check the page history of the various terms, you will see that basically I and everyone else who has tried, all gave up.

1854:

else would they come here and write articles about them? I totally understand your point and I also understand why you think the way you do, it's a reasonable position in a way. It is not a position that is compatible with wikipedia's policies though. Just because someone believes in something doesn't make it

4246:

to a particualr example i was told "That's what DRV is for". I am hoping to build up a list of several examples on which there is celar consensus that a speedy was not warrented, and then use them together in a discussion on the CSD talk page, or perhaps at the pump. Do you think this plan worth while?

145:

subjects, they don't even assert notability, and thus meet the requirement for (A7). I'm not sure there's much consistency when it comes to deletion, because WikiPhilosophy varies from editor to editor. I'm not sure I have time to work on an analysis of the data, but would be interested in the results.

4245:

You may be right. I have discussed the over use of speedy delete (and A7 in particular) on the CSD talk page several times, as you may know if you follow that page. In the past such complaints have been not infrequently dismissed as theoretical in default of sufficeient examples, and when i did point

3300:

See for example the template {{db-bio}} " this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with this page’s proposed speedy

2775:

And why should it be deleted soon? I removed the prod. It should not be reproded. NO reason for speedy deletion that I have seen. And if it goes for AfD might not be deleted. Also, I never said I would improve it! It has been almost 16 years since I lived in NY and more than that since I have

2623:

at present. I've much less experience in thinking about these things than you, & no firm view on how to label the categories. I don't personally mind the made-up term Academic journals as long as it is consistently applied. What bothers me is the present haphazard duplication, which is a mess! As

2368:

Dear DGG, I have greatest respect for your work, but you know I never agreed with the article on History of typography in East Asia - I really feel it is quite irrelevant when there is no page called history of typography yet... Thanks for your efforts to try to draw me into that article - but I just

2130:

The problem with the guidelines for academics is that the majority of WP people do not think academics very notable in the first place. I therefore think we would do best isolating ourselves from the general discussions, at least until we see how they will turn out. With regard to the notability of

2097:

I see the broad inclusion of the pnc template as a good step toward continuity. If you look at the history at the template and at WP:N, you will see that I am not a supporter of the current form which I believe to be overly restrictive and subjective, but I do believe that if the template can be put

1895:

notability which is done with attribution and reliable sources. I'm just going to have to flat out disagree with your assesment of what constitutes a reliable source. Knowledge is very clear on the criteria for what is accepted as a RS and what you're advocating is not the same thing. I have no doubt

1777:

Some of the Lexis sources mentioned the clinic in passing, other articles were about the clinic specifically. WHen I made that comment I didn't have the time to add the sources, as doing so would mean spending 20 minutes sorting them out. That's why I asked the original creator to help out instead as

1555:

my sense is that you tend to exaggerate claims of notability to justify inclusion. For a brief moment on wikipedia, moderately notable and well-regarded Dr. Peirce was promoted to "pioneer of transplants" and "inventor of artificial circulation technology", claims which are unverifiable because they

1533:

page seem like whole cloth fabrications based on little more than a perusal of the guy's publication list. With regards to the membrane oxygenator, he doesn't hold a patent for it's invention and, among the dozen or so patents filed for membrane oxygenators in the 1950s and 1960s, he's only cited in

1344:

Thank you for this! As discussion at deletion appeal will show, I was caught in the middle of a battle over the Laurence H. Scott entry. Apparently people keep looking for Scott's own publications, when perhaps they might consider his importance as a printer, designer, and publisher of major poets.

1325:

which could possibly generate controversy so I want to have it as close to NPoV and as well-written as possible before the masses devour--it is nom for DYK. I saw an AfD about a religious topic and agreed with the philosophy behind your reasoning. Would very much like your input even if you wish to

300:

Or they serve as a route to further information. For material that is open access, the link (which should always be given in a WP article if there is an OA version) gives the access directly. For online material that is not, the link (which should be given even though not OA) will normally lead to

4560:

If you were using a password the same as your account name, there was a security problem & they were all disabled, & there is nothing much to do but create another account. Other things happen, and the easy way is to do the same--start another. Just indicate on the new user page who you used

4360:

I feel that an editor who takes it upon him or herself to copy and paste from external sources has a responsibility to make certain that copy was allowed, and to justify it. Lack of attribution is always a bad sign. :-) If I had been an admin, I wouldn't have deleted the article outright either--

3948:

Hey, just wanted to let you know that I struck out your comment on the Jocelyne Couture-Nowak DRV. The wording was correct -- the AfD ended in delete, therefore it should be "endorse deletion" or "overturn and keep," not the other way around (as you wrote). Thanks and let me know if I made a mistake

3880:

Thanks for your prompt reply and explanation. It certainly is an odd point at which to place the notability boundary, as it were, but if it has consensus, I won't worry about it. There are worse articles around! Personally, I would rather not remove a CSD tag without consulting the editor who placed

3849:

I am not very impressed that an apparently experienced editor would remove a CSD tag (contrary to its own instructions) without at least leaving an explanation on the article's talk page or informing the editor who placed the tag. If "all villages" really are notable, then you could explain as much,

3028:

But, as for Country Club Plaza (Arden-Arcade, California) I thought it an almost empty article, and probably not notable, but that it was possible you or another editor would know of something more to say. I hoped that you would either add enough to make it notable, or let the article get deleted.

2603:

I've been a science librarian for over 20 years, and this has continually been a source of confusion If you look at what libraries actually call things, quite a variety of terms are used. I've taught the subject as well, and there is no real agreement in the textbooks, and the key term "serial" has

2046:

and AfD log - link there. Biophys again publishes so-called typical methods or distinctions of these alleged teams in order to discredit his opponents. His term "internet brigades" is also original research. He also doesn't publish Tygodnik Powszechny to the end, because this sources explicitly says

1814:

David, I put dates of birth and death after people mentioned in the articles to benefit genealogists who might have an interest. Also it keeps the reader clear as to whether that person is living. As you say, excessive use of dates may clog up an article. So I can reduce them down where appropriate.

1577:

article, in proper English. I was reading the Portuguese article about the Bible when I saw what I thought it was an error and from there I arrived to the English one(witch certainly was the source). Than I saw that also the Spanish, Esperanto, and I think the Svenska and Suomi also repeat the same.

1189:

The nominator says on her talk p. "This is not an attack on the big paraphilias, this is an annoyance with small chatrooms dedicated to a sub-subgenre of erotica pretending they have a medical problem on wikipedia. All in all, the whole phenomena is really annoying. I would start a special comission

906:

You should read the wikipedia policy on attribution. It goes something like this: if something is true, but no published source says so, it cannot go on wikipedia. People's personal experiences or personal websites and forums are not allowed as sources. "Knowledge is an encyclopedia, not a publisher

326:

For a particular article with say 100 or so refs, i would do them by hand. Since in any one article the journal titles will repeat, I'd copy and paste. I suppose if I had to do more than one article I'd copy the lists into BBEdit and use a grep search and replace, and then paste them back, for all

83:

I recognize the usefulness of speedy in obvious cases, but I see it also being applied to non-obvious cases, and I will perhaps make some comments on that. I also plan to collect & analyze some data about the consistency of deletion practice, but not for a month or two when I'll have the time.

79:

I do not always get all of the procedure right yet, but I try. I notice some of the others in the debate were also unfamiliar with the provision. Perhaps those who have been editing a very long while learn to accept the odd parts and even the incompatibilities as part of WP life. I hope you're glad

75:

the criterion on speedy, and I of course find it as you say, and, in my view, incompatible with every statement about notability everywhere else in WP. And I do check speedies, and for things I recognize as notable and think can be clearly demonstrated as notable I go to the trouble of putting in a

3009:

When I know for sure something is not notable, and fits in a speedy, I speedy. If anyone disagrees, they can remove the tag or "holdon" if they're fast enough, or go to AfD or Deletion Review. I don't do this much, because I rarely do new page patrol, so the obvious stuff has already been deleted

1853:

The work I do is not a reflection of any personal moral position on sex. I don't recall ever questioning the existence of any of the fetishes or paraphilias that I've worked on here either (but there might be forgotten exceptions). I have no doubt that 95% of them really exist with some people, why

1496:

with the edit summary "Google??? He died in 1840." I disagree that notable people who died before "teh Internets" became popular will necessarily have no mentions of them on Google. I was prepared not to propose deletion if there had been even one result that indicated the subject had been involved

1143:

Policy is very clear in these regards. Your interpretation of begs for closer reading of policy. Blogs and websites are acceptable from people about themselves in a much stricter sense than you suppose. The policy for use of unreliable sources describing themselves means that if you need a citation

823:

Dear DGG, Thank you for your useful suggession. I am working on it already. I have submitted the full scientific article to the journal of the University of Iowa. I do not know whether they will accpet it or not. I am not doing these just to be included in wikipedia article, rather I am doing these

520:

I agree with your view on the lists. Some of them have become somewhat of a playbox for editors who like trivial associations. Yes, "featuring" opens the door to such trivial entries. I am all for renaming, cleaning up and giving a short explanation after each entry as to the role the title element

359:

sorry, can't get the link with brackets to parse right. If there's a larger discussion I'll certainly oppose this on practicality and text-clutter grounds, unless someone finds a common way of searching for references that requires the full names. FAC doesn't need more shrubberies. Opabinia regalis

354:

In the short term, my plan is to do nothing, since Circeus hasn't responded to the subsequent comments on his suggestion. I left him a note about opening this for wider discussion; a substantial change in style recommendations affecting as many articles as this one would deserves a wider discussion

350:

Opabinia, where do you stand on that Object? If you need help converting them in order to address the Object, I can help. Am I missing something, or would we actually have to do every one by hand? I can't find a database that can be used to automate it - if you feel it has to be done, we can divide

321:

EdJohnston's experience with entrez is useful, but it doesn't work outside biomedicine. In biomed, a mass conversion could be done, but getting it entered from some of the nonstandard references people have used will require some work. If I had to sustitute full titles throughout the WP database by

87:

I intend this as a start of a friendly discussion, and if you have any suggestions I will be interested,and I even hope perhaps that you'd feel like joining the analysis. Two judgments are better than one, especially from people of different backgrounds. I like doing this sort of thing as a group..

4170:

you changed to a redirect yesterday --I see the speedy for the redirect but I did not notice the speedy or other deletion process for the original. In any case i want to recreate it as it is one of the things I know about & I'm sure i could do a proper article whatever may have been wrong with

3381:

Hi! I thank you for your suggestion on my page. I added some references, but overall some of the suggestions you gave reflected what was already the format. The article does not look like a CV...at least no acceptable CV. It is a biographical article, which I only wrote after many people at my

2991:

You say on the page it is probably not notable but then on the history page your edit comment says nearly empty article. What exactly is your problem with hte article. And please speak in definitives, it is confusing when you use probabilities as it shows you really don't know what you are talking

2247:

I agree with you on the single sourcing, and am actively trying to see that acknowledged in the template. I don't like the language of the template yet, but I would prefer to see consistency among the various permutations of the notability infrastructure. I think that if consistency is achieved,

2093:

My goal is to simplify the notability infrastructure by the following: (1) eliminate superfluous sub-guidelines, (2) provide as much continuity among the remaining sub-guidelines and WP:N, and (3) develop a more welcoming structure for bona fide information while allowing us to combat the flood of

308:

I say this on the basis of my experience. First, as a biology librarian at a major university. I know the mistakes that get made. They depend on subject; in biology--there are many standards, especially with older material, especially ewith UK and other European material. After 20 years of doing

304:

For material that is not available online, all users must go through a library. Experts will recognize the journal, will usually have access to a research library, and will get the aticle if owned or ask for it if not, and any university library ILL department can deal with standard abbreviations.

2611:

opinion, "Academic journal" is a made-up term -- and i gather that is your opinion also--, but some of the other WP library science people disagree and want to keep using it, as they think "journal" non-specific. I added the cat to prevent people putting things in "Journal" which were clearly not

1537:

I'm also wondering what basis you have to suggest that he is a pioneer for organ transplants. There is a difference between "published articles about organ transplants" and "major pioneering work". His first published work on kidney transplants, in the 1964 article you cite, comes a full decade

313:

because there are now two codes for each journal, one for print and one for online--all the vendors are still rewriting their systems--I've advised some of them about it. The ISSN works in all online catalogs, but only if the user knows enough to enter it, which they don't until you teach them.

144:

criteria; most of these were just trash. We get a lot of people that add "articles" about themselves like "Trisha Smith is a girl at Jones High School and she is soooo sexayyy!" or "MySpace.com/ThatOneDude is a great web site. You should go there." Articles like this aren't only about non-notable

3470:

After I wrote that you were a "resident inclusionist", I questioned whether that was right. It seems you understood it in the spirit I intended. I have seen you vote for delete on many occasions, and though I don't always agree with you (it's just not possible for that to happen with the sheer

2350:

saying that if you point one out, I'll help. If we do this, perhaps we should go to individual editors and ask them on their talk pages if they'd be willing to merge one or two school articles a week into a school district article as a team. Wasn't there someone creating huge numbers of these in

784:

currently there is a move to delete many of the sub-pages about him that I've made, under claims that its mere pro-Ellison cruft while on the other hand many editors have found the segment which I had nothing to do with about his previous ties with the Nation of Islam as an unbalanced attack. Of

2585:

The basic problem is the confusion between the two uses of journal--a general meaning, including almost any periodical publication, used to distinguish journals from books,in which such publications as Scientific American are journals, and the use in the academic world to contrast peer-reviewed

312:

There are 3 ways of doing this. One is to always use the full title. WP is not paper, but it does make for longer reference lists. The other is to have an abbreviation matching database and do a link. The third is to use ISSN's, the 8 digit serial code. This isn't as simple as it was last year,

3418:

actually, I met the other poet, Zlatko Krasni, now under "attack" by AfD, twice last year; it is very strange to find how appearance on the web is the only convincing argument for someone's existence, at least for people living out too much time here instead of in the real world. please keep a

2689:

Ma has been adding , and (a new one for me everywhere - some of the stuff is I think yours - Man, Christiansen etc. If you have a minute perhaps you could pick up his trail & see if you can add any. I have done all or most of mine. His own contributions are hardly distinguished by their

2118:

In general I prefer a small number of flexible rules. The problem is that such flexibility permits an unlimited flexibility in interpretation towards either inclusion or exclusion. On the other hand, excessive specification leads to results not conforming to common sense, and their consequent

3016:

I usually put it for prod so other people can see for themselves. If nobody feels its worthy of keeping, it gets deleted and there's no fuss. If anybody wants to keep, they remove the tag, unless they wrote it, when they have to ask someone else to remove it. I see that on my watchlist, and

2751:. (In so doing also combing the Scottish and Welsh varieties, which currently direct to English Breakfast.) This spat has been going on for years, with both sides unwilling to relinquish their national name in the title. "Full Breakfast" is the common name used throughout Britain and Ireland ( 316:

The simplest way to start is with full titles. The matching database is also underway, as something call the Missing Journals Wikiproject, aiming at entering all 12 or so titles into a WP article, complete with all codes. I'm in touch with the people doing it . They estimate 10 years, but if

136:

Thanks for your note. I agree there are many Knowledge policies and guidelines which seem to completely conflict with other policies and guidelines. Regarding your question, of course I am glad that new people become active. Even with 6,000,000 user accounts, most of the work is done by a few

1670:

Hi, seeing you have been involved in previous Afd debates on the subject I invite you to contribute to this discussion to clarify certain issues about football player notability. I think clearer guidelines are needed to avoid repeated inappropriate nominations for deletion and time consuming

2427:

to follow the red links... if it's not your impression that this was the consensus from the AfD, would a deletion review be in order? I would be willing to start one. I feel pretty strongly about this; the LoC pages are great examples of unusual browsing schemes for Knowledge content. --

31:

Thank you for the feedback on the Catholic Encyclopedia template. It was a good point on putting the tag on the talk page rather the main page, which I will do in future. If you would like to go on the talk page on Catholic Encyclopedia project page if you have any other thoughts:

2123:

But at present with the same discussions going on in multiple places over the same matters, I am concerned that it is likely to end in an ill-considered compromise adopted out of exhaustion. I very much distrust the current discussion for the confusion about what is being said

181:

I understand the point you are making - the flip side is that even with the present situation the list of articles tagged for speedy deletion is typically 200 items. Put a time limit on, even if it's restricted to sensible articles (and remember many junk articles are deleted

3020:

For shopping malls and schools, I never speedy, because I know that they will all be contested & I don't like to speedy in hope of avoiding a discussion. When a number of malls or schools are in question, I may well prod them all, and let other people decide what's worth

1653:

I don't think the outcome if one of the DRVs should influence the other. LMRAdv. read much more like a game-guide because I never got round to cleaning it up. LMP1mgs, however, contained NO game-guide material whatsoever and so should NOT be affected by LMPAdvmg's DRV.

3419:

friendly eye on him as well. your intuition about transliteration could be correct; the name is more regularly written with a "y" and not with "i", but krasni follows the transliteration used by the former jugoslavian authorities when treating serbian names, I think. (

2805:

Thank you for your concise feeback with reference to my article on Karen Karch. I have taken a whack at responding to your concerns and would like to get your further reflectioins on whether I've, indeed, been responsive. Thank you, again, for your comments. Regards,

694:, which covers all the facts of the IAT plus more. This article and Dbachmann's attitude towards writing such articles does nothing to support minority theories, it only shows how minority theories are random Hindu radicalist groups trying to change their history. 4401:

Oh, no! I'm sorry you misunderstood me. The whole exchange was meant to be good-natured humor with no hint of reproach! (Oh, and by the way, the edit summary (of the original bit about spelling) was meant to be a tippoff: "I are not perfect") Happy editing!

360:

01:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Without raising the long-term policy question, I don't think it would be that hard to convert the journal names in Proteasome. Assuming the reference uses a journal in the NLM list, you should be able to look up its journal name at

3085: 2292:

I recently received a lot of mails/ requests from Knowledge admins that questioned the articles posted. I would like to remove the articles, is it possible, since I created those to instantly delete the pages or do I have to go through the deletion process??

1156:

because members of a group of people do not get to speak for that whole group on wikipedia just because they have a website. The same is true of a self published aquaphile journal as is of a forum post. It is very plainly another form of original research.

3520:

Yes, I meant to move it under my user name I suppose. I am currently rewriting the article, and I'm trying to avoid an edit war in the process. If you may move this under my user page it would be greatly appreciated. I do not know how to do so. Sincerely,

160:

Speedy deletion means just that - it can be deleted at any time. Articles are always retrievable if there has been a mistake, or the creator can redraft to address the problem, if that is possible (notability issues might be insoluble for obvious reasons)

505:. We had several of our lists nominated lately with no notification, apart for a notice in our categorization department about a CfD on a category that included several of them, so I got the chance to notify the project and we saved some of them. Thanks. 1623:

I have no idea. He seems to be polite enough when contacted about his actions, but he keeps on doing it anyway. I almost hate to say anything because he's actually a pretty good writer, but his subjects usually aren't notable. It just goes on and on ...

443:

Hi. I edit conflicted with you and then dropped my new "peace" section above yours as it was in context to the prior statement. But then I thought that I was being rude. Would you prefer that I move my peace offering before your observation? Thanks!

285:

for wider visibility. Since the suggestion of using full journal names does not currently have the consensus of editors in the sciences, I'm going to leave it alone for now, and will make the changes later if it's agreed that this is a useful proposal.

4140:

I recently checked your edit count using the "Wannabe Kate" tool. Based on those statistics and my general impression of you from AFD discussions, I'm fairly certain that sysop rights are yours for the asking. You should consider making a request at

1166:

Policy is not up for automatic interpretation just because it is called attribution not verifiability-- in fact the term is bent harder against use of things that we may agree on as true and promotes more use of cited sources. You do not need to tell

76:

appropriate statement in what seems to be the expected language, and often do some editing to the article as well (I make no attempt to do this systematically unless I recognize something & think it can be defended, which is about 1 per day.)

592:

Could be, my problem is that I was looking like crazy but could not find any... maybe wrong glasses... thanks. It would be good to leave a note to the editor about comprising the references into a marked section so blind guys like me can find them

4205: 4193: 4167: 80:

that new people are becoming active. If you will look at my edits you will see that they tend to compromise. I dislike the intensity of many quarrels here & have no intention of getting involved in them unless I can help reach a solution.

1550:

Hey, I'll support you in your efforts to save articles. The citations you mention certainly confer notability and (as I've noted on his talk page) I have no more beef with the article. However, in my experience with you on this article and

201:

I very much agree, DGG. Speedy delete should be within 24 hours, not a matter of minutes or an hour (since AFD is a week or two weeks, I think). Knowledge policies are becoming way too serious and nuts and its literally ruining the place. —

170:

Most speedies are obvious junk/copyright violations/nonsense, and genuine objections tend to come from the creators, who obviously know the content. I don't know if the list of deleted edits is accessible to non-admins. Any article in mind?

4045:

Basically speaking, yes. But it's not so simple: OrthodoxWiki's copyright policy seems to have changed over time, which makes matters a bit difficult. If you want to get involved in the whole effort, we're trying to coordinate things at

3487:

I've just closed this AfD, and I noticed that you'd accidentally contributed two opinions to it. Mercifully for everyone concerned, one was a "keep" and the other was a "weak keep", so you hadn't recanted your views or anything very odd.

4356:

tag unattributed cut-and-paste, however. The person who did the copying gets an opportunity to quickly fix the problem (a simple attribution would have been sufficient in this case) and an admin gets to have a second look at the page.

3850:

and that requires more than a curt edit summary. If there is a different policy set out for villages, that's fine, but I would like to know about it for future reference. I have to question the wisdom of such logic, however; what makes

3162:

Just to let you know that this article is up for AfD as no notable reviews of the individual in question could be found, even in Serbian. If you know of any reasons why he should be considered notable, please feel free to leave them at

3939:

Eventually there should be an article about this important Safavid philosopher and thus I decided to create one with my limited knowledge of Islamic philosophy. I am sure others will be able to expand it but I'll do my best as well.

521:

plays in each film. This way lists become informative and play some role other than duplicating categories. I will try to motivate list editors in this direction and will do some samples where I can. We already have such an example,

1663: 2752: 4228: 4217: 4209: 3005:

When I know or strongly believe something is notable (more exactly, encyclopedia worthy in general) then I don't put on a deletion tag, or if some one else has, I remove the tag altogether. If anyone really disagrees, they go to

824:

with the same reasons of my writing in wikipedia. I want to share my authentic feelings and thoughts with many many other people so that any science in it can be shared by other researchers too- thats the goal here. Thanks Samir

681:

Your comment on the deletion page indicates you support keeping it to give minority theories a fair chance. The problem is that this article is filled with POV against the theory. It's created, Dbachmann, suggests it be moved to

1838:

Thanks for your efforts toward impartial editing. I couldn't make any progress either with that crowd of hackers. I finally had to walk away. But the admins exposed them in the end. Perhaps there is justice in wiki-land.

3609:

is a malignant venomous article on Japan. For instance, National Eugenic Law is a law that permits the artificial abortion for the maternity protection including economical reasons. Please write your detailed policy again.

2776:

been to Brooklyn. I don't remember enough to add anything other than that there is a subway station in the Williamsburg area and in the Queens section of the street is where Dad once had an office. Hardly wiki worthy!

403:

with non-notable articles. I came across the article in question, and saw it as non-notable(as it asserted NO notability), and possibly considered "little or no context", these categories being CSD:A7 and CSD A1,(as seen

3854:

villages notable? How can they be apparently exempt from the normal notability requirements? Surely that undermines the ethos of notability. The article in question certainly appears to fail to establish its notability.

3707:. I was happy to establish the notability of the book but I am perplexed by some the other comments left there and would appreciate your advice on how I might improve the article further. The comments I refer to are: 1345:

I've begun work to document that aspect of his career and would MUCH APPRECIATE someone's keeping the entry alive long enough for me to provide something that might turn that discussion into an informed debate.

1297:

from your watch page, I'd appreciate if you'd keep it around there just a little longer - maybe two weeks if you don't mind? You are a valuable presence, even just as an observer, in the discussion. Thank you.

2369:

can't see the point of doing an article like history of X in Y when there is no article called history of X!! What is in that article anyhow is not typography. For that matter, there is also no article called

2059:

Vlad, thanks for the head up; in the Deletion Review I commented "Relist for further discussion", and further discussion is what I intend to do. on the article talk page & any subsequent deletion process.

1129:. Did you think the Free Republic article was a proportional response to the AfD listing? Or did you mean something else? Thanks. (P.S.: I mean this as straightforwardly as possible, not in confrontation!) -- 2643:

In any case , I think the first step is to rename the broadest category, Category:Serials, periodicals and journals to Category:Serials, periodicals, journals, and magazines, and I am going to propose it.

4333: 3639: 2835:

It's faintly ironic that me, Dhartung and Mwelch - who, along with you, are probably the most fanatical "no I'm sure I can rescue this" inclusionists of the AfD regulars - are the Evil Deletionist Vandals

2399:

about them, as opposed to considerations of encyclopedicity or, after all, policy, I'm afraid we'll have to delete about half our articles on Islam, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and American politics.

998:. I am mostly ambivalent to the latter, as the articles of mine (which you voted keep for; many thanks, as the nom forgot to notify me) are the two more important articles regarding this fringe science. 2127:

To protect against this, I think the best way is the development of entirely separate guidelines for special topics by people who understand the field and are prepared to defend their guidelines at AfD.

1100: 84:

I know some others are also looking at how well the various procedures work from a variety of angles. I have some background at that sort of analysis. That will of course be OR, and treated as such.

3509:

Seems my temp page has been nominated for deletion! I barely started rewriting and fixing the article! I do not know how this process works on wiki. Would greatly appreciate if you help me. Sincerely,

3435: 2190:

He has made a number of other easily findable errors as well. I have corrected them and commented in the AfC. That 2000 yr old paper is a good cite useful in several places, i was able to confirm it .

1911:

I must say. Administrators are not making it easier to find information, the reason Knowledge was created, but harder to. I hate self-loving, delete happy, idiotic adminastrators. No need to respond.

1441:

are cited up front, as opposed to the "blogosphere" evidence we often let pass in Hindutva-fringecruft for lack of any real evidence), there is no way the article should be deleted. Sorry Bakaman, but

3134:

Don't worry, I wasn't going to dump 50 articles into your to do list! That last one was the only other one I found and it was an oversight that I didn't co-nom it at the time of the others. Thanks --

2825: 4249:

But it is also true that I don't feel that it is proper (except in an emergency) to reverse another admin without some form of discussion, and FRV is the sanctioned palce for this particualr topic.

1497:

in something notable as claimed therein, but there were no sources to back up that assertion. All I could find of someone who matched his name and birth place and year was some genealogical record.

4197: 4189: 2113: 1229:

and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!

399:

Thanks for informing me. I had just finished adding a comment to an article about a completely non-notable (and no longer existent) website. I was patrollying the new pages list, which tends to be

2090:

It looks like we might be on different tacks toward the same course regarding the notability issue. I think it might be nice to discuss our objectives to see whether we have some common ground.

1685:

Thanks for the complement. I love local history, especially the areas around where we live and never really examine. I appreciate your review of the debate and for your kind words. Take care.

4548:

Sorry to bother again in such a short time. It seems I cannot log in with my current username, keeps saying my PS is wrong, and I do not have an email accnt linked to my wiki one. What can I do?

1747:

Hello. I am new to the wiki culture - as you can tell. The John Machemehl article has now passed its 5 days of debate. Do one of us need to close it? Sorry to bother you with this. Thanks.

1675: 2700:

I don't have Man in fact; I think many of them can be left. Even the most extreme user cannot, I think, remove as uncited stuff with no page numbers. The AfD on the list is the same guy as at

3481: 1406: 337:&There's another problem, which is the use of full article titles. This really helps the beginner. In biomed, they could be linked through PubMed IDs, and some WP editors already use them. 3353:{{Multicol}} This text appears in the first column. {{Multicol-break}} This text appears in the second column. {{Multicol-break}} This text appears in the third column. {{Multicol-end}} 3057:{{Multicol}} This text appears in the first column. {{Multicol-break}} This text appears in the second column. {{Multicol-break}} This text appears in the third column. {{Multicol-end}} 2832:; apparently we're somehow being mean to him by voting "delete" on some of his articles. Be aware that at some point he'll no doubt remember you as well as part of the conspiracy against him. 351:

up the work. I still resist the idea, since it would take a lot of manual work, and the PMID should suffice, but if you need help, I'll dig in. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

2815: 1148:

got their name, their website would be a good source even though it is not published by an outside source or reviewed. You could not use The Dresden Dolls website as a reference for defining

995: 4481: 922: 1896:

that we'll get a chance to work together more in the future (or rather preach to the same audience) and from your demeanor so far I have faith that it will be a constructive experiance.

2911:

than he is for his cancer research. His was one of the first operational definitions of sustainability and he has thus been popular far beyond the scientific community. Again, thanks!

4490: 2861: 4505: 2021: 4231:

is the right place to do it. As long as you can find something encyclopedic to say about it, I wouldn't worry about the fact that a previous page on the topic has been deleted. --

2034: 498: 2310:

The words practice what you preach come to mind - if you had searched the web you would have found this guy is extremely well known for founding the internet infidels website.

1873:. That's what makes it an encyclopedia and not just a public forum using wiki software. Simply coming here and adding material based on one's personal experiance or memory is 35: 3098:

Thanks as the nom for taking time to comment and take action on this. I'm always keen to see better content arise from an AfD and editors like yourself make this happen! --

2589:

Furthermore, the general category for the group is Category:Serials, periodicals and journals, omitting magazines altogether. Journal, at present, is a redirect to Magazine.

368:? Users with suitable browser plugins could then bypass the Knowledge ISBN page and be directed to their home library's link resolver. --Helperzoom 17:23, 26 May 2005 (UTC). 4345: 1383: 3539:

I placed {{ db - userreq }} tags, and the article was deleted. Was I supposed to do this once I had finished writing and replaced article? Can I retrieve work I had done?

1760: 1514: 1500:

Please consider an article's (lack of) claims to notability, and whether these claims are sourced (they could be totally made up if unsourced), before de-prodding. Thanks.

1258: 892:

I added a comment in reply to your idea about categories. Basically I think that trying to duplicate all the many existing external lists of conferences is a non-starter.

808:

Dear DGG, As a teacher of psychiatry I always liked your attitude of dealing things. I will be glad to let you know that my research is now mentioned in an online article

760: 687: 1843: 650: 2347: 2066: 1664: 412:. Thus I marked it for deletion, but it did not qualify for deletion after you merged it into an article worth saving.(have to leave now, on a schedule, == Academics == 2137: 960: 4365: 2131:

academics, it is not a good idea to have rigid requirements--AfDs frequently delete reasonably good borderline articles. The spammy ones are best handled by editing.

483:

first, though. If that guideline had been fresh in your memory, you would not have removed the PROD tag from this non-notable biographical article. Have a great day!

4434: 2678: 2667: 1956: 1379: 4387:(P.S.: this was a test of your joke detector. If you did not detect the joke, your detector is indeed defective. Please bring it in for servicing at your nearest 4375:

Please tell me you didn't think "varous tyops" was genuine mistake rather than humor to illustrate my point. If so, your joke detector is stuck or something. :-)

3749: 3092: 2889: 1914:

Wait a minute. Under copyright laws, if I give credit of the work to the original creator, like I did, it would be perfectly legal. Once again, no need to respond.

1733:

You gave two different opinions on this article (keep and weak delete). Could you, for clarity, strikethrough the one you no longer or least agree with? Thank you!

803: 3926: 1865:

Knowledge is an encyclopedia and is not in the buisness of publishing things that are true simply because they are true. Everything that goes in wikipedia must be

1116: 1022: 4120: 3728: 3626:

Please be good enough to put right type of deleting tag in article Hanging in NDH or I will return speedy because to tell truth I do not know to put any other. --

1560: 317:

everyone listened to my instructions I think it could be done in a shorter time (smile). Using the entrez database would help in biomedicine, but not elsewhere.

4025: 2960: 2851: 2178:(not with Ma). Someone has found an 1863 book that says the Chinese did not invent printing at all (except actually it doesn't when you look at it). Seriously! 4320: 3076: 2866: 2529: 1829: 1737: 1726: 683: 620:

Thanks. It might have been a mistake on my part - my brain gets into a bit of autopilot when looking at new pages. Do you know which article(s) you noticed? --

522: 3900: 2483: 2051: 1824: 140:

I agree SPEEDY has often been applied to articles which don't really apply. At the same time, I've speedy deleted hundreds of articles I felt didn't meet the

120:

which was already in a quite advanced form. Oddly enough, CM got an apology; I did not! Quite a few of his SD's around then were thwarted one way or another

4487: 4346: 4340: 3746: 2777: 2451: 972: 3997: 3915: 2981: 1834:

DGG, thought you might be interested in this checkuser report, since their vandalism resulted in total deletion of the Gordon James Klingenschmitt article.

290: 4551: 3689: 3646:

about the title of the article, so I am notifying everyone who voted or commented on the AfD in case you wanted to participate in the discussion. Thanks!

3322:

Each point on this is open to reinterpretation, and is all discussed repetitively on the WP:CSD talk page. If you want to continue, we should do so there.

3287: 2000: 1526: 964: 4522: 2158: 1542: 809: 479:

for deletion. You removed the PROD tag a few days ago, so I thought you'd like to know – you might want to participate in the AfD discussion. Please read

2946: 2791: 2502: 2480: 2455: 1748: 1262: 343: 3274: 1986: 1028:

You wanted this article kept (which it has been) but stated it needed improvements. Perhaps you could make some, as I certainly think it needs them. :)

534: 227: 218: 190: 4013: 2903:

article. The references are great. However, as you will note if you look at the article as I've re-written it, he is more notable for establishing the

2839: 1099: 896: 4567: 3259: 3109: 2382: 2026:

Hello DGG! It seems that user Biophys has restored recently his Internet Troll Squads article containing his original research again, this time under

1900: 1042: 770: 367:

Also: how about making the standard ISBN link produce a latent OpenURL like this: <a name='isbn=0-120345678-9' rel='alternate' title='OpenURL': -->

4519: 4509: 4146: 3733: 3472: 2939: 2760: 2745: 2668: 2522: 240:

I am thinking about writing about Norman H. Horowitz, Caltech biology professor, previous department head etc. One can find some material about him:

3595: 3145: 3129: 2738: 2708: 2232: 2215: 3643: 2920: 2874: 1628: 1579: 797: 270: 3970: 2636: 2624:

far as consensus having proved difficult to achieve, which page histories should I check out? Perhaps this is a discussion which should happen on

2576: 2332: 1698: 1199: 175: 165: 3684: 2807: 2279: 2148:

An outbreak of the usual. I see you're keeping busy! I suppose the Master of the playing Cards is not near the top of the to do list now? Cheers

921:

Since you were earlier involved in the meta-discussion on superhero categories, please comment on the issue now that it's ended up on CFD again.

151: 4508:. If I disappear for some reason, it will be there, and you can just change the timestamp. I say this because I have final exams coming soon. 4406: 4035: 2719: 2596: 2501:

Welcome to Knowledge. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits, such as those you made to

2264:

I went ahead & developed this, but it can certainly be expanded - I think you had Helmutt L-H, although others seem a bit sniffy over him!

2196: 1091: 549: 124: 4329: 3837: 3616: 2966: 2867: 2675: 2268: 1727: 1465: 1186:

The nominator of this article has nominated a number of articles about non-orthodox sexual practices, and succeeding in deleting some of them.

975:

21:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC) I have replied to this anon user, who is also using 66.177.173.119 both multi-user accounts, at the COI indicated..

514: 4337: 3874: 3210: 2810: 2659: 2650: 2324:

Thanks for changing it to AfD - I have no problems seeing what the community feels and will comment shortly - right now the dogs need a walk!

1422: 981: 732: 433: 137:

thousand people. As users go on Wikibreak or suffer from burnout, if these users weren't quickly replaced, Knowledge would soon become a mess.

4261: 4213: 3698: 3164: 2974: 1989: 1944: 1803: 1130: 748:

Now I think it is time to start thinking about the consequences this should have... if you have any ideas you can count on my input and help

371:

Knowledge:Book sources already has a latent OpenURL in the form of an ISBN COinS tag, right under the Notes heading. I've just added them to

282: 4315: 4110: 4061: 3796: 3693: 1975: 1454: 94: 4512: 4047: 3906: 3764: 3475: 2934: 2016: 1809: 1504: 1032: 419: 4518:

The answers look good. There's one place where you forgot to close a ), and in the link to the AFD you should replace WP with Knowledge.

3661: 2615:

Thanks for filling me in. I do recognise the distinction between peer-reviewed / not, and as you say there are distinct article pages for

1877:

and not allowed. I have no problem with these articles existing, as long as they can meet the criteria for inclusion according to policy.

1785: 1556:

simply aren't true. Liberal views on notability are one thing but exaggerating the truth to establish notability should give you pause.

1127: 487: 4456: 4424: 3334: 2996: 2965: 1107: 1072: 754: 66: 3460: 2744:("very similar an English breakfast, consists of bacon rashers, eggs, sausages, baked tomatoes, mushrooms, white pudding, black pudding" 1643: 462: 2780: 2004: 1702: 848: 4272: 4268:

Thanks for the comment! BTW -- I like the way you have your user page laid out. I might try the "What I know" etc. organization. --

3545: 3534: 3525: 3515: 2409: 4591: 4554: 3650: 2929: 2469: 2440: 2363: 2108: 1582: 1395: 1334: 206: 43: 4255: 4130: 3929: 3778: 3367: 1658: 1480: 1349: 1016: 949: 3668: 3423: 3412: 3402: 2559: 1796: 1639:

My pleasure. I hope that things can work out smoothly now; I've watchlisted the page to keep an eye on it for a bit. Good Luck! --

1609: 887: 61: 3035: 2318: 2282: 2080: 1311: 448: 223:

I'm not sure I have the time to gather lots of stuff together - I think I might be spending too much time on WP to be honest... —

4476: 2765: 2373:

either! And in any event, I don't feel like touching the subject of printing after my bitter JG experience. But thanks anyhow!

2252: 1881: 1578:

I corrected the two former but I can’t even try it on the two others! If you know anyone who can do it please tell them. Thanks,

1520: 911: 880: 864: 264: 259: 4577: 4149: 4092: 2304: 1932: 4395: 3171: 2162: 3925:

Hi. Sorry, I didn't know being mayor was notable per se. I'll try to put some more info on him if I get some time. Thanks.

1283: 828: 4382: 4235: 2915: 2355: 1858:

by wikipedia's definition of the term. Also just because people talk about it or form internet groups do those groups act as

1721: 1368: 775: 745:

looks like we were right about the media attention the SJ incident would get... and its so bad I can't even feel any glee...

671: 610: 599: 587: 545:

Thank you for removing the tags. Since your edit, I have added a few more references and stripped down the language further.

3182: 2794: 2737:("any combination of fried bacon, eggs, sausages, tomatoes, bread, black pudding, baked beans, grilled kidneys and kedgeree" 1175: 1161: 813: 3496: 3071: 2543: 1790: 1247: 1002: 635: 581:

Sorry to bother you with this, but I really fail to see a references section in the article, could you give me a pointer ?

540: 3572: 1961: 4214:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Scholarly_Publishing_and_Academic_Resources_Corporation

2257: 571: 3789: 3185: 2517:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here:

1767: 3943: 3724:

Thank you for your time, if you are able to donate some to this. If not, thank you for your previous contributions. --

2956: 2465: 2420: 1437:

articles. If you agree the topic is valid, as you said you did (and it is hard to disagree with this, since manifestly

876: 810:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Concept-of-Death-Can-Influence-Mental-Health---A-Research-Finding-In-Bangladesh&id=478743

759: 458:

I tried to wikify it on your user page but it does not seem to exist. When I looked for it, I was unable to find it. --

2694: 2182: 2169: 2152: 1261:, which was closed but now restarted as a new discussion by the closing admin. In case you're interested, please join 4177: 4086: 3991: 3964: 3176: 2800: 2548:(note: i replied on the article talk page that I did not consider it worthwhile to challenge over this one article.) 1133: 492: 429:

Thank you for the change of "vote" on its deletion. Your integrity is notable and your comments well taken to heart.

269:

Wondering if you had gotten a chance to look at some of the responses from science editors to your suggestion on the

2674:

Just wondering if you could take another look. The article's creator has added some independent sourcing. Thanks,

2554: 356: 4308: 4054: 4003: 3439: 3078: 2604:

never been really defined, and has now been abandoned in the cataloging rules in favor of "continuing publication".

2536: 2518: 2476: 630: 502: 334:

I notice that O.r. has said she recognizes the abbreviations better, and so do I. But we are not the average users.

2094:

spam and nonsense. Clearly this is no easy task and there are multiple ways to accomplish this or similar goals.

3673: 3601: 3115: 2629: 2346:

I like your idea about a bunch of us tackling a school district a week, merging the stumps. I added a comment at

1994: 1980: 786: 676: 2306: 4227:

If you would like to create an article about the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation, then

3831: 2977:

for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. --

2424: 2042:

Unfortunately I didn't keep such rubbish and admins deleted the original page. The only thing that remained is

2003:? The link to the AFD discussion was incomplete. While the first discussion only had three participants, the 1716: 1400: 1382:-- I am most open to discussing questions of presentation, article scopes and titling, please provide input at 1021: 453: 54: 4212:, and proposing it for speedy deletion since its only content was a link to the organization's Web site. (See 3429: 1759:

Following your contribution to the discussion on football player notability you might be interested in voting

4587:

My apologies for deleting your vote at Auer. I don't know how I managed that; it certainly wasn't deliberate

4486:

Thanks for the comment on my User Page. I did not know that. Thanks for the information. I appreciate it! (

4277: 4040: 3842: 2351:

Alabama a while back? If you decide you really want to do this and can find the districts, give me a holler.

1953: 1538:

after the first successful kidney transplant by Dr. Joseph Murray. It's hard to say that he was a pioneer.

1063: 1048: 278: 4534: 4499: 4103: 3465: 1634: 1525:

Hey there. I understand that you have very liberal feelings about notability but your recent edits to the

424: 3501: 3086:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management

2882: 2258: 2211:, ideally with the historical source for him? Of course the article still remains China-less, for now. 2098:

into use and then prominently discussed in the light of day, more palatable language can be developed.

1701:, as, if I'm reading your comment correctly, you thought the AfD was closed as a keep; you can check out 1587: 1459: 954: 105: 4004: 255:

And a huge number of publications. I do not want to have a deletion fight again, however. Suggestions?--

4469: 2986: 2755:

for the Lonely Planet's description of the "phenomenon"). I see it is also used in the US, for example

2565: 2414: 1648: 994:, which you voted keep for recently, has reappeared on Afd. Also, I would appreciate your thoughts on 781: 394: 3315:

remove an article immediately it it obviously should be removed, without listing it as a speedy first.

1921:

I'm keeping this one at the top. Tributes to my willingness to delete are always appreciated. Thanks.

4588: 4097: 3824: 3633: 1339: 467: 244: 4126:

left comment on his page. hope it helps and I can be helpful. thanks once more for past help to me.

4278: 4162: 4106:? It is inappropriate to use the template that you used without any explanation of your reasoning. 3754: 3660:

Hi, I am wondering if you have time to help get a WikiProject dedicated to Journals underway. See

3655: 3443: 3339: 2390: 1950: 1906: 1772: 1511: 1501: 737: 4440: 4260: 4240: 3606: 2296: 1783: 1568: 1373: 1240: 916: 196: 26: 4102:

Could you please provide some evidence for your claim that I committed a copyright violation at

996:

Knowledge:Deletion_review/Log/2007_March_14#HHO gas, Aquygen, Brown's gas, Magnecular bond, etc.

408:). I tend to be a little on the deletionist side, mostly because I value the overall quality of 386: 3891: 3865: 3813: 3793: 3783: 2950: 2734: 2625: 2514: 2459: 1966:

see my response to your reply on the article for deletion talk page, or just look at this link.

1288: 872: 841: 833: 2076:

Thank you. Your revert of my edit was quite proper according to WP policies of attribution.

785:

course it could be something else, so please explain the problems you see with the article on

4431: 4421: 4184:

The SPARC mess was confusing, I'll give you that. :) Someone — I don't know who — moved the

3843: 3725: 3704: 3390:

Could you please please help me ... remove the incorrect accent from the first e in the name

3155: 2395:

please see the reply on my talkpage. If we begin to base AfD outcomes based on people having

2273: 1442: 1416: 1272: 654: 287: 117: 48: 1967: 1498: 766:

I have reverted your reversion. Read the entry, please. What does the first sentence say? --

405: 361: 4415: 4303: 4286: 3743: 3385: 3304:

Authors have also been known to do it, but the system apparently keeps track none the less.

2790:

You put the article up for deletion and i was just wondering on your tips for improvement (

2770: 2741: 2445: 2085: 1848: 1840: 1595: 1316: 991: 767: 661: 626: 3391: 1887:

I'm not really sure I follow you entirely. I suppose I'm saying that it is not our job to

1835: 301:

at least the abstract of the article, which can be sufficient information in many cases.

8: 4540: 4370: 4117: 4107: 3347:{{Col-begin}} {{Col-1-of-2}} Column 1 here {{Col-2-of-2}} Column 2 here {{Col-end}} 3051:{{Col-begin}} {{Col-1-of-2}} Column 1 here {{Col-2-of-2}} Column 2 here {{Col-end}} 2690:

detailed referencing of course, but it's one law for Ma & one for the rest of us....

2405: 2370: 1557: 1539: 1530: 1485: 1450: 1391: 1355: 1252: 1007: 901: 691: 560: 530: 510: 3976:

Thanks for the note. Yup, you're right -- this is far from the average deletion review.

4253: 4010:

We've both just !voted to delete a school. Is this a sign of the dawn of the End Times?

3455: 3328:

22:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC) as for the school districts, I responded on your talk page.

2900: 2899:

I just want to let you know how much I appreciated your words of support regarding the

2894: 2878: 2817: 2728: 2378: 1821: 1795:

Hi, since you are a science librarian I was wondering if you might know anything about

1779: 1711: 1618: 1226: 926: 646: 430: 377: 3810:? The works are notable because it meets the requirements that many schools use them. 2713:

Yes, this situation can be dealt with by firmness in keeping to what is reasonable.

1999:

When you have a minute, would you mind returning to the Deletion Review discussion on

657:

comment. Perhaps you can fix this so that another editor does not come by and slap a

4171:

the first--If you're an admin could you restore it to my user space for the purpose?

4135: 3882: 3856: 3773: 3589: 3566: 3395: 3365: 3280: 3143: 3127: 3107: 3069: 2978: 2569: 2510: 2338: 2249: 2105: 2077: 2071: 2048: 2043: 2031: 2027: 2012: 1331: 1309: 1145: 1113: 1059: 1013: 868: 845: 818: 749: 645:

Hi DGG. The information for the abus gun article appears to have been taken from the

605: 594: 582: 484: 476: 445: 438: 416: 4459:. I'm not sure why you got confused by the contrib history, but given how hapazard 2582:

You have found a real problem, where the terminology reflects the lack of consensus.

2419:

Hi there! I also posted this on the AfD talk page... not just the B schedule on the

1665:

Knowledge talk:Notability (people)#Regarding notability of Football (soccer) players

4232: 4072: 4066: 3977: 3950: 3912: 3613: 3493: 3480: 3284: 2908: 2620: 2435: 2242: 1692: 1411: 1277: 986: 968: 923:

Knowledge:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_14#Fictional_characters_by_power

853: 640: 554: 4204:. I'm not actually an admin, so my contribution to the mess was limited to moving 3197:

templates etc. Apologies if you are a moderator, but there is no way of telling!

3017:

depending on what they've said, I usually defer to them but sometimes send to AfD.

4460: 4449: 4441: 4290: 4269: 4051: 3807: 3420: 3409: 3399: 3271: 3043: 2993: 2297: 1891:

Notability but instead it is the responsibility of the editor adding material to

1625: 1574: 1364:, particularly as he himself has recanted his previous views. What do you think? 1361: 893: 699: 621: 357:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=Journals&term=%22Dev+Cell%22

109: 36:

Wikipedia_talk:Catholic_Encyclopedia_topics#A_proposal_for_clearing_up_blue_links

2479:... would you be willing to follow through with this if Yannismarou declines? -- 4388: 4321: 4216:

for the entire text of the page.) Since then, somebody else has speedy-deleted

3920: 3550: 3089: 2945:

There does not seem to be much more that can be added to any of them. Thanks. —

2886: 2881:

since it makes comprehensible grammatical sense. If it's not CSD A7, then it's

2748: 2506: 2401: 1552: 1446: 1387: 1232: 1209: 1172: 1158: 1138: 908: 834: 794: 569: 526: 506: 249: 224: 215: 203: 187: 172: 162: 58: 40: 2756: 2521:. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. 4574: 4448:

What the? I think you might have confused the perpetrator with the victim.

4250: 4154: 4142: 3819: 3739: 3714:"until the "spammy" feeling can be dealt with, I have to go with weak delete" 3711:"The article reads like an advert for the book, which is not what WP is for." 3449: 3267: 3250: 3221: 3201: 3191: 3156: 2829: 2374: 1928: 1897: 1878: 1870: 1754: 1706: 1431: 1294: 1244: 1222: 1087: 1067: 1039: 1029: 825: 668: 480: 146: 17: 1603:

how can this be stopped? Maybe today's seige will have an influence (smile)

649:

game booklet. As a result, I could not tell whether the article described a

4582: 3768: 3760: 3679: 3647: 3627: 3581: 3558: 3357: 3231: 3135: 3119: 3118:

from the same publisher, if you have time to investigate... Thanks again --

3099: 3061: 2705: 2691: 2489: 2352: 2265: 2229: 2212: 2179: 2166: 2149: 2008: 1874: 1859: 1686: 1640: 1438: 1304: 1299: 1054: 615: 576: 546: 121: 113: 1510:

OK no problem with AfD. I gotta cool off before commenting on AfDs too...

4127: 3665: 3542: 3531: 3522: 3512: 3489: 3438:. When you've got it in a state worth keeping, do a regular page move to 3266:

You can tell if someone is an administrator by looking for their name in

3241: 2912: 2785: 2701: 2429: 2325: 2311: 2175: 1972: 1866: 1855: 1764: 1672: 1493: 1486: 1346: 1267: 999: 812:

You can read it and any comment can be mailed to me at my e-mail address

3801: 2592:

Don't understand what you mean by saying journal redirects to magazine.

2287: 1836:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/USMC_Padre

1573:

Thanks for you words, and thank you for completing my correction of the

1106:

This article is up for deletion can you kindly share your opinion on it

4473: 4403: 4392: 4379: 4362: 3187:- are you an admin/sysop on Knowledge? I thought only they can remove 3168: 2684: 2656: 2633: 2593: 2573: 2143: 1655: 1407:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Hindutva pseudoscience (2nd nomination)

1365: 1181:

comment by DG to put this into perspective: what I said in the AfD was

1121: 459: 274: 256: 4116:

Thanks for taking a second look, and for moving the dicussion to AfD.

4071:

Just wanted to let you know that I responded on my talk page. Thanks!

1742: 1080:

Connection problems forced me to stop doing this on a regular basis .

525:, which started during the AfD. And thanks for offering further help. 4361:

just tagged it so at least one other pair of eyes could look at it.

3408:

thank you for your help and other comments - very much appreciated! (

1800: 1734: 1477: 1380:

User_talk:Dbachmann/Wikipedia_and_nationalism#Hinduvata_pseudoscience

1327: 1322: 564: 563:

please post warning messages only on their talk page. Happy editing.

409: 88:

which is one reason I'm here. Which talk page should we continue at?

497:

Hi DGG, and thank you for trying to save one of our WP Films lists (

4563: 4173: 3330: 3324: 3031: 3001:

In general (and thanks for encouraging me to write it out in full)

2715: 2646: 2550: 2192: 2133: 2062: 2044:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_March_26

1923: 1605: 1476:. Might you want to strike through the one that no longer applies? 1195: 1082: 977: 339: 327:

the common titles. I am a great believer in patient manual entry.

90: 71:(re-posted here for convenience--answered at Forsfrom talk.) I did 4455:

use a sock to vandalize both my user and talk pages (which I have

2513:

for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the

501:). If you see any more film lists nominated, please, notify us in 108:

was speedily deleted, after about 5 mins, by the over-enthusiatic

2616: 2505:, have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been 2423:

was deleted ... ALL the schedules were deleted, classes A-Z. See

2208: 1171:

not to fight. You have assaulted my intentions, I have not yours.

1149: 1126:

I'd appreciate an explanation of what you meant by this comment:

4206:

SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation

4194:

SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation

4168:

SPARC - Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation

3307:

What an admin can do with speedies, and a non-admin can not is:

3084:

As a librarian, could you take a look at this deletion debate:

2494: 1427:

you may not be aware of this, but there is the possibility to

4221: 4201: 4185: 4155: 1215: 1053:

Welcome to the resource exchange... here's your badge! :) ---

804:

From the article writer of Philosophy of death and adjustment

415:

Thanks for the note. I look forward to working with you. --

4573:

Thank you! Got a new one. Wont make the same mistake again!

4482:

Curly versus Straight Apostrophe and Quotation Marks in WORD

2733:

Hi, DGG. Just to clarify, the merger proposal is to combine

2207:

Many thanks for your comments! Do you have a decent ref for

1193:(Given that, I think I accurately described the intentions). 2450:

FYI, I have proded the books by this author as a result of

2348:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Don G. Giunta Middle School

1360:

Thanks for your note. I think mentioning his name violates

1190:

on non-made-up paraphilias and fetish if I even knew how."

1153: 186:

being tagged}, and I fear that admins will be overwhelmed.

4430:

It does appear that your assumption is wholly incorrect.--

4145:. If you want me to nominate you, I will. Best regards. 3934: 3621: 3806:

Okay, so I just put the publishers name for the books in

3356:

The latter's obviously more flexible. Hope that helps, --

3318:

override hangon tags if he doesn't think they have merit.

3312:

actually remove an article after someone puts on a speedy

3060:

The latter's obviously more flexible. Hope that helps, --

2022:

Restoring of Internet Troll Squads after AfD was endorsed

861:

noticed that Brandt had something to say about his AfD ?

362:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=Journals

2114:

I'm answering here, because it will be a bit of an essay

1321:

Hey DGG I am new to WP (about 20 days). I have created

4229:

Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation

4218:

Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation

4210:

Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Corporation

3298:

anybody except the author can remove a speedy template.

112:, who in the same session had also managed to S-delete 4528: 3642:

AfD. There is a discussion going on at the article's

2278:

Why do you think Dufferin Mall is not a notable mall?

1680: 523:

List of films featuring the United States Marine Corps

4347:

National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research

4166:

I am a little confused by what happened to this page

3911:

I've responded on my talk to your question. Regards,

2452:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Susan Alcorn (author)

2387:

PS: And how about adding a (talk) to your signature?

1405:

Since you commented on the afd, it has been re-Afd'd

3881:

it, but we'll agree to differ on that one. Regards,

2454:... you might want to keep an eye on them as well. — 1468:

you're on record with two different recommendations—

3759:I was wondering if you would have a second look at 3555:I sent you an email the other day, did you get it? 2228:Actually for the moment this appears to be sorted. 1705:

here, where the consensus was clearly to delete. —

1598:, just to trigger the "You have new messages" box.) 690:. An article well-written by minority theorists is 3738:Please stop "vandalising" articles as the one for 3678:A few people seem to have been caught out. IT was 3014:When I don't know for sure, which is pretty often, 1862:according to wikipedia's definition of the term. 1778:they obviously know where their info came from. - 1257:Hello and sorry for the spam. You participated in 1239:Awesome job on finding some better references for 4420:Thank you. I will take a look, and sort it out.-- 4289:for a (rather belated) reply to your comment! :) 3279:There are also some nifty things you can do with 2940:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Christoff Johnson 2669:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Stephen P. Sheehi 1293:Although you mentioned you're planning to remove 4332:, I thought you might want to contribute to its 3662:Knowledge:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Journals 3217:Ignore, that, I've seen that anyone can remove 2568:, which seems to cover much the same ground as 1235:}} to their talk page with a friendly message. 971:, who has a history of making vanity edits. // 651:fictional topic from an in-universe perspective 214:It might be worth mentioning to Jimbo Wales. — 2868:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Connor Stevens 1830:Proof of vandalism by NavyChaps and USMC Padre 1728:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/John Machemehl 1466:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Laurence Scott 3578:OK, just double checking you got my reply :) 3247:templates which need to remain on the page. 3165:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Zlatko Krasni 2975:Knowledge:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc 2925:Hello ... would you please close these AfDs? 283:Knowledge talk:Scientific citation guidelines 4504:I'm going to draft a co-nom and leave it at 4463:'s is, I guess that shouldn't be surprising. 4048:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy 3765:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Sunder Nagar 2935:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Casey Clinch 2816:Yet another installment in the never-ending 2607:so which way would you like to merge? In my 2161:for daring to mention woodblock printing in 4328:Hi. Since you contributed to the article's 4224:has been moved back to its rightful place. 2477:User talk:Yannismarou#Books by Susan Alcorn 1012:Sorry, you are right. I jumped the gun. -- 3790:User talk:Anthony Appleyard#taxonomy stubs 3283:, under the special pages on your left. -- 2174:Yes I saw. Another front opens tonight at 1101:Natural History of South Asia mailing list 780:Please give reasoning for your COI tag at 3734:Your changes to the Steve Vickers article 3446:); that'll keep the page history intact. 3436:User:DGG/Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2930:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Bomb Town 4192:, and created the new silly-titled page 2921:Please close these Articles for Deletion 1797:The Golden Book of Chemistry Experiments 4198:SPARC - Scalable Processor ARChitecture 4196:. Someone else sensibly requested that 4190:SPARC - Scalable Processor ARChitecture 14: 3296:As I understand it, you will see that 2572:. Do you agree they should be merged? 2163:Four Great Inventions of ancient China 3699:Articles for deletion/Wild Law (book) 1945:Online general-interest book database 4330:first deletion nomination discussion 3638:Hello, you recently participated in 1810:Dates of birth and death in articles 1615:David, I assume you're referring to 1464:I noticed that in the discussion at 667:template on the article. Thanks. -- 3703:Thank you for your comments on the 2905:system conditions of sustainability 2165:, so I better say thanks quickly! 2007:was more widely noticed. Thanks. 23: 2493: 2421:Library_of_Congress_classification 1225:has smiled at you! Smiles promote 1214: 24: 4602: 4378:Hey! Are you stalking my edits? 2364:History of Typography in the East 1594:(A copy of our conversation from 4352:Re public domain: Good call. I 3440:Emerald Group Publishing Limited 3079:Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2560:Journals & Academic journals 888:AfD page for List of conferences 245:This piece on Norman H. Horowitz 4506:User:YechielMan/Other stuff/DGG 2630:Category talk:Academic journals 2157:He has just reported me on 3RR 1617:The Never-Ending Chronicles of 1521:Factually incorrect information 1326:forgo editing. Will you proof 787:talk:Keith Ellison (politician) 604:Just trying to help.... thanks 499:List of childhood-related films 265:Re: usage of full journal names 4468:(paraphrased from my reply on 4324:nominated for deletion (again) 815:Thanks Mohammad Samir Hossain 55:commons:Category:Mainz psalter 13: 1: 776:Re:Keith Ellison (politician) 653:or a real item. I read your 434:21:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC) 420:20:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC) 279:Knowledge talk:Citing sources 4561:to be. Happened to me once. 4104:Property and Freedom Society 3763:and the discussion on AFD: ( 1791:Article about chemistry book 1697:Just wanted to alert you to 1231:Smile at others by adding {{ 541:Lisa Feldman Barrett article 67:reply, criteria for deletion 7: 4188:article to the silly title 3720:"too promotional in nature" 3630:19:40, 19 April 2007 (CET) 2259:Master of the Playing Cards 1384:Talk:Hindutva pseudoscience 1038:Thanks for making a start! 344:06:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC) 291:01:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC) 260:21:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC) 228:19:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 219:19:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 207:18:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 191:20:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 176:18:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 166:18:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 152:20:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 125:17:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 106:Master of the Playing Cards 95:16:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 62:03:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC) 44:21:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 10: 4607: 4592:08:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 4568:07:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 4555:05:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 4523:13:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 4513:03:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 4491:20:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4477:21:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4470:User talk:Anthony.bradbury 4435:21:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4425:20:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4407:20:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4396:20:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4383:20:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4366:16:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4341:04:04, 29 April 2007 (UTC) 4316:15:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 4273:05:10, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 4256:03:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 4236:02:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 4178:00:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC) 4150:10:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 4131:04:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 4121:04:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 4111:19:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC) 4093:18:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC) 4062:02:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 4036:08:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 3998:03:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 3971:02:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 3944:Jocelyne Couture-Nowak DRV 3930:08:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC) 3916:03:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC) 3907:"insufficient portal talk" 3901:23:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 3875:22:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 3838:22:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 3797:20:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 3779:05:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 3750:14:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 3729:09:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 3694:04:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 3669:01:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 3651:00:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 3617:15:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 3596:23:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 3573:00:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 3546:22:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 3535:15:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 3526:01:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 3516:14:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3497:09:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3476:04:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3461:03:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3424:00:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3413:22:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3368:02:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3335:22:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3288:20:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3275:15:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3260:14:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3211:14:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3172:11:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3146:02:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3130:01:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3110:01:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3093:06:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 3072:02:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC) 3036:05:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 2997:03:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 2982:23:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2961:07:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 2916:23:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 2890:15:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 2862:11:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 2826:"filed harassment charges" 2811:22:07, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2795:21:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2781:21:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2766:18:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2747:) into one article called 2720:21:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2709:13:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2695:02:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2679:13:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2660:12:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2651:01:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2637:12:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2597:12:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2577:12:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2566:Category:Academic journals 2555:03:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2544:03:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2484:03:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2470:18:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 2441:05:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 2410:09:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 2383:19:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2356:17:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2333:09:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2319:08:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2283:04:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 2269:03:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC) 1768:10:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC) 1738:05:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC) 1722:03:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC) 1676:20:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 1659:10:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 1644:06:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 1629:05:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 1610:05:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 1583:17:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 1561:06:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 1543:05:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 1515:04:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC) 1505:03:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 1481:00:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC) 1455:09:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC) 1423:19:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC) 1396:12:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC) 1369:01:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC) 1350:12:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC) 1335:16:29, 23 March 2007 (UTC) 1312:05:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC) 1284:20:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 1248:19:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 1200:16:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 1176:05:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 1162:04:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 1144:for why the musical group 1134:10:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC) 1117:12:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC) 1092:20:40, 14 March 2009 (UTC) 1073:06:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC) 1043:06:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC) 1033:04:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC) 1017:07:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC) 1003:10:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC) 982:22:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC) 950:13:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC) 912:22:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC) 897:11:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC) 881:00:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC) 849:06:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC) 829:02:18, 10 March 2007 (UTC) 782:Keith Ellison (politician) 761:Mark Radcliffe (filmmaker) 688:Hindutva and pseudoscience 4535:edit counter opt-in terms 4220:(per my suggestion), and 3403:18:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 3177:Removal of PROD templates 2801:With Reference to Karen K 2253:21:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2233:21:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2216:14:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2197:08:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2183:05:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2170:04:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2153:04:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2138:02:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC) 2109:18:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC) 2081:08:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC) 2067:13:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC) 2052:04:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC) 2035:04:04, 7 April 2007 (UTC) 2017:06:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC) 1990:07:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 1976:08:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1962:RE:German Soldier's House 1957:05:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1933:20:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC) 1901:08:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1882:08:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1844:20:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 1825:18:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 1804:09:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 1786:08:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC) 798:08:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC) 771:22:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC) 755:22:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC) 733:08:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC) 672:08:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC) 636:03:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC) 611:00:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC) 600:00:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC) 588:23:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC) 572:07:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC) 550:05:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC) 535:08:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC) 515:08:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC) 493:About lists of films AfDs 488:16:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC) 463:15:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC) 449:04:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC) 4005:École acadienne de Truro 3530:Done, and much obliged! 3444:Emerald Group Publishing 3434:Spammy, but workable(?) 2877:meets the definition of 2509:or removed. Please use 4578:20:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC) 3674:Vietnamese Californians 3607:Eugenics in Showa Japan 3602:Eugenics in Showa Japan 2759:, among other terms. -- 2655:Sounds sensible to me. 2047:it has no any evidence. 1995:re: Frederique_Constant 1981:Beware the Yellow Peril 1445:was never an argument. 1378:Please see my reply at 1241:Breast expansion fetish 677:Indigenous Aryan Theory 3705:AfD page for this book 2969:nominated for deletion 2735:Full English breakfast 2626:Category talk:Journals 2564:Hi. I see you started 2498: 1401:Hindutva pseudoscience 1265:. Thank you. Regards, 1219: 1023:Justin Michael Jenkins 454:what is WP:Snowball ?? 148:Firsfron of Ronchester 4285:Hello! Please see my 4041:OrthodoxWiki articles 3844:Gayton, Staffordshire 3227:templates - it's the 3181:A question regarding 2497: 1671:discussions. Cheers! 1218: 1049:The resource exchange 867:comment was added by 250:Horowitz oral history 118:User:Charles Matthews 4589:William M. Connolley 4545:Hi, This is Hetoum, 4500:For future reference 3826:One Night In Hackney 3466:About my AFD comment 2742:Full Irish breakfast 1635:Excercise physiology 992:Khachkar destruction 684:Hindutva revisionism 425:Growing Earth Theory 53:Hi, i googled these 3502:Van Resistance/temp 3430:here's your emerald 2828:against myself and 2371:history of printing 2119:evasion at AfD. 2001:Frederique_Constant 1951:CambridgeBayWeather 1588:local history fiend 1531:membrane oxygenator 1512:Resurgent insurgent 1502:Resurgent insurgent 1460:AfD: Laurence Scott 967:is a sockpuppet of 955:Scientific Activist 692:Out of India theory 561:Knowledge:user page 3717:"It needs cleanup" 2992:about. Cheers!!! 2987:Country Club Plaza 2901:Karl-Henrik Robert 2499: 2415:LoC Classification 1871:attribution policy 1649:MPADV & MP1mgs 1527:E. Converse Peirce 1282: 1220: 840:I have replied at 647:Age of Empires III 395:Scientific Journal 271:the FAC nomination 237:==N.H. Horowitz== 4334:second nomination 4313: 4200:be moved back to 4098:Copyvio evidence? 4090: 4032: 3995: 3968: 3794:Anthony Appleyard 3634:Looking for input 3281:Special:Listusers 3256: 3207: 2883:complete bollocks 2858: 2570:Category:Journals 2540: 2533: 2503:John H. Cade, Jr. 2439: 2408: 2028:Internet brigades 2015: 1875:original research 1453: 1394: 1352:(from talk page) 1340:Laurence H. Scott 1266: 1146:The Dresden Dolls 1071: 884: 634: 533: 513: 475:I have nominated 468:Christina Sormani 142:assert notability 4598: 4432:Anthony.bradbury 4422:Anthony.bradbury 4312: 4309: 4307: 4301: 4298: 4295: 4083: 4080: 4077: 4059: 4034: 4031: 4026: 4023: 4018: 3988: 3985: 3982: 3961: 3958: 3955: 3898: 3889: 3872: 3863: 3836: 3827: 3776: 3771: 3755:Sunder Nagar AFD 3742:(see discussion 3726:Lesley Fairbairn 3656:Journals project 3592: 3584: 3569: 3561: 3458: 3453: 3340:Two column lists 3255: 3253: 3246: 3240: 3236: 3230: 3226: 3220: 3206: 3204: 3196: 3190: 2909:The Natural Step 2860: 2857: 2852: 2849: 2844: 2763: 2621:Academic journal 2541: 2538: 2534: 2531: 2527: 2433: 2404: 2391:AfD and feelings 2330: 2316: 2011: 1907:Kings of Clonmel 1860:reliable sources 1773:Calthorpe Clinic 1719: 1714: 1709: 1449: 1436: 1430: 1419: 1414: 1390: 1330:? Much obliged 1307: 1302: 1280: 1275: 1270: 1057: 946: 944: 942: 940: 938: 862: 752: 738:you know what... 729: 726: 723: 720: 717: 714: 711: 708: 705: 702: 698: 666: 660: 624: 608: 597: 585: 567: 529: 509: 390: 385:Empty citation ( 383: 381: 373: 288:Opabinia regalis 149: 4606: 4605: 4601: 4600: 4599: 4597: 4596: 4595: 4585: 4543: 4533:I agree to the 4531: 4502: 4484: 4461:User:Referenced 4450:User:Referenced 4445: 4442:User:Referenced 4418: 4373: 4350: 4326: 4310: 4305: 4299: 4296: 4291: 4283: 4266: 4243: 4241:Speedys and DRV 4159: 4138: 4100: 4089: 4078: 4073: 4069: 4055: 4043: 4027: 4019: 4014: 4011: 4008: 3994: 3983: 3978: 3967: 3956: 3951: 3946: 3937: 3923: 3909: 3892: 3883: 3866: 3857: 3847: 3835: 3825: 3823: 3816: 3808:Birdsall Viault 3804: 3802:Birdsall Viault 3786: 3774: 3769: 3757: 3736: 3701: 3676: 3666:John Vandenberg 3658: 3636: 3624: 3604: 3590: 3582: 3567: 3559: 3553: 3504: 3494:Schreit mich an 3485: 3468: 3451: 3447: 3432: 3388: 3363: 3354: 3348: 3342: 3263: 3251: 3244: 3238: 3234: 3228: 3224: 3218: 3214: 3202: 3194: 3188: 3179: 3160: 3141: 3125: 3105: 3082: 3067: 3058: 3052: 3046: 2989: 2971: 2923: 2897: 2871: 2853: 2845: 2840: 2837: 2822: 2803: 2788: 2773: 2761: 2731: 2687: 2672: 2562: 2539:(Contributions) 2537: 2530: 2523: 2492: 2448: 2425:any old version 2417: 2393: 2366: 2341: 2326: 2312: 2301: 2298:Richard Carrier 2290: 2288:Direct Deletion 2276: 2262: 2245: 2146: 2116: 2101:Your thoughts? 2088: 2074: 2024: 1997: 1983: 1964: 1947: 1909: 1851: 1841:ChaplainReferee 1832: 1812: 1793: 1775: 1757: 1745: 1731: 1717: 1712: 1707: 1695: 1683: 1668: 1651: 1637: 1590: 1575:Gutenberg Bible 1571: 1569:Gutenberg Bible 1523: 1492:You de-prodded 1490: 1462: 1434: 1428: 1417: 1412: 1403: 1376: 1374:article titling 1358: 1342: 1319: 1305: 1300: 1291: 1278: 1273: 1268: 1259:this discussion 1255: 1237: 1212: 1141: 1124: 1104: 1051: 1026: 1010: 1000:John Vandenberg 989: 957: 936: 934: 932: 930: 928: 919: 917:Superpower cats 904: 890: 863:—The preceding 856: 838: 821: 806: 778: 768:CalendarWatcher 764: 750: 740: 727: 724: 721: 718: 715: 712: 709: 706: 703: 700: 696: 679: 664: 658: 655:to be clarified 643: 618: 606: 595: 583: 579: 565: 557: 543: 495: 470: 456: 441: 427: 397: 384: 375: 374: 372: 330:Other comments 267: 238: 199: 197:Re:overspeeding 158: 147: 110:User:Firefoxman 69: 51: 29: 27:Catholic-expand 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4604: 4584: 4581: 4571: 4570: 4542: 4539: 4530: 4527: 4526: 4525: 4501: 4498: 4496: 4488:JosephASpadaro 4483: 4480: 4465: 4464: 4444: 4439: 4438: 4437: 4417: 4414: 4412: 4410: 4409: 4389:service center 4372: 4369: 4349: 4344: 4325: 4319: 4282: 4276: 4265: 4259: 4242: 4239: 4182: 4181: 4158: 4153: 4137: 4134: 4124: 4123: 4118:DickClarkMises 4108:DickClarkMises 4099: 4096: 4085: 4068: 4065: 4042: 4039: 4007: 4002: 4001: 4000: 3990: 3963: 3945: 3942: 3936: 3933: 3922: 3919: 3908: 3905: 3904: 3903: 3846: 3841: 3829: 3815: 3814:Earls of Stair 3812: 3803: 3800: 3785: 3784:taxonomy stubs 3782: 3756: 3753: 3747:147.188.192.41 3735: 3732: 3722: 3721: 3718: 3715: 3712: 3700: 3697: 3675: 3672: 3657: 3654: 3635: 3632: 3623: 3620: 3603: 3600: 3599: 3598: 3552: 3549: 3503: 3500: 3484: 3479: 3467: 3464: 3442:(or, perhaps, 3431: 3428: 3387: 3384: 3375: 3372: 3361: 3352: 3346: 3341: 3338: 3320: 3319: 3316: 3313: 3309: 3308: 3305: 3302: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3262: 3248: 3213: 3199: 3178: 3175: 3159: 3154: 3153: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3139: 3123: 3103: 3081: 3077:Journals from 3075: 3065: 3056: 3050: 3045: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3023: 3022: 3018: 3011: 3007: 2988: 2985: 2970: 2964: 2943: 2942: 2937: 2932: 2922: 2919: 2896: 2893: 2875:Connor Stevens 2873:I don't think 2870: 2865: 2821: 2814: 2802: 2799: 2787: 2784: 2778:172.163.189.62 2772: 2769: 2749:Full breakfast 2730: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2686: 2683: 2671: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2605: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2587: 2583: 2561: 2558: 2491: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2447: 2444: 2416: 2413: 2392: 2389: 2365: 2362: 2360: 2340: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2300: 2295: 2289: 2286: 2275: 2272: 2261: 2256: 2244: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2202: 2201: 2200: 2199: 2145: 2142: 2141: 2140: 2128: 2125: 2115: 2112: 2087: 2084: 2073: 2070: 2057: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2023: 2020: 1996: 1993: 1982: 1979: 1963: 1960: 1946: 1943: 1941: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1908: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1850: 1847: 1831: 1828: 1811: 1808: 1792: 1789: 1774: 1771: 1756: 1753: 1744: 1743:John Machemehl 1741: 1730: 1725: 1699:my edit on DRV 1694: 1691: 1689:29 March 2007 1682: 1679: 1667: 1662: 1650: 1647: 1636: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1601: 1600: 1589: 1586: 1570: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1558:Irene Ringworm 1553:Alan W. Clarke 1540:Irene Ringworm 1522: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1489: 1484: 1461: 1458: 1443:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 1402: 1399: 1375: 1372: 1357: 1354: 1341: 1338: 1318: 1315: 1290: 1289:Glyconutrients 1287: 1254: 1251: 1230: 1213: 1211: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1183: 1182: 1140: 1137: 1123: 1120: 1103: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1050: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1025: 1020: 1009: 1006: 988: 985: 973:66.177.173.119 956: 953: 918: 915: 903: 900: 889: 886: 855: 852: 837: 835:Riccardo Campa 832: 820: 817: 805: 802: 801: 800: 777: 774: 763: 758: 739: 736: 678: 675: 642: 639: 617: 614: 578: 575: 556: 553: 542: 539: 538: 537: 494: 491: 469: 466: 455: 452: 440: 437: 426: 423: 396: 393: 348: 347: 346: 335: 324: 323: 298: 297: 266: 263: 253: 252: 247: 236: 235: 234: 233: 232: 231: 230: 198: 195: 194: 193: 156: 155: 154: 138: 134: 131: 130: 129: 128: 127: 68: 65: 50: 47: 28: 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4603: 4594: 4593: 4590: 4580: 4579: 4576: 4569: 4566: 4565: 4559: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4553: 4552:149.68.164.13 4549: 4546: 4538: 4536: 4524: 4521: 4517: 4516: 4515: 4514: 4511: 4507: 4497: 4494: 4492: 4489: 4479: 4478: 4475: 4472: 4471: 4462: 4458: 4457:duly reported 4454: 4451: 4447: 4446: 4443: 4436: 4433: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4426: 4423: 4413: 4408: 4405: 4400: 4399: 4398: 4397: 4394: 4390: 4385: 4384: 4381: 4376: 4368: 4367: 4364: 4358: 4355: 4348: 4343: 4342: 4339: 4335: 4331: 4323: 4322:Cathy O'Brien 4318: 4317: 4314: 4304: 4302: 4294: 4288: 4280: 4279:Steve Vickers 4275: 4274: 4271: 4270:Myke Cuthbert 4263: 4258: 4257: 4254: 4252: 4247: 4238: 4237: 4234: 4230: 4225: 4223: 4219: 4215: 4211: 4207: 4203: 4199: 4195: 4191: 4187: 4180: 4179: 4176: 4175: 4169: 4164: 4161: 4160: 4157: 4152: 4151: 4148: 4144: 4133: 4132: 4129: 4122: 4119: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4109: 4105: 4095: 4094: 4088: 4081: 4076: 4064: 4063: 4060: 4058: 4053: 4049: 4038: 4037: 4033: 4030: 4029:(talk to me!) 4024: 4022: 4017: 4006: 3999: 3993: 3986: 3981: 3975: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3966: 3959: 3954: 3941: 3932: 3931: 3928: 3918: 3917: 3914: 3902: 3899: 3897: 3896: 3890: 3888: 3887: 3879: 3878: 3877: 3876: 3873: 3871: 3870: 3864: 3862: 3861: 3853: 3845: 3840: 3839: 3834: 3833: 3828: 3821: 3811: 3809: 3799: 3798: 3795: 3791: 3781: 3780: 3777: 3772: 3766: 3762: 3752: 3751: 3748: 3744: 3741: 3740:Steve Vickers 3731: 3730: 3727: 3719: 3716: 3713: 3710: 3709: 3708: 3706: 3696: 3695: 3691: 3687: 3686: 3681: 3671: 3670: 3667: 3663: 3653: 3652: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3631: 3629: 3619: 3618: 3615: 3611: 3608: 3597: 3594: 3593: 3587: 3586: 3585: 3577: 3576: 3575: 3574: 3571: 3570: 3564: 3563: 3562: 3548: 3547: 3544: 3540: 3537: 3536: 3533: 3528: 3527: 3524: 3518: 3517: 3514: 3510: 3507: 3499: 3498: 3495: 3491: 3483: 3478: 3477: 3474: 3463: 3462: 3457: 3454: 3445: 3441: 3437: 3427: 3425: 3422: 3416: 3414: 3411: 3406: 3404: 3401: 3397: 3393: 3383: 3379: 3378: 3373: 3370: 3369: 3366: 3364: 3360: 3351: 3345: 3337: 3336: 3333: 3332: 3327: 3326: 3317: 3314: 3311: 3310: 3306: 3303: 3299: 3295: 3289: 3286: 3282: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3273: 3269: 3265: 3264: 3261: 3258: 3254: 3243: 3233: 3223: 3216: 3215: 3212: 3209: 3205: 3198: 3193: 3186: 3183: 3174: 3173: 3170: 3166: 3158: 3157:Zlatko Krasni 3147: 3144: 3142: 3138: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3128: 3126: 3122: 3117: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3108: 3106: 3102: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3091: 3087: 3080: 3074: 3073: 3070: 3068: 3064: 3055: 3049: 3037: 3034: 3033: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3019: 3015: 3012: 3008: 3004: 3003: 3002: 2999: 2998: 2995: 2984: 2983: 2980: 2976: 2968: 2963: 2962: 2958: 2955: 2952: 2948: 2941: 2938: 2936: 2933: 2931: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2918: 2917: 2914: 2910: 2907:and founding 2906: 2902: 2892: 2891: 2888: 2884: 2880: 2876: 2869: 2864: 2863: 2859: 2856: 2855:(talk to me!) 2850: 2848: 2843: 2833: 2831: 2827: 2819: 2818:Billy Hathorn 2813: 2812: 2809: 2798: 2796: 2793: 2783: 2782: 2779: 2768: 2767: 2764: 2758: 2754: 2750: 2746: 2743: 2739: 2736: 2721: 2718: 2717: 2712: 2711: 2710: 2707: 2703: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2693: 2682: 2680: 2677: 2670: 2661: 2658: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2649: 2648: 2642: 2638: 2635: 2631: 2627: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2613: 2610: 2606: 2602: 2598: 2595: 2591: 2590: 2588: 2584: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2575: 2571: 2567: 2557: 2556: 2553: 2552: 2546: 2545: 2542: 2535: 2528: 2526: 2520: 2516: 2512: 2508: 2504: 2496: 2485: 2482: 2478: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2467: 2464: 2461: 2457: 2453: 2443: 2442: 2437: 2431: 2426: 2422: 2412: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2398: 2388: 2385: 2384: 2380: 2376: 2372: 2361: 2358: 2357: 2354: 2349: 2344: 2334: 2331: 2329: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2317: 2315: 2308: 2307: 2305: 2299: 2294: 2285: 2284: 2281: 2274:Dufferin Mall 2271: 2270: 2267: 2260: 2255: 2254: 2251: 2234: 2231: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2217: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2198: 2195: 2194: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2181: 2177: 2172: 2171: 2168: 2164: 2160: 2155: 2154: 2151: 2139: 2136: 2135: 2129: 2126: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2111: 2110: 2107: 2102: 2099: 2095: 2091: 2083: 2082: 2079: 2069: 2068: 2065: 2064: 2053: 2050: 2045: 2041: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2033: 2029: 2019: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1992: 1991: 1988: 1978: 1977: 1974: 1969: 1968: 1959: 1958: 1955: 1952: 1942: 1935: 1934: 1930: 1926: 1925: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1912: 1902: 1899: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1868: 1863: 1861: 1857: 1846: 1845: 1842: 1837: 1827: 1826: 1823: 1822:Billy Hathorn 1819: 1816: 1807: 1805: 1802: 1798: 1788: 1787: 1784: 1781: 1770: 1769: 1766: 1762: 1752: 1751:2 April 2007 1750: 1740: 1739: 1736: 1729: 1724: 1723: 1720: 1715: 1710: 1704: 1700: 1690: 1688: 1678: 1677: 1674: 1666: 1661: 1660: 1657: 1646: 1645: 1642: 1630: 1627: 1622: 1620: 1619:Billy Hathorn 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1608: 1607: 1599: 1597: 1592: 1591: 1585: 1584: 1581: 1576: 1562: 1559: 1554: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1541: 1535: 1532: 1529:articles and 1528: 1516: 1513: 1509: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1488: 1483: 1482: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1457: 1456: 1452: 1448: 1444: 1440: 1433: 1425: 1424: 1421: 1420: 1415: 1408: 1398: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1371: 1370: 1367: 1363: 1353: 1351: 1348: 1337: 1336: 1333: 1329: 1324: 1314: 1313: 1310: 1308: 1303: 1296: 1295:glyconutrient 1286: 1285: 1281: 1276: 1271: 1264: 1260: 1250: 1249: 1246: 1242: 1236: 1234: 1228: 1224: 1217: 1201: 1198: 1197: 1192: 1191: 1188: 1187: 1185: 1184: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1174: 1170: 1164: 1163: 1160: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1136: 1135: 1132: 1128: 1119: 1118: 1115: 1110: 1108: 1102: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1084: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1069: 1065: 1061: 1056: 1044: 1041: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1031: 1024: 1019: 1018: 1015: 1005: 1004: 1001: 997: 993: 984: 983: 980: 979: 974: 970: 966: 965:Cellularesque 962: 952: 951: 948: 947: 924: 914: 913: 910: 899: 898: 895: 885: 882: 878: 874: 870: 866: 859: 851: 850: 847: 843: 836: 831: 830: 827: 816: 814: 811: 799: 796: 792: 791: 790: 788: 783: 773: 772: 769: 762: 757: 756: 753: 746: 743: 735: 734: 731: 730: 693: 689: 685: 674: 673: 670: 663: 656: 652: 648: 638: 637: 632: 628: 623: 613: 612: 609: 602: 601: 598: 590: 589: 586: 574: 573: 570: 568: 562: 552: 551: 548: 536: 532: 528: 524: 519: 518: 517: 516: 512: 508: 504: 500: 490: 489: 486: 482: 478: 473: 465: 464: 461: 451: 450: 447: 436: 435: 432: 431:MichaelNetzer 422: 421: 418: 413: 411: 407: 402: 392: 388: 379: 369: 365: 363: 358: 352: 345: 342: 341: 336: 333: 332: 331: 328: 320: 319: 318: 314: 310: 306: 302: 295: 294: 293: 292: 289: 284: 280: 276: 272: 262: 261: 258: 251: 248: 246: 243: 242: 241: 229: 226: 222: 221: 220: 217: 213: 212: 211: 210: 209: 208: 205: 192: 189: 185: 180: 179: 178: 177: 174: 168: 167: 164: 153: 150: 143: 139: 135: 132: 126: 123: 119: 115: 111: 107: 103: 102: 101: 100: 99: 98: 97: 96: 93: 92: 85: 81: 77: 74: 64: 63: 60: 56: 49:Mainz Psalter 46: 45: 42: 38: 37: 33: 19: 18:User talk:DGG 4586: 4572: 4562: 4550: 4547: 4544: 4532: 4503: 4495: 4485: 4467: 4466: 4452: 4419: 4416:Block evader 4411: 4386: 4377: 4374: 4359: 4353: 4351: 4327: 4292: 4284: 4267: 4248: 4244: 4226: 4183: 4172: 4165: 4139: 4125: 4101: 4074: 4070: 4056: 4044: 4028: 4020: 4015: 4009: 3979: 3952: 3947: 3938: 3924: 3910: 3894: 3893: 3885: 3884: 3868: 3867: 3859: 3858: 3851: 3848: 3830: 3817: 3805: 3787: 3761:Sunder Nagar 3758: 3737: 3723: 3702: 3690:bananabucket 3683: 3680:User:Bnguyen 3677: 3659: 3637: 3625: 3605: 3588: 3580: 3579: 3565: 3557: 3556: 3554: 3541: 3538: 3529: 3519: 3511: 3508: 3505: 3486: 3469: 3433: 3417: 3407: 3396:Benoît Gréan 3394:and make it 3392:Bénoît Gréan 3389: 3386:Benoît Gréan 3380: 3377:ANDRE MEDICI 3376: 3374: 3371: 3358: 3355: 3349: 3343: 3329: 3323: 3321: 3297: 3180: 3161: 3136: 3120: 3114:And I found 3100: 3083: 3062: 3059: 3053: 3047: 3030: 3013: 3000: 2990: 2979:Kevin Murray 2972: 2967:Template:pnc 2953: 2947:68.239.79.97 2944: 2924: 2904: 2898: 2872: 2854: 2846: 2841: 2834: 2824:Billy's now 2823: 2804: 2792:86.133.68.97 2789: 2774: 2771:Grand Street 2732: 2714: 2688: 2673: 2645: 2608: 2563: 2549: 2547: 2524: 2515:welcome page 2500: 2481:68.239.79.97 2462: 2456:68.239.79.97 2449: 2446:Susan Alcorn 2418: 2396: 2394: 2386: 2367: 2359: 2345: 2342: 2327: 2313: 2309: 2302: 2291: 2277: 2263: 2250:Kevin Murray 2246: 2191: 2173: 2156: 2147: 2132: 2117: 2106:Kevin Murray 2103: 2100: 2096: 2092: 2089: 2086:PNC Template 2078:ClaudeReigns 2075: 2061: 2058: 2049:Vlad fedorov 2032:Vlad fedorov 2025: 1998: 1984: 1970: 1965: 1949:No problem. 1948: 1940: 1922: 1920: 1913: 1910: 1892: 1888: 1864: 1852: 1849:RE: Fetishes 1833: 1820: 1817: 1813: 1794: 1776: 1758: 1749:Bhaktivinode 1746: 1732: 1696: 1687:Bhaktivinode 1684: 1669: 1652: 1638: 1616: 1604: 1602: 1593: 1572: 1536: 1524: 1491: 1473: 1469: 1463: 1426: 1410: 1404: 1377: 1359: 1343: 1332:ClaudeReigns 1320: 1317:Take a peek? 1292: 1256: 1238: 1221: 1194: 1168: 1165: 1142: 1125: 1114:Atulsnischal 1111: 1105: 1081: 1052: 1027: 1014:Kevin Murray 1011: 990: 976: 958: 927: 920: 905: 891: 869:Alf photoman 860: 858:good job... 857: 846:Black Falcon 842:my talk page 839: 822: 807: 779: 765: 747: 744: 741: 695: 680: 644: 619: 603: 591: 580: 558: 544: 496: 485:DavidCBryant 477:this article 474: 471: 457: 446:Kevin Murray 442: 428: 417:Kevin Murray 414: 400: 398: 370: 366: 353: 349: 338: 329: 325: 315: 311: 307: 303: 299: 268: 254: 239: 200: 183: 169: 159: 141: 114:Rede Lecture 89: 86: 82: 78: 72: 70: 52: 39: 34: 30: 4541:User Hetoum 4371:Quite human 4336:. Thanks. - 4262:Neil rankin 4233:Quuxplusone 3913:Newyorkbrad 3818:Please see 3767:) Regards, 3614:Azukimonaka 3285:HappyCamper 2879:WP:NONSENSE 2702:Papermaking 2511:the sandbox 2475:Please see 2176:Papermaking 1494:Enoch Moore 1487:Enoch Moore 1356:Blood libel 1263:the new one 1253:Cockroaches 1233:subst:Smile 1008:Re: Science 969:biochemnick 959:Please see 902:Attribution 844:. Cheers, 662:In-universe 157:==Speedy== 4520:YechielMan 4510:YechielMan 4147:YechielMan 3682:. Thanks, 3473:YechielMan 3421:Klaus rabe 3410:Klaus rabe 3400:Klaus rabe 3362:(Stephen) 3272:EdJohnston 3140:(Stephen) 3124:(Stephen) 3104:(Stephen) 3066:(Stephen) 3010:by others. 2994:Alamar2001 2895:K-H Robert 2762:sony-youth 2729:breakfasts 2525:Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť 2343:Hi David, 2005:second AFD 1626:Realkyhick 1323:an article 742:Hi there, 622:Strangerer 275:proteasome 4287:talk page 4136:Adminship 3644:talk page 3090:Pharamond 2887:Pete.Hurd 2339:Good idea 2072:Tom Short 1987:Jörg Vogt 1580:AntoniusJ 1328:Tom Short 1173:Lotusduck 1159:Lotusduck 961:this page 909:Lotusduck 819:Thank you 795:Wowaconia 527:Hoverfish 507:Hoverfish 472:Hi, DGG! 439:WP:N Talk 410:Knowledge 378:cite book 225:Wackymacs 216:Wackymacs 204:Wackymacs 188:jimfbleak 173:jimfbleak 163:jimfbleak 104:DGG, btw 59:Cherubino 41:JASpencer 4575:Hetoum I 4311:contribs 4067:Response 3770:=Nichalp 3685:Blnguyen 3622:Deleting 3482:This AfD 3252:superbfc 3203:superbfc 3116:one more 2957:contribs 2830:Dhartung 2808:Maclenin 2753:see here 2681:(done). 2609:personal 2507:reverted 2466:contribs 2397:feelings 2375:mukerjee 2280:Kingjeff 2243:PNC etc. 1898:NeoFreak 1879:NeoFreak 1869:via the 1867:verified 1818:Thanks, 1763:. Rgds, 1708:bbatsell 1693:Tap, tap 1362:WP:UNDUE 1245:LaMenta3 1227:WikiLove 1223:LaMenta3 1040:Tyrenius 1030:Tyrenius 987:heads up 877:contribs 865:unsigned 854:GE Hacks 826:Shoovrow 669:Jreferee 641:Abus gun 631:Contribs 555:Warnings 503:WP Films 4281:Article 3927:Slacker 3775:«Talk»= 3648:Tufflaw 3628:Rjecina 3583:Majorly 3560:Majorly 3044:columns 3021:saving. 2706:Johnbod 2692:Johnbod 2676:Pan Dan 2617:Journal 2353:Noroton 2303:Huh??? 2266:Johnbod 2230:Johnbod 2213:Johnbod 2209:Cai Lun 2180:Johnbod 2167:Johnbod 2150:Johnbod 2009:Rossami 1889:declare 1856:notable 1761:on this 1703:the AfD 1596:my page 1150:cabaret 1112:Thanks 547:Djbwiki 133:Hi DGG! 122:Johnbod 73:recheck 4537:...-- 4529:Counts 4354:always 4143:WP:RFA 4128:Hetoum 4016:irides 3935:Thanks 3921:Mayors 3886:Adrian 3860:Adrian 3820:WP:BAN 3591:(hot!) 3568:(hot!) 3551:E-mail 3543:Hetoum 3532:Hetoum 3523:Hetoum 3513:Hetoum 3490:BigHaz 3268:WP:LOA 2913:Sunray 2842:irides 2740:) and 2532:(Talk) 2430:phoebe 2328:Sophia 2314:Sophia 2030:title. 2013:(talk) 1973:Jadger 1954:(Talk) 1765:StephP 1681:Thanks 1673:StephP 1474:Delete 1470:Relist 1366:Jayjg 1347:SocJan 1210:Smile! 1139:Policy 1131:woggly 481:WP:BIO 401:filled 184:before 4474:Coren 4404:Coren 4393:Coren 4380:Coren 4363:Coren 4300:smart 4222:SPARC 4202:SPARC 4186:SPARC 4156:SPARC 4057:juice 4052:Mango 4021:centi 3895:M. H. 3869:M. H. 3506:Hi! 3398:??? ( 3359:Steve 3169:Yupik 3137:Steve 3121:Steve 3101:Steve 3063:Steve 2847:centi 2836:here. 2657:Dsp13 2634:Dsp13 2594:Dsp13 2574:Dsp13 1893:prove 1755:Vote! 1656:Bowsy 1439:WP:RS 929:: --> 460:Filll 257:Filll 16:< 4583:Auer 4391:.) 4338:Eep² 4293:matt 4079:star 4075:Rock 3984:star 3980:Rock 3957:star 3953:Rock 3788:See 3640:this 3456:acan 3350:Or 3344:Use 3237:and 3222:prod 3192:prod 3184:and 3054:Or 3048:Use 3006:AfD. 2973:See 2951:talk 2820:saga 2757:here 2619:and 2519:link 2490:Edit 2460:talk 2436:talk 2406:(𒁳) 2379:talk 2159:here 1929:talk 1801:Itub 1735:Fram 1478:Deor 1472:and 1451:(𒁳) 1432:move 1413:Baka 1392:(𒁳) 1301:Ante 1154:punk 1088:talk 945:< 894:andy 873:talk 627:Talk 616:prod 577:Miah 566:Mkdw 559:Per 531:Talk 511:Talk 406:here 387:help 273:for 4564:DGG 4453:did 4264:AfD 4251:DES 4208:to 4174:DGG 4050:. 4012:- 3949:-- 3852:all 3832:303 3612:]-- 3450:coe 3331:DGG 3325:DGG 3232:afd 3167:. - 3032:DGG 2838:- 2786:LPS 2716:DGG 2647:DGG 2628:or 2551:DGG 2402:dab 2193:DGG 2134:DGG 2063:DGG 1924:DGG 1780:Mgm 1641:Avi 1606:DGG 1447:dab 1418:man 1388:dab 1306:lan 1269:Hús 1196:DGG 1152:or 1083:DGG 1068:WRE 1055:J.S 978:DGG 751:Alf 686:or 607:Alf 596:Alf 584:Alf 340:DGG 281:or 116:by 91:DGG 57:-- 4493:) 4091:) 3996:) 3969:) 3792:. 3745:). 3692:) 3664:. 3492:- 3459:— 3448:— 3426:) 3415:) 3405:) 3270:. 3257:— 3249:— 3245:}} 3242:db 3239:{{ 3235:}} 3229:{{ 3225:}} 3219:{{ 3208:— 3200:— 3195:}} 3189:{{ 2959:) 2885:. 2797:) 2685:Ma 2632:? 2468:) 2438:) 2381:) 2144:JG 2124:: 2104:-- 1971:-- 1931:) 1806:. 1713:¿? 1435:}} 1429:{{ 1386:. 1298:-- 1279:nd 1169:me 1122:Hi 1109:. 1090:) 963:. 925:. 879:) 875:• 793:-- 789:. 665:}} 659:{{ 629:| 444:-- 382:: 380:}} 376:{{ 4306:/ 4297:. 4163:← 4087:C 4084:/ 4082:( 3992:C 3989:/ 3987:( 3965:C 3962:/ 3960:( 3688:( 3452:l 2954:· 2949:( 2722:. 2463:· 2458:( 2434:( 2432:/ 2377:( 1985:. 1927:( 1782:| 1718:✍ 1621:. 1409:. 1274:ö 1086:( 1070:) 1066:/ 1064:C 1062:/ 1060:T 1058:( 943:t 941:n 939:a 937:i 935:d 933:a 931:R 883:. 871:( 728:e 725:l 722:g 719:a 716:e 713:e 710:l 707:b 704:o 701:N 697:— 633:) 625:( 389:)

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

Index