User talk:Delicious carbuncle

1210:

interactions I have formed the impression that ArbCom is shirking its duty in this regard. (And now actively trying to fob it off on the WMF who are unwilling to take it on in a meaningful way.) I started writing the blog posts after I gave up on the usual channels. The first editor I profiled was a no-brainer. ArbCom was told and did nothing. That user was blocked after a second blog post, but not by ArbCom. I followed up by profiling a second user. That user has not been blocked (but I am confident that it is only a matter of time). If you didn't understand by this point that it would be a good idea to keep an eye on the Wikipediocracy blog, you missed your wake-up call. If the circus that erupted from an unrelated blog post there about a different matter didn't put it on the ArbCom regular reading list, I don't know why not. My most recent blog post went up 25 March. Did none of the Arbs see it? Did no other editor email you about it? My email to ArbCom was a courtesy. Just about any acknowledgement of my email would have prevented my posting on Jimbo's page. I recall having had this discussion before and being told that the process would be changed. I guess it wasn't. I have no way of knowing what's going on within ArbCom, but the observable actions do not correspond with statements made by Arbs. On a more personal note, if you are inclined to dismiss reports of problems because you don't like the tone of the emails, you should not have stood for election to ArbCom. Who did you think writes emails to ArbCom - happy editors praising the quality of the articles? I would hope that my "familiarity" is a refreshing change (and my apologies if my sign off of "warmest regards" was offensive to you).

1151:

Your e-mail shows up at Fri, Mar 29, 2013 (10:58 PM) in my records (timings should be UTC, possibly BST). My response (to the mailing list) was Sat, Mar 30, 2013 (12:33 PM), mainly reporting that I had done a search within my records on the username (though this would not have picked up anything reported in 2011 or 2012) and pointing out some earlier discussion from 2009, and pointing people at the diff from 2007 (which has since been pointed out elsewhere). The details are broadly what I stated in my post to ANI last night. I then left the matter and waited for a response from my colleagues (it is easy to do this when there are lots of other things competing for attention, and that is always the case with arbitration). This weekend was unusual in that it was noticeable that not many arbs were around (I can back that up with details if needed). Nothing was said on the matter between my mailing list post on the Saturday and a response on Tue, Apr 2, 2013 (9:38 AM) that stated that you had turned up on Jimbo's talk page and were very unhappy about this.

1147:

up the e-mails I received from you (all from the mailing list), and I see three e-mail threads before my current 2-year term, one from August 2010 and one from December 2010. If you have been active in sending in e-mail reports in 2011 and 2012, it is not something I would have been aware of, and not something other arbs would necessarily have flagged up to the incoming arbs this year. What I do notice, on reviewing the three opening e-mails I have from you since my current term started, is that you adopt a tone of familiarity verging on contempt, especially in the way you sign off the e-mails (I would quote those sign-offs directly, but you might object). That certainly put me 'on edge' with regards to you, and I suspect other arbs as well. This may be one reason why arbs have been, or are starting to, 'tune out' your e-mails.

1235:

action followed by later review if needed), or following deliberations that involve more arbitrators (much slower). There is literally no way to speed up the deliberative process if there are not enough arbitrators around (and there weren't over that weekend). The point where things went wrong was not acknowledging your e-mail. So I have to ask you direct, if this happens again, will you be e-mailing us or not? If you are, I have said I will ensure your e-mail is acknowledged if I am around. Can you please, even if you don't respond to anything else, answer that one question.

2807:. However, I did not come here with poor assumptions and I did not ask a series of questions; in fact, I only asked a single one-sentence question. I also did not come here at random: I decided to discuss the issue here because I understand that someone in Jimbo's position only has so much time to review messages and I didn't really feel that it would be respectful of me to start unnecessarily hashing out details in his userspace. In any event, I do not disagree as to whether genuine sexual harassment on our project should be taken seriously and I elaborated on this 4898: 1179:

may not have happened to have kept in emails, where procedural policies are enforced in the same way from case to case. It shouldn't be left to a group of elected volunteers to determine whether someone's past activity is contrary to child protection policy or not, otherwise you are being asked to determine what level of past paedophilia advocacy or activity is acceptable or not. I think that most people would agree that shouldn't be something that a group of volunteers deliberate on, it should be part of the official responsibility of the site's management.

4779:, and a whole slew of List of rampage killers for the Americas, Africa, and so on. This is a huge problem that I completely agree with you on and that editor with OWN issues is behind them all (Lord Gon or whatever his name is). I think, depending on what Knowledge policy actually is on the issue, that perhaps there is competency issues that can be used, obviously an unhealthy obsession with the topic exists, but am unsure whether that itself adds up to warranting a topic ban. I would support one though and hope to coordinate with you on this issue. 3269: 21: 1101: 5039: 3515: 2221:- do you know why there are 650 and not 450 women in that list? JPL is why - a few hours of his time, devoted to helping highlight women poets. Media parroted the claim that we have more articles on porn starts than poets, JPL is proving them wrong. Seriously... drop ... the... pitchfork... Also, you're very concerned about the special bio. Do you really think it should be treated differently than any other? I do not, not at all. If you do, that is sad commentary on wikipedia.-- 4840: 1772: 2507: 706:"When an editor is blocked for such conduct, the blocking administrator is instructed to use neutral block summaries, and disable the editor's ability to edit their talk page as well as their access to the on-site user email interface. Blocking administrators should inform the blocked editor that any appeals or further discussion may be addressed only to the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-appeals-enlists.wikimedia.org, and then notify the Committee immediately." 5319: 1242:, seemingly as if ArbCom have some group awareness. We don't. It is extremely easy for individual arbitrators to fail to notice something - not all arbitrators are keyed in to what is going on. Thinking that addressing ArbCom as a whole means all the arbitrators are listening to you is about the most common mistake people make (the key is to get at least one arbitrator to listen and then make a fuss about something). Some arbitrators are very definitely 1228:(I read parts of the Wikipediocracy forum, but rarely the blogs), though it was probably best that you reverted that edit as multiple people piling into this discussion will make it much more difficult to get anywhere. And while we are being frank, the part of one of your e-mails that struck a strange tone with me (I wouldn't have called it offensive) was where you referred to yourself as our "devoted servant". That struck me as just taking the piss. 5264: 1460:

Whilst it was not grounds for blocking (as you pointed out in your second email), I'm sure it lead to some members of the committee ignoring you. I will also say that I dropped the ball over the Easter weekend, I pretty much ignored the arbcom email lists and focussed on article writing. I should have read and replied to your email, for which I apologise. Like Carcharoth above, I will do my best to acknowledge any emails from you that I see.

4642: 1036:

note (the "further explanation" is linked there, I believe, if you've forgotten). That being said, I don't disagree with your goals, especially as related to child protection; it's just the means with which you and the community over there attempt to reach them violate my vision of civil interaction. I am fairly sure that, had we met under more favourable circumstances, I would have had a much different first impression of you.

971:

blocks, just that I am willing to be blocked if that's what it takes to draw attention to the situation. ArbCom did not act on any of the three cases I documented. Two of those editors are now blocked. If you haven't read the blog posts yet, read at least the first two (both are about the same user) and ask yourself what ArbCom should have done in that case. I think you will agree that they had ample time for due diligence.

2261:

sexist by putting her in American women journalists and not American journalists, but instead in a non-gendered sub cat? Which bugs you more? For which error should he be strung up? I don't see anything about this incident that has "targeted" her, anymore than the jealous people guarding her bio have "targeted" her for special white-knight protection. Is calling someone a journalist or columnist some sort of smear now?

293: 5130: 934:

lynch mob behavior against accused pedophiles will do irreperable damage to reputations. It will not matter that your ID will have been correct; it will have undermined policy and allowed that future miscarriage of justice and fairness to happen by creating an environment tolerant of those types of discussions and acusations being made fully public.

1155:

future, and get no response, that you please e-mail at least one more time asking for at least an acknowledgement that the e-mail has been received. If I am around, I will send such acknowledgements in future, though I can't promise instant action - as Georgewilliamherbert says above (and a lot of what he says makes sense),

732:

write the policy notwithstanding, this policy is ArbCom's responsibility. It is good to know that you would have blocked this user, but that does nothing to alleviate my concerns that the body to whom editors are directed to report these cases chose not to act in this case (and in the earlier cases I have documented).

4812:

Ah, yes, and that discussion did not seem to get very far. The issue still stands it being an ownership issue and the fact that the editor himself is the problem. Consensus does not require EVERYONE to agree, and consensus sure does seem to favor the fact that "rampage" is vague and undefined. Not to

3330:

It's a reliable source if you are writing about boots in general, but it is not a book about sexual fetishes, so it can hardly be seen as authoritative on that subject. Interest in boots or shoes may be casually referred to as a "shoe fetish", but that is not speaking about a paraphilia. Similarly, a

3233:

Dusti, I don't have a problem with you personally, just with your actions here and only some of those. A very long while ago, I tried to get you to stop closing AfDs because you seemed to lack the judgment required. You still do, yet you seem to want to make changes that require judgment. If you went

3033:

I have reported you now. Your claim that shoe fetishism would be any kind of "main topic" for boot fetishism indicates that you know nothing of the subject, which makes your actions all the more questionable. I am not primaraly reverting your redirects, I am trying to work on the article. If you keep

2856:

Again, the article itself is not the issue. My suspicion is that Russavia will work to get the article translated into other languages and the Jimbo images uploaded to the local projects. I don't know how much success he will have with this, given that Jimbo has expressed his feelings quite strongly.

2751:

I considered those assertions combined to carry a pretty direct implication that translating the Pricasso article would constitute further sexual harassment. The action being suggested is also new for all intents and purposes, because as far as I'm aware, it has never happened, and even if it has, it

1906:

Just to clarify, no, I'm not making any suggestions of the sort. I'm just explaining that you shouldn't just ignore him because he mentions legal threats. I've reached out to him for now and hopefully we can work out something where everyone is happy and we don't end up in a big mess. More at my talk

1482:

Worm That Turned, if members of ArbCom are going to ignore me because I called one of their own "a self-important twat" then they are welcome to do that. It won't help with the perception that ArbCom are ignoring their responsibilities, but as you can from the above, AGK thinks that ArbCom is doing a

1234:

Over the matter in question, we had actually got to the stage where support was slowly coalescing to take some action as a committee, but that possibility was cut short by the action that was eventually taken. This is because such action is either taken unilaterally by an individual arbitrator (rapid

1154:

Of course this could have been handled better, but I hope the above helps explain some of the background. For my part if you had sent a second e-mail asking what was going on, I would have replied. You may still be unhappy with how this was handled, but can I ask that if you make reports like this in

826:

If I had looked at this and come to the conclusion that you were wrong - i.e., this person was in no way credibly holding or advocating those views - I would indef block you myself for having done that much damage to their reputation. It would likely be reduced on appeal, but I doubt the block would

746:

I am coming to see from this discussion and the various discussions on ANI that your interpretation and understanding seems fairly common if not the usual one. Which would seem to create a problem if most everyone reads it that way and messages only into the Arbcom main mailing list with significant

3111:

And yes, I do realize that went to something regarding biting newbies - but the concept is still pretty much the same. Not sure where the issue came from, but in any regards - I've closed the discussion again. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it had already been discussed about closing the discussion as

2245:

interprets the categories they see at the bottom of articles and the interpretations that one can draw from the categorization of women apart from their males peers. This is not a new problem, but it may have provided enough impetus to finally deal with it. I defended Johnpacklambert on Jimbo's page

1664:

Your counting is better this time. I think the edit summaries are clear enough. I was about to propose a merge to the main article, but the stuff that isn't trivia is a misrepresentation of the sources, so there's really nothing worth merging. If editors insist of removing the redirect, I guess I'll

1497:

It's quite simple really Delicious carbuncle in my mind, if actually want Arbcom to look at a case, present us with the evidence quietly, as is suggested in policy. We seem to have managed well enough whenever anyone else does so. Creating blog posts, emailing snide remarks and highlighting the blog

1035:

My sincere apology for misreading the situation at Jimbo's talk page and having it colour my understanding of yourself since, and as such besmirching your name at ANI. It is no excuse for my inaccurate statement, but I hope you will recognise my state of mind at the time at the time I first read the

929:

We both agree that there exists a problem and it has to be dealt with somewhere, by someone. Arbcom's position of old was that they asserted authority over appeals and that admins could act, and the topic was touchy enough that public discussion of incidents was prohibited; that was codified by the

853:

Or, in another common case on-wiki, someone who stridently believes a reasonable age of consent should be 16 (which it is, legally, in 30 US states, at least according to our article) or 15 (which it is, legally, in much of Europe, again based on our articles) or 14 (which it is, legally, in much of

834:

A case can be made that you should be indef blocked anyways, on the grounds that even if in this case you're evidently right about them (IMHO), we should not be selective about enforcing the clear policy not to discuss these on-wiki, because it sets up a precedent that will utterly destroy someone's

505:

Comments posted on Knowledge suggesting that an editor may be a pedophile will be RevDeleted promptly, to avoid issues of privacy and possible libel. You should raise your concerns only by email; questions or accusations directed against a particular editor in project space may result in a block for

3748:

say, not because I like or dislike you. really, this is about your actions on WP, not about who you are as a person. If you think I am being rude towards you, it is probably because I have a good idea of how many different people have asked you to be more careful closing AfDs and how many times you

3710:

with any work on Knowledge - you're going to have those that disagree with you. You see, it wouldn't matter if I were a sysop or not in this case, you would still disagree with me, and you'd either take it to Deletion Review, or AN, or call for my head. It's because you dislike me, and while that's

3705:

I'm feeling fine :) Thanks for the concern - and I'm not really a rude person, though I usually worry that I'll come off as rude, and I don't like that. You see, in this situation, we're at a deadlock. I know I'm right, you think you're right. It's not going to go anywhere. So I'm going to leave it

2988:

By "our purposes" I was indicating the purposes of Knowledge as an encyclopedia. If boot fetishism is sufficiently distinguished from shoe fetishism as a topic, there should be reliabel (and authoritative) sources discussing it. Adding trivia about The Avengers does not substantiate any need for it

2787:

but I have quite deliberately not said that I think Russavia is sexually harassing Jimbo. Russavia is quite obviously trolling Jimbo -- I think many people would call it harassment -- but as to whether or not it constitutes "sexual harassment" in the workplace, I am not qualified to say. I think it

2264:

Seriously, I know you don't think you're carrying a pitchfork, but when you're outside a castle, holding a torch and demanding that a witch be burned for crimes which AREN'T EVEN CRIMES - you need to drop the pitchfork. You have brought nothing to AN which is contravention of any policy or guidance

1831:

If you must take legal action, we cannot prevent you from doing so. However, it is required that you do not edit Knowledge until the legal matter has been resolved to ensure that all legal processes happen via proper legal channels. You should instead contact the person or people involved directly,

1178:

This is why the WMF needs a dedicated point of contact for such issues. Somewhere where the person in receipt of such reports isn't influenced by the style of the report, or past antagonisms with the reporter, where there is institutional memory that isn't dependent on what a group of people may or

1146:

What you may not be fully aware of is how fragmented this institutional memory can be. Some arbs are new, only elected this year or last year, some have been around for years, one (me) was around in 2009 and 2010, but was not around in 2011 and 2012. Now, after reading what you said above, I looked

970:

advocating that discussions of this sort be held in public or that these types of matters would benefit from community input. On the contrary, I fully support the part of the policy that states editors will be blocked for doing what I did. This doesn't mean that I think I should be exempt from such

3003:

It is more than sufficiently distinguished. It is not the same at all. Trivia about the Avengers could of course be removed from the article if that's important to you, but that's not what the article is about. If you READ the ARTICLE and not just the trivia section, you'll see this. If you try to

2802:

Considering the context of the proposal, I believe that one reading — and especially a quick reading — of your words can be interpreted as implying that the article's translation needed to be stopped. This does not mean that you intended to make that suggestion, and I am no stranger to words being

2204:

What you said is that he ghettoized her. I read your opening statement. Do you realize that he didn't, b/c he also placed her in columnists? Would you like me to provide you a list of 20 women columnists that aren't in the journalists parent cat? Will you then drag those who committed such a crime

1431:

As you can see, the only one in which ArbCom took any visible action is the "9 September report" in which ArbCom declined to block. The situation with the user named in the "6 February report" is still not clear to me - does ArbCom intend to take action or not? As best as I can tell without a more

1254:

be aware of those e-mails. The other thing I think you may not fully understand is the amount of other work we do (among other things, a case has just moved to voting, and there is an appeal I am trying to get moved forward). This explains, though it doesn't excuse, why we don't always give things

1246:

listening to you (and to some extent, I don't blame them). That is part of the problem here. Given that this is almost never raised during elections, you need to ask each individual arbitrator what their stance is on ArbCom's role in enforcing issues such as the ones you raise. That will help more

1209:

Carcharoth, being as frank as I can be given the circumstances, ArbCom cannot fail to have noticed that I have been pressing them on this issue for some time now. I am not styling myself as some magical detector of undesirable editors. We may disagree on some cases and that's fine, but through our

965:

Off the top of my head I can think of one case where an editor was wrongfully blocked for suspicion of pedophilia advocacy. I can also think of one case where an editor protested quite strongly about their block with the defence that they were a legitimate author and "researcher" (although I think

903:

Incidentally, I think your choice of "someone who stridently believes a reasonable age of consent should be 16" is a terrible example. For one thing, I don't think that they would be likely to be accused of advocacy of pedophilia, and, for another, being "strident" about anything implies advocacy,

731:

The policy states in two places that reports of such cases should be directed to ArbCom. Admins can act and inform ArbCom, but there is no indication in the policy that anyone outside of ArbCom should be the first point of reporting. Blocks under this policy are appealed to ArbCom. That you helped

3657:

I've sat here re-writing this post over and over, as I don't want to come off rude. You're wrong. My recent AfD closures are in-line with policy. This was closed as a procedural close. It is an inappropriate re-listing, it's being stated so on the discussion. The consensus is that this should not

1627:

Nothing is being deleted and only a single editor has protested. Other than that, you are correct, it has been around for a few years, but that is clearly no indication of quality. It would somewhat pointless to have an AfD to delete the article only to immediately recreate it as a redirect. As I

1150:

The other thing that likely happened here is that some arbs really were not around over the Easter weekend, or were slow to respond. I may have been the first to read your e-mail when it came in and seriously look at it, and I should have responded to you then; for failing to do that I apologise.

933:

My point is, we need to be clear on the difference between "someone seems to have made the correct ID here" and "we want large public debates and accusations by anyone in the future". If what you just did becomes the norm for behavior, someone WILL ge falsely or mistakenly accused, and the usual

3419:

either? That article is nothing like the definition of "shoe fetish" you are advocating here. I know the term can be used the way you are saying, but that has nothing to do with what we are discussing here. First, that casual use of the term has nothing to do with the encyclopedic view I thought

2694:

I am a little tired to be trying to pull this off right now, but I'll give it a shot. On your third point, you describe Russavia's stated intent to have Pricasso translated into other languages and the possibility that he might upload the disputed files to each respective project, which you note

1541:

AGK, I was unable to locate a response from ArbCom on the "6 February report". I had a discussion I had in March with Worm That Turned, who was quite clear that they were not speaking for ArbCom. If there was an email from the Committee, can you resend it? As for the other cases, in what way did

1230:

Having got that out of the way, part of the reason I'm trying to engage with you here on your talk page is to ensure that at the end of this we are both clear where things stand. One point I want to really try and get across to you is that your approach nearly always makes it harder to deal with

950:

I should have said this as well - I don't feel you're not qualified. I don't know if you are or not; I don't know your background, etc. On the specifics in this case, on brief to moderate examination, you seem to have found evidence and concluded in a reasonable manner. I think the policy and

3380:

You say shoe fetishism is a casual way of refering to an interest in boots, like if it was some sort of a hobby. However, it is a well researched paraphilia. Why should I change my mind? You haven't said anything which could convince me that you are right. On the contrary, you have dismissed my

3345:

Obviously, you haven't read the book. It is a book about boots in general, but among all the other aspects of boots, it also deals with boots as a sexual fetish. (A quote from the book, page 68: "The relationship between boots and sex has been a focus of psychosexual and sexological studies for

2260:

Can you detail what mistake he actually made? Do you think, for example, that calling her a journalist or columnist was a mistake? He honestly felt she qualified; consensus on talk was ultimately against, so he removed it. This is a lot of noise for a simple issue. Or, do you think he was being

1459:

For clarity the email I sent, whilst not on behalf of the committee, explained the reasons we were not taking action. From what I understand, your first email on 23 December didn't exactly endear you to the committee, given that it included a direct personal attack, which was made clear to you.

1135:

There are a couple of points in all that has been written that deserve a response now rather than later, mainly to correct some misunderstandings on several sides. I may write more tomorrow when I have more time (having time and opportunity to respond in detail at the right point, and not hours

845:

Such as, say (as a hypothetical only), there might be two Norwegians of the same or similar names, one of whom is not a child sexual predator but thinks the laws against them are silly, and the other one who is a semi-out actual child abuser. Accusing the first of being the second and being an

3457:

How is it, you can't answer straight questions? Have you read the book or not? So far, it seems you haven't. As long as you say the book is not saying what it is saying, you are basically saying I am lying when I claim that it does. Since you can't give any reason for your view (no, so far you

3018:

I wouldn't want to force you to do anything, but I think I'm pretty well within standard practice redirecting such a poor article to the main topic. You may wish to consider which of us is actually likely to be seen as editing warring here (hint: both) and whether people will wonder about your

2699:

be convinced to support as a community-centric function at meta, for a very limited subset of extremely abusive users where, say, no real opposition exists aside that of sock- and meatpuppets. However, in suggesting this action with respect to Russavia, the implication is that his behavior has

649:

John lilburne has it right. It is not about this particular case or any particular case - this is one of ArbCom's responsibilities and I expect ArbCom to carry it out. I can certainly understand why the issue makes them uncomfortable, but, as individuals, they knew about it when they stood for

2330:

If you can't be bothered to fix the issue, why throw those who are trying to the wolves? Or do you have some other clever set of solutions up your sleeve? I keep on asking, and keep on hearing crickets - what positive contribution are you planning on making to solve this complicated series of

1596:

I would agree in most cases, but as that particular article stands now, your proposal seems like an unnecessary waste of everyone's time. Nothing has been deleted, so you are free to move anything that you deem worthwhile into the main article. Alternatively, you could improve that article to

1443:

Thank you for your follow-up. My point was that every report you've sent us has been actioned, albeit with some delay in most cases. We do not intend to take action on the 6 February report, for the reasons we set down in an e-mail to you, but this would change if more evidence came to light.

539:

DC, where in that policy does it say: "Find compelling evidence anywhere on the Internet that someone may be a pedo and you can get them blocked on Knowledge"? What you have been doing does not strike me as upholding the purpose of the policy, but trying to use it to act out your own personal

3350:

can't really say it is not reliable for the information taken from it. Also, if a book is a reliable source, it is a reliable source for whatever message it gives you. And if you have a paraphilia which makes you sexually aroused by wearing boots or seeing others wearing boots, that is boot

3198:

Negative. I've not failed thus far. I'm sure in 13,000 edits I've made some mistakes, absolutely - but I've never passively attacked an editor. "Get a clue" is certainly not polite nor professional. Reverting a closure on a noticeboard without notice to the editor also is neither polite nor

3395:

That isn't anything like what I said. Let me try again. The term "shoe fetish" is often used to mean simply an interest in shoes (i.e., someone who owns many pairs of shoes may be said to have "a shoe fetish") or to imply that womens shoes are popularly regarded as "sexy". Neither of those

2833:

As a side note, and although I couldn't much more strongly disagree with you about globally banning Russavia, I would like to stop and thank you for making several good points about why BLPE should not have been invoked, particularly with respect to protocol and fairness. I do believe that

3711:

kind of hurtful (hell, a lot of your comments in your edit summary are hurtful), it's who you are, and I'm now learning to not care. I do ask that any time you revert me in the future, have the courtesy to leave me a note on my talk page (so, for the sake of my sanity, I know). Thanks! :)

2289:

Are you convinced yet, or do you need umpteen other people to weigh in on the AN? Can you just do the honorable thing, ask an admin to early close it, that you withdraw the ban request, apologize and move on? The few who have voted to ban are people with extant, known grudges against JPL.

1520:

I make no secret of the fact that my aim here is to get ArbCom to deal with this issue. I don't know if it's working yet, but at least we're talking about it now. And I think one or two of the more far-thinking people see where this could end up and may take appropriate corrective action.

2933:. I used it as an example in a discussion of images, so far from having an issue with it, I thank you for this spectacularly inappropriate image choice. If you want to copy my userpage, I can't stop you, but I think it may lead others to wrongly assume a connection between our accounts. 579:

What you mean is that you wish they would just block who you want blocked so you wouldn't "have" to violate the rules to whip up a public frenzy against someone to get your way. That isn't really the same as not having an option. Simple question: why is it so important to get the person

634:

He says he contacted ArbCom, who apparently are in the middle of a dispute with WMF over who is best suited to deal with such issues. If ArbCom aren't, and the WMF decide to hide behind the sofa and pretend not to be in, why should some lowly other admin take on the responsibility?

854:

the rest of Europe), or even 13 (Spain, some other countries around the world) is taken to be a child abuser by someone, who reports them for CP violation, when they in fact are just supporting or agreeing with a position supported by laws in a number of countries and US states.

2469: 3203:

is, and it seems you're generally in the midst of controversy, so I'll let it stay at that, because I frankly don't care. Here's another digital hug if you need it. I don't really have an issue with you and I do believe I've interacted with you in the past. Have a good one.

2378:

Maybe so, but I believe it would be better if he stopped doing that for the time being. I don't quite understand why you keep leaving me messages about this. I'm unlikely to change my mind and the decision is up the community (which does not seem to support a limited ban).

2345:

I'm not throwing anyone to the wolves, threatening to burn anyone at stake, or anything other than suggesting that JPL by banned from categorizing articles about people. That's all. Part of the problem here is that some people seem to be completely lacking in perspective.

3476:

I can't be bothered to invest the effort that would be required to prevent you from turning a useful redirect into a terrible simulation of an encyclopedia article. I look forward to the inevitable gallery of images of a disgraced civil servant wearing shiny high boots.

816:

If you're an admin, it is - you're empowered by the policy to (privately in the non-public sense) assess and investigate the situation, if you feel there's a policy violation then block and report to Arbcom based on your judgement. Or you can punt to Arbcom with just a

3873:

A bit odd for a white supremacist to live in Japan and have an affinity for so many other cultures, don't you think? I agree the evidence is damning due to the stormfront links, and the girl love bit is creepy if not conclusive, but something doesn't quite add up.

3428:

it doesn't say anything about whatever it is someone is using it as a reference for. How do you know the book is *just* a "general interest" book without any information about that interest as a sexual fetish? What makes you think I would be lying about its content?

1839:. I'll be glad to hear from you, SchroCat. Also Cassianto, MisterShiney, Dr. Blowfeld, Bencherlite and Delicious carbunkle. The rules sensibly provide for that course, so I know you will be happy to abide by it, and I will be happy to hear from one and all of you. 922:

Empowered was used for a reason. Whether the power is then not used, used appropriately and with good judgement, or abused is a separate issue. The policy was specific in not empowering everyone on this matter, due to the sensitivity and impact of possible false

2740:"...Russavia has stated that he intends to have the Pricasso article translated into other languages I fully expect that if the images are deleted from Commons he will have them uploaded to each individual project. The sanction here does nothing to prevent that." 4508:

To clear things up, I was not, in fact, tracking your edits. I added that page to my watchlist recently and saw one of the previous IP edits, so I was interested in what got removed. Having noticed an issue with the version that got restored, I went in and fixed

3346:

several decades. Among fetishes associated with an article of clothing, boot fetishism is said to be the most popular.") Everything I have written about the fetish which I use that book as a source for, is dealt with in the book. So if you haven't read the book,

2205:

before AN? I hope you can see from the bulk of the opinions that consensus is against your nomination - why don't you do the right thing and withdraw it, while there's still time to save your reputation. Even the so-called porn star, it turns out, she basically

3926:

Just checked the inbox. There's nothing but a message from the Commons oversight committee telling me that they aren't going to oversight nude images of a woman whose name is included in the filename and who did not consent to the images being publicly posted.

2246:

when Jimbo himself suggested a ban, but if JPL does not have the good sense to stay away from Filipacchi's article and keeps making mistakes like those discussed in the ban thread, I think it would be better for everyone if he stayed away from bios altogether.

2972:

You redirected a referenced and asked for page to another page for no reason at all, just claiming it was for *some people's* ("our") purposes and that some pop cultural references didn't help. What's your reason and what's the purposes you are refering to?

2778:

is harassment directed at Jimbo. If anyone did, it wasn't me, so I'm not sure why you showed up here to start asking me this series of questions based on poor assumptions you have made. Jimbo has made allegations about Russavia's actions, with regard to the

2679:

activity on another WMF project, including his stated intention to have the Pricasso article translated for other language Wikipedias. I don't understand how you think this implies that I am stating that Jimbo's rights are being violated - can you explain?

3643:). I agree that this will be closed, but given the circumstances, it really ought to be done by an admin so that the closure doesn't become another point of disagreement. As I asked you years ago, please stop closing AfDs. You lack the necessary judgment. 2895:

Hi, I received a notification about a mention of my username that was included in one of your posts. I think that discussion is dead and buried now, but if you take issue with my conduct in the future, please drop me a message on my talk page too. Cheers,

2788:

is a credible enough assertion that it should be taken very seriously. As for the terms of use, I do not know how often people are banned from the WMF projects for violating them, but I believe it happens as a matter of course for certain infractions.

540:

feelings about who should be allowed to participate. That sort of mentality just encourages turning every contentious debate into a witch hunt and we don't need that shit (we already have it really, but we certainly don't need to encourage it).--

1142:"ArbCom and I have a relationship going back years. At times it has been more productive than it is at present, but I believe there is enough of an institutional memory in that group that Arbs know what to expect when they see a report from me." 841:

Somewhere in here, attempting to forcibly assert the conclusion to the investigation crosses over into disrupting Knowledge to prove a point. And, again, if this guy wasn't self-evidently guilty, your damage to his reputation would be grossly

650:

election to ArbCom. Georgewilliamherbert, welcome to the show, but you arrived rather late - perhaps someone will fill you in on what you've missed over the past months. Perhaps ArbCom will be more communicative with you than they are with me?

3331:

character appearing on a television show wearing boots does not indicate that the makers of the show are trying to appeal to people with boot fetishes. Without a source that says that in so many words, they are just a character wearing boots.

1058:

Apology accepted, but you should realize that there is a wide range of opinions "over there" at Wikipediocracy, even on this particular issue. Although I wrote those blog posts and they published them, I don't speak for Wikipediocracy.

849:

Again, I don't think that's what happened here, that's just a hypothetical. But it's the sort of thing that the investigation needs to make an effort to get right, and until it's resolved the investigation should for good reasons be

4948:, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of 3400:

usages of the term is referring to the actual paraphilia. Since it is, as you say, a well-researched paraphilia, it shouldn't be that hard to find sources dealing with the paraphilia rather than a general interest book on boots.

1597:

demonstrate that human-goat intercourse is sufficiently different from other kinds of human-animal intercourse that it deserves its own article. Failing that, I think a redirect to the main article is the only sensible option.

1073:

Thank you for the clarification. I must admit my experience has been... less than impressive. I've already told you about my first experience with the forums at my talk page, although those I've checked recently have been much

3351:

fetishism. It is not just something "casual". For people with sexual fetishes of this kind, it is very serious; it is part of their identity, just like your sexual gender preferences. And boots are not shoes, boots are boots.

1255:

like your e-mails the full attention they may deserve. You may object to that, but as I've said, please send a follow-up e-mail first to try and get our full attention. It is not just you, that is advice I give to everyone.

1231:

things like this, it politicises the issues when what is needed is calm and dispassionate analysis and decisive action one way or the other (if you want to get the handling in the abstract changed, see my suggestion below).

3112:

there wasn't really much that could be done. He can email Jimbo if he wishes, or take it to the appropriate forum. It doesn't take an admin to see that, nor does it take an admin to stop a discussion that's already dead.

714:. That's intended to avoid someone bouncing a request out on a noticeboard or the like. But it's been a semi-regular occurrence that someone pointed it out privately to an admin, the admin blocked and notified Arbcom. 830:

Delay is clearly an issue and lack of communications is a issue. But in saying "inaction is the issue" you're essentially acting as judge, jury, and executioner. Which normal users are not authorized to do in these

4277: 2482:

On the top of the category, and then explain at the resultant CfD why you disagree with the category. Attacking users for populating the category in accordance with existing rules is not the way to respond to the

3772: 900:

qualified to make these determinations. Yes, I know, you didn't say "qualified" you said "empowered", but I think you get the point. Don't get me wrong, I understand what you are saying and agree with much of it.

2550:

which directly involves some actions you have taken recently. I believe I have represented the actions and concerns fairly, but if I have unintentionally misrepresented your position please correct me. Cheers!

5192:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 4813:

mention there are multiple issues with the list article anyways. The lede is ridiculous and doesn't pass our standards of what to put, not to put, in a lede; Ive created FL articles before and this is terrible.

3080:

I'm sorry, but where in the hell did that comment come from? As far as I know, non-admins can close discussions when there's really no point in letting them continue... do you mind sharing what's on your mind?

2722:

I neither said nor implied that the article about Pricasso constitutes sexual harassment. And I am not proposing "a new type of WMF action" - I am urging that the existing terms of use be applied to this case.

857:

There are a range of nuanced views in here, some of which are mainstream some of which are fringe some of which are actual advocacy of adult-child sex. Only the latter are actually CP violations and blockable.

3877:

However, if all is at it's purported to be then that school may have a serious problem on their hands and people might be in serious danger. I have a feeling you've opened up a can of very screwed up worms.

2947:

I asked precisely because I won't use it if you have a problem with it. Anyway, I just prefer people to say something to my face rather than behind my back, but I can't stop you either. So, good backbiting I

4049:

I think you are mistaken. I am not involved in that request and I hope to remain that way. I encourage everyone to simply ignore it and go back to whatever they were doing before Pink Ampersand showed up.

3365:

I get the impression that no matter what I say you won't change your mind, but please try not to misquote me. I did not say that shoe or boot fetishism was casual. Perhaps there is a language issue here?

2095:

I would say that if Kauffner had said any of that in a normal discussion it would be perfectly fine. Emblazoning it on a user page comes off as a polemical attack, even if it is a mild and humorous one.--

1290:

Your report on 9 September 2012: Not blocked, though open to reconsidering if more evidence comes to light. You seemed happy at the time with this decision, and said we should reconsider if circumstances

789:

ArbCom members have since stated that they were looking at it (I believe, I don't have diffs). Had they sent you an email telling you they were looking into it? If not, that might be the change that is

3881:

Btw, when you write these posts do you give your subjects an opportunity to comment before before you publish them? If not, it might be something worth considering, for reasons I'm sure are intuitive.

2545:

Howdy Carbuncle, please forgive the intrusion on your talk space. I know you asked me to stay away from your talk page, and I have tried to respect that request. I have recently filed a inquiry at the

671:

Any admin can and should block upon becoming aware, and then privately notify Arbcom for any appeals that may be made. Arbcom and the WMF arguing about whatever should only be affecting unblock appeals.

1193:

I think this is a sound idea, although keeping ArbCom in the loop for investigations would likely be helpful since some of the users reported may have been discussed previously, as was the case here.

712:"Reports of editors engaging in such conduct should be made to the Arbitration Committee for further action, and should not be the subject of community discussion, requests for comment or consensus. " 1739:

Not all Professors are notable, but being one is an assertion of importance sufficient to avert speedy deletion. Suggest Prod or AFD if you consider he does not meet the general notability gideline.

5370: 4143:

Hi DC, a couple of the Arbs have asked if you would make a statement on the case request mentioned above, as they feel it will provide more insight on whether a case is actually required. Regards,

2700:

violated and will continue to violate Wales' rights, which is more or less a stipulation of invoking the Terms of Use due to sexual harassment—freedom from which is often characterized as a right.

1005:

I read the latest blog post and researched some; I am aware of but have not read the earlier ones and not researched them yet. As I said, admins dealing with these things are days of work...

4064:

I feel this is a very arrogant reply. You are being uncooperative. If you disagree with the allegations made, you should write your opinion there, not arrogantly dismiss other editors' views.

2297:- but otherwise please stop attacks on editors - he's been through a lot, I wouldn't like to have my name dragged through the media mud, and then have fellow editors turn on me. Would you? -- 2143:

I'm quite certain that is not what Kauffner intended. Why don't you ask them. The page is blanked now and it will probably stay blanked, I'm not sure there's anything else to say about it.

289:

on your talk page earlier today, was it because you were expecting to need that room for the predictable shitstorm that would be created by your post on Jimbo's talk page? Just curious.

5326: 5312: 4296: 1573:

I've noticed that you have deleted this particular article without any prior discussion with the article's editors. I think it would be better to discuss the reliability of references on

2209:

a porn star (or close to it). The whole thing is a witch hunt. Why not put down your torch, and try to work to solve the problem. Do you really care about readers? Fine - work to refine

1250:

And I think you are still making the mistake of assuming that all arbitrators are aware of e-mails you sent to the committee in 2012 - those elected in December 2012 (including me) will

187:

I have removed the external links from your post, and revdeleted all revisions that contained the links. Please don't restore them. I have also asked a question about this incident at

926:

I have not seen a gross mistake made by an admin doing this, and I presume Arbcom would privately counsel, warn, or sanction someone who abused it. But I don't know if that's happened.

5283: 5275: 5267: 5256: 4717: 2431: 3802: 3420:

Knowledge would have. Second, we are discussing boot fetishism, not shoe fetishism. Third, the book I refer to deals with boots in general, their history and as a fashion item, but

838:

Under the circumstances, with an evidently guilty party, a community discussion underway and Arbcom highly aware and Jimmy highly aware, I leave it to the community processes et al.

1970: 1700: 1646:

Three editors have objected now, and you've replaced the content with a redirect 6 times over their objections. Don't you think it's about time to explain on the talk page, per

5307: 2653:

In effect, yes — by raising the point that the BLP sanction cannot prevent Russavia from further translating that draft, and by implication, allegedly violating Wales' rights.

3835: 4314:

We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

4008:

and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

4728:

during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.

5286:

during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.

5234:

Community input is politely requested for Jimbo's tkpg with regard ur expertise in gen. notability per wp:GNG & applicabilities of eg wp:PROF, wp:AUTH, etc. w/in AfD's

1628:

suggested to Jarble, you are welcome to improve the article or copy any important content into the main article. Failing that, please leave the redirect in place. Thanks.

685: 629: 520: 89:

to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to

820:

If you're Arbcom, you're empowered to (again, privately in the non-public sense) investigate and assess and if necessary block, based on their evidence and discussions.

5254: 4701: 491: 5411: 4873: 4034: 3662:

close, and I'm interested to see how long it stays open. I'm not going to defend the closure further. NAC states I can be reverted, and as such I was. End of story.

2040: 1014: 980: 960: 945: 914: 773: 759: 741: 726: 699: 600: 574: 560: 534: 2235:

Obiwankenobi, I am concerned about Amanda Filipacchi's bio because the biographies of people who are publicly critical of WP often become targets. The fact is, it

242: 565:

Perhaps you should direct your ire towards ArbCom and the WMF. I would prefer that it could all of been handled quietly and privately, but that wasn't an option.

5022: 2492: 1391:

on ANI, "We didn't ignore the report; the Committee did not see any reason to take further action" (when I asked which report that pertained to, I got no answer)

4737: 3936: 2957: 2942: 1938: 1530: 1515: 1492: 919:

The question of qualification has never been properly answered. Most editors and admins personally are uncomfortable enough with the issue to shy away from it.

805: 5015: 5002: 4884: 3773: 2402: 2001: 1836:

That makes a lot of sense. So, please provide me with some contact so that I can contact you directly in order to iron this out. For me, you can contact me at

525:

Not only aware of it, but agree with it entirely. When ArbCom shirks their responsibility for upholding that policy, however, I don't compelled to observe it.

370: 5302: 4853: 4497: 4265: 4076:

I'm choosing not to participate in my own defence. That may be foolish, but it isn't arrogant. If ArbCom finds grounds to sanction me, they will sanction me.

3486: 3471: 3452: 3438: 3410: 3390: 3375: 3360: 3340: 3057: 3043: 3028: 3013: 2998: 2536: 644: 4953: 4059: 2920: 2138: 2115: 1757: 1202: 659: 5221: 4563: 3993: 3862: 2834:

Newyorkbrad meant well and he obviously didn't have a lot of time to think things through, but ultimately there were ramifications that he did not foresee.

2388: 2373: 2355: 2340: 2325: 2277: 2255: 2230: 2199: 2152: 2088: 5113: 4127: 4115: 4097: 4085: 4071: 3967: 3952: 2808: 2560: 1083: 1068: 875: 390: 364: 280: 4822: 4807: 4752: 2316:

have only convinced me more. As I keep trying to tell you, I am not going to start any RfC's about specific categories. That will not solve the problem.

1811: 1264: 1219: 485: 321: 307: 217: 5095: 4627: 4604: 3817: 2465: 1840: 419: 405: 3921: 3155:

I find it fascinating how rude you can be. Then again, your block history says loads about that as well. Here's a digital hug, seems like you need one.

1929:

I'm not sure why he didn't just email me through WP, but I've sent a note to the email address he left here, so we should know soon what this is about.

1924: 1901: 1888: 1693: 1674: 1659: 1637: 5249: 2695:

would inherently fall outside the scope of policy here. Subsequently, in your conclusion, you propose a new type of WMF-wide action — something that I

823:

The policy is in place for a reason - in cases of false or mistaken accusations, there is essentially no possible recourse from the public accusations.

3586: 1606: 1224:

Thanks for the response, please feel free to be as frank as you need to be and I'll do the same. I'll start by saying that I agree with what was said

4574:

I removed my WP:CANVAS post and your reply with it. If that was not OK with you, please restore it, but I do not want to have it up there otherwise.

4285: 4271: 3978: 3758: 3735: 3700: 3686: 3652: 3243: 3228: 3193: 3179: 3150: 2616:

translated constitute an infringement of Wales' rights? I can't help but say that I expect to see this article moved to the mainspace at this point.

2866: 2828: 2797: 2769: 2732: 2717: 2689: 2670: 2648: 1862: 1188: 1163:

has the timings wrong), but that is enough for now. I'll aim to follow up tonight, and am willing to discuss this as much or as little as you want.

4763:

I saw your comment on Jimbo's page about an issue you are having on that page. I remember a discussion in a wider forum on this issue, and perhaps

2571: 1725: 1555: 253: 2443: 1621: 1388: 1477: 4247: 3532: 1590: 440: 5142: 4650:

Message added 23:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can

2069: 1398:

started at Talk:ARBCOM, "As for your questions at AN, I did look at them, and did not see anything I thought I could helpfully reply to" (AGK)

966:

that block was more than justified). I am sure that mistakes have been and will be made in both directions. Just to be completely clear, I am

4090:

I'm not going to force you into participating, but I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate it if we got to hear your version of the story.

3958: 2982: 2857:

The issue is the images. If the images appear in other projects, or remain on Commons, I predict that my proposed solution may be revisited.

1565: 1160: 1137: 265: 4191: 717:

It's been a couple or three years since the last case I took action on but if you'd showed me that info privately I would have acted here.

202: 4768: 3324: 1720: 4767:

can remember where it took place as I remember we both agreed on what should be done. But the point that brings me here- are you aware of

2745:"...but if Russavia is involved in hostile environment sexual harassment, as you claim, he should be removed from the project entirely..." 5166: 4856:

from this summer. I don't think I've laughed harder than when I read that, and I've seen some truly laughable things in my day. Cheers,

4523: 2109: 594: 554: 4012: 1612:

Since it has been around for a few years, AfD would be appropriate, not just a unilateral deletion protested by several other editors.

1324:

15 September - second email sent, response "Regretfully, e-mails to us are sometimes not read, and your earlier e-mail to us was missed"

4956:. There's lots of news this month for the Knowledge Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... 4795: 4772: 3136: 5090: 5063: 4788: 3914: 1122: 2851: 2306: 2184: 2175:? Do you care or not care about that fact? Because that is a pretty important piece of trivia that your accusation at AN left out.-- 2046: 1986: 1837: 182: 4776: 4005: 1793: 1454: 169: 3295: 2190:

It was brought up in the AN discussion. I completely understand your line of reasoning. I think I was clear in what I said at AN.

4529: 4482: 2528: 2013: 1868: 1361:

23 December - email to ArbCom about related issue, action promised by ArbCom but not carried out on an absolute no-brainer action

164: 159: 154: 149: 144: 139: 134: 129: 124: 4865: 3783:

case request, this action was carried at as an Arbitration Committee clerk so cannot be undone without ArbCom consent. Regards,

1225: 1040: 5391: 5171: 4696: 3831: 3312: 2025: 1699: 1574: 2967: 1172: 286: 4043: 3462:

about a book you haven't even read can't possibly count as a reason), I hope you will leave the article alone in the future.

1848: 5226: 5217: 5071: 4211: 4203: 3184:

I'm not even trying, Dusti. I find it fascinating how completely unaware you are of your own failings. Thanks for the hug!

349: 3915:

the shrieks of the usual suspects with zero respect for BLP "subjects" but plenty of admiration for their own sorry selves

2239:

being treated differently from other articles of comparable authors. Aside from that, Filipacchi has reminded us of how a

4162: 3105: 2905: 2436: 1966: 1247:

than anything to move things forward, rather than you conducting some campaign and saying you have 'formed impressions'.

5245: 5204:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

5148: 4914: 3234:

around fixing typos or copyediting, I'm sure we would get along fine. Thanks for the hug, but I didn't really need it.

2132: 2063: 1305: 470: 355:

You've been an admin since June. Perhaps you should sit back and let someone else worry about this. Just a suggestion.

96: 58: 45: 4589: 3904: 3547: 3424:

as a subject of a sexual fetish. Why is that so hard for you to understand? You can't just dismiss a book because you

3288: 3285: 3281: 2804: 2266: 1395: 1052: 618:

Can you explain your intermediate steps between apparent at first ignored private notifications and the big spectacle?

3847: 3309: 3303: 2633: 2547: 3629: 3528: 1355: 1311:

AGK, I'll try to answer as best as I can without being able to name the editors under discussion. In reverse order:

371: 222:

DC ... I actually agree with your comments at Jimbo's page, that we should ban certain users, but I'd tone it down.

5059:, which serves to coordinate editors interested in container-related topics and better-organize Knowledge content. 5055: 4758: 4725: 4709: 4703: 4548: 2583: 2294: 1581:- it appears that you have deleted this article's content without any prior discussion with the article's editors. 455:

I can't explain at the risk of 1000 arbitration cases, but hopefully you know what I'm talking about. Thank you.

5395: 5213: 4518: 4466: 4154: 3794: 2104: 589: 549: 4290: 3571: 2364:

to stop playing piano - he can play cello instead. Categorizing people is kind of the main thing he does here.--

5298: 2613: 2602: 2021: 1269: 1010: 956: 941: 871: 755: 722: 681: 625: 516: 424: 5124: 4440: 3004:

redirect the article again, I'll be forced to report you for edit warring. It's not up to you to decide this.

1136:

later, is something that would also have helped here). The main point I want bring up here is one you mention

5241: 5101: 4830: 4218: 4167: 3913:

I'm guessing that DC's inbox is currently overflowing with thank-you notes from Japanese parents. Meanwhile,

3259: 2497: 2218: 2172: 1962: 1762: 5274:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at 4539:

Upon seeing a diff from you at ANI with my name in it and an edit summary of wtf, I was slightly worried :p

1345: 5237: 4928: 4743:

Beeblebrox, you know better than to make bad faith deletion nominations like this. Why are you doing this?

4716:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at 2168: 2162: 1974: 1958: 1893:

Ignore the implicit suggestion from WTT to give JohnClarknew your contact details for litigation purposes.

813:

Specific to the "inaction is the issue" - While I sympathize with much of this, THIS part is not your call.

5342: 2926: 5383: 5330: 5308: 5209: 4986:

Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

4018: 3658:

have been re-listed at this early of a time. Controversial AfD? Likely. Inappropriate close? No - It's a

1784:

Hello! You have a great sense of humor. You managed to make me smile, when I felt miserable. Thank you.

1748: 1498:

on high profile pages suggest that your motive is something beyond dealing with child protection issues.

1091: 750:

I am leaning towards a policy and process change being necessary for this. But I'm not sure which one.

4635: 90: 5387: 5345: 5029: 4652: 4510: 4236: 3597:

I disagree with the revert and in allowing the conversation to continue, as it's clearly going to be a

3558: 2953: 2916: 2901: 2474:%5B%5BWikipedia%3ACategories+for+discussion%2FLog%2F2013+May+14%23User+talk%3ADelicious+carbuncle%5D%5D 2313: 2096: 1918: 1882: 1509: 1471: 1381:

6 February - email to ArbCom, no response (note that I originally reported this user to ArbCom to 2011)

581: 541: 498: 188: 2331:

problems? All I've seen is a witch-hunt, for now, on editors doing regular old categorization work. --

615:

Did you think to contact privately any of the admins who have discussed blocking such accounts before?

4974:

Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

4660: 4454: 3824: 3467: 3434: 3386: 3356: 3320: 3039: 3009: 2978: 2488: 2120:

Yes, I have. And I see no issue at all - if anything, the userpage is laudatory towards Filipacchi.--

2017: 1982: 1952: 1118: 1006: 952: 937: 867: 751: 718: 677: 621: 512: 5120: 5080:'s programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this 4980:

OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

4799: 4744: 4596: 4555: 4489: 4478: 4257: 4207: 4183: 4107: 4077: 4051: 3985: 3944: 3928: 3854: 3809: 3750: 3740:

Dusti, I don't know how you "know" that you are right, but I think that I am right because of what

3692: 3644: 3578: 3478: 3444: 3402: 3367: 3332: 3235: 3185: 3142: 3071: 3049: 3020: 2990: 2934: 2858: 2789: 2724: 2681: 2640: 2380: 2347: 2317: 2247: 2210: 2191: 2144: 2080: 2032: 1993: 1930: 1871:, he clearly feels aggrieved. I've offered my services through OTRS, it's unlikely to be finished. 1844: 1803: 1685: 1666: 1629: 1598: 1547: 1522: 1484: 1433: 1211: 1194: 1130: 1060: 972: 906: 765: 733: 691: 651: 566: 526: 477: 397: 356: 313: 272: 234: 209: 1665:

take it to AfD, but it has never been my intention to delete it, since it is a valid search term.

4968:

Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

4461: 4253: 4176: 4041: 2439:

page. Please do not empty the category or remove this notice while the discussion is in progress.

1184: 640: 5338: 5109: 4908: 4544: 3974: 3843: 2579: 2556: 2369: 2336: 2302: 2273: 2226: 2180: 2127: 2058: 1743: 1578: 93:

this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

863:

I think you're correct on this case, but would not act without a long review (days of effort).

5162: 5081: 5060: 4694: 4158: 4124: 4094: 4068: 3918: 3902: 3798: 2949: 2912: 2897: 2607: 1908: 1897: 1872: 1858: 1733:

Hello Delicious carbuncle. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of

1499: 1461: 1079: 1048: 345: 261: 65: 5341:: consensus to delete "just a list of postal codes" articles demonstrated in previous AfDs ( 3779:

Hi Delicious carbuncle, just to keep you informed. I've hatted your statement regarding the

5407: 5228: 5200:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4818: 4784: 4733: 4324: 4319: 4004:

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at

3999: 3463: 3430: 3382: 3352: 3316: 3035: 3005: 2974: 2484: 1978: 1817: 1789: 1260: 1168: 1114: 798: 463: 331: 302: 197: 4992:

WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

1295:

I do not have any other e-mails from you on file that relate to child protection reports.

8: 5399: 5205: 4998:

Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

4897: 4617: 4579: 4474: 4448: 4242: 4150: 3790: 3592: 1711: 436: 415: 386: 3830:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at

5294: 4329: 4029: 3543: 3521: 3514: 3034:

on redirecting it, of course it will never be more than a "poor article" in your eyes.

1655: 1617: 1180: 636: 5366: 5181: 5172: 5105: 5019: 4904: 4861: 4764: 4569: 4540: 4503: 4197: 3970: 3839: 3381:

sources without explaining why, just claiming the text "gets worse with every edit".

2575: 2552: 2365: 2332: 2298: 2269: 2222: 2176: 2122: 2053: 450: 227: 5353: 2268:- should I also be banned for such divisive categorization of female journalists? -- 5270:, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for 5201: 5185: 5158: 5154: 4922: 4680: 4121: 4091: 4065: 3888: 3568: 3508: 2598: 1894: 1855: 1586: 1341:

21 November - first blog post, reported to ArbCom by at least one user, no response

1075: 1044: 341: 257: 4347:

questions, you can ask me personally. I'm Ocaasi. I'm glad you're with us :) --

2265:

whatsoever - if you do have something, please share it. Take a look at this edit:

1965:. There is no rule that people must be in the specific similar category to be in 1854:

Ignore this. JohnClarknew has been indefinitely blocked for making legal threats.

5403: 5138: 4814: 4780: 4729: 4256:. You know how it is. I just keep on trucking. Hope things are good with you. :) 3868: 3732: 3683: 3626: 3225: 3176: 3133: 3102: 2007: 1785: 1452: 1303: 1268:

On the diff I pointed to in my initial post here, I've attempted to clarify that

1256: 1164: 1030: 791: 456: 297: 192: 31: 5352:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

3917:

are turning this project into even more of a malicious joke than it already is.

3268: 1707: 5197: 5189: 4613: 4575: 4334: 4232: 4145: 3785: 3745: 3659: 3640: 3598: 3552: 3416: 3292: 3073: 2989:

to have its own article, whatever your personal feeling on the subject. Sorry.

2930: 2214: 1734: 1727: 1364:

4 January - email to ArbCom to tell them that I had dealt with the issue myself

432: 411: 382: 378: 4962:

4172: 1327:

20 September - ArbCOM email to say that they will not be acting on this report

1100: 5290: 5279: 5271: 5193: 5077: 5038: 4938: 4721: 4713: 4470: 4281: 4222: 3823: 3741: 3636: 3602: 3539: 2890: 2588: 2538: 2521: 2076: 1823: 1651: 1647: 1613: 428: 35: 4276:

The Arbitration case request in which you were named as a party to has been

3943:

Noformation, it really isn't odd at all, but I am unable to elaborate here.

2925:

You used a 19th Century naughty postcard image of a topless adolescent girl

1280:

DC, is there some recent report of yours that we have not already actioned?

20: 4857: 4839: 4670: 3960: 1771: 1737:, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: 892:

qualified to make that judgment, subject to review by ArbCom, who are just

337: 223: 5376:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

5014:

only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the

704:

I helped write the policy, and have implemented it on several occasions.

5087: 4918: 4534: 4348: 3834:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "

3774:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Offsite comments and personal attacks

3563: 2594: 2565: 2506: 1582: 1483:

great job. For the record, I stand by my "self-important twat" comment.

256:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

5263: 5134: 3713: 3664: 3607: 3206: 3157: 3114: 3083: 2574:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

674:

Am I understanding you correctly that you only went straight to Arbcom?

4647:

Hello, Delicious carbuncle. Please check your email; you've got mail!

4595:

Fine with me. At least now you know how the ArbCom sausage gets made.

2803:

completely and utterly misconstrued, as this even happened to me just

866:

Arbcom is predictably more deliberative than that. For good reason.

4228: 3910: 2841: 2818: 2759: 2707: 2660: 2623: 1157:"Arbcom is predictably more deliberative than that. For good reason." 3308:

Would you please explain to me, why Bradley Quinn's book "The Boot"

2217:- banning editors who diffuse cats? No, I'm not feeling it. Look at 1826:

and I agree with it completely. However, they do add the following:

1358:

started on Jimbo's talk page, editor blocked independently of ArbCom

4718:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Containers

2639:

Did I suggest that Jimbo's righst were being infringed in any way?

2293:

If you want to do an RFC for novelists, do it! - the door is right

1542:

ArbCom "action" them? Admins blocked two of the users after ArbCom

1445: 1296: 884:

am not qualified to decide who should be banned under this policy.

5276:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Poetry is always wrong

4712:, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for 4407: 4400: 4393: 4386: 4379: 4372: 4365: 410:

The consensus in talk page decided to have the arrest re-added. --

5188:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge

2911:

Ohhh, by the way, I like your userpage image, can I use it too?--

2519:

For trying to infuse common sense into the Filapacchi Imbroglio.

951:

community limiting empowerment to act on findings is the point.

4852:

Perusing your talk page, I am surprised to see no barnstars for

3561:. It is appreciated. A voice of sanity is very welcome. Cheers. 2407:

If you think a category should not exist you should place this:

1832:

by email or through any other contact methods the user provides.

2783:. I suspect that Jimbo and I are in agreement about Russavia's 1159:. Anyway, there are some other points I want to raise (I think 668:

I may be missing something, but I think you misread the policy.

54:

Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.

4724:

with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of

3968:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Delicious_carbuncle

191:, and I thought it would be polite to let you know about it. 5282:

with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of

4609: 2361: 381:

article, join in discussion on re-adding "arrest" content. --

3535:

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

2752:

certainly hasn't ever happened in a controversial setting.

2425:

mean that any of the pages in the category will be deleted.

497:

Were you aware before your recent posts of this section of

4488:

I will take your good advice under consideration. Thanks.

2774:

I don't think anyone has asserted that anything about the

1287:

Your report on 6 February: Not blocked. Explanation given.

61:

and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed.

59:

specify a descriptive "Subject/headline" for a new topic

5394:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

4013:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for arbitration

2312:

I have not changed my mind at all. In fact, edits like

5359:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

3520:

Hello, Delicious carbuncle. You have new messages at

340:

if you seriously believe you were not edit warring. —

930:

policy, which among other things made it enforceable.

5010:

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be

4473:. Please comment on content and not contributors. 846:

abuser would be a permanent stain on his reputation.

105: 4202:Back, but ready to contribute :) How've you been? 3601:, however, I won't edit war to keep it open. And a 4173:What we need is awareness, we can’t get careless.. 4006:Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests#Delicious carbuncle 3853:Thanks for letting me know. I've commented there. 3706:as is. I'm quite proud of my recent AfD work, and 1432:thorough search, those are the most recent cases. 72:" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with " 5180:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current 4874:Books and Bytes: The Knowledge Library Newsletter 3019:knowledge of WP practise for such a new editor. 2051:on Kauffner's user page. What's wrong with it?-- 1424:3 April - editor blocked independently of ArbCom 880:Let me see if I understand what you are saying. 3984:It appeared to have concluded already. Thanks. 3749:have simply ignored their well-meaning advice. 2572:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 2416:This category is being considered for deletion. 896:elected by the community and are therefore the 764:Delay is not the issue. Inaction is the issue. 254:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 2593:DC, I know more not than most people. Thanks, 2403:How to deal with disagreements with categories 1706:I've declined the CSD of this article because 1284:Your report (to ArbCom-l) on 3 April: Blocked. 312:Who can predict the future? Certainly not me. 3458:acctually haven't been able to, because your 4769:List of rampage killers (workplace killings) 3691:Dusti, feel free to be as rude as you like. 3635:No, it absolutely was not appropriate. Read 2429:Please share your thoughts on the matter at 1418:1 April - discussion started on Jimbo's page 860:It takes a lot of review and due dilligence. 271:Not unexpected. Thanks for letting me know. 5096:Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians 5053:Thanks for taking the initiative to create 2675:No sanction here can prevent Russavia from 1321:9 September - first email sent, no response 4773:List of rampage killers (school massacres) 2570:Hello. There is currently a discussion at 888:who has passed an RfA and become an admin 252:Hello. There is currently a discussion at 5036: 4272:Rejection of the Arbitration case request 2612:In what way does Russavia's efforts have 2548:Biographies of living persons noticeboard 2452:Your reason(s) for the proposed deletion. 1384:11 February - follow-up sent, no response 4777:List of rampage killers (home intruders) 2360:But that's like saying, I'm only asking 1992:Please discuss this at WP:AN, not here. 1546:to act and I brought the issue on-wiki. 492:WP:Child Protection "not on wiki" clause 76:" if replying to an existing topic and " 5365:notice, but please explain why in your 1969:, they only need be in some sub-cat of 1415:29 March - email to ArbCom, no response 3141:Dusti, don't run before you can walk. 2450:{{subst:cfd2|Delicious carbuncle|text= 1977:clearly is a sub-cat of that category. 1869:Knowledge:Don't overlook legal threats 3832:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard 3781:Offsite comments and personal attacks 3199:professional. I'm not sure what your 2464:: If this category is empty, and all 233:That's probably wise advice. Thanks. 4944:Welcome to the inaugural edition of 4651: 2427:They may, however, be recategorized. 2409: 1240:"ArbCom cannot fail to have noticed" 1238:Moving on to another point, you say 372:Talk:George Maharis#Re-add "arrest"? 290: 15: 5238:User talk:Jimbo Wales#Suggested fix 4456:Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge 4291:Welcome to The Knowledge Adventure! 1967:Category:American women journalists 1421:2 April - discussion started on ANI 690:You need to read the policy again. 13: 5354:deleted for any of several reasons 5333:because of the following concern: 5327:List of postal codes in Cape Verde 5317: 5313:List of postal codes in Cape Verde 5153:Hi. Can you offer your opinion in 4640: 4330:The Teahouse new editor help space 4320:The Knowledge Adventure Start Page 4294: 3513: 2473: 2031:I expect it to disappear shortly. 19: 14: 5422: 5206:review the candidates' statements 1961:which is a legitimate sub-cat of 1710:doesn't apply to creative works. 34:. Please adhere to the talk page 5284:Knowledge:Poetry is always wrong 5268:Knowledge:Poetry is always wrong 5262: 5257:Knowledge:Poetry is always wrong 5128: 5127: 5037: 4896: 4854:this brilliant bit of commentary 4838: 4726:Knowledge:WikiProject Containers 4710:Knowledge:WikiProject Containers 4704:Knowledge:WikiProject Containers 4280:by the arbitration committee. - 3959:Wikipediocracy outing raised at 3911:Not so odd now, don't you think? 3443:You're a bit thick, aren't you? 3267: 2505: 2012:What do you recommend regarding 1867:That's poor advice Bencherlite. 1770: 1099: 291: 4893:Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 396:I am very interesting. Thanks. 38:and particularly the following: 5212:. For the Election committee, 5182:Arbitration Committee election 5173:ArbCom elections are now open! 4866:04:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC) 4823:20:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC) 4808:20:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC) 4789:19:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC) 4753:23:18, 17 September 2013 (UTC) 4738:22:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC) 4325:The Knowledge Adventure Lounge 4102:I'm curious how you think you 3557:Thank you for your support at 2047:I can't see any BLP violations 1971:;Category:American journalists 1701:Standing Room Only (2004 film) 1351:19 December - second blog post 835:innocent life sooner or later. 377:If you are interesting in the 183:Your post on Jimbo's talk page 1: 5412:03:56, 21 February 2022 (UTC) 5303:21:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC) 5222:13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC) 5102:Knowledge:Missing Wikipedians 4450:About The Knowledge Adventure 4106:force me into participating. 3415:Haven't you read the article 2219:Category:American women poets 2173:Category:American journalists 1963:Category:American journalists 1957:I added Amanda Filipacchi to 1567:Human–goat sexual intercourse 904:which is a problem in itself. 5091:15:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC) 5072:The Knowledge Library Survey 5064:04:31, 6 November 2013 (UTC) 5023:21:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC) 4990:Announcing WikiProject Open: 4984:News from the library world: 4656:at any time by removing the 3808:Thanks for letting me know. 3048:Thanks for letting me know. 2169:Category:American columnists 1975:Category:American columnists 1959:Category:American columnists 7: 5398:allows discussion to reach 5379:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 5362:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 5208:and submit your choices on 5100:You have been mentioned at 4972:New subscription donations: 4697:23:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC) 4628:00:22, 30 August 2013 (UTC) 4605:00:13, 30 August 2013 (UTC) 4590:21:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC) 4564:14:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC) 4549:04:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC) 4530:05:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC) 4019:Knowledge:Arbitration guide 3275:The Brilliant Idea Barnstar 2968:What's your purposes, then? 506:the editor who posted them. 46:post your new topic at the 10: 5427: 5390:exist. In particular, the 5250:00:40, 28 March 2017 (UTC) 5214:MediaWiki message delivery 5149:Michael Shermer discussion 5143:14:20, 12 March 2015 (UTC) 5076:As a subscriber to one of 4966:Knowledge Loves Libraries: 4952:, please add your name to 4846:The Barnstar of Good Humor 4498:18:40, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 4483:17:47, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 4428:The Veil of Verifiability 4425:The Neutral Point of View 4422:Small Changes, Big Impact 1939:15:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC) 1925:12:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC) 1902:11:36, 30 April 2013 (UTC) 1889:09:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC) 1863:09:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC) 1849:23:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC) 1812:14:50, 22 April 2013 (UTC) 1794:10:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC) 1778:The Barnstar of Good Humor 1726:Speedy deletion declined: 1694:14:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC) 1675:04:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC) 1660:04:14, 11 April 2013 (UTC) 1348:start on Jimbo's talk page 1334:21 November 2012 blog post 499:Knowledge:Child protection 420:03:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC) 189:User talk:Worm That Turned 68:your posts with one more " 5384:proposed deletion process 5114:01:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 5043: 4996:New ways to get involved: 4837: 4286:17:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC) 4266:14:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC) 4252:Things never change much 4248:13:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC) 4212:07:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC) 4192:12:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4163:04:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC) 4128:13:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4116:13:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4098:13:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4086:13:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4072:11:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4060:04:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 4044:02:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC) 3994:14:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3979:09:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3953:15:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3937:15:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3922:14:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3905:07:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3863:02:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3848:00:41, 17 July 2013 (UTC) 3836:Wikipediocracy_and_outing 3487:15:03, 28 June 2013 (UTC) 3472:21:14, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 3453:19:14, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 3439:17:30, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 3411:13:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 3391:05:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC) 3376:22:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 3361:21:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 3341:19:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 3325:18:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 3304:Why is this not reliable? 3296:19:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3266: 3244:18:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3229:16:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3194:16:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3180:16:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3151:12:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3137:01:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3106:00:58, 25 June 2013 (UTC) 3058:16:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 3044:16:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 3029:15:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 3014:15:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2999:15:12, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2983:14:12, 23 June 2013 (UTC) 2958:16:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2943:16:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2921:14:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2906:14:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2867:16:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2852:08:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2829:05:44, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2798:03:43, 19 June 2013 (UTC) 2770:23:49, 18 June 2013 (UTC) 2733:15:05, 18 June 2013 (UTC) 2718:13:45, 18 June 2013 (UTC) 2690:02:29, 17 June 2013 (UTC) 2671:01:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC) 2649:00:36, 17 June 2013 (UTC) 2634:00:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC) 2603:14:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC) 2504: 2437:Categories for discussion 2016:? I'm out of my depth. — 1769: 1758:21:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC) 1721:17:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC) 1638:02:49, 9 April 2013 (UTC) 1622:01:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC) 1607:20:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC) 1591:19:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC) 1556:16:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC) 1531:17:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC) 1516:16:56, 5 April 2013 (UTC) 1493:16:43, 5 April 2013 (UTC) 1478:10:16, 5 April 2013 (UTC) 1455:09:35, 5 April 2013 (UTC) 1306:22:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 1265:20:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 1220:15:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 1203:14:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 1189:07:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 1173:04:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 1123:22:07, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1107:The Barnstar of Diligence 1098: 1084:15:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1069:15:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1053:15:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 1039:TL;DR version: I've been 1015:05:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 981:23:26, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 961:22:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 946:22:39, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 915:22:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 876:21:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 806:20:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 774:20:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 760:19:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 742:19:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 727:19:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 710:Yes, that's prefaced by: 700:17:26, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 686:16:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 660:13:21, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 645:08:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 630:08:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 601:05:25, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 575:04:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 561:04:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 535:04:08, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 521:03:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 486:01:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 476:Someone had to do it. :) 471:01:27, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 406:00:28, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 391:00:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 365:00:19, 3 April 2013 (UTC) 350:23:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 322:23:26, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 308:23:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 281:23:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 266:23:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 243:19:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 218:17:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 203:17:32, 2 April 2013 (UTC) 98:⇒ Start a new Talk topic. 85:I will generally respond 80:" if replying to a reply. 5167:17:54, 20 May 2014 (UTC) 5047:The WikiProject Barnstar 5003:Read the full newsletter 4803: 4759:List of rampage killings 4748: 4600: 4559: 4493: 4261: 4187: 4182:Don't believe the hype. 4111: 4081: 4055: 3989: 3948: 3932: 3885:You're a ballsy fellow. 3858: 3818:03:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC) 3813: 3803:01:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC) 3759:01:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 3754: 3736:01:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 3701:01:37, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 3696: 3687:01:34, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 3653:01:24, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 3648: 3630:01:17, 7 July 2013 (UTC) 3587:16:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 3582: 3572:15:59, 2 July 2013 (UTC) 3548:07:51, 1 July 2013 (UTC) 3529:07:51, 1 July 2013 (UTC) 3482: 3448: 3406: 3371: 3336: 3239: 3189: 3146: 3053: 3024: 2994: 2938: 2862: 2793: 2728: 2685: 2644: 2584:04:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 2561:16:28, 15 May 2013 (UTC) 2537:Issue at BLPN regarding 2529:21:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2493:21:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2389:20:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2384: 2374:18:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2356:18:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2351: 2341:18:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2326:18:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2321: 2307:17:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2278:15:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2256:14:04, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2251: 2231:04:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2200:03:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2195: 2185:00:26, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2153:18:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2148: 2139:17:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2116:17:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2089:17:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2084: 2070:17:16, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2041:22:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 2036: 2026:22:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 2002:21:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1997: 1987:21:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1934: 1822:Knowledge has a policy. 1807: 1689: 1670: 1633: 1602: 1551: 1526: 1488: 1437: 1215: 1198: 1064: 976: 910: 827:have been controversial. 769: 737: 695: 655: 570: 530: 481: 401: 360: 317: 276: 238: 213: 5371:the article's talk page 5242:Hodgdon's secret garden 4419:An Invitation to Earth 4416:Say Hello to the World 1575:the article's talk page 1314:9 September 2012 report 441:16:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC) 5350: 5322: 5278:and please be sure to 5056:WikiProject Containers 4720:and please be sure to 4645: 4434:Looking Good Together 4299: 3605:was appropriate here. 3559:the Commons discussion 3518: 2468:have been cleaned up, 1378:5 February - blog post 1371:6 February 2013 report 24: 5396:articles for deletion 5335: 5331:proposed for deletion 5321: 5186:Arbitration Committee 5078:The Knowledge Library 4954:the subscriber's list 4644: 4298: 4168:Doing the write thing 3517: 2513:The Editor's Barnstar 2432:this category's entry 1113:For a job well done. 427:has been reported to 425:This incident you did 336:I suggest you reread 170:26 APR 12 - 29 MAR 13 165:28 JUN 11 - 17 APR 12 160:28 JUL 10 - 16 JUN 11 155:15 DEC 10 - 26 JUL 10 150:20 APR 09 - 14 DEC 09 145:01 OCT 08 - 19 APR 09 140:13 JUN 08 - 01 OCT 08 135:07 MAY 08 - 12 JUN 08 130:25 MAR 08 - 06 MAY 08 125:14 JAN 08 - 24 MAR 08 23: 4513:The Devil's Advocate 4469:is pretty clearly a 4335:Knowledge Help pages 3522:WilliamH's talk page 2470:click here to delete 2167:Do you realize that 2163:Diffusing categories 2099:The Devil's Advocate 2018:alf laylah wa laylah 1412:25 March - blog post 1007:Georgewilliamherbert 953:Georgewilliamherbert 938:Georgewilliamherbert 868:Georgewilliamherbert 752:Georgewilliamherbert 719:Georgewilliamherbert 678:Georgewilliamherbert 622:Georgewilliamherbert 584:The Devil's Advocate 544:The Devil's Advocate 513:Georgewilliamherbert 5190:arbitration process 5121:Delicious carbuncle 5086:Thanks and cheers, 4831:A barnstar for you! 4800:Delicious carbuncle 4745:Delicious carbuncle 4597:Delicious carbuncle 4556:Delicious carbuncle 4490:Delicious carbuncle 4258:Delicious carbuncle 4184:Delicious carbuncle 4108:Delicious carbuncle 4078:Delicious carbuncle 4052:Delicious carbuncle 3986:Delicious carbuncle 3966:Please be aware of 3945:Delicious carbuncle 3929:Delicious carbuncle 3855:Delicious carbuncle 3810:Delicious carbuncle 3751:Delicious carbuncle 3708:in working with AfD 3693:Delicious carbuncle 3645:Delicious carbuncle 3579:Delicious carbuncle 3479:Delicious carbuncle 3445:Delicious carbuncle 3403:Delicious carbuncle 3368:Delicious carbuncle 3333:Delicious carbuncle 3260:A barnstar for you! 3236:Delicious carbuncle 3186:Delicious carbuncle 3143:Delicious carbuncle 3050:Delicious carbuncle 3021:Delicious carbuncle 2991:Delicious carbuncle 2935:Delicious carbuncle 2859:Delicious carbuncle 2790:Delicious carbuncle 2725:Delicious carbuncle 2682:Delicious carbuncle 2641:Delicious carbuncle 2498:A barnstar for you! 2381:Delicious carbuncle 2348:Delicious carbuncle 2318:Delicious carbuncle 2248:Delicious carbuncle 2192:Delicious carbuncle 2145:Delicious carbuncle 2081:Delicious carbuncle 2033:Delicious carbuncle 1994:Delicious carbuncle 1931:Delicious carbuncle 1804:Delicious carbuncle 1763:A barnstar for you! 1686:Delicious carbuncle 1667:Delicious carbuncle 1630:Delicious carbuncle 1599:Delicious carbuncle 1548:Delicious carbuncle 1523:Delicious carbuncle 1485:Delicious carbuncle 1434:Delicious carbuncle 1212:Delicious carbuncle 1195:Delicious carbuncle 1092:A barnstar for you! 1061:Delicious carbuncle 973:Delicious carbuncle 907:Delicious carbuncle 766:Delicious carbuncle 734:Delicious carbuncle 692:Delicious carbuncle 652:Delicious carbuncle 567:Delicious carbuncle 527:Delicious carbuncle 478:Delicious carbuncle 431:. Comment there. -- 398:Delicious carbuncle 357:Delicious carbuncle 314:Delicious carbuncle 273:Delicious carbuncle 235:Delicious carbuncle 210:Delicious carbuncle 5388:deletion processes 5323: 5280:sign your comments 5255:MfD nomination of 5202:arbitration policy 5030:A barnstar for you 4722:sign your comments 4702:MfD nomination of 4653:remove this notice 4646: 4431:The Civility Code 4300: 3533:remove this notice 3519: 2805:a few hours earier 2446: 25: 5309:Proposed deletion 5069: 5068: 4939:Knowledge Library 4871: 4870: 4765:User:AndyTheGrump 4624: 4586: 4438: 4437: 3577:I do what I can. 3315:in your opinion? 3301: 3300: 2534: 2533: 2527: 2485:John Pack Lambert 2480: 2479: 2476: 2457: 2442: 2211:WP:Categorization 1979:John Pack Lambert 1953:Amanda Filipacchi 1799: 1798: 1273: 1128: 1127: 905: 177: 176: 104: 103: 5418: 5381: 5380: 5364: 5363: 5320: 5266: 5133: 5132: 5131: 5061:Northamerica1000 5041: 5034: 5033: 5016:Suggestions page 4900: 4842: 4835: 4834: 4692: 4689: 4686: 4683: 4677: 4675: 4669: 4665: 4659: 4655: 4643: 4636:You've got mail! 4622: 4584: 4526: 4521: 4515: 4457: 4451: 4410: 4403: 4396: 4389: 4382: 4375: 4368: 4362: 4361: 4297: 4246: 4245: 4240: 4177:Hillbillyholiday 4037: 4032: 3900: 3897: 3894: 3891: 3734: 3729: 3726: 3723: 3720: 3717: 3685: 3680: 3677: 3674: 3671: 3668: 3628: 3623: 3620: 3617: 3614: 3611: 3570: 3566: 3536: 3271: 3264: 3263: 3227: 3222: 3219: 3216: 3213: 3210: 3178: 3173: 3170: 3167: 3164: 3161: 3135: 3130: 3127: 3124: 3121: 3118: 3104: 3099: 3096: 3093: 3090: 3087: 2950:Ultimate Destiny 2913:Ultimate Destiny 2898:Ultimate Destiny 2850: 2848: 2827: 2825: 2768: 2766: 2716: 2714: 2669: 2667: 2632: 2630: 2614:Pricasso (draft) 2526: 2509: 2502: 2501: 2475: 2459: 2455: 2441: 2410: 2171:is diffusing on 2137: 2135: 2130: 2125: 2112: 2107: 2101: 2068: 2066: 2061: 2056: 1921: 1915: 1885: 1879: 1774: 1767: 1766: 1755: 1751: 1746: 1718: 1717: 1708:Knowledge:CSD#A7 1512: 1506: 1474: 1468: 1450: 1301: 1267: 1131:Couple of points 1103: 1096: 1095: 902: 597: 592: 586: 557: 552: 546: 305: 300: 296: 295: 294: 208:Thanks, Scotty. 200: 195: 106: 16: 5426: 5425: 5421: 5420: 5419: 5417: 5416: 5415: 5392:speedy deletion 5378: 5377: 5361: 5360: 5339:WP:NOTDIRECTORY 5318: 5316: 5260: 5232: 5227:In some benign 5210:the voting page 5176: 5155:this discussion 5151: 5129: 5098: 5074: 5032: 5027: 5005: 4950:Books and Bytes 4946:Books and Bytes 4943: 4933: 4891: 4890: 4889: 4885:Books and Bytes 4876: 4833: 4796:this discussion 4761: 4707: 4690: 4687: 4684: 4681: 4678: 4673: 4667: 4663: 4661:You've got mail 4657: 4649: 4641: 4638: 4621: 4583: 4572: 4537: 4528: 4524: 4519: 4511: 4506: 4471:personal attack 4464: 4462:Personal attack 4459: 4455: 4449: 4446: 4408: 4401: 4394: 4387: 4380: 4373: 4366: 4295: 4293: 4274: 4241: 4227: 4226: 4200: 4170: 4035: 4030: 4002: 3964: 3898: 3895: 3892: 3889: 3871: 3838:". Thank you. 3828: 3777: 3727: 3724: 3721: 3718: 3715: 3712: 3678: 3675: 3672: 3669: 3666: 3663: 3639:(and then read 3621: 3618: 3615: 3612: 3609: 3606: 3595: 3564: 3562: 3555: 3537: 3526: 3511: 3313:reliable source 3306: 3262: 3220: 3217: 3214: 3211: 3208: 3205: 3171: 3168: 3165: 3162: 3159: 3156: 3128: 3125: 3122: 3119: 3116: 3113: 3097: 3094: 3091: 3088: 3085: 3082: 3078: 2970: 2893: 2842: 2835: 2819: 2812: 2760: 2753: 2708: 2701: 2661: 2654: 2624: 2617: 2610: 2591: 2568: 2543: 2500: 2453: 2449: 2405: 2165: 2133: 2128: 2123: 2121: 2114: 2110: 2105: 2097: 2064: 2059: 2054: 2052: 2049: 2010: 1955: 1919: 1909: 1883: 1873: 1820: 1765: 1753: 1749: 1744: 1731: 1713: 1712: 1704: 1579:WP:edit warring 1571: 1510: 1500: 1472: 1462: 1446: 1297: 1133: 1115:Darkness Shines 1094: 1033: 599: 595: 590: 582: 559: 555: 550: 542: 494: 453: 375: 334: 303: 298: 292: 198: 193: 185: 113: 12: 11: 5: 5424: 5402:for deletion. 5382:will stop the 5315: 5306: 5259: 5253: 5235: 5231: 5225: 5179: 5175: 5170: 5150: 5147: 5146: 5145: 5097: 5094: 5073: 5070: 5067: 5066: 5050: 5049: 5044: 5042: 5031: 5028: 5007: 5001: 4960:New positions: 4935: 4881: 4880: 4879: 4878: 4877: 4875: 4872: 4869: 4868: 4849: 4848: 4843: 4832: 4829: 4828: 4827: 4826: 4825: 4760: 4757: 4756: 4755: 4706: 4700: 4648: 4639: 4637: 4634: 4633: 4632: 4631: 4630: 4618: 4580: 4571: 4568: 4567: 4566: 4536: 4533: 4517: 4505: 4502: 4501: 4500: 4475:Dragons flight 4463: 4460: 4447: 4445: 4439: 4436: 4435: 4432: 4429: 4426: 4423: 4420: 4417: 4413: 4412: 4405: 4398: 4391: 4384: 4377: 4370: 4360: 4359: 4358: 4357: 4356: 4355: 4354: 4353: 4352: 4351: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4332: 4327: 4322: 4292: 4289: 4273: 4270: 4269: 4268: 4250: 4204:216.26.215.100 4199: 4196: 4195: 4194: 4169: 4166: 4141: 4140: 4139: 4138: 4137: 4136: 4135: 4134: 4133: 4132: 4131: 4130: 4023: 4022: 4016: 4001: 3998: 3997: 3996: 3963: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3941: 3940: 3939: 3870: 3867: 3866: 3865: 3827: 3822: 3821: 3820: 3776: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3762: 3761: 3594: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3554: 3551: 3527:Message added 3525: 3512: 3510: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3499: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3493: 3492: 3491: 3490: 3489: 3464:Harold O'Brian 3431:Harold O'Brian 3417:shoe fetishism 3383:Harold O'Brian 3353:Harold O'Brian 3317:Harold O'Brian 3305: 3302: 3299: 3298: 3278: 3277: 3272: 3261: 3258: 3257: 3256: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3252: 3251: 3250: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3077: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3036:Harold O'Brian 3006:Harold O'Brian 2975:Harold O'Brian 2969: 2966: 2965: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2931:Women in Libya 2927:in the infobox 2892: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2742: 2609: 2606: 2590: 2587: 2567: 2564: 2542: 2535: 2532: 2531: 2516: 2515: 2510: 2499: 2496: 2478: 2477: 2466:incoming links 2462:Administrators 2460: 2451: 2440: 2428: 2418: 2413: 2404: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2366:Obi-Wan Kenobi 2333:Obi-Wan Kenobi 2299:Obi-Wan Kenobi 2287: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2270:Obi-Wan Kenobi 2262: 2223:Obi-Wan Kenobi 2177:Obi-Wan Kenobi 2164: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2103: 2092: 2091: 2075:Have you read 2048: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2009: 2006: 2005: 2004: 1954: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1942: 1941: 1827: 1819: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1797: 1796: 1781: 1780: 1775: 1764: 1761: 1735:Richard Kolker 1730: 1728:Richard Kolker 1724: 1703: 1698: 1697: 1696: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1641: 1640: 1610: 1609: 1570: 1564: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1422: 1419: 1416: 1413: 1407: 1406: 1405:3 April report 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1394:27 February - 1392: 1387:26 February - 1385: 1382: 1379: 1373: 1372: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1362: 1359: 1354:19 December - 1352: 1349: 1344:27 November - 1342: 1336: 1335: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1325: 1322: 1316: 1315: 1293: 1292: 1288: 1285: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1275: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1132: 1129: 1126: 1125: 1110: 1109: 1104: 1093: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1032: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 948: 935: 931: 927: 924: 920: 864: 861: 858: 855: 851: 847: 843: 842:inappropriate. 839: 836: 832: 828: 824: 821: 818: 814: 787: 786: 785: 784: 783: 782: 781: 780: 779: 778: 777: 776: 748: 715: 708: 675: 672: 669: 666: 665: 664: 663: 662: 619: 616: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 607: 606: 605: 604: 603: 588: 548: 510: 509: 508: 493: 490: 489: 488: 452: 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 379:George Maharis 374: 369: 368: 367: 333: 330: 329: 328: 327: 326: 325: 324: 285:When you were 250: 249: 248: 247: 246: 245: 184: 181: 179: 175: 174: 173: 172: 167: 162: 157: 152: 147: 142: 137: 132: 127: 119: 118: 115: 114: 109: 102: 101: 95: 94: 82: 81: 62: 55: 52: 41: 30:Welcome to my 26: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5423: 5414: 5413: 5409: 5405: 5401: 5397: 5393: 5389: 5385: 5374: 5372: 5368: 5357: 5355: 5349: 5348: 5346: 5343: 5340: 5334: 5332: 5328: 5314: 5310: 5305: 5304: 5300: 5296: 5292: 5289: 5285: 5281: 5277: 5273: 5269: 5265: 5258: 5252: 5251: 5247: 5243: 5239: 5230: 5229:wp:CANVASSING 5224: 5223: 5219: 5215: 5211: 5207: 5203: 5199: 5195: 5191: 5187: 5183: 5174: 5169: 5168: 5164: 5160: 5156: 5144: 5140: 5136: 5126: 5122: 5118: 5117: 5116: 5115: 5111: 5107: 5103: 5093: 5092: 5089: 5085: 5084: 5083:brief survey. 5079: 5065: 5062: 5058: 5057: 5052: 5051: 5048: 5045: 5040: 5035: 5026: 5025: 5024: 5021: 5017: 5013: 5006: 5004: 4999: 4997: 4993: 4991: 4987: 4985: 4981: 4979: 4975: 4973: 4969: 4967: 4963: 4961: 4957: 4955: 4951: 4947: 4942: 4940: 4932: 4930: 4927: 4924: 4920: 4916: 4913: 4910: 4906: 4901: 4899: 4894: 4888: 4887: 4886: 4867: 4863: 4859: 4855: 4851: 4850: 4847: 4844: 4841: 4836: 4824: 4820: 4816: 4811: 4810: 4809: 4805: 4801: 4797: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4786: 4782: 4778: 4774: 4770: 4766: 4754: 4750: 4746: 4742: 4741: 4740: 4739: 4735: 4731: 4727: 4723: 4719: 4715: 4711: 4705: 4699: 4698: 4695: 4693: 4672: 4662: 4654: 4629: 4626: 4625: 4615: 4611: 4608: 4607: 4606: 4602: 4598: 4594: 4593: 4592: 4591: 4588: 4587: 4577: 4565: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4552: 4551: 4550: 4546: 4542: 4532: 4531: 4527: 4522: 4516: 4514: 4499: 4495: 4491: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4480: 4476: 4472: 4468: 4458: 4452: 4444: 4443: 4433: 4430: 4427: 4424: 4421: 4418: 4415: 4414: 4411: 4406: 4404: 4399: 4397: 4392: 4390: 4385: 4383: 4378: 4376: 4371: 4369: 4364: 4363: 4350: 4346: 4342: 4336: 4333: 4331: 4328: 4326: 4323: 4321: 4318: 4317: 4316: 4315: 4313: 4310: 4309: 4308: 4307: 4306: 4305: 4304: 4303: 4302: 4301: 4288: 4287: 4283: 4279: 4267: 4263: 4259: 4255: 4251: 4249: 4244: 4238: 4234: 4230: 4224: 4220: 4217:I've started 4216: 4215: 4214: 4213: 4209: 4205: 4193: 4189: 4185: 4181: 4180: 4179: 4178: 4174: 4165: 4164: 4160: 4156: 4152: 4148: 4147: 4129: 4126: 4123: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4113: 4109: 4105: 4101: 4100: 4099: 4096: 4093: 4089: 4088: 4087: 4083: 4079: 4075: 4074: 4073: 4070: 4067: 4063: 4062: 4061: 4057: 4053: 4048: 4047: 4046: 4045: 4042: 4040: 4039: 4038: 4033: 4020: 4017: 4014: 4011: 4010: 4009: 4007: 3995: 3991: 3987: 3983: 3982: 3981: 3980: 3976: 3972: 3969: 3962: 3954: 3950: 3946: 3942: 3938: 3934: 3930: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3909: 3908: 3907: 3906: 3903: 3901: 3886: 3883: 3879: 3875: 3864: 3860: 3856: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3837: 3833: 3826: 3819: 3815: 3811: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3800: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3787: 3782: 3775: 3760: 3756: 3752: 3747: 3743: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3733: 3731: 3730: 3709: 3704: 3703: 3702: 3698: 3694: 3690: 3689: 3688: 3684: 3682: 3681: 3661: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3650: 3646: 3642: 3638: 3634: 3633: 3632: 3631: 3627: 3625: 3624: 3604: 3600: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3576: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3569: 3567: 3560: 3550: 3549: 3545: 3541: 3534: 3530: 3523: 3516: 3488: 3484: 3480: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3469: 3465: 3461: 3456: 3455: 3454: 3450: 3446: 3442: 3441: 3440: 3436: 3432: 3427: 3423: 3418: 3414: 3413: 3412: 3408: 3404: 3399: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3388: 3384: 3379: 3378: 3377: 3373: 3369: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3349: 3344: 3343: 3342: 3338: 3334: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3322: 3318: 3314: 3310: 3297: 3294: 3290: 3287: 3283: 3280: 3279: 3276: 3273: 3270: 3265: 3245: 3241: 3237: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3226: 3224: 3223: 3202: 3197: 3196: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3183: 3182: 3181: 3177: 3175: 3174: 3154: 3153: 3152: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3134: 3132: 3131: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3103: 3101: 3100: 3075: 3059: 3055: 3051: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3041: 3037: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3017: 3016: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2996: 2992: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2980: 2976: 2959: 2955: 2951: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2940: 2936: 2932: 2928: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2903: 2899: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2849: 2847: 2846: 2840: 2839: 2832: 2831: 2830: 2826: 2824: 2823: 2817: 2816: 2810: 2806: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2786: 2782: 2777: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2767: 2765: 2764: 2758: 2757: 2750: 2746: 2743: 2741: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2715: 2713: 2712: 2706: 2705: 2698: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2678: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2668: 2666: 2665: 2659: 2658: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2646: 2642: 2638: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2631: 2629: 2628: 2622: 2621: 2615: 2608:Draft article 2605: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2586: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2563: 2562: 2558: 2554: 2549: 2540: 2530: 2524: 2523: 2518: 2517: 2514: 2511: 2508: 2503: 2495: 2494: 2490: 2486: 2471: 2467: 2463: 2458: 2456: 2445: 2438: 2434: 2433: 2426: 2424: 2417: 2414: 2412: 2411: 2408: 2390: 2386: 2382: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2353: 2349: 2344: 2343: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2323: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2310: 2309: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2291: 2279: 2275: 2271: 2267: 2263: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2253: 2249: 2244: 2243: 2238: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2203: 2202: 2201: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2182: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2154: 2150: 2146: 2142: 2141: 2140: 2136: 2131: 2126: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2113: 2108: 2102: 2100: 2094: 2093: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2067: 2062: 2057: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2030: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2023: 2019: 2015: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1984: 1980: 1976: 1972: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1922: 1916: 1914: 1913: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1900: 1899: 1896: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1886: 1880: 1878: 1877: 1870: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1861: 1860: 1857: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1833: 1828: 1825: 1813: 1809: 1805: 1801: 1800: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1783: 1782: 1779: 1776: 1773: 1768: 1760: 1759: 1756: 1752: 1747: 1740: 1736: 1729: 1723: 1722: 1719: 1716: 1709: 1702: 1695: 1691: 1687: 1684: 1683: 1676: 1672: 1668: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1619: 1615: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1568: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1545: 1540: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1513: 1507: 1505: 1504: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1475: 1469: 1467: 1466: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1453: 1451: 1449: 1442: 1441: 1439: 1435: 1430: 1423: 1420: 1417: 1414: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1404: 1403: 1397: 1393: 1390: 1386: 1383: 1380: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1370: 1369: 1363: 1360: 1357: 1353: 1350: 1347: 1343: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1326: 1323: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1313: 1312: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1304: 1302: 1300: 1289: 1286: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1274: 1271: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1253: 1248: 1245: 1241: 1236: 1232: 1227: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1186: 1182: 1181:John lilburne 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1143: 1139: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1111: 1108: 1105: 1102: 1097: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1042: 1037: 1016: 1012: 1008: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 982: 978: 974: 969: 964: 963: 962: 958: 954: 949: 947: 943: 939: 936: 932: 928: 925: 921: 918: 917: 916: 912: 908: 899: 895: 891: 887: 883: 879: 878: 877: 873: 869: 865: 862: 859: 856: 852: 848: 844: 840: 837: 833: 829: 825: 822: 819: 815: 812: 811: 810: 809: 808: 807: 804: 803: 802: 797: 796: 795: 775: 771: 767: 763: 762: 761: 757: 753: 749: 745: 744: 743: 739: 735: 730: 729: 728: 724: 720: 716: 713: 709: 707: 703: 702: 701: 697: 693: 689: 688: 687: 683: 679: 676: 673: 670: 667: 661: 657: 653: 648: 647: 646: 642: 638: 637:John lilburne 633: 632: 631: 627: 623: 620: 617: 614: 613: 602: 598: 593: 587: 585: 578: 577: 576: 572: 568: 564: 563: 562: 558: 553: 547: 545: 538: 537: 536: 532: 528: 524: 523: 522: 518: 514: 511: 507: 503: 502: 500: 496: 495: 487: 483: 479: 475: 474: 473: 472: 469: 468: 467: 462: 461: 460: 442: 438: 434: 430: 426: 423: 422: 421: 417: 413: 409: 408: 407: 403: 399: 395: 394: 393: 392: 388: 384: 380: 373: 366: 362: 358: 354: 353: 352: 351: 347: 343: 339: 323: 319: 315: 311: 310: 309: 306: 301: 288: 287:"making room" 284: 283: 282: 278: 274: 270: 269: 268: 267: 263: 259: 255: 244: 240: 236: 232: 231: 229: 225: 221: 220: 219: 215: 211: 207: 206: 205: 204: 201: 196: 190: 180: 171: 168: 166: 163: 161: 158: 156: 153: 151: 148: 146: 143: 141: 138: 136: 133: 131: 128: 126: 123: 122: 121: 120: 117: 116: 112: 108: 107: 100: 99: 92: 88: 84: 83: 79: 75: 71: 67: 63: 60: 56: 53: 51:of this page. 50: 49: 43: 42: 40: 39: 37: 33: 27: 22: 18: 17: 5386:, but other 5375: 5367:edit summary 5358: 5351: 5337: 5336: 5325:The article 5324: 5287: 5261: 5233: 5177: 5152: 5106:Ottawahitech 5099: 5082: 5075: 5054: 5046: 5020:The Interior 5011: 5009: 5008: 5000: 4995: 4994: 4989: 4988: 4983: 4982: 4977: 4976: 4971: 4970: 4965: 4964: 4959: 4958: 4949: 4945: 4936: 4934: 4925: 4911: 4905:The Interior 4902: 4895: 4892: 4883: 4882: 4845: 4794:Do you mean 4762: 4708: 4679: 4616: 4578: 4573: 4541:Kevin Gorman 4538: 4512: 4507: 4465: 4441: 4344: 4343:If you have 4311: 4275: 4219:a discussion 4201: 4171: 4144: 4142: 4103: 4028: 4026: 4024: 4003: 4000:Notification 3971:Andy Dingley 3965: 3887: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3840:Andy Dingley 3829: 3784: 3780: 3778: 3714: 3707: 3665: 3608: 3596: 3556: 3538: 3459: 3425: 3421: 3397: 3347: 3307: 3274: 3207: 3200: 3158: 3115: 3084: 3079: 2971: 2894: 2844: 2843: 2837: 2836: 2821: 2820: 2814: 2813: 2784: 2780: 2775: 2762: 2761: 2755: 2754: 2744: 2739: 2710: 2709: 2703: 2702: 2696: 2676: 2663: 2662: 2656: 2655: 2626: 2625: 2619: 2618: 2611: 2592: 2576:Coffeepusher 2569: 2553:Coffeepusher 2544: 2520: 2512: 2481: 2461: 2448: 2430: 2422: 2420: 2419: 2415: 2406: 2292: 2288: 2241: 2240: 2236: 2206: 2166: 2098: 2050: 2011: 1956: 1911: 1910: 1898: 1875: 1874: 1859: 1841:JohnClarknew 1835: 1830: 1829: 1821: 1818:Legal Action 1777: 1742: 1741:Thank you. 1738: 1732: 1714: 1705: 1611: 1572: 1566: 1543: 1502: 1501: 1464: 1463: 1447: 1298: 1294: 1279: 1251: 1249: 1243: 1239: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1161:this comment 1156: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1134: 1106: 1038: 1034: 967: 923:accusations. 897: 893: 889: 885: 881: 800: 799: 793: 792: 788: 711: 705: 583: 543: 504: 465: 464: 458: 457: 454: 376: 335: 332:Edit Warring 251: 186: 178: 110: 97: 86: 77: 73: 69: 47: 29: 28: 5159:Nightscream 5125:we miss you 4254:around here 3593:AFD Closure 1895:Bencherlite 1856:Bencherlite 1577:instead of 1076:Crisco 1492 1045:Crisco 1492 1043:, sorry. — 342:Crisco 1492 299:‑Scottywong 258:Mark Arsten 199:| express _ 194:‑Scottywong 5404:asilvering 5236:... here: 5198:topic bans 5157:? Thanks. 4978:New ideas: 4937:Greetings 4815:Camelbinky 4781:Camelbinky 4730:Beeblebrox 4031:PinkAmpers 3599:Snow Close 3531:. You can 2785:motivation 2539:Kauffner's 2421:This does 1786:Seleucidis 1396:discussion 1389:discussion 1356:discussion 1346:discussion 1257:Carcharoth 1165:Carcharoth 1074:better. — 580:blocked?-- 36:guidelines 5400:consensus 5329:has been 5194:site bans 4676:template. 4620:<: --> 4614:Ruhrfisch 4582:<: --> 4576:Ruhrfisch 4504:Hellooooo 4409:Mission 7 4402:Mission 6 4395:Mission 5 4388:Mission 4 4381:Mission 3 4374:Mission 2 4367:Mission 1 4198:Swamilive 4146:Callanecc 4120:I can't. 3786:Callanecc 3311:is not a 3293:Evanh2008 3282:Precisely 3072:A little 2444:add entry 1715:INeverCry 451:Thank you 433:George Ho 412:George Ho 383:George Ho 32:talk page 5299:contribs 5291:Mr. Guye 5272:deletion 4941:members! 4929:contribs 4915:contribs 4714:deletion 4442:Get Help 4282:Penwhale 4278:declined 4155:contribs 3795:contribs 3540:WilliamH 3509:Talkback 2948:guess.-- 2541:new page 2522:Milowent 2295:that way 1802:Thanks! 1754:Chequers 1652:Dicklyon 1614:Dicklyon 850:private. 790:needed. 111:Archives 4858:28bytes 4691:rmation 4570:Apology 4025:Thanks, 3899:rmation 3869:Article 3746:WP:SNOW 3641:WP:SNOW 3460:opinion 2845:C M B J 2822:C M B J 2776:article 2763:C M B J 2711:C M B J 2664:C M B J 2627:C M B J 2435:on the 2215:WP:EGRS 2008:Advice? 1569:article 1291:change. 1031:Apology 894:editors 817:report. 304:| yak _ 224:Bearian 64:Please 57:Please 44:Please 5369:or on 5184:. The 5088:Ocaasi 5012:opt-in 4919:Ocaasi 4525:cntrb. 4349:Ocaasi 4223:WP:ANI 4122:Liquid 4092:Liquid 4066:Liquid 3742:WP:NAC 3637:WP:NAC 3565:Begoon 3553:Thanks 3398:casual 3074:chompy 2781:images 2595:Drmies 2483:issue. 2454:~~~~}} 2242:reader 2111:cntrb. 2077:WP:BLP 1973:, and 1907:page. 1824:WP:NLT 1648:WP:BRD 1583:Jarble 1544:failed 1041:an ass 886:Anyone 831:cases. 747:delay. 596:cntrb. 556:cntrb. 429:WP:ANI 66:indent 48:bottom 5135:Lotje 4619:: --> 4581:: --> 4509:it.-- 4125:Water 4104:could 4095:Water 4069:Water 4036:& 3961:WP:AE 3919:Draco 3825:WP:AN 3426:think 3286:thank 2891:Hello 2697:might 2589:Maybe 2362:Liszt 1750:Spiel 801:Vesey 466:Vesey 338:WP:EW 91:watch 5408:talk 5295:talk 5246:talk 5218:talk 5163:talk 5139:talk 5119:Hi, 5110:talk 5018:. -- 4923:talk 4909:talk 4862:talk 4819:talk 4804:talk 4785:talk 4749:talk 4734:talk 4601:talk 4560:talk 4545:talk 4520:tlk. 4494:talk 4479:talk 4467:This 4262:talk 4229:SamX 4225:. -- 4208:talk 4188:talk 4159:logs 4151:talk 4112:talk 4082:talk 4056:talk 3990:talk 3975:talk 3949:talk 3933:talk 3859:talk 3844:talk 3814:talk 3799:logs 3791:talk 3755:talk 3744:and 3697:talk 3660:Bold 3649:talk 3583:talk 3544:talk 3483:talk 3468:talk 3449:talk 3435:talk 3422:also 3407:talk 3387:talk 3372:talk 3357:talk 3337:talk 3321:talk 3291::) 3289:you! 3240:talk 3201:deal 3190:talk 3147:talk 3054:talk 3040:talk 3025:talk 3010:talk 2995:talk 2979:talk 2954:talk 2939:talk 2917:talk 2902:talk 2863:talk 2809:here 2794:talk 2729:talk 2686:talk 2645:talk 2599:talk 2580:talk 2557:talk 2489:talk 2385:talk 2370:talk 2352:talk 2337:talk 2322:talk 2314:this 2303:talk 2274:talk 2252:talk 2227:talk 2196:talk 2181:talk 2149:talk 2134:ller 2129:chba 2124:Laun 2106:tlk. 2085:talk 2065:ller 2060:chba 2055:Laun 2037:talk 2022:talk 2014:this 1998:talk 1983:talk 1935:talk 1920:talk 1912:Worm 1884:talk 1876:Worm 1845:talk 1808:talk 1790:talk 1745:Ϣere 1690:talk 1671:talk 1656:talk 1634:talk 1618:talk 1603:talk 1587:talk 1552:talk 1527:talk 1511:talk 1503:Worm 1489:talk 1473:talk 1465:Worm 1438:talk 1270:here 1261:talk 1226:here 1216:talk 1199:talk 1185:talk 1169:talk 1138:here 1119:talk 1080:talk 1065:talk 1049:talk 1011:talk 977:talk 957:talk 942:talk 911:talk 898:most 872:talk 794:Ryan 770:talk 756:talk 738:talk 723:talk 696:talk 682:talk 656:talk 641:talk 626:talk 591:tlk. 571:talk 551:tlk. 531:talk 517:talk 482:talk 459:Ryan 437:talk 416:talk 402:talk 387:talk 361:talk 346:talk 318:talk 277:talk 262:talk 239:talk 228:talk 214:talk 87:here 5311:of 5301:) 5297:) ( 5240:.-- 5178:Hi, 5104:. X 4917:), 4903:by 4671:ygm 4666:or 4610:Yep 4554::) 4535:heh 4345:any 4312:Hi! 4284:| 4221:at 4175:-- 3603:NAC 3348:you 2929:of 2677:any 2566:ANI 2447:: 2423:not 2213:or 1650:? 1448:AGK 1299:AGK 1252:not 1244:not 968:not 5410:) 5373:. 5356:. 5347:). 5344:, 5248:) 5220:) 5196:, 5165:) 5141:) 5123:, 5112:) 4864:) 4821:) 4806:) 4798:? 4787:) 4775:, 4771:, 4751:) 4736:) 4674:}} 4668:{{ 4664:}} 4658:{{ 4612:. 4603:) 4562:) 4547:) 4496:) 4481:) 4453:| 4264:) 4210:) 4190:) 4161:) 4157:• 4153:• 4114:) 4084:) 4058:) 4027:— 3992:) 3977:) 3951:) 3935:) 3861:) 3846:) 3816:) 3801:) 3797:• 3793:• 3757:) 3699:) 3651:) 3585:) 3546:) 3485:) 3470:) 3451:) 3437:) 3409:) 3389:) 3374:) 3359:) 3339:) 3323:) 3284:, 3242:) 3192:) 3149:) 3056:) 3042:) 3027:) 3012:) 2997:) 2981:) 2956:) 2941:) 2919:) 2904:) 2865:) 2838:— 2815:— 2811:. 2796:) 2756:— 2731:) 2704:— 2688:) 2657:— 2647:) 2620:— 2601:) 2582:) 2559:) 2525:• 2491:) 2387:) 2372:) 2354:) 2339:) 2324:) 2305:) 2276:) 2254:) 2237:is 2229:) 2207:is 2198:) 2183:) 2151:) 2087:) 2079:? 2039:) 2024:) 2000:) 1985:) 1937:) 1923:) 1887:) 1847:) 1810:) 1792:) 1692:) 1673:) 1658:) 1636:) 1620:) 1605:) 1589:) 1554:) 1529:) 1514:) 1491:) 1476:) 1440:) 1263:) 1218:) 1201:) 1187:) 1171:) 1140:: 1121:) 1082:) 1067:) 1051:) 1013:) 979:) 959:) 944:) 913:) 890:is 874:) 772:) 758:) 740:) 725:) 698:) 684:) 658:) 643:) 628:) 573:) 533:) 519:) 501:: 484:) 439:) 418:) 404:) 389:) 363:) 348:) 320:) 279:) 264:) 241:) 230:) 216:) 78::: 5406:( 5293:( 5288:— 5244:( 5216:( 5161:( 5137:( 5108:( 4931:) 4926:· 4921:( 4912:· 4907:( 4860:( 4817:( 4802:( 4783:( 4747:( 4732:( 4688:o 4685:f 4682:N 4623:° 4599:( 4585:° 4558:( 4543:( 4492:( 4477:( 4260:( 4243:S 4239:‧ 4237:✎ 4235:‧ 4233:☎ 4231:‧ 4206:( 4186:( 4149:( 4110:( 4080:( 4054:( 4021:. 4015:; 3988:( 3973:( 3947:( 3931:( 3896:o 3893:f 3890:N 3857:( 3842:( 3812:( 3789:( 3753:( 3728:i 3725:t 3722:s 3719:u 3716:D 3695:( 3679:i 3676:t 3673:s 3670:u 3667:D 3647:( 3622:i 3619:t 3616:s 3613:u 3610:D 3581:( 3542:( 3524:. 3481:( 3466:( 3447:( 3433:( 3405:( 3385:( 3370:( 3355:( 3335:( 3319:( 3238:( 3221:i 3218:t 3215:s 3212:u 3209:D 3188:( 3172:i 3169:t 3166:s 3163:u 3160:D 3145:( 3129:i 3126:t 3123:s 3120:u 3117:D 3098:i 3095:t 3092:s 3089:u 3086:D 3076:? 3052:( 3038:( 3023:( 3008:( 2993:( 2977:( 2952:( 2937:( 2915:( 2900:( 2861:( 2792:( 2727:( 2684:( 2643:( 2597:( 2578:( 2555:( 2487:( 2472:. 2383:( 2368:( 2350:( 2335:( 2320:( 2301:( 2272:( 2250:( 2225:( 2194:( 2179:( 2147:( 2083:( 2035:( 2020:( 1996:( 1981:( 1933:( 1917:( 1881:( 1843:( 1806:( 1788:( 1688:( 1669:( 1654:( 1632:( 1616:( 1601:( 1585:( 1550:( 1525:( 1508:( 1487:( 1470:( 1436:( 1272:. 1259:( 1214:( 1197:( 1183:( 1167:( 1117:( 1078:( 1063:( 1047:( 1009:( 975:( 955:( 940:( 909:( 882:I 870:( 768:( 754:( 736:( 721:( 694:( 680:( 654:( 639:( 624:( 569:( 529:( 515:( 480:( 435:( 414:( 400:( 385:( 359:( 344:( 316:( 275:( 260:( 237:( 226:( 212:( 74:: 70::

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

Index