User talk:Delicious carbuncle/Archive 8

1015:

posted on the Knowledge thread that was removed: Although I know that this account will be banned for "sockpuppetry" or "evasion of block" or whatever, I just want to point out have you thought to see if these accounts created to say how the account Kagome_85 should have a sitewide ban MIGHT be related to Moukity? Kagome_85 is my account, but these accounts created to say there should be a sitewide ban are not. If an IP trace was done you would find that this account and the accounts made to say there should be a sitewide ban put on me probably start with 142., but you would also see that the rest of the digits that follow my account and the ones that follow the accounts made to say there should be a sitewide ban put in place on me are different. I know you may say that any user that is guilty would say that, however, I am pointing that out since a.) I am not stupid enough to go on here saying you should put a sitewide ban on me by using a different account since I know you can trace it and b.) Why would I go make another account to report something I did on another account when I know that would just get me in trouble since I can get caught? and c.) Why would I go linking to a news article about me when I don't want people to know about it? I'm not looking for attention or anything like some people are.

4248:

context should not be complicated: The notion that Savage is in any way shape or form a prominent anti-Scientologist is ridiculous except in so far as he is one of a large number of people notable for other reasons who happens to have made some anti-Scientology remarks. In that setting, the notion that Cirt intended to promote material about Savage because of obscure anti-scientology remarks made by Savage years ago comes across as a paranoid claim about Cirt's intentions. Given that, and the apparent vendetta targeting Cirt, this becomes a "paranoid vendetta". Now, I strongly suggest that you focus on the actual issues at hand. I'm becoming increasingly tempted to go to ANI and ask for a ban on you interacting with Cirt.

1019:

retirement sign on it anyway since you can be guaranteed I won't be using this anymore. By the way, the only reason I found this post was that I went to check the Incidents Noticeboards for something on another topic that I was told about that has nothing to do with me, so you can't say that I had any knowledge of this thread because I never, if you looked at the date that this post was made you would see that. Please, I implore you, to do an investigation into the accounts that started this discussion on me, and see if they were made by Moukity (a.k.a. Blackmagic1234). If you see this, then you will know that he is at fault as well.

4022:

identified, based on little more than hearsay evidence. (Now, considering the past actions of that particular individual, it will likely be glossed over as a special case.) Mindbunny's statements pale in comparison. At any rate, striking the comments is not preventing anyone from reading them, so it accomplishes nothing even if you had a point about BLP issues. Let Mindbunny suffer the consequences of making the comments. I doubt anyone will agree that their hypothetical example should be excised and if they were going to take offense at being called "fuckheads", I think they would have done so by now. If you wish to

3374:

laws governing testimonials, and this is actually how I found this article on wikipedia and why I added this very appropriate 4th sub-category... That being the case, I suggest you visit the websites I listed and learn about an industry BEFORE you delete another wikipedia users post, because, as you wrote "appears" to be something different. That's simply irresponsible editing. I suggest you do your homework and replace or un-edit my relevant addition to the article. Or, if you still feel it' not relevant to that article please tell me where you think these companies should be listed.

2611:. Your closer to AE thread on your conduct than really doing any good here in improving this. Its also worth noting the lack of direct communication between you Cirt has also been his best defense. We all see the issues with Cirt's editing and it will be solved in time whether by restrictions or by improvement in writing with neutrality. I think the latter is more likely as she as been improving on that lately. The four most serious CoatRacks are at AFD and more eyes are on Cirt than have been since WP:ARBSCI. I think You have done enough for now. 1790:. I am making no statement as to whether or not your edits are good or bad in this case, but merely notifying you that you are editing in an area under special ArbCom sanctions, and that by editing in this area, you find your edits under special scrutiny. You may be blocked without further warning, after this notification, should it be determined that you are editing tendentiously in the area of Scientology. Again, no statement as to whether your edits so far have met that description, but you ARE on unstable ground here, so tread cautiously. -- 253: 221:

hard feelings whatsoever, then or now. You're one of the good ones and we're in this together. We just have to somehow convince the powers-that-be that this isn't a playpen and serial vandalism will be followed with possible legal action if that is in fact possible. Somehow,we have to put teeth in this thing. We can block and revert all day, but in the case of multiple, coordinated vandalism (or one very determined little boy in Alabama), the people who run this place need to take some responsibility. --

3538: 3081: 1902: 1737:? I thought that is what we were meant to be discussing. And when did majority rule replace consensus? That discussion has only just started. I find your aggressive actions in this episode disturbing. It would be nice if you would let things run their course without hyperbole, doublespeak, contradictions, and threats. In fact, it would be nice if you didn't keep typing things but never addressing any of my questions, so please don't reply here unless absolutely necessary. Thanks. 1933: 1274:. Protecting the article will help, but only result in a different target. Since the ANI threads didn't get anywhere and private discussions with ArbCom members have not worked (the user's identity is known to ArbCom), I may have to follow up more formally, but I would rather not because it would be a tedious exercise and reopen a conflict that has been largely dormant since this user ceased editing on a regular basis. 2223:, he made some very good suggestions to both of us. Namely, that we both try to move forwards collaboratively. I would like to try to make a good faith effort to discuss with you, here on your talk page or at my talk page, some of your concerns, in a polite and cordial manner. :) I would like to try to address your complaints - similarly to the way I successfully and collaboratively did so with 351:

straw - your proposal intends on letting this problem continue forever, and I won't support that. If you want to make your own amendment proposal, it is not proper to do so through someone else's, otherwise I would have done the same with respect to Spartaz's proposal. Finally, please cease making inaccurate statements about me or my position - for example, contrary to what you said

1210:

is not backed up by the facts. You are being faecinorous and avataristic if you assume that deleting such an article without fair-warning is not kleptomaniacal. I hope I've enriched your vocabulary. Now go and get a job, because I will not stand idly by and watch my name get defamed by some old-maidish user who has not asserted any true notability for any of their comments.--

812:

over to the UK page that SI.com linked to, that has got modeling shots of her posted on it, by assuming it to be some genuinely contracted photo agency. Have you ever been to such a site? They have a bunch of high quality pix on them of the person they are promoting. Duh. So, again, I f*'d up by not glancing at the site long enough--STILL haven't, btw--to see

2780:-- I think it is safe to say that our edits had no interrelationship. Cirt is a prolific and useful editor and admin, but their POV-pushing in Scientology-related articles is not something that should be ignored. I have no idea who you are or why you are trying to distort what is happening here, but stop making these kinds of unfounded accusations. 4061:, but edit warring about a line is really a bit silly, don't you think? I do not understand why you have taken it upon yourself to strike another user's comments without discussion, or why you have chosen to ignore that the same phrase that you are striking appears in a ban proposal to which you contributed. Can you explain your actions? 430:, and these pink films are in the same style, and of the same lack of expliciteness as are his films. The Pink film category probably makes "Pornographic film" redundant anyway. Whether we should put Pink film as a sub-category of "Pornographic film" or "Erotic film" or "Sexploitation" or whatever, is another matter. 829:

very best of my knowledge I'm not guilty in any way whatsoever of any kind of foul play. OK? But instead I get from you, "H-B, you left the site in the article as a site for modeling pix!" Yeah, so I did. That's what it is. Bring it to the article's talkpage. ...Although I suppose user tk pg's are OK too. Shrugs.--

4281:. What is more, you have simply reiterated your usage of the word "paranoid" with out explaining it. I will try to be clear - I am not interested in Cirt as a person or persons, or in their general activity on Knowledge. My interest in Cirt relates to their flagrant and repeated POV-pushing and violation of 2805:, or you will both have sanctions sought now. I've tried being nice, tried convincing you both to use your heads and be mature - and now I'm done. The battles between you two are detrimental to WP and annoying the userbase. You will both back off and stop it now, or it will be stopped for you. Good day. 3151:- it isn't enough to say "this isn't neutral," you must provide reasons why it is not neutral. Synthesis is a problem, but it doesn't automatically upset NPOV. If you're going to keep on ignoring calls to state your problem, the template will be removed. A template is not to be used as a badge of shame. 4663:

Can you stop speaking in riddles, please? Are you claiming that the person who operated the Dbiv account and the person operating the Sam Blacketer are not the same person? I'm not suggesting that this is anything other than coincidence, but I note that the articles you allude to were both created by

3745:

The user requested to leave Knowledge permanently, apparently because the drama/community scrutiny was too much. ANI is, to my mind, the last place to advertise this. A quick, quiet note with Gfoley would have been more respectful, and would have been a better way to clarify the issue, in any case. -

2757:

Your mission on here is not to trail her and harp over every edit like you do, or for her to do vice-versa. WP is not the venue for either of your personal tirades. You guys need to cut it out. If you guys can't take it off WP and work it out, then you need to straight up ignore and avoid each other,

2588:

I think was a misunderstanding here. Very soon after I added that information to the original request, it was collapsed. I interpreted "Claims of post-warning misconduct should be brought in a separate thread" to mean "start a new thread for this evidence", so I did. I am not conducting a "harassment

2310:

that your reason for canvassing admins to impose sanctions on me at the arbitration request you started was due to your frustration over critical statements made by another editor. I cannot understand this statement to mean anything other than that you were deliberately attempting to limit discussion

1500:

Paid editing goes on here all the time, whether it is contractors/editors paid to create articles or people who edit articles of interest to their employer as part of their job. If Knowledge had a desire to eliminate or mitigate this, it would need to take measures that would substantially change its

1431:

as the article has an IMDB link. During the last RFC I tried unsuccessfully to get the sticky prod process broadened from unsourced to ignore Facebook, Myspace, LinkedIN and Utube "sources", and IMDB is usually reckoned better than those, at least for screen credits. If the article had been unsourced

57:

While I could provide evidence to show that my edits reflected what I was told at ANI and thus were neither pointy nor disruptive, I am reluctant to do so only to have my unblock request denied by an admin who sees things that same way you do. If anyone cares to unblock me, they will. Otherwise, I'll

4311:

One meaning of paranoid is overly suspicious. It doesn't mean one needs to think that one is the target. And no, vendetta doesn't imply that you are acting in retaliation to a perceived wrong to you. You are targeting another user in a way that is overly suspicious and clearly focusing on that user.

4247:

Yes, I saw your remark earlier. It should have been apparent that it fell under the category of comments about Cirt which I was not interested in discussing further. Content, not the contributors matter. To avoid further derailing that conversation, I'm replying here. The meaning of paranoid in this

4149:

I have expressed some of my concerns in the ANI thread that I linked on your page. It is unfortunate that a medical condition makes it hard for you to understand Knowledge, but if that is the case, then maybe editing here is not a good idea. Most of us have physical, mental, emotional, financial, or

4021:

Rob, I think we are generally in agreement when it comes to BLP issues, but sometimes I feel that you can't see the forest for the trees. That particular topic is about a page that really really shouldn't exist at all on Knowledge and is an outright personal attack on an individual who can easily be

2633:

Will you please back off her, I dont particularly mind the extra scrutiny of her work but the more people gripe on WR especially with Threads like "Cirt Scientology edits jan 2011" the more it looks like a cabal of editors Targeting her thus making her the Victim rather than about legitimate content

2322:

to separate the subject's professional career from their involvement with the CoS was made by another editor after I raised it at BLPN. You reverted it. Although some of the fluff has been removed, the article is still larded with a truly ridiculous number of gratuitous references to Scientology and

1209:

refreshing to see such care given to ones dignity on Knowledge. Lets make one thing clear: all my commentary is published. I somehow doubt that you read all four clear, investigated sources that appear on just about every major search engines terminology, but at any rate, your blatant editorialising

1034:

A word of advice to both parties - it should be apparent to you that these types of things can lead to unpleasant real-world consequences (legal and otherwise). Stop editing Knowledge, stop posting messages about one another here or elsewhere, and stop antagonizing each other. This will not end well

303:

The sanction is aimed more at Neutralhomer then you but for fairness I'm proposing it for both of you. It seems fair from the last discussion at ANI that anything between you and Neutralhomer ends up badly. I usually find it goes wrong when I do high profile blocks so I'm not looking to use my block

4190:

I'm sure you must have a blog you can put that on, don't you? The picture does not illustrate DYI in any appreciable way and telling readers to watch part of a full length documentary on a band because part of it shows the band making tshirts is really stretching things a little too far. Sorry, but

1464:

Since IMDB ha been consistently rejected as a reliable source for biographies of living people, I considered that it was as good as unsourced. If the addition of an IMDB link would not have been sufficient to remove the tag, then it seems odd that the presence of one would necessitate it's removal,

828:

As for when I deleted the site from being listed as her agency in the infobox. What, you're Elliot freakin Spitzer, Sheriff o' Wall Street ? I'm sitting at the phones in my trading pit or boiler room or whatever its called working like a dog and you're coming along and making aspersions when to the

584:

I have unblocked both accounts a grand total of four minutes after you had posted the report to AN. I must admit I am a bit curious as to why I was not notified, and why you failed to attempt to resolve the matter on my user talk page, and instead went straight to a report at the admin noticeboard?

350:

You are the subject of the sanction proposal and your comment has been put in the designated section for users involved. Please let users who are not involved (the community) to comment on whether the sanction should be enacted or not. Additionally, my recent comment tells you that this is the last

220:

I needed to get my head on straight, which is why I vented in the first place. All self-control basically went out the window since this has gone on for so long and I fear it's driven others off the project. I've e-mailed Jimbo to apologize to him for having to step in my big ol' can of worms. No

113:

the community is expected to overlook the occasional instance of non optimum interaction or comment, and where there are signs of a deterioration in compliance with WP standards to offer help - and advocating for the removal of an admin from certain activities is a penultimate step (to RfC/Admin or

3373:

That's interesting because they are all "Trust Seal" companies - and it was not one company I posted, but 3 different companies; all of which offer a trust seal as their main or sole product. I work for a business magazine in the US and came across these industries while researching the FTC's new

2283:

My concerns are related to BLP and POV issues, not Scientology. While working on an article about a book by CoS founder L Ron Hubbard may improve our working relationship, I do not think it is relevant to the issues I have raised. Perhaps we could work together on something completely unrelated to

2114:

I haven't yet had a chance to read through all the comments made in that "finding" or at related ANI threads, but I think some people, including yourself, are mistaken about some of the basic facts. It isn't surprising, given the chorus of Cirt's supporters drowning out the few reasoned responses,

970:

talk page? I am not being faceniorous are demagogic when I paint those comments I made as being both constructive and quite logically not vandalism. I really do not understand why it was deleted. EVIDENCE says War on Terror, was both iraq's and afghanistan's war's primary names, why did you delete

633:

I'm not sure what you are upset about, to be honest. I notified you about the thread within a minute of starting it. As I keep saying, the issue is a wider one and not limited to your recent actions, so discussing it on your talk page does little to remind other admins of the previous resolutions.

108:

No one said it was policy to insult or threaten vandals, even persistent ones, at ANI. What was said was that one or two instances of frustration being vented (and not directly at the vandal, because it was not on the vandals talkpage or the vandalised article talkpage) was not grounds to question

4170:

I have adjusted my Bricolage image and One-Eyed Doll reference so they fit within the scope of the article. The sequence in the film is a detailed examination of the DIY process (in this case by a punk band), which illustrates the article quite nicely, and the art gallery/crafts store image is a

2711:. Both of you need to consider taking a break from each other, if not from WP, and quite possibly even The Net as a whole. As I advised earlier - either get a room and get it over with, duke it out, or avoid each other. The S/N ratio is overbearing and is starting to drown out legitimate WP work. 1018:

I hope that you consider what I said since I felt I should point out the fact that Moukity could(and more than likely is) be behind these new accounts made to say that I should be banned from the site permanently. Anyway, feel free to ban this account as you probably will, but I'll be putting the

811:

Obviously she has various agencies that represent her. Or, come to think, as one of the most famous tv personalities in her country, maybe she doesn't need to, I dunno. I'm editing like a automaton here trying to pop things into their appropriate category and apparently I messed up when I clicked

744:

You were so quick to respond to my post that you missed the fact that I notified Cirt on their talk page immediately after starting the thread. You decided that it was an "incident report" (which it wasn't) and moved it to ANI where it is likely not to be seen by as many admins and will soon fall

396:

Hi, Delicious carbuncle. Conversations on hard / soft porn and the differences between the Japanese and US concepts of such have led to the agreement that these non-explicit films do not belong in the same category with hardcore US videos. I originally added the category, that's why I removed it.

328:

Inhibiting requests for enforcement is an area that most admins find very difficult as it effectively disenfranchises users from the usual consensus driven dispute resolution that wikipedia relies on, hence the problems with finding a blocker here. I want an absolutely unambiguous line to make it

2287:

I have presented evidence at ANI of a long-term pattern of POV-pushing and anti-Scientology activities because it is my sincere belief that you hold a bias that prevents you from fairly applying our policies and guidelines. I do no think it is appropriate or helpful to reframe this as a personal

1014:

Although I know you might delete this and refuse to reply to it given that another user has been deleting my posts claiming how I am not allowed to post since I'm banned, I think you should listen to me, given that a user is harassing me(the one that started the discussion on me). This is what I

4568:

While Derby Hurts indeed has a Facebook page, it is primarily a podcast (a fact I neglected to mention). And although DerbyDeLosMuertos.JPG is the regalia of a just one Latina roller derby athlete, the image is meant as an example of the infusion of Día de los Muertos imagery into American pop

4326:

Perhaps you should look at the etymology of vendetta. If you had chosen to use either word without the other, I would let it slide, but I find it hard to believe that nothing was implied by the combination, but as you have more or less stated that that wasn't your intention, I will believe you.

1645:) is both over-reaching your admin powers and a clear indication of your inability to view objectively anything remotely related to Scientology. I suggest that if a block is forthcoming, you had best find solid grounds for it and find someone else to do it. Regardless, I won't take it lightly. 1513:

isn't a problem for me. If people use sockpuppets or meatpuppets to generate the appearance of consensus or to sway AfDs, that is not ok. If people have a clear conflict of interest but refuse to admit it, that is not ok. If people are attempting to co-opt Knowledge to benefit their commercial

173:

Beeblebrox, I hope to explain myself at ANI (unless someone prematurely archives the topic to prevent me from doing so), but I will respond to parts of your comment here because I agree with much of what you say. Vandals are a fact of life on Knowledge. We should work to discourage them and to

4622:

Thanks. I am sure we will have no problem working together, but I doubt our situations are the same. I hope you didn't miss my point - your own BLP here has been deleted in part because of the negative information it contained. So far as I know, it was sourced and accurate. You appear to have

159:, and the best way to deal with an admin who has been trying in good faith in every conceivable way to stop him for several years and has gotten to the end of his rope and vented a little about it is to pat him on the back and tell him it going to be ok, and not to get so worked up about it. 2729:

here, I have to assume that you think I am someone involved in some sort of long-term off-wiki dispute with Cirt. It might be helpful if you told me who that was, or what your stake in this is. Otherwise, I am going to assume that you are just confused and ignore you. Feel free to email me.

3464:

I see, so even if it's a relevant and factual post, one who has a vested interest and arguably the greatest knowledge of a particular topic, cannot edit a post. As long as that's the wikipedia wide standard I will abide by it, but if elsewhere on the site people and businesses are editing

284:

Let's see, it's August and there have been no interactions since January. When Neutralhomer violates his restrictions the first time, I let it slide. When he violates his restriction the second time and I ask for it to be enforced. Rather than enforce it, your response is to ask for an

1504:

I am generally of the opinion that what matters is the results - if paid editors are creating decent articles that meet all of our guidelines, that should be fine and we probably won't even notice. Where I differ from many people who hold this opinion is that I have concerns about

142:

Even if you are right, you edit warred. You can't honestly claim you didn't know that was wrong and would get you blocked. The overall point here is that BF101 is not just any old vandal or troll. He has demonstrated his utter contempt for this project and it's goals literally

3760:

The vanishing appeared to have been a multi-admin pile-on so ANI seemed like the best place for my question. If Dusti is vanished/retired, I sincerely hope they aren't hanging around reading ANI in case their former username comes up. Question answered, let's drop it. Thanks.

1824:

I'm not sure how it could have; if no conflict exists there is nothing to scrutinize. Its the presence of the conflict which generates attention. In any event, this is not a finding of wrongdoing, but merely a reminder of the environment in which the conflict is occuring.

4464:

Your statement that you assume I am another editor is a personal attack. Please remove the entire line of inquiry from the talk page as it is inappropriate there and does not serve to further the discussion on improving the article. That is, it is disruptive. And offensive.

3241:

I'm not assuming that - on the contrary, if I didn't think you had some deeply hidden reason, I wouldn't be asking. I'm just saying that's how it comes across, since you seem to be deliberately refusing to provide a reason that would enable editors to correct the problem.

602:

This seems to be a recurring issue and not specific or limited to your recent blocks. I started the thread in part as a reminder to other admins who may not have seen the first two. Giftiger wunsch's well-intentioned move from AN to ANI has dilued the usefulness of this.

943: 313:

I'm not responding to Neutralhomer (as much out of kindness as anything else) so there really isn't any "bickering" to speak of. As I said, I have no objection to an absolute interaction ban, but I don't have much hope that it will be any different than the last one.

1363:

Correct you are. I left a note too. :) LOL. For what it's worth I recognized "Carolyn" right away, but I don't block fast any more because the risk of being wrong is too high, and in the current humiliate-all-admins environment there's hell to pay when you are.

4006:- that comment is a violation of the talkpage guidelines. I have reverted your replacement of the disputed content - please do not replace it, if you do I will report you. It is not quasi censorship as you claim but the removal of policy and guideline violation. 1163:. Perhaps your efforts would be well-spent if you paid a blind bit of attention to the serious impact the subject had on numerous reliable publications, then you would see fit not to get rid of my work. Your destructive editing is so self-serving it is pitiful.-- 3184:

Yet I've asked you several times to explain the neutrality issue, and you just can't come up with anything. It's almost as if you're trying to discredit the article for personal reasons. I hope that's not the case - that's why I keep asking and asking and

852:

you're supposed to be careful abt removing sourced material. Please contribute in good faith to the discussion on the talk page. Do you really think mention of the World Cup should be deleted? If you are too lazy to improve this coverage, then, per basic

4026:

someone, it should be Mindbunny for the comments, not me for reverting your completely impotent action. If you do decide to take some action against me, please link to this comment. I'll be reverting your striking again now - proceed as you see fit.

3208:

Oh, and the guideline also states that adding the tag may be tendentious. It looks like that's closer to the case here, doesn't it? Since you're stubbornly refusing to provide a reason and instead are trying to keep it there as a badge of shame?

3695:

who is a crat on meta wiki and an otrs admin and a load of other positions. As you said it all looks correct, orts is a bit secretive by its very nature and I don't think there is like a list of volunteers anywhere. I sent you an email for your

114:

ArbCom desysop Request) rather than an initial one. I would further comment that amending policy requires obvious and transparent consensus, rather than the interpretation of what you think was said in respect of one instance. Even if you claim

1096:

Hi. Why isn't IMDB a reliable source for BLPs? At least it is better than no source or a false one, but I don't understand why it's unreliable. However, I have not restored my statement; I just want to hear your opinion on the matter. Thanks.

3939:

Oh -- so, just to be clear, you were not saying that it was not PRODable (I thought you were claiming that it was not subject to PROD), only that you felt that it had exhibited sufficient notability in the article itself to pass the A7 bar?

3715:

I've removed the section you created at ANI for what should be rather obvious reasons. RTV typically does not extend to deletion of user talk pages. If you want to move the talk page to a different location or whatever, that is fine by me. -

3648:

Largest online retailer in the UK? Did you actually read the article? I note you've now AfDd the article - as spam, of all things - because what every new contributor needs is row after row of automated messages telling them they're shite.

174:

mitigate the damage they do. The most successful interaction strategy seems to be, as you say, revert-block-ignore. The least successful interaction strategy seems to be baiting the vandals and becoming, to use the vernacular, a "lulzcow".

701:

You actions, though likely well-intentioned, were hasty and unhelpful in this instance. If you read the previous threads, you would have seen that this is a recurring issue and not something that is specific to Cirt or any other admin.

2873: 1580:, but I merely meant that the whole "legal advice" (actual or perceived as such) debate is usually fruitless and best avoided. Your comment seemed to be going in both of those directions at once. Some things are taken too seriously. -- 961: 2855: 4435:

There is no accusation. As I said, I had just assumed that you and the IP editor were one and the same and I was surprised to see you replying to a thread started by the IP. I'm sorry - I did not mean to upset you with my question.

4507:

I saw your message when I logged in and struck my comment because it was clear you had misinterpreted my question as an accusation and it was not my intention to upset you. Removing the discussion seems unnecessary at this point.

576: 3189:

you to follow the rules and provide a rationale that goes beyond "It's not neutral because I said so." Synthesis does not automatically confer non-neutrality. If you do not provide a rationale for the tag, it will be removed.

1640:

Again, I do not see how this is a BLP violation and you have offered no explanation. Further, I feel that your threat of a block for adding a source used in other BLPs (and, what's more, added to articles including BLPs by

235:

PS: The "medicated fist" comment was intended to be humorous and I'm sorry I didn't make that sufficiently clear. The last thing I'd want to do is to actually do bodily harm to anyone, let alone a child, however bratty.

181:, which only spurs on the vandals and trolls. Let's not forget that he is putting himself in this stressful and frustrating position. It is counter-productive and PMDrive1061 should find something else to do on the project. 2263:, founder of Scientology. I posted to relevant WikiProject talkpages about that quality-improvement-effort. Would you like to work collaboratively with me on this, to improve that article's quality status, together? :) -- 126:. I strongly suggest that in future you should ensure that you have consensus for your actions, and that you understand that the community and its policies are not to be gamed when you are in the minority of opinion. 4285:. I am not a Scientologist. I have no personal or professional affiliation with the Church of Scientology. I am not very interested in Scientology as a whole. Your use of the word "paranoid" implies that I feel that 3565:

As you reported this user to ANI yesterday, I thought I should let you know that I blocked the user as a sockpuppet yesterday but then lifted the block after multiple checkusers found no connection between the two.

2198:

I started to write something in the original request, but realized that a separate appeal would be more easily understood by editors who had not participated in the original discussion. Thank you for your support.

2459:, later overturned for lack of a warning. If you fail to heed this warning, you may be topic banned, initially, for three months, then with additional topic bans increasing in duration to a maximum of one year. ++ 4346: 4043:- I am .not sure why you feel the desire to replace this violation but I have again reverted it - please do not replace it - it is clearly disruptive and demeaning and a violation of talkpage page guidelines. 2955:

Hello Delicious carbuncle. The quirk of fate that someone with your username would start a thread on ANI entitled "Something fishy on Pelican State beach" brought a smile to my day. Cheers and happy editing.

2386:

at this point. While entertaining for a while - it has since become quite detrimental to WP, and is like watching the demise of my marriage all over again. Feel free to delete - just making an observation.

1855:

your current edits appear to be using multiple formats to attack a user in order to distract from the ANI rather than improve wikipedia. In your own words the edits you have done to the BLP and ANI are to

3631: 2744:

Nope - the dispute between you two is certainly on-Wiki, and has been witnessed multiple times by multiple people. One needs to only look at both of your talk pages and edit histories to see the level of

2327:"). The reader is given the impression that Doven's success is inextricably linked to Scientology. This BLP should serve as an example of why I feel that I must file a request for arbitration enforcement. 1465:

but it's par for the course. Maybe another RFC will have a different result once there is a longer history of BLPprods. It's a moot point since someone added other links, but thanks for letting me know.

980: 745:

into jokes about nipples if it doesn't get quickly archived by someone like yourself. If you see me starting threads on AN assume that I have done so for a reason and ask me before moving them. Thanks.

872:

That someone once labelled various athletes as different types of animals has no place in their biography. You seem to be having trouble understanding the difference between fact, opinion, and trivia.

3864: 677:. It hardly seems fair to bring up a particular incident, especially one where the blocking admin was so co-operative, if you do feel that it's not just Cirt who needs to be reminded of this. I think 2993: 2819:

I have had enough of your hyperbolic nonsense. Feel free to seek whatever sanctions you wish, but stop leaving comments here unless you are notifying me of discussions related to those sanctions.

857:

guidelines youre simply sposed ta mention your concerns on the tkpg, not delete in whole other's contributions that are in portion correct. Can you show me a guideline that says other than that?--

4101:

So, you don't wish to discuss this, but are intent on reverting anyway? You seem to be upset about something at the moment, so I will leave it alone, but you really need to get some perspective.

1154: 4390: 596: 2133: 2097: 617:

That did not answer either question, both of which are customary and even noted in instructions at multiple pages, prior to directly escalating issues, which you failed to do in both cases. --

4357:

If you have a reason to keep, please could you explain it - if not, then I can't see that your keep !vote would be of any use - whether another article exists or not has no bearing on whether

2531:

Apologies, I, err did not think that Cirt would actually do something like that just after getting a warning, nonetheless I think that Lar's suggestion of a cool down period is 'a good idea'.

1190:

article. English doesn't appear to be your first language, so I will assume that your comments were not meant as a personal attack, but please be mindful of how your words may come across.

1958:

states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the

4171:

nice counterpoint to Home Depot. I'd be happy to discuss this matter with you and/or to take to to Knowledge: Third Opinion, as I'm not quite sure which section of WP:EL is applicable,

1527: 1219: 1172: 1127:, but is generally accepted for uncontroversial information relating directly to film or tv work. You should have no trouble finding many discussions relating to this in the archives of 912: 898: 881: 90:

If you think I should be blocked for more time, I am powerless to stop you, but please don't come by to insult me when I'm not really in a position to respond in any public forum (like

4057:

How can I "replace" something that is not gone but merely has a line through it? If you can explain exactly how it is a violation of BLP policy, I might be persuaded that it should be

2749:

in your guys' interactions and chasing each other around on here. As several other editors and even admins have mentioned before, it has become quite distracting and detrimental to WP

2137: 51: 1160: 26: 2314:

Even in the article you use as an example of your successful collaboration with other editors on CoS-related articles, you are merely demonstrating your lack of perspective. On

1009: 2906: 2694: 2680: 2666: 2620: 2598: 4623:

benefited from a sympathetic application of the rules here, yet you appear to be advocating a harsh application for others. Are you are willing to have your own BLP restored?

2456: 3485: 3441: 3394: 3337: 3307: 1028: 3023: 1474: 1410: 4607:

As I doubt your birth certificate gives your first name as Delicious, perhaps we will work together fine if we leave out quotation marks around each other's first names.

1659:

I am not threatening a block. I will not act in an admin capacity, as I am involved in this issue. But I will report you if you continue to flagrantly go against the 3:1

1068: 2685:

I have no doubt someone will attempt to frame the discussion that way, but, in this particular case, I don't think people will take as anything other than misdirection.

2109: 2091: 1857: 792: 778: 754: 711: 3596: 1050: 67: 4677: 4658: 4632: 3526: 4405: 1889: 1604: 1238: 1199: 1083: 1003: 581: 3506: 3458: 3415: 3366: 2929:

him, another investigation will probably not help. Unlike Benjiboi's socks, this editor has stayed out of trouble, so it may just be someone with similar interests.

2920: 739: 383: 4159: 4110: 4070: 4036: 3985: 3971: 3949: 3934: 3891: 3848: 3834: 2311:

which was critical of your actions. I think this is both grossly inappropriate for an admin and indicative of your unwillingness to directly address valid concerns.

1683:

Surely the appropriate solution to this dispute would be to wait for the RSN discussion to reach a consensus? If there is a genuine issue with adding the source to

716:

Not hasty at all; in hindsight, I still support my actions. If you wanted to report a specific issue, and you did specifically mention Cirt, it should have been at

570: 540: 207: 4232: 4218: 4200: 3820: 3770: 3755: 3740: 3672: 3658: 3643: 3551: 3291: 3273: 3255: 3236: 3222: 3203: 3179: 3094: 2979: 2720: 2124: 1919: 1565: 1385: 1371: 1354: 503: 461: 439: 421: 3068: 2938: 2885: 2208: 2115:

but I hope you will at least allow me the chance to set the record straight. You may not change your mind about the result, but at least you will have the facts.

1840: 1819: 1267: 1044: 4336: 4321: 4306: 3808: 1314: 333: 323: 308: 298: 151:

what he wants. Now the person who knows the most about him is on a break, another user is blocked, and there is discussion all the way up to Jimbo's talk page.

4588:

Thank you for the notice you left on my talk page. I am watching both the arbitration request and the talk page there, so further notice should be unnecessary.

4545: 4531: 4517: 4502: 4488: 4474: 4445: 2828: 2814: 2789: 2767: 2739: 2424: 2410: 1140: 955: 866: 103: 3512: 1485:

Found myself wondering what your views on paid editing are. Pro? Anti? Pro some of it sometimes? Anti all of it? Or is it all a little more complex than that?

1326: 766: 727: 684: 168: 2671:

merely pointing out how it could be played or may look to a third party. I welcome scrutiny in the subject area to be sure. Just concerned about the methods.

2361: 2341: 2039: 1746: 1728: 1700: 1678: 1654: 1283: 838: 643: 628: 612: 2486: 2291:

Having publicly raised my concerns, I believe it would be unfair to you if you did not have an opportunity to publicly rebut them. Your comments thus far at

4052: 1024: 135: 85: 1494: 783:

I think I know what I was writing when I wrote it, but let's not waste any more time discussing it. I'm sure you had good intentions despite the results.

696: 2657:

so there may be no need for any further discussion. I am certain those threads will prove useful should this need to go back to arbitration enforcement.

927:

I am Irish, lived here all my life, and I've never come across the surname Cahole before. Neither has the phonebook for Dublin, Ireland's largest city.

485: 1868: 42:

you make any appeal, or launch an ANI discussion over my actions. I will of course note my sanctioning of you at ANI and Jimbo's talkpage, in any case.

3473: 3429: 3382: 3325: 2274: 2191: 1159:

then please go to the effort of reading the massively enumerated list of highly reputable third-party subjects founded specifically around the article

1035:

for either one of you and the longer it goes on the worse the consequences are likely to be. The sooner you figure that out and walk away, the better.

31:

I will not template you, since you are likely familiar with the {{unblock|''your reason here''}} format. I would very strongly suggest that you review

4291:

am somehow being persecuted by Cirt's actions. The word "vendetta" similarly implies that I am acting in retaliation for some perceived wrong done to

177:

The issue with PMDrive1061 is a long-term pattern. He finds "fighting" vandals stressful and lashes out with language that is clearly in violation of

4348: 2589:

campaign" at all. I have taken pains not to direct engage Cirt in argument, while allowing them to defend themselves against any allegations I made.

2471: 2280:

Cirt, while I can appreciate Jehochman's suggestions and your show of goodwill in extending this offer, I must decline it for the following reasons:

2220: 1059:

seems to redirect to a broken link. I'm not criticising you, I just thought that then the formatting of the page would be a little clearer. Thanks.--

2866: 763:

an incident report, as you were reporting an incident by Cirt. It's as simple as that; it should have been on ANI and I was right to move it there.

2773: 2152: 1805: 1766: 1542: 1074:

The reason for that is probably covered in my talk page archives or in the ANI archives if you search on my username. Thanks for noticing, though.

245: 230: 4003: 1550: 4642: 2912: 2858: 2555: 2396: 2378:

Jesus would you two either get a room and frack or else get in a cage fight and get over all this already? You have both been going at this for

1999: 1056: 2076: 1294: 272: 4206: 1589: 3110: 4429: 4087: 3170:

The discussion on the talk page covers both NPOV and synthesis issues. Note that the guideline says: "Removing this tag may be tendentious".

3005: 2582: 2214: 406: 3731:

There don't seem to be any privacy issues involved in this particular case, so the "obvious" reasons are not obvious to me - what are they?

2144:. Several people in these discussions have expressed the opinion that you should appeal the AE decision. The relevant arbitration remedy is 1915: 2964: 2525: 2442: 2307: 2051: 886: 4616: 4597: 1810:

Thank you for the notification. I find it unsurprising that the "special scrutiny" did not prevent the current situation from developing.

1271: 194:

which should not be accepted from an admin under any circumstances. Ignoring these types of statements is counter to the best practice of

122:

and you should have then initiated discussion. Since you edit warred to reincorporate your changes you were violating WP:BRD to make your

4015: 3976:

Got it. I thought that's what you were saying ... I must have missed the fact that it survived a deletion effort. Many thanks. Best.--

2653:

is a discussion forum made up of all sorts of people with their own opinions - there is no "cabal of editors". Cirt has stated that they

2155:), but this has not progressed due to Coren having been ill. If you decide to appeal, I would advise you to check with an admin, perhaps 1490: 2643: 669:. If you feel that all admins should be reminded about the consensus about the word nipple in usernames, you should leave a new note at 304:

button here. I do want the bickering to end and a formal unambiguous community sanction leaves no space for this to be wriggled around.

894: 862: 834: 4578: 3663:

Your sarcasm is not helpful. You seem unable to distinguish a spammer from other new contributors, but let's let the AfD sort it out.

3624: 1458: 1260: 3164: 2603:

Ok, I follow why you did it. I think you really need to take a break from "Cirt watch" I think it will do us all a bit of good if we

2849: 2844: 2451:

that a discretionary topic ban is contemplated in your case. The behaviours for which this ban is contemplated are outlined in this

1376:

I believe in the old ways, where some admins are chosen randomly for humiliation, while others are immune to any kind of criticism.

759:

I didn't miss anything; when I left the comment, you hadn't notified Cirt. You did so shortly after, so I retracted the comment. It

368: 3876: 3581: 3137: 278: 4458:

If you believe someone is using sock puppets (or meat puppets), you should create a report at Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations.

449: 4126:

Is there concerns about me and my edits? It may not be an excuse but I just wanted to let you I have a medical condition. I have

1518:'s various proposals). I have to say that most of the paid editing I see smells spammy to me, but I have a pretty low tolerance. 4143: 1634: 1509:

the articles are created. If someone gets paid to write an article because they can write and are familiar with Knowledge, that

1117: 4257: 2172: 1850: 1486: 3050: 2726: 1533: 3915: 3794: 1299: 890: 858: 830: 4641:

My assistant took no part in the deletion debates beyond baldly stating his support for deletion without giving reasons. He

4396:

I thought it was in keeping with the nomination rationale. Not that I am suggesting the nominator is a trolling sockpuppet.

3705: 2634:

concerns. I am not a fan of Cirt by any means but she does make alot of content that is extremely neutral and well written.

1780: 555: 525: 215: 4493:

Full removal would be appreciated, including your new response. Then I will take care of my comment (i.e., remove it too).

3958:, if something has survived a deletion request (i.e., CSD or PROD), it must get a deletion discussion at AfD, so I guess I 3494: 2024: 720:, and you should have discussed it directly with Cirt first. If you feel that there should be a general reminder about it, 4184: 3725: 2159:, on which page and in which format you should launch your appeal, as this will affect your chances of success. Cheers, -- 1335: 936: 4649:

existed, so this was nothing new. My name does occur in two articles in mainspace, about which I have made no objection.

2073: 4479:

I believe you have misunderstood my intention, but I have now struck the comment. Again, I apologise for offending you.

1595:

I cautioned Silver seren about their comment on legal matters for forestall one of those debates, not to encourage one.

476:? It's cited, and Jasper Sharp mentions it in conjunction with this film. I didn't link the two, a reliable source did. 4384: 2241:

made an excellent recommendation to both of us - that together we try to work collaboratively to improve an article to

2231:- an article you had complained about in posts to ANI and BLPN, which resulted in comment by Maunus, see edit summary: 991: 987: 91: 491: 352: 4411: 4264: 3481: 3437: 3390: 3333: 2985: 1955: 2151:

The process for AE appeals is ill-defined; I've been trying to write a Guide to appealing sanctions (see discussion

1432:

when you tagged it then an IMDB link would not have been enough to justify removal of the tag, but as it was more a

3106: 2902: 2676: 2639: 2616: 2578: 2492: 1995: 1908: 1901: 3449:

I would like to respect your privacy, but it is clear to me that you have a connection to one of those companies.

2141: 4673: 4628: 4541: 4513: 4484: 4441: 4401: 4332: 4302: 4228: 4196: 4155: 4106: 4066: 4032: 3967: 3930: 3887: 3844: 3816: 3766: 3736: 3668: 3639: 3592: 3502: 3454: 3411: 3362: 3287: 3269: 3251: 3232: 3218: 3199: 3175: 3160: 3133: 3064: 2975: 2934: 2881: 2824: 2785: 2735: 2690: 2662: 2594: 2482: 2406: 2204: 2120: 2035: 1885: 1815: 1742: 1696: 1650: 1600: 1561: 1523: 1470: 1381: 1350: 1310: 1279: 1234: 1195: 1136: 1079: 1040: 999: 951: 908: 877: 788: 750: 707: 639: 608: 566: 536: 499: 457: 417: 379: 319: 294: 203: 99: 63: 4583: 4451: 2573:

Any legitimate concerns about Cirt are now looking like the harassment campaign NOT like "legitimate concerns"

2070: 1959: 389: 3688: 3087: 3080: 2232: 374:

I'm not interested in playing your games. Please just walk away and leave this for other people to deal with.

4127: 2337: 1571: 1391: 531:

My rudeness? That will be a nice change. Usually it's people who are jealous of my naturally long eyelashes.

17: 2950: 2448: 1975: 1244: 1229:? I'll add a warning to your talk page as a handy reference now that I know that language isn't the issue. 1113: 3903: 2654: 3465:

information about themselves, their industry, or their companies, then I understand. Is that the case?

3102: 2898: 2892: 2703:

The reality is that the Cirt/DC nonsense has gone on for entirely too long as it is, clearly constitutes

2672: 2635: 2612: 2574: 2538: 2508: 2319: 1991: 1979: 1687:, it can be removed by someone other than yourself. Perhaps they will be able to explain how it violates 1449: 1401: 843: 3962:

saying it is not PRODable. A procedural niggle only - there isn't much chance it will survive the AfD.

3227:

I'll reply on the talk page, but thanks for the assumption that I'm trying to "discredit" the article.

2911:

Good show TRA, good show. Back to Benji - is this worth looking into or am I just getting paranoid? -

3544: 3537: 2776:

which shows a grand total of 38 articles that Cirt and I have both edited. With a single exception --

928: 3997: 2986: 2852: 2468: 1985: 806: 775: 736: 693: 3421:

Yes I did, and I agree completely with the COI policy. Why do you feel it is relevant to my post?

2992:

As you contributed to this article, or commented at its first AfD, you may be like to contribute at

2332:

I regret having to rebuff your outreach and I hope you understand this is not personally motivated.

4669: 4624: 4537: 4509: 4480: 4437: 4397: 4328: 4298: 4224: 4192: 4151: 4102: 4062: 4028: 3963: 3926: 3883: 3840: 3812: 3762: 3732: 3664: 3635: 3588: 3574: 3498: 3450: 3407: 3358: 3265: 3228: 3171: 3060: 2971: 2930: 2877: 2820: 2781: 2731: 2686: 2658: 2590: 2478: 2402: 2333: 2200: 2116: 2031: 1881: 1811: 1738: 1692: 1646: 1596: 1557: 1519: 1466: 1377: 1346: 1306: 1275: 1230: 1191: 1132: 1075: 1036: 995: 947: 904: 873: 784: 746: 703: 635: 604: 562: 532: 495: 453: 413: 375: 315: 290: 199: 131: 95: 59: 47: 2649:

I don't think anyone is trying to "victimize" Cirt by discussing their Scientology-related edits.

4654: 4612: 4602: 4563: 3602: 2249:

potential. I would like to work with you on that quality improvement proposal - for the article

4378: 3142: 2303:

appear to be attempts to limit discussion of the underlying issues rather than addressing them.

2156: 2145: 1971: 1938: 1864: 1610: 1585: 1444: 1436: 1396: 1215: 1168: 1064: 976: 390: 267: 2925:

The recent sockpuppetry case that ended in Benjiboi's block didn't turn this one up, so if it

2497:

I would suggest that you withdraw it asap, pending sufficient actionable evidence of behavior

3522: 3493:

Sorry, your question is ambiguous and I'm not sure what you are asking. Perhaps ask again at

3477: 3433: 3386: 3329: 2134:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_discretionary_sanction_at_AE.3F

2098:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_discretionary_sanction_at_AE.3F

1951: 1926: 1577: 1428: 364: 241: 226: 681:

will probably be more appropriate and reach the intended audience more selectively, though.

4417: 4139: 4095: 4048: 4011: 3981: 3945: 3911: 3830: 3701: 3469: 3425: 3378: 3321: 3115: 2708: 1538: 1480: 1245: 1089: 551: 521: 164: 78:

time, not less. You'll generally find that feigning cluelessness does not help your case.

252: 8: 4574: 4214: 4180: 3858: 3790: 3751: 3721: 3654: 3620: 3567: 3283: 3247: 3214: 3195: 3156: 3129: 2961: 2347: 2105: 2087: 1963: 1546: 1368: 1332: 481: 435: 402: 345: 127: 43: 3015:

I don't know if you collect these or think they're daft, but nevertheless, here is one:

1765:

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

962:

I do not understand how an historical message, such as mine, was struck from the record.

4650: 4608: 4242: 3906:

was not PRODable. I was unclear as to why you felt that. You can respond here. Tx.--

3278:

Yes, I know. I'm eagerly awaiting your reply there - I'm sure it will be enlightening.

3074: 3044: 2916: 2862: 2704: 2185: 2166: 1833: 1798: 1760: 1556:

I didn't see that, but it comes as no surprise. Thanks for bringing it to my attention

849: 721: 678: 656: 4367: 4317: 4253: 3559: 2628: 2561: 2323:

Scientologists (including a reference in the lede to "the younger sister of musician

2288:

dispute between two editors which can be solved through discussion on your talk page.

2045: 2004: 1947: 1860: 1581: 1211: 1164: 1060: 972: 426:

Talk was between another editor and me-- he'd removed the category from Russ Meyer's

274:

I think its time to make this interaction ban absolute. Please feel free to comment.

259: 36: 3811:? I guess my answer is no, I don't know about the Carson article. Give me a clue... 2138:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Potential_WP:CANVASSING_by_User:Cirt

448:

think that the category is not appropriate? I'll answer at the discussion you began

4593: 4527: 4498: 4470: 4425: 4121: 3804: 3519: 3010: 3001: 2810: 2777: 2763: 2716: 2650: 2567: 2420: 2392: 1895: 1787: 1684: 1616: 1289: 1103: 472: 360: 237: 222: 82: 1427:

Hi Delicious Carbuncle, I hope you don't mind, but I've removed your BLPprod from

1186:. Although you have two decent sources, it would be better to expand the existing 4135: 4134:

I also have a hard time understanding Knowledge because of my condition. Thanks!

4091: 4044: 4007: 3977: 3941: 3907: 3868: 3826: 3697: 3558: 2604: 2546: 2516: 2256: 2251: 2234:"remove neutrality tag - Cirt has argued well for the merit of included material" 1422: 1183: 577:

Speedy to admin board report with no notification or prior attempt at resolution?

547: 517: 160: 123: 32: 3630:

It exists, but otherwise I see no claim of notability. Perhaps you could delete

1786:

Regarding this, it seems clear that this sort of issue falls under the remit of

971:

that in a conversation on it I am not being confrontational, I am asking; why?--

724:

is probably your best bet, and individual names should be left out of the note.

191:"I would personally like to medicate this idiot with a very large right fist..." 4570: 4450:

The proper venue for your concerns is not the article talk page. Please review

4210: 4176: 3955: 3922: 3786: 3780: 3747: 3717: 3650: 3616: 3354: 3279: 3243: 3210: 3191: 3152: 3125: 2957: 2608: 2357: 2296: 2270: 2260: 2238: 2101: 2083: 2082:

I'm asking Future Perfect to reconsider since they appear not to be uninvolved.

2020: 1776: 1724: 1674: 1630: 1365: 1329: 1256: 1128: 922: 854: 818: 624: 592: 477: 431: 398: 152: 115: 1962:

to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains

109:

the general ability and dedication of the admin(s) and editors concerned. Per

4646: 4282: 4083: 3897: 3800: 3403: 3350: 3039: 2464: 2315: 2292: 2246: 2242: 2228: 2180: 2161: 1943: 1826: 1791: 1706: 1688: 1664: 1660: 1620: 1515: 1226: 1020: 816:

the site's pix of her came from...eg her numerous shoots I now know done for

717: 666: 195: 185: 178: 156: 119: 110: 1342: 94:

where I would attempt to demonstrate my cluelessness to your satisfaction).

4420:

talk page and ask that you strike them immediately (meaning full removal).

4313: 4249: 3682: 3612: 3148: 2452: 2300: 2178:

Please disregard the above; I've just noticed that you're at AE already. --

2054: 2010: 1734: 1714: 1296: 1179: 1090: 670: 662: 511: 330: 305: 275: 2994:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Suicide of Nicola Raphael (2nd nomination)

1769:

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

147:

of times. By making a big dramafest out of PMs remarks you are giving him

4589: 4523: 4494: 4466: 4421: 4165: 3710: 3692: 3691:, which is the users otrs discussion, it was removed in the next edit by 3349:

since that company appears to be something different. I suggest you read

2997: 2806: 2759: 2712: 2416: 2388: 2224: 1539:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kleenezplease

1320: 1098: 931: 79: 74:

If you don't see the point violation, you really ought to be blocked for

4150:

other limitations that prevent us from doing things that others can do.

3312:

You removed my factual and relevant to this topic. Please explain why.

2457:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive76#Delicious_carbuncle

1123:

By longstanding consensus, IMDB is not considered a reliable source for

966:

Okay, why did you feel it necessary to refactor primary evidence on the

903:

Don't be afraid, just don't bother coming back to my talk page. Thanks.

3346: 2533: 2503: 2061:

from all edits related to Scientology, including but not limited to an

412:

Can you provide a link to where that was discussed and agreed? Thanks.

2153:

Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration#Appeals_process_for_discretionary_sanctions

1146: 4665: 3059:

Thanks. I hope you won't be offended if you see it for sale on eBay.

2352: 2265: 2066: 2015: 1771: 1719: 1669: 1625: 1252: 674: 619: 587: 4277:, you choose to threaten me with a proposed ban on interacting with 3587:

Just fellow travellers then, I suppose. Thanks for letting me know.

3315: 2259:

and a book well-regarded and with positive reception of its author,

2065:

against bringing forward any further Sc.-related complaints against

1880:

Cirt's anti-Scientology agenda. Which you appear to share. Go away.

1713:

discussion has resolved before using questionable sources that fail

1615:

Please stop the BLP violations, as you have done twice now, at page

994:

my warning. The content of your edits is irrelevant and immaterial.

3882:

Thanks for letting me know. I suspect you are in for a pummelling.

2798: 2460: 1623:, this disruptive behavior pattern will be reported. Thank you, -- 967: 4191:

I'm taking it out again. You are welcome to seek a third opinion.

2447:

You are hereby notified that in accordance with the provisions of

4354:

Is that meant to be a serious rationale? Am I missing something?

1266:

Just the usual trolling sockpuppet of a grudge-bearing user. See

1187: 546:

It was the opening comment that was the issue, nothing you said.

359:), I supported the proposal that removed "other issues". Thanks! 329:

extremely clear what is and is not going to get someone blocked.

3345:

You additions seemed purely promotional and not a good fit with

1541:

I think an old acquaintance has found his way back here again -

1155:

If you wish to delete my articles callously and mean-spiritedly,

198:, whatever else you may think of the general issue of civility. 3260:

I can't make sense of that sentence, but I will respond on the

1954:

with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the

470:

Why are you reverting the information on the other film titled

3531: 1328:

That was my feeling too -- good to see some confirmation ...

3554:

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

3097:

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

2096:

Since his response was no, I raised the issue at AN/I. See

1922:

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

2324: 1978:. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary 1055:

I thought you might like to know that the page for I'm not

184:

My request was not that he be de-sysopped, but simply that

3037:

Awarded for services to NPOV and BLP policy in Knowledge.

3022: 2874:

Relations between the LGBT community and Ethnic Minorities

665:

as it simply served to partially-copy the thread moved to

4131: 2746: 1858:

back up my allegations of Cirt's anti-Scientology agenda.

986:

You made edits to an archived discussion. I have already

27:

Your editing privileges have been suspended for 24 hours

4416:

I do not appreciate your disruptive accusations on the

3863:

You have been directly or indirectly mentioned on this

2009:

I have filed a report of which you are the subject, at

1010:

Knowledge Discussion On Me(Kagome_85) PLEASE READ!!!!!!

4297:

by Cirt. Please strike your comment on the talk page.

3543:

Hello, Delicious carbuncle. You have new messages at

3086:

Hello, Delicious carbuncle. You have new messages at

1907:

Hello, Delicious carbuncle. You have new messages at

4002:

Hi, this sort of thing is a violation of talk BLP -

3308:

why would you remove a relevant and appropriate post?

3093:

Message added 02:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC). You can

2030:

Really. That should be interesting, don't you think?

1709:, we should defer to the 3:1 consensus to wait until 4569:

culture, of which roller derby is certainly a part.

3925:. Sorry if that wasn't clear from the edit summary. 1576:... no slight was intended by my recent comments at 4327:Please chose your words more carefully next time. 2057:thread about you. Per these findings, you are now 4643:had originally nominated the article for deletion 4349:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Paul II (octopus) 4263:I find it telling that when I ask you to explain 1968:do not edit war even if you believe you are right 3316:http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Trust_seal 2401:I think you have me confused with someone else. 1051:Your second link on your user page doesn't work. 661:Just to let you know, I reverted your revert on 3921:It is a declined speedy, so must go to AfD per 3615:. Please try to be more careful in the future. 1767:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 3513:Silly people getting their knickers in a twist 1442:then it doesn't qualify for a BLPprod. Cheers 516:Once again your rudeness has landed you there. 4205:Kencf0618 has opened a mediation cabal case 2753:, is to the point of harassment, and really 3632:Knowledge:Article Incubator/Getlenses.co.uk 3101:Please see my response there. I am serious 2566:This is getting extremely unproductive and 1205:Actually, English is my first language. It 4668:, who is knee-deep in the santorum issue. 3825:The Garrison Carson :) How have you been? 3607:I've declined your speedy here - it quite 3120:On the off chance you're not watching the 1942:according to the reverts you have made on 357:you objected to all of my proposed changes 4312:Give it a rest. I think we're done here. 3020: 1936:You currently appear to be engaged in an 3124:talk page for a reply, I replied there. 2449:Knowledge:ARBSCI#Discretionary_topic_ban 2801:. This is not the place. You will both 14: 3785:Do you know about the Carson article? 3088:WP:BLPN#New Village Leadership Academy 2797:utilize WP as a battlefield to wage a 2655:are taking comments "under advisement" 3839:I am well. How are things with you? 3147:Hi DC. Please read the guidelines at 2215:Proposal: Quality improvement project 1966:among editors. If unsuccessful, then 1178:As it stands, the article is full of 155:. The best way to deal with BF101 is 3495:Knowledge:Editor assistance/Requests 2443:Discretionary topic ban contemplated 2142:User_talk:Elen_of_the_Roads#AE_query 1663:consensus, and continue to violate 23: 3634:, since it now redundant? Thanks. 3536: 3079: 2284:Scientology when this is resolved. 1909:ResidentAnthropologist's talk page 1900: 1341:On a completely unrelated matter, 92:Knowledge talk:No personal attacks 24: 4693: 4645:when it was created, long before 1691:as you seem unable or unwilling. 889:is not a guideline, I'm afraid.-- 561:Got it. Sorry for the confusion. 3021: 2501:their recent warning was given. 2132:Delicious carbuncle, please see 1970:. Post a request for help at an 1931: 1487:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 251: 891:Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden 859:Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden 831:Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden 118:, your edits were reverted per 2845:You thinking what I'm thinking 1851:Please cease gaming the system 1161:DisInformation (search engine) 956:23:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 937:23:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 913:02:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 899:02:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 882:01:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 867:00:27, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 839:00:14, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 793:21:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 779:21:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 755:21:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 740:21:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 712:21:28, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 697:21:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 644:22:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 629:21:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 613:21:20, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 597:21:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 428:Beyond the Valley of the Dolls 188:be enforced for his statement 13: 1: 4128:Obsessive_compulsive_disorder 3292:22:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3274:22:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3256:22:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3237:21:59, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3223:21:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3204:21:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3180:21:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3165:21:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3138:17:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC) 3111:02:37, 18 February 2011 (UTC) 3069:12:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 3051:04:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 2872:I am if you're thinking that 2621:19:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC) 2599:14:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC) 2583:02:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC) 2556:02:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC) 2526:02:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC) 2487:02:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC) 2472:01:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC) 2411:22:58, 15 December 2010 (UTC) 2397:22:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC) 2362:20:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC) 2342:19:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC) 2275:18:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC) 2209:15:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC) 2192:12:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC) 2173:12:24, 14 December 2010 (UTC) 2125:03:27, 14 December 2010 (UTC) 2110:21:07, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 2092:20:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 2077:19:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 2040:05:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 2025:04:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 2000:02:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 1982:. If edit warring continues, 1916:01:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC) 1890:19:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC) 1869:19:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC) 1619:. If you continue to violate 1528:13:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC) 1495:12:43, 22 November 2010 (UTC) 1475:17:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1459:17:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1411:17:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1386:03:50, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1372:01:31, 15 November 2010 (UTC) 1355:17:58, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 1336:03:55, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 942:No one said it was a popular 18:User talk:Delicious carbuncle 4223:Thanks for letting me know. 3006:14:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC) 2980:18:28, 20 January 2011 (UTC) 2965:18:12, 20 January 2011 (UTC) 2829:17:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 2815:17:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 2790:17:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 2768:16:30, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 2740:15:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2721:07:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2695:04:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2681:04:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2667:04:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2644:03:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2425:07:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC) 2255:, considered a "classic" of 2146:Knowledge:ARBSCI#Enforcement 1841:15:11, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1820:12:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1806:08:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1781:07:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1747:07:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1729:07:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1701:07:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1679:07:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1655:07:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1635:06:55, 8 December 2010 (UTC) 1605:22:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 1590:22:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 1566:11:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC) 1551:08:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC) 1514:venture that is not ok (see 1315:16:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC) 1300:16:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC) 1284:14:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC) 1261:04:03, 29 October 2010 (UTC) 1239:22:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC) 1220:22:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC) 1200:22:42, 20 October 2010 (UTC) 1173:22:33, 20 October 2010 (UTC) 1141:02:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC) 1118:09:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC) 585:Thank you for your time, -- 7: 3103:The Resident Anthropologist 2939:03:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC) 2921:15:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC) 2907:14:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC) 2899:The Resident Anthropologist 2886:00:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC) 2867:15:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC) 2751:(which is everyone's stake) 2673:The Resident Anthropologist 2636:The Resident Anthropologist 2613:The Resident Anthropologist 2575:The Resident Anthropologist 1992:The Resident Anthropologist 1534:In case you didn't see this 1084:15:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC) 1069:15:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC) 1045:15:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC) 1029:11:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC) 1004:20:20, 4 October 2010 (UTC) 981:20:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC) 571:22:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC) 556:22:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC) 541:22:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC) 526:21:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC) 10: 4698: 3902:Hi ... you indicated that 3597:21:26, 19 March 2011 (UTC) 3582:23:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC) 3527:03:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC) 3507:19:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC) 3486:19:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC) 3459:19:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC) 3442:19:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC) 3416:12:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC) 3395:03:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC) 3367:22:28, 11 March 2011 (UTC) 3338:21:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC) 2876:is a terrible article. ;) 2221:Jehochman's user talk page 504:23:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC) 486:22:40, 7 August 2010 (UTC) 462:00:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC) 440:23:39, 7 August 2010 (UTC) 422:22:36, 7 August 2010 (UTC) 407:22:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC) 384:17:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 369:17:12, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 334:14:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 324:14:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 309:14:43, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 299:14:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 279:14:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC) 216:Don't give it a thought... 4678:02:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC) 4659:00:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC) 4633:23:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC) 4617:23:09, 15 June 2011 (UTC) 4598:16:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC) 4579:04:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC) 4522:It would be appreciated. 4412:Talk:Santorum (neologism) 3771:10:29, 5 April 2011 (UTC) 3756:10:24, 5 April 2011 (UTC) 3741:10:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC) 3726:10:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC) 3706:17:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC) 3673:13:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 3659:13:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 3644:12:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 3625:10:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 3031:The Barnstar of Integrity 3027: 2987:Suicide of Nicola Raphael 2970:You are most welcome. :) 2725:Given this note and your 1990:without further notice. 1225:Perhaps you haven't seen 246:22:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC) 231:22:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC) 208:17:26, 29 July 2010 (UTC) 169:16:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC) 136:12:59, 29 July 2010 (UTC) 104:23:37, 28 July 2010 (UTC) 86:23:06, 28 July 2010 (UTC) 68:22:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC) 52:21:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC) 4546:12:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4532:12:49, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4518:12:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4503:12:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4489:12:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4475:04:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4446:03:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4430:03:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4406:02:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4391:01:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC) 4361:article should be kept. 4337:18:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 4322:18:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 4307:16:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 4258:14:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 4233:02:28, 6 June 2011 (UTC) 4219:22:43, 5 June 2011 (UTC) 4201:02:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 4185:00:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 4160:02:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 4144:00:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 4111:23:33, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 4071:22:23, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 4053:22:12, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 4037:22:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 4016:21:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC) 3986:16:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC) 3972:15:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC) 3950:15:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC) 3935:15:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC) 3916:14:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC) 3892:16:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 3877:14:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 3849:12:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC) 3835:22:51, 14 May 2011 (UTC) 3821:15:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC) 3795:13:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC) 2493:Re your latest AE thread 2219:Delicious carbuncle, at 1345:seems to be in Florida. 764: 725: 682: 4347:Your keep rationale at 2050:Please see my comments 1972:appropriate noticeboard 1874:Yes. The ANI thread is 1305:And hello to you, too. 990:not to do this and you 391:Office Lady Rope Slave‎ 263:at Lionelt's talk page. 4584:Hi Delicious carbuncle 3541: 3084: 2772:Please take a look at 2157:User:Elen_of_the_Roads 1905: 3809:Carson the Circus Dog 3540: 3083: 1904: 1578:User talk:Jimbo Wales 1572:Just to make clear... 1429:Brandon Jones (actor) 673:, without mentioning 4418:Santorum (neologism) 2951:Thanks for the smile 2707:and is bordering on 1246:User talk:Allowkeeps 4670:Delicious carbuncle 4625:Delicious carbuncle 4538:Delicious carbuncle 4510:Delicious carbuncle 4481:Delicious carbuncle 4438:Delicious carbuncle 4398:Delicious carbuncle 4329:Delicious carbuncle 4299:Delicious carbuncle 4225:Delicious carbuncle 4193:Delicious carbuncle 4152:Delicious carbuncle 4103:Delicious carbuncle 4063:Delicious carbuncle 4029:Delicious carbuncle 3964:Delicious carbuncle 3927:Delicious carbuncle 3884:Delicious carbuncle 3841:Delicious carbuncle 3813:Delicious carbuncle 3763:Delicious carbuncle 3733:Delicious carbuncle 3665:Delicious carbuncle 3636:Delicious carbuncle 3589:Delicious carbuncle 3499:Delicious carbuncle 3451:Delicious carbuncle 3408:Delicious carbuncle 3359:Delicious carbuncle 3266:Delicious carbuncle 3229:Delicious carbuncle 3172:Delicious carbuncle 3061:Delicious carbuncle 2972:Delicious carbuncle 2931:Delicious carbuncle 2878:Delicious carbuncle 2821:Delicious carbuncle 2782:Delicious carbuncle 2732:Delicious carbuncle 2687:Delicious carbuncle 2659:Delicious carbuncle 2591:Delicious carbuncle 2479:Delicious carbuncle 2455:archived section: 2403:Delicious carbuncle 2348:User talk:Jehochman 2334:Delicious carbuncle 2201:Delicious carbuncle 2117:Delicious carbuncle 2032:Delicious carbuncle 1882:Delicious carbuncle 1812:Delicious carbuncle 1739:Delicious carbuncle 1693:Delicious carbuncle 1647:Delicious carbuncle 1597:Delicious carbuncle 1558:Delicious carbuncle 1520:Delicious carbuncle 1467:Delicious carbuncle 1378:Delicious carbuncle 1347:Delicious carbuncle 1307:Delicious carbuncle 1276:Delicious carbuncle 1251:What's going on? -- 1231:Delicious carbuncle 1192:Delicious carbuncle 1133:Delicious carbuncle 1076:Delicious carbuncle 1037:Delicious carbuncle 996:Delicious carbuncle 948:Delicious carbuncle 905:Delicious carbuncle 874:Delicious carbuncle 844:What are you doing? 785:Delicious carbuncle 747:Delicious carbuncle 704:Delicious carbuncle 636:Delicious carbuncle 605:Delicious carbuncle 563:Delicious carbuncle 533:Delicious carbuncle 496:Delicious carbuncle 454:Delicious carbuncle 414:Delicious carbuncle 376:Delicious carbuncle 316:Delicious carbuncle 291:Delicious carbuncle 200:Delicious carbuncle 96:Delicious carbuncle 60:Delicious carbuncle 3696:perusal/amusement. 3552:remove this notice 3542: 3095:remove this notice 3085: 2758:plain and simple. 1976:dispute resolution 1920:remove this notice 1906: 494:on the talk page. 58:sit this one out. 3998:personal opinions 3873: 3517:amuses me too :) 3489: 3472:comment added by 3445: 3428:comment added by 3398: 3381:comment added by 3341: 3324:comment added by 3056: 3055: 2893:talk page stalker 1956:three-revert rule 1948:edit disruptively 1180:original research 807:Who did what when 660: 582:This is now done. 289:interaction ban? 4689: 4452:Knowledge policy 4387: 4381: 4373: 4370: 3874: 3871: 3805:Carson McCullers 3577: 3555: 3545:Asav's talk page 3525: 3488: 3466: 3444: 3422: 3397: 3375: 3340: 3318: 3098: 3047: 3042: 3025: 3018: 3017: 2896: 2778:Jamie Sorrentini 2727:previous message 2188: 2183: 2169: 2164: 1935: 1934: 1923: 1836: 1829: 1801: 1794: 1685:Jamie Sorrentini 1617:Jamie Sorrentini 1456: 1452: 1447: 1441: 1435: 1408: 1404: 1399: 1110: 1101: 934: 777: 772: 771: 738: 733: 732: 695: 690: 689: 654: 473:Rope and Breasts 444:In other words, 264: 262: 255: 4697: 4696: 4692: 4691: 4690: 4688: 4687: 4686: 4605: 4603:A friendly note 4586: 4566: 4564:Day of the Dead 4414: 4385: 4379: 4371: 4368: 4352: 4245: 4168: 4124: 4000: 3900: 3869: 3861: 3783: 3713: 3685: 3605: 3603:Getlenses.co.uk 3575: 3563: 3556: 3549: 3534: 3518: 3515: 3467: 3423: 3376: 3319: 3310: 3145: 3118: 3099: 3092: 3077: 3045: 3040: 3013: 2990: 2953: 2890: 2847: 2631: 2564: 2495: 2445: 2318:, a good-faith 2257:science fiction 2252:Slaves of Sleep 2227:at the article 2217: 2186: 2181: 2167: 2162: 2063:interaction ban 2048: 2007: 1980:page protection 1932: 1929: 1924: 1913: 1898: 1853: 1834: 1827: 1799: 1792: 1763: 1613: 1574: 1536: 1483: 1454: 1450: 1445: 1439: 1433: 1425: 1406: 1402: 1397: 1323: 1292: 1268:this ANI thread 1249: 1157: 1152: 1149: 1104: 1099: 1094: 1053: 1012: 964: 932: 930:. Just sayin' 925: 846: 809: 769: 767: 730: 728: 687: 685: 579: 514: 394: 348: 270: 257: 250: 218: 29: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4695: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4681: 4680: 4636: 4635: 4604: 4601: 4585: 4582: 4565: 4562: 4561: 4560: 4559: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4555: 4554: 4553: 4552: 4551: 4550: 4549: 4548: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4413: 4410: 4409: 4408: 4351: 4345: 4344: 4343: 4342: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4244: 4241: 4240: 4239: 4238: 4237: 4236: 4235: 4167: 4164: 4163: 4162: 4123: 4120: 4118: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4076: 4075: 4074: 4073: 4040: 4039: 3999: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3993: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3988: 3899: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3860: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3854: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3782: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3712: 3709: 3684: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3604: 3601: 3600: 3599: 3562: 3557: 3548: 3535: 3533: 3530: 3514: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3462: 3461: 3419: 3418: 3402:Have you read 3372: 3370: 3369: 3309: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3206: 3144: 3141: 3117: 3114: 3091: 3078: 3076: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3054: 3053: 3034: 3033: 3028: 3026: 3012: 3009: 2989: 2984: 2983: 2982: 2952: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2941: 2846: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2755:needs to stop. 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2630: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2609:given her rope 2605:drop the stick 2563: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2494: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2477:Acknowledged. 2444: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2330: 2329: 2328: 2312: 2304: 2289: 2285: 2261:L. Ron Hubbard 2216: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2195: 2194: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2094: 2047: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2006: 2003: 1928: 1925: 1914:Message added 1912: 1899: 1897: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1852: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1762: 1759: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1733:Has it failed 1612: 1611:BLP violations 1609: 1608: 1607: 1573: 1570: 1569: 1568: 1535: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1502: 1482: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1424: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1358: 1357: 1322: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1291: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1248: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1203: 1202: 1156: 1153: 1150: 1148: 1147:re: Creme Puff 1145: 1144: 1143: 1093: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1052: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1011: 1008: 1007: 1006: 963: 960: 959: 958: 924: 921: 920: 919: 918: 917: 916: 915: 845: 842: 819:H Para Hombres 808: 805: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 799: 798: 797: 796: 795: 714: 651: 650: 649: 648: 647: 646: 578: 575: 574: 573: 544: 543: 513: 510: 509: 508: 507: 506: 468: 467: 466: 465: 464: 393: 388: 387: 386: 347: 344: 343: 342: 341: 340: 339: 338: 337: 336: 269: 268:Please see ANI 266: 217: 214: 213: 212: 211: 210: 182: 175: 140: 139: 138: 128:LessHeard vanU 106: 71: 70: 44:LessHeard vanU 28: 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4694: 4679: 4675: 4671: 4667: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4656: 4652: 4651:Sam Blacketer 4648: 4644: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4637: 4634: 4630: 4626: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4618: 4614: 4610: 4609:Sam Blacketer 4600: 4599: 4595: 4591: 4581: 4580: 4576: 4572: 4547: 4543: 4539: 4535: 4534: 4533: 4529: 4525: 4521: 4520: 4519: 4515: 4511: 4506: 4505: 4504: 4500: 4496: 4492: 4491: 4490: 4486: 4482: 4478: 4477: 4476: 4472: 4468: 4463: 4459: 4456: 4455: 4453: 4449: 4448: 4447: 4443: 4439: 4434: 4433: 4432: 4431: 4427: 4423: 4419: 4407: 4403: 4399: 4395: 4394: 4393: 4392: 4388: 4382: 4376: 4375: 4374: 4362: 4360: 4355: 4350: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4325: 4324: 4323: 4319: 4315: 4310: 4309: 4308: 4304: 4300: 4296: 4295: 4290: 4289: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4275: 4270: 4266: 4262: 4261: 4260: 4259: 4255: 4251: 4234: 4230: 4226: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4216: 4212: 4208: 4204: 4203: 4202: 4198: 4194: 4189: 4188: 4187: 4186: 4182: 4178: 4174: 4161: 4157: 4153: 4148: 4147: 4146: 4145: 4141: 4137: 4133: 4129: 4119: 4112: 4108: 4104: 4100: 4099: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4082: 4078: 4077: 4072: 4068: 4064: 4060: 4056: 4055: 4054: 4050: 4046: 4042: 4041: 4038: 4034: 4030: 4025: 4020: 4019: 4018: 4017: 4013: 4009: 4005: 3987: 3983: 3979: 3975: 3974: 3973: 3969: 3965: 3961: 3957: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3947: 3943: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3932: 3928: 3924: 3920: 3919: 3918: 3917: 3913: 3909: 3905: 3893: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3880: 3879: 3878: 3875: 3866: 3850: 3846: 3842: 3838: 3837: 3836: 3832: 3828: 3824: 3823: 3822: 3818: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3802: 3801:Johnny Carson 3799: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3772: 3768: 3764: 3759: 3758: 3757: 3753: 3749: 3744: 3743: 3742: 3738: 3734: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3727: 3723: 3719: 3708: 3707: 3703: 3699: 3694: 3690: 3674: 3670: 3666: 3662: 3661: 3660: 3656: 3652: 3647: 3646: 3645: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3622: 3618: 3614: 3610: 3598: 3594: 3590: 3586: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3580: 3578: 3571: 3570: 3561: 3553: 3546: 3539: 3529: 3528: 3524: 3521: 3508: 3504: 3500: 3496: 3492: 3491: 3490: 3487: 3483: 3479: 3475: 3471: 3460: 3456: 3452: 3448: 3447: 3446: 3443: 3439: 3435: 3431: 3427: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3405: 3401: 3400: 3399: 3396: 3392: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3368: 3364: 3360: 3356: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3343: 3342: 3339: 3335: 3331: 3327: 3323: 3317: 3313: 3293: 3289: 3285: 3281: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3259: 3258: 3257: 3253: 3249: 3245: 3240: 3239: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3220: 3216: 3212: 3207: 3205: 3201: 3197: 3193: 3188: 3183: 3182: 3181: 3177: 3173: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3162: 3158: 3154: 3150: 3140: 3139: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3113: 3112: 3108: 3104: 3096: 3089: 3082: 3070: 3066: 3062: 3058: 3057: 3052: 3049: 3048: 3043: 3036: 3035: 3032: 3029: 3024: 3019: 3016: 3008: 3007: 3003: 2999: 2995: 2988: 2981: 2977: 2973: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2963: 2959: 2940: 2936: 2932: 2928: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2894: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2883: 2879: 2875: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2853: 2850: 2830: 2826: 2822: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2800: 2796: 2793: 2792: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2779: 2775: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2765: 2761: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2737: 2733: 2728: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2718: 2714: 2710: 2709:WP:HARASSMENT 2706: 2702: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2684: 2683: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2656: 2652: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2641: 2637: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2610: 2606: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2571: 2569: 2557: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2549: 2545: 2544: 2541: 2537: 2536: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2519: 2515: 2514: 2511: 2507: 2506: 2500: 2488: 2484: 2480: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2470: 2466: 2462: 2458: 2454: 2450: 2426: 2422: 2418: 2414: 2413: 2412: 2408: 2404: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2385: 2384: 2383: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2354: 2349: 2346:I replied at 2345: 2344: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2326: 2321: 2317: 2316:Michael Doven 2313: 2309: 2305: 2302: 2298: 2294: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2281: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2267: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2253: 2248: 2244: 2240: 2236: 2235: 2230: 2229:Michael Doven 2226: 2222: 2210: 2206: 2202: 2197: 2196: 2193: 2190: 2189: 2184: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2171: 2170: 2165: 2158: 2154: 2149: 2147: 2143: 2139: 2135: 2126: 2122: 2118: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2075: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2052: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2022: 2018: 2017: 2012: 2002: 2001: 1997: 1993: 1989: 1987: 1981: 1977: 1973: 1969: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1953: 1950:or refuse to 1949: 1945: 1941: 1940: 1927:December 2010 1921: 1917: 1910: 1903: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1878: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1859: 1842: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1830: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1795: 1789: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1773: 1768: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1736: 1732: 1731: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1721: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1686: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1671: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1639: 1638: 1637: 1636: 1632: 1628: 1627: 1622: 1618: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1516:User:Eclipsed 1512: 1508: 1503: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1492: 1488: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1457: 1453: 1448: 1438: 1437:refimproveBLP 1430: 1412: 1409: 1405: 1400: 1393: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1383: 1379: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1370: 1367: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1356: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1334: 1331: 1327: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1298: 1295: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1272:this followup 1269: 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1247: 1240: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1208: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1142: 1138: 1134: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1115: 1114:contributions 1111: 1109: 1108: 1102: 1092: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1058: 1057:Pauline Berry 1046: 1042: 1038: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1026: 1022: 1016: 1005: 1001: 997: 993: 989: 985: 984: 983: 982: 978: 974: 969: 957: 953: 949: 945: 941: 940: 939: 938: 935: 929: 914: 910: 906: 902: 901: 900: 896: 892: 888: 885: 884: 883: 879: 875: 871: 870: 869: 868: 864: 860: 856: 851: 841: 840: 836: 832: 826: 824: 822: 820: 815: 794: 790: 786: 782: 781: 780: 776: 774: 773: 762: 758: 757: 756: 752: 748: 743: 742: 741: 737: 735: 734: 723: 719: 715: 713: 709: 705: 700: 699: 698: 694: 692: 691: 680: 676: 672: 668: 664: 658: 657:edit conflict 653: 652: 645: 641: 637: 632: 631: 630: 626: 622: 621: 616: 615: 614: 610: 606: 601: 600: 599: 598: 594: 590: 589: 583: 572: 568: 564: 560: 559: 558: 557: 553: 549: 542: 538: 534: 530: 529: 528: 527: 523: 519: 505: 501: 497: 493: 489: 488: 487: 483: 479: 475: 474: 469: 463: 459: 455: 451: 447: 443: 442: 441: 437: 433: 429: 425: 424: 423: 419: 415: 411: 410: 409: 408: 404: 400: 392: 385: 381: 377: 373: 372: 371: 370: 366: 362: 358: 354: 335: 332: 327: 326: 325: 321: 317: 312: 311: 310: 307: 302: 301: 300: 296: 292: 288: 283: 282: 281: 280: 277: 273: 265: 261: 260:a new message 254: 248: 247: 243: 239: 233: 232: 228: 224: 209: 205: 201: 197: 193: 192: 187: 183: 180: 176: 172: 171: 170: 166: 162: 158: 154: 150: 146: 141: 137: 133: 129: 125: 121: 117: 112: 107: 105: 101: 97: 93: 89: 88: 87: 84: 81: 77: 73: 72: 69: 65: 61: 56: 55: 54: 53: 49: 45: 41: 38: 34: 19: 4606: 4587: 4567: 4457: 4415: 4366: 4365: 4363: 4358: 4356: 4353: 4293: 4292: 4287: 4286: 4278: 4273: 4272: 4268: 4246: 4175:? Cheers! 4172: 4169: 4125: 4117: 4080: 4058: 4023: 4001: 3959: 3904:this article 3901: 3862: 3784: 3714: 3689:I found this 3686: 3608: 3606: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3516: 3468:— Preceding 3463: 3424:— Preceding 3420: 3377:— Preceding 3371: 3320:— Preceding 3314: 3311: 3261: 3186: 3149:Template:POV 3146: 3143:School House 3122:School House 3121: 3119: 3116:School House 3100: 3038: 3030: 3014: 2991: 2954: 2926: 2848: 2802: 2794: 2754: 2750: 2632: 2572: 2565: 2550: 2547: 2542: 2539: 2534: 2532: 2520: 2517: 2512: 2509: 2504: 2502: 2498: 2496: 2446: 2415:Not at all. 2381: 2380: 2379: 2351: 2320:edit attempt 2264: 2250: 2233: 2218: 2179: 2160: 2150: 2131: 2062: 2059:topic-banned 2058: 2049: 2014: 2008: 1988:from editing 1983: 1967: 1946:. Users who 1937: 1930: 1876: 1875: 1861:Coffeepusher 1854: 1832: 1831: 1797: 1796: 1770: 1764: 1718: 1710: 1705:In cases of 1668: 1642: 1624: 1614: 1582:Demiurge1000 1575: 1537: 1510: 1506: 1484: 1481:Paid editing 1443: 1426: 1395: 1324: 1293: 1250: 1212:Cymbelmineer 1206: 1204: 1165:Cymbelmineer 1158: 1124: 1106: 1105: 1095: 1091:Jonah Falcon 1061:Cymbelmineer 1054: 1017: 1013: 992:acknowledged 988:reminded you 973:Cymbelmineer 965: 926: 847: 827: 825: 817: 813: 810: 765: 760: 726: 683: 618: 586: 580: 545: 515: 471: 445: 427: 395: 356: 349: 286: 271: 249: 234: 219: 190: 189: 148: 144: 75: 39: 30: 4271:made about 3859:ANI mention 3693:User:Daniel 3474:Petermonaco 3430:Petermonaco 3383:Petermonaco 3326:Petermonaco 3264:talk page. 2705:WP:HOUNDING 2607:as we have 2237:. Further, 1984:you may be 1952:collaborate 1390:That seems 850:wp:PRESERVE 361:Ncmvocalist 346:Please stop 238:PMDrive1061 223:PMDrive1061 4243:Your reply 4136:Neptunekh2 4092:Off2riorob 4045:Off2riorob 4008:Off2riorob 3978:Epeefleche 3942:Epeefleche 3908:Epeefleche 3865:ANI thread 3827:The Tomfux 3698:Off2riorob 3357:. Thanks. 3347:Trust seal 2100:. Cheers. 1918:. You can 1761:ANI notice 1501:character. 1366:Antandrus 1330:Antandrus 887:DONTLIKEIT 548:Off2riorob 518:Camelbinky 161:Beeblebrox 37:WP:DISRUPT 4666:User:Cirt 4571:kencf0618 4364:Regards, 4211:bobrayner 4177:kencf0618 3787:Teggersin 3651:Ironholds 3617:Ironholds 3609:obviously 3280:Roscelese 3262:article's 3244:Roscelese 3211:Roscelese 3192:Roscelese 3153:Roscelese 3126:Roscelese 2958:MarnetteD 2774:this list 2568:WP:POINTY 2562:Seriously 2306:You have 2239:Jehochman 2102:Griswaldo 2084:Griswaldo 2071:Fut.Perf. 2067:User:Cirt 2046:Topic ban 2005:AE notice 1964:consensus 1960:talk page 1788:WP:ARBSCI 1543:Schrandit 1511:in itself 1184:synthesis 675:User:Cirt 478:Dekkappai 432:Dekkappai 399:Dekkappai 397:Regards. 258:You have 145:thousands 4536:Thanks. 4386:contribs 4265:a remark 4122:Concerns 4059:redacted 3550:You can 3532:Talkback 3482:contribs 3470:unsigned 3438:contribs 3426:unsigned 3391:contribs 3379:unsigned 3334:contribs 3322:unsigned 3288:contribs 3252:contribs 3219:contribs 3200:contribs 3161:contribs 3134:contribs 3075:Talkback 3011:Barnstar 2913:Haymaker 2859:Haymaker 2803:stop now 2799:holy war 2245:or even 1974:or seek 1939:edit war 1896:Talkback 1455:Chequers 1407:Chequers 1290:Grow up! 1125:anything 1021:Sango 42 968:Iraq war 823:or what? 768:Giftiger 729:Giftiger 686:Giftiger 492:answered 287:absolute 124:WP:POINT 33:WP:POINT 4369:Phantom 4314:JoshuaZ 4250:JoshuaZ 3956:WP:PROD 3923:WP:PROD 3870:Damiens 3748:Kingpin 3718:Kingpin 3611:passes 3560:Dezidor 3523:Centric 3355:WP:CORP 2897:at AFD 2297:WP:BLPN 2053:on the 1986:blocked 1707:WP:BLPs 1423:BLPprod 1343:this IP 1297:Spartaz 1188:Disinfo 1129:WP:BLPN 855:editing 331:Spartaz 306:Spartaz 276:Spartaz 256:Hello. 153:WP:DFTT 149:exactly 116:WP:BOLD 4647:WP:BLP 4590:Gacurr 4524:Gacurr 4495:Gacurr 4467:Gacurr 4422:Gacurr 4283:WP:BLP 4084:WP:3rr 4024:report 3781:Carson 3404:WP:COI 3351:WP:COI 3187:asking 2998:JohnCD 2807:Srobak 2795:Do not 2760:Srobak 2713:Srobak 2417:Srobak 2389:Srobak 2308:stated 2299:, and 2293:WP:ANI 2247:WP:FAC 2243:WP:GAC 2225:Maunus 1944:WP:ANI 1828:Jayron 1793:Jayron 1689:WP:BLP 1665:WP:BLP 1661:WP:RSN 1621:WP:BLP 1369:(talk) 1333:(talk) 1227:WP:NPA 933:Bastun 923:Cahole 770:Wunsch 731:Wunsch 722:WT:UAA 718:WP:ANI 688:Wunsch 679:WT:UAA 667:WP:ANI 196:WP:RBI 186:WP:NPA 179:WP:NPA 157:WP:RBI 120:WP:BRD 111:WP:AGF 83:(talk) 80:Friday 40:before 4372:Steve 4267:that 4173:savvy 3940:Tx.-- 3898:query 3613:WP:A7 3406:yet? 2499:after 2453:WP:AE 2382:YEARS 2350:. -- 2301:WP:AE 2055:WP:AE 2013:. -- 2011:WP:AE 1877:about 1735:WP:RS 1717:. -- 1715:WP:RS 1711:after 1667:. -- 1451:Spiel 1403:Spiel 946:. ;) 814:where 671:WP:AN 663:WP:AN 490:I've 16:< 4674:talk 4655:talk 4629:talk 4613:talk 4594:talk 4575:talk 4542:talk 4528:talk 4514:talk 4499:talk 4485:talk 4471:talk 4442:talk 4426:talk 4402:talk 4380:talk 4359:this 4333:talk 4318:talk 4303:talk 4279:Cirt 4254:talk 4229:talk 4215:talk 4207:here 4197:talk 4181:talk 4156:talk 4140:talk 4130:and 4107:talk 4096:talk 4088:DIFF 4081:note 4067:talk 4049:talk 4033:talk 4012:talk 4004:diff 3982:talk 3968:talk 3954:Per 3946:talk 3931:talk 3912:talk 3888:talk 3867:. -- 3845:talk 3831:talk 3817:talk 3791:talk 3767:talk 3752:talk 3737:talk 3722:talk 3702:talk 3687:Hi, 3683:otrs 3669:talk 3655:talk 3640:talk 3621:talk 3593:talk 3576:Talk 3503:talk 3478:talk 3455:talk 3434:talk 3412:talk 3387:talk 3363:talk 3353:and 3330:talk 3284:talk 3270:talk 3248:talk 3233:talk 3215:talk 3196:talk 3176:talk 3157:talk 3130:talk 3107:talk 3065:talk 3002:talk 2976:talk 2962:Talk 2935:talk 2917:talk 2903:talk 2882:talk 2863:talk 2857:? - 2825:talk 2811:talk 2786:talk 2764:talk 2736:talk 2717:talk 2691:talk 2677:talk 2663:talk 2640:talk 2629:Cirt 2617:talk 2595:talk 2579:talk 2483:talk 2421:talk 2407:talk 2393:talk 2358:talk 2353:Cirt 2338:talk 2325:Beck 2271:talk 2266:Cirt 2205:talk 2140:and 2121:talk 2106:talk 2088:talk 2036:talk 2021:talk 2016:Cirt 1996:talk 1886:talk 1865:talk 1816:talk 1777:talk 1772:Cirt 1743:talk 1725:talk 1720:Cirt 1697:talk 1675:talk 1670:Cirt 1651:talk 1631:talk 1626:Cirt 1601:talk 1586:talk 1562:talk 1547:talk 1524:talk 1491:talk 1471:talk 1446:Ϣere 1398:Ϣere 1392:Fair 1382:talk 1351:talk 1311:talk 1280:talk 1270:and 1257:talk 1253:John 1235:talk 1216:talk 1196:talk 1182:and 1169:talk 1151:;-p 1137:talk 1080:talk 1065:talk 1041:talk 1025:talk 1000:talk 977:talk 952:talk 944:name 909:talk 895:talk 878:talk 863:talk 848:Per 835:talk 789:talk 751:talk 708:talk 640:talk 625:talk 620:Cirt 609:talk 593:talk 588:Cirt 567:talk 552:talk 537:talk 522:talk 512:AN/I 500:talk 482:talk 458:talk 450:here 436:talk 418:talk 403:talk 380:talk 365:talk 353:here 320:talk 295:talk 242:talk 227:talk 204:talk 165:talk 132:talk 100:talk 76:more 64:talk 48:talk 35:and 4269:you 4166:DIY 4132:ADD 3872:.rf 3711:ANI 3520:Egg 3046:466 2747:OCD 2570:. 2461:Lar 2187:466 2168:466 1643:you 1507:how 1325:... 1321:Yes 1107:Mid 1100:Hey 761:was 446:you 4676:) 4657:) 4631:) 4615:) 4596:) 4577:) 4544:) 4530:) 4516:) 4501:) 4487:) 4473:) 4454:: 4444:) 4428:) 4404:) 4389:\ 4335:) 4320:) 4305:) 4294:me 4274:me 4256:) 4231:) 4217:) 4209:. 4199:) 4183:) 4158:) 4142:) 4109:) 4098:) 4090:- 4086:- 4079:- 4069:) 4051:) 4035:) 4014:) 3984:) 3970:) 3960:am 3948:) 3933:) 3914:) 3890:) 3847:) 3833:) 3819:) 3807:? 3803:? 3793:) 3769:) 3754:) 3739:) 3724:) 3704:) 3671:) 3657:) 3642:) 3623:) 3595:) 3569:NW 3505:) 3497:. 3484:) 3480:• 3457:) 3440:) 3436:• 3414:) 3393:) 3389:• 3365:) 3336:) 3332:• 3290:) 3286:⋅ 3272:) 3254:) 3250:⋅ 3235:) 3221:) 3217:⋅ 3202:) 3198:⋅ 3178:) 3163:) 3159:⋅ 3136:) 3132:⋅ 3109:) 3067:) 3041:JN 3004:) 2996:. 2978:) 2960:| 2937:) 2927:is 2919:) 2905:) 2884:) 2865:) 2854:, 2851:, 2827:) 2813:) 2788:) 2766:) 2738:) 2719:) 2693:) 2679:) 2665:) 2651:WR 2642:) 2619:) 2597:) 2581:) 2485:) 2463:: 2423:) 2409:) 2395:) 2360:) 2340:) 2295:, 2273:) 2207:) 2182:JN 2163:JN 2148:. 2136:, 2123:) 2108:) 2090:) 2069:. 2038:) 2023:) 1998:) 1888:) 1867:) 1835:32 1825:-- 1818:) 1800:32 1779:) 1745:) 1727:) 1699:) 1677:) 1653:) 1633:) 1603:) 1588:) 1564:) 1549:) 1526:) 1493:) 1473:) 1440:}} 1434:{{ 1394:. 1384:) 1353:) 1313:) 1282:) 1259:) 1237:) 1218:) 1207:is 1198:) 1171:) 1139:) 1131:. 1116:) 1082:) 1067:) 1043:) 1027:) 1002:) 979:) 954:) 911:) 897:) 880:) 865:) 837:) 791:) 753:) 710:) 642:) 627:) 611:) 595:) 569:) 554:) 539:) 524:) 502:) 484:) 460:) 452:. 438:) 420:) 405:) 382:) 367:) 322:) 297:) 244:) 236:-- 229:) 206:) 167:) 134:) 102:) 66:) 50:) 4672:( 4653:( 4627:( 4611:( 4592:( 4573:( 4540:( 4526:( 4512:( 4497:( 4483:( 4469:( 4440:( 4424:( 4400:( 4383:| 4377:/ 4331:( 4316:( 4301:( 4288:I 4252:( 4227:( 4213:( 4195:( 4179:( 4154:( 4138:( 4105:( 4094:( 4065:( 4047:( 4031:( 4010:( 3980:( 3966:( 3944:( 3929:( 3910:( 3886:( 3843:( 3829:( 3815:( 3789:( 3765:( 3750:( 3735:( 3720:( 3700:( 3667:( 3653:( 3638:( 3619:( 3591:( 3579:) 3573:( 3547:. 3501:( 3476:( 3453:( 3432:( 3410:( 3385:( 3361:( 3328:( 3282:( 3268:( 3246:( 3231:( 3213:( 3194:( 3174:( 3155:( 3128:( 3105:( 3090:. 3063:( 3000:( 2974:( 2933:( 2915:( 2901:( 2895:) 2891:( 2880:( 2861:( 2823:( 2809:( 2784:( 2762:( 2734:( 2715:( 2689:( 2675:( 2661:( 2638:( 2615:( 2593:( 2577:( 2551:i 2548:m 2543:☯ 2540:n 2535:u 2521:i 2518:m 2513:☯ 2510:n 2505:u 2481:( 2469:c 2467:/ 2465:t 2419:( 2405:( 2391:( 2356:( 2336:( 2269:( 2203:( 2119:( 2104:( 2086:( 2074:☼ 2034:( 2019:( 1994:( 1911:. 1884:( 1863:( 1814:( 1775:( 1741:( 1723:( 1695:( 1673:( 1649:( 1629:( 1599:( 1584:( 1560:( 1545:( 1522:( 1489:( 1469:( 1380:( 1349:( 1309:( 1278:( 1255:( 1233:( 1214:( 1194:( 1167:( 1135:( 1112:( 1078:( 1063:( 1039:( 1023:( 998:( 975:( 950:( 907:( 893:( 876:( 861:( 833:( 821:? 787:( 749:( 706:( 659:) 655:( 638:( 623:( 607:( 591:( 565:( 550:( 535:( 520:( 498:( 480:( 456:( 434:( 416:( 401:( 378:( 363:( 355:( 318:( 293:( 240:( 225:( 202:( 163:( 130:( 98:( 62:( 46:(

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

Index