User talk:Dennis Brown/Archive 5

10083:

recall-list subscription after only a few months on the job then discovers it's really fun servicing his personal grudges by carrying out revenge-blocks on editors targeted who've not respected the admin's almighty power as they should over any excuse imaginable at an opportune time that can be exaggerated to appear in line of duty fully supported by policy while keeping other admins at arms length by intimidating them by calling them trolls if they interfere or manipulating them using accepted concept of admin corps comradeship ("I-caution-you-to-think-twice-before-butting-in-like-this-and-questioning-a-fellow-admin's-decision") and generally throwing around "fuck this" and "fuck that" in edit summaries whenever the urge strikes and subjugating victims with "I'll unblock you if you promise that you'll no longer be a dick" and routinizing said formula with threat to indef cherry-on-top and so on and so on while avoiding as much as possible obvious evidence of blatant admin abuse knowing that admins are seldom removed by arbcom and to operate under the radar pretty much guarantees a lifelong mop and if anyone wants to mess with them they have their aggressive and equally-brutish admin buddies who'll come through the window to help out immediately claiming uninvolved editor status and then supporting their buddy's decision while adding berating comments to the victim to keep things under control because that's what friends are for, right? And writes an obvious "us versus them" WP essay because they feel safe in the nest they've created here and want to boast to the world how macho they are and how much they should be feared since they know how to operate and don't give a crap. I think you're dreaming pretty pastel colors that any way forward isn't a tooth extraction for the ache that pains – when you are gripping your jaw in pain in the dentist chair does your dentist do a rootcanal or just stand in front of you preaching how someday good and reasonable dental hygiene and further advances in flouride technology will someday make cavities the way of the dodo if we would all just agree to start now by practicing good hygiene habits at home on a daily basis? I can see the need for a recall process mandatory for all admins and I'm only 1+ years editor here; how about working on something concrete like that that will address a real ill? (It'd not only feel better with the toothache gone knowing all admins are subject to mandatory recall, but the entire mouth will smell better too since a bad tooth can really stink a lot.) Thanks for consider; good luck with your effort. p.s. I have some "blood-stained clothes", can you recommend a good detergent that can remove the stains?

907:

article, the first was fixing a name issue of a living person. An official source which was used to reference the list of spokespersons, listed the name as Aleksey to which those details were used on the article. An editor changed the spelling to Oleksiy; which deviated away from the official source. Now I know that BLP policies are as secure as Fort Knox, and as strict as a dictatorship regime (for choice of phrase); which is why I swiftly changed the name back to how it was shown on the source. My understanding was that logic would have prevailed with it being obvious the change was a living person and nothing else. A few hours later, another editor added controversial content about human rights issues; and there was still an on-going discussion about a previous inclusion of such details (written in an objective and emotional manner) on the article's talk page. During that discussion it was decided to omit such details and work towards a mutual re-write; where members of the project where invited to write on the talk page, their suggestions of how the re-write should be worded. Now I know the user who added the latest details wouldn't have been aware of this discussion, and at the time I did the first revert, I wrote on their talk page explaining about the current decision to omit, and also invited them to participate in the discussion on the talk page. However, instead of discussing, they reinstated the content and then started to discuss. It was at this point that I did the 2nd revert and reminded them that they need to discuss first before re-adding content that is still being agreed on. A second user then re-added the details for a 3rd time, and again I left them a note making them aware of the current situation and the content discussion asking them to kindly self-revert. My request was ignored, so I boldly placed the article back into its omitted version - being fully aware I had reached the 3RR limitation, and wouldn't have crossed-over to a 4th revert on the same content (if it was to have been added again for a 4th time). The 24-hours (in all honesty) were a God send, as it meant I had to take time-away from Knowledge - something which many editors, including yourself, had advised me to take since the recent family loss, and that I never acted on the advice at the time. Again thanks for the feedback, much appreciated -

880:

universally agree and not labor the issue. I would have warned you instead of blocking you, but not all admins are as communicative. Looking at the summaries, I don't see that you made a claim that it was a BLP violation in the summary, which I would suggest in the future. Likely, the admin saw multiple reverts, most said "good faith revert" and just hit the bit red button forcing you to go read a book for a day. We handle so many edit wars and such that we might not always read every word in every revert it if looks obvious. Personally, I don't revert more than twice before I get outside opinions, unless it is clearly vandalism and I have tagged it as such. Often I won't revert the second time before getting another editor (doesn't need to be an admin) to look at it. Perhaps someone who is shown to be active on that article. Just a neutral note on their talk page asking them to look at it. You can talk with the blocking admin, provide the diff that was a BLP but it is kind of moot at this point and you can't "revert" the log entry. And yes, often block requests don't get attention for some time. I haven't worked my up to block reviews yet, but I know it is understaffed. We have a lot of admins here, but often too few to deal with the load. The problem with block review is that an admin is usually not willing to override another admin unless there is a clear mistake. One of the edits being a BLP consideration might not be enough reason, as the admin might have just blocked you for the 3 reverts. Did you look to see if the reviewing admin tried to ask the blocking admin on his talk page? That might provide some info. So while I might agree with you in theory, in practice the best thing to do is never use that 3rd revert unless it is an emergency, and then if you do because it is a serious BLP issue, summarize it as such very clearly and immediately ask an admin for assistance. Then if you are blocked, you can establish a clear pattern of seeking assistance and providing a rationale. Not everyone is as reluctant to block as I am, so you have to be a bit more careful. As you have seen, even when you are right, things happen and there isn't much to be done after the fact.

9495:

perfect candidate will get an oppose from me if I think they are cliquish. We aren't all the same, but if you take an adversarial attitude about all admins, you end up pushing some of them against you. All I can do is what I do, stay independent, I give admins the benefit of the doubt, but I give all users the same, and when I see a mistake by an admin, I ask them about it, politely, since that is the most effective way to get them to voluntarily reverse their actions, and that makes them more likely not to do the same thing in the future. Admins are NEVER going to have a universal blocking system, I will always be less likely to block than others, and some will always be willing to block without notification. Don't waste your time trying to fix that, it is a volunteer force, it won't happen. All you can do is vote in good admins, or become one and lead by example. More rules aren't going to solve this. Keeping things in full daylight will help, however. In the end, that is all I can do, be independent, try to fix bad blocks when I'm aware of them (see my user page, I say I will review admins if asked, btw). Knowledge will never be "fixed". All I can do is try to not make the same mistakes as others, and make my little corner a better place, and maybe others will try to do the same. One person at a time. Again, more rules aren't the answer, accountability is.

10485:"I'm all for constructive criticism, but I only see constant criticism." You're clearly frustrated and (I think) confused by our little dialogue, aren't you. (Asking me "don't know why you waste your time" chatting w/ you.) Our topics were basically just the two -- your assertion re why the opposers !voted the way they did, and the Q about double-standard at the ANI. Both topics could have been dealt with simply enough, but, you chose the path each time of denial, and misreading. (I didn't go away, so now you step things up to personal attacks as responses.) You pride yourself in dealing straighforwardly with issues, but look how confused, frustrated, and emotional you get when those issues are about *you* and challenge your concept-of-self that you've built-up, of admirable admin ("universally viewed as civil"), supported by lots of editors and admins stroking same. So I'm a "stone in your shoe". Too bad for me. (Block me! ;)) And rather than *deal*, it's much safer to react with as many disparaging things you can think of to say to me, screwing fairness & civility, just so you can get back to your normal, comfortable world of being thought of so highly. 1962:

it actually isn't working if you have noticed blocks were also issued for violations of IBAN in last 2 months. Probably the best way to move forward would be to ask DS and TG to forget any IBAN relaxations/(or whatever you may call it) given previously and clarify them it is an IBAN violation and it should not happen again. That will I guess help in solving the issue. Though I think a TBAN is more needed here and I with some other editors did give this suggestion at the time of IBAN proposal and later too but it wasn't taken. My concern here was just that the reporting editor himself has been doing the same, has observed similar actions being done by the other party in the past and had been given clarifications by admins a number of times but yet again.... Well I see you may be disappointed that how a simple thing can't be understood by the editors but it is only that in the past admins did let it go (somewhat similar situations). (Btw I know you are a new admin as I am following you since you filed your RFA. Not in any negative way just for the learning purpose.) --

9735:

by vote shooting down your idea, and I felt that I explained it in a fairly detailed way, particularly the first time. Another issue is binary thinking: there are many admins who agree in principal with what you are saying. I would encourage you to work WITH those admins instead of lumping us all together. Swap ideas, allow us to be persuaded without being told that we are part of the problem. Allow us to share our experiences of abuse to help tailor a solution as well. There is no silver bullet here, only incremental changes that will help the culture evolve into something better. If you want to open a dialog and invite open minded admins on a subpage somewhere, maybe that would be better as a first step, so any idea would already have some degree of consensus. Start by identifying the problems, rather than proposing solutions, allow others to see the problems who might not have before. Again, building from the ground up. It might seem slower, but that is the only way I know to actually be successful at creating change, here or in the real world.

10390:

that I researched and concluded was tainted with abusiveness. And just in that, I would be plenty "busy". Your question is unfair, the only reason I'm talkin' to you at all is that you are admin and somewhat "different" and open to ideas, however, you are also quite fallible too, as you aptly demonstrated to me by dodging a simple incivil thing you did by calling the group of editors opposing History2007's RfA "in fear of honesty" without any basis, then "standing by your statement" until a big-gun like Malleus came by, then were insulting to me further by then responding you needed time to "reflect about it for a couple days", when the incivility on your part was not subtle or refined to warrant extra "think time" and you clearly (to me) were attempting to find a way to save face before making your "apology", which still was buried under long sentences and fancy words. But hey!: I forgive all that because you're human. I think you just need to look in the mirror more, and more carefully.) But it's hot out now and I need to find some lemonade. Cheers!

1122:

run videos in the corner or use the TV card. I'm a snob about using Linux on the server, but more open to Windows on the desktop only for the entertainment apps. Most of the time, as now, I use the TV as a monitor here in the living room and watch and type. If I used my regular desktop, I might just partition and dual boot Fedora solely because I'm so familiar with RH's backend layout. I cut my teeth on RH starting with 1.0, and now use CentOS. I still can't get used to Debian based distros, even though they are superior on the desktop. I have several servers I can ssh into, but PUTTY isn't the best for cutting/pasting, and I wanted a native app. I could just reinstall Cygwin, but I think I like Zenmap better since it is basically the CLI, with some mouse options. Not fancy at all, but 25mb to carry the backend. You might give it a try for boxen that require Windows. I used to use PortScan, a french program that hasn't been maintained in a decade and was simple but good. Might still see if I can get that to work in a virtual machine.

9461:

editors, the most thoughtful, view the system with contempt because it makes no attempt to address these simple issues in a meaningful way. You do not stand in a warzone, it's an uncomfortable place because you know you can be shot or mortared at any moment, and that is the analogue of what they feel and face, that at anytime, someone will take a dislike to them, indef block them, and because of their integrity they will not return. Returning involves telling lies, as is required "I did something wrong, I understand I won't do it again" to the same person who hates them, and they're gone forever. There is no allowance for a difference of opinion between the admin that block someone and that blocked editor. They either agree with the person who has just upset them, bow and kiss arse, or they're out. There is no possible reason why it needs to be the same admin that reviews a block, beyond the admins ego, it assumes that no other admin is capable of assessing an editor re-entering the community.

9473:

unreasonable, it's confirmation that it is, indeed, unreasonable. If the first opinion is wrong, and there is no second opinion, then you can justifiably think that you may well have got a bad block. If five people endorse the block, it's less likely, if 30 people endorse the block you are on your own and have to accept that yes, it's just you. The way I see it, if any editor has ever been disliked by one admin, then they may as well leave now, because it's just a matter of time, because regardless of the editor's actions, the system fully supports and backs spite and vendetta and admins reviewing themselves. If broad consensus came into it, fine, if single admin consensus is the standard, then that's that. People will look at wikipedia as having standards the same as any board or forum. I expect not many people try to do high quality encyclopedic work on 4chan, and so the good editors see that wikipedia is simply not up to the task.

9694:

mandatory 4 warnings, because it was obvious, knowing someone might "call me out", yet knowing it was the right thing to do. So I did. I don't really have my sea legs with the admin bit yet, to be perfectly honest, it takes a while. And I'm still seeing new things because my perspective is literally changing by the week, even while my core beliefs have not. I've never been as involved with the actual process here (politics) as I've been in the last two months so it is often a bit to take in, and often I find myself stretched in so many directions, with only so many hours in the day. I seldom get to edit now, as the demands to resolve disputes and help others, plus learning SPI dominate my day. Malleus, you might feel that little is lost ;) but I still enjoy editing, even if it isn't my best talent. I actually like helping others, likely as much as editing, so I will get over it.

1791:. Your debating skills are plenty good that you can overlook it and focus on the merits of your argument, just like you have been doing. You probably are a little more sensitive right now because it is something you care about and it is frustrating that he isn't seeing your perspective in a way you want him to, and is a bit dismissive in a way that might be perceived as arrogant to some. In short, it is not actionable, or close to actionable at this point. Feeling the way you do is normal. Asking for another opinion was wise. Just keep doing what you are doing: being the sweet, passionate person who uses logic and persuasion without getting snippy back. You are always welcome to ask me here, anytime you need a second opinion. I might not always tell you what you want to hear, but I promise I will always tell you what I believe is the truth. 1184:

Veronica, Archie, IRC in a shell with IIRC then BitchX, anon FTP for, um, things :) This is one reason I want to tool up a bit and maybe help out in SPI. I actually understand the back end a bit more than most, although much of it is old school. I still love working in a CLI over GUI for any real work, but I'm not as up to date as I would be if I could do IT all day, instead of 15% of my day, and spending the rest of the time in photoshop and writing commercial web copy and dealing with managerial issues. Ever work with Lantastic? Ha! I even ran a multiline BBS for a few years before the interwebs, in DOS with QEMM and Desqview. Told you, I'm old school, and just lazy enough to use the easiest tools. Probably because I'm getting old.

9765:

and I won't ask Auntie, because Auntie will tell me what I think more than what I said, so I'll double check with you, that paragraph that begins "So make a simple route for a third party newbie editor to follow," someone claims something or other about not respecting consensus or some such, which is not what it says, and people often have a tendency to read whatever it is they would like to be reading rather than what is there. So I don't care really if one or two can misinterpret, but I was wondering if more than just one or two can misinterpret that paragraph, what do you think ? Besides Penyulap is bothering me taking up my time when I have a million things to do, btw, sorry about that, and take a week to respond, there is no hurry.

3644:

It isn't a business directory. We don't delete articles because the subject of the article doesn't like them. It doesn't work that way. If you add content here, it must be 100% original and not already copyrighted (no cut and paste from the website), and when you do, you release it under the CC license. This means that everyone else can use it, change it, modify it, add to it, subtract from it. You do not own that article any more than you own the air you breath, and you have no more say about the content than I do, or the next person who logs on. We all try to make sure the info is accurate, but we are not interested in helping you make your client "look good", and efforts to manipulate articles solely to make a client look good

9906:

to change what is going on. Like all problems, it isn't so simple. You change the outcomes by changing the culture here, and that takes time, patience, a large group of fellow admins who willing to work within the cause, and steady (even if slow) progress. I get lumped as a "typical admin" by people who are pissed about another admin's action all the time, and it doesn't endear me to their cause. If you want to get admins to change, you have to vocally support the admins who are doing it right. There are several, and many more on the cusp. My idea isn't popular, but that isn't relevant. I know it is the only way to get popular support for these other ideas, by working together and keeping it level headed with reasonable goals.

3136: 5611:

argument about content or a personal comment, but is instead a neutral, procedural request. I don't see any problem with how YRC handled it. It wasn't the only option, but it was an acceptable one. Persistence is different than harassment. I wouldn't have pushed it any further, but I likely would have done the second post as well. It might be annoying to the user (as was the improper name), but the request is a valid one, and the editor did remove without comment, so YRC had no idea if it was ignored or not. Had he not changed it, I was going to just go in and change it myself as a 3rd party. YRC shouldn't do that, but anyone else could, again, in my opinion. Being polite doesn't require being passive.

2027:. We are not overflowing with talent in the writing department. We need good authors more than we need good admins. We are an encyclopedia, after all. Take a look around at the state of most of the articles here. He seems to have taken in the proper vane as well. He was quite vocal in opposing me at my RfA and has never bothered to even address me before now, but I certainly don't take it personal. I accept everyone for what they are, good and bad. Including Malleus. He frustrates me, and I've been vocal against him at times, but that doesn't erase his contributions. To be honest, I consider a rare few of his "disruptions" to be among his finest contributions. I'm complicated that way. 3731:

notice and get blocked for, so seriously, I don't want to see that happen, and would just say that you need to do the things I asked so that perhaps you can edit here legitimately. I'm actually trying to help you. Most admins would have just blocked your IP and deleted your message, which is actually what the policies kind of say to do. Seriously, I'm trying to help you. Spend the time to learn a bit, follow the advice here, learn to contribute in a way that is acceptable. It isn't hard, you just have to forget about the checks you are getting and contribute in a neutral tone, and follow some simple guidelines. We have lots of 13 year olds who can do it here, surely you can.

9539:

here. We can reach for the moon, or we can start with the lowest hanging fruit. I tend to start with the lowest hanging fruit, trying to make a difference where I can, and doing so more often. I can speak out early and often, and hopefully persuade others to my point of view. I don't think more rules are the answer, as we have so damn many rules now that after almost 6 years, I'm still finding new ones weekly. I'm more a fan of common sense than rote memory of rules anyway. As for the solution, all I can do is that which is within my own limited skill set, using my own judgement. If we disagree on a solution, it is helpful to remember that we still agree on the problem.

10098:

people together using positive reinforcement in a consensus environment, offwiki. I believe you need to provide a positive alternative to the status quo, one that attracts other admins rather than repels them and puts them into defensive mode. You may see my ideas as Pollyanna or unworkable, but I've also a lifetime of experience from doubters who sat on the sidelines while I did what they said was impossible, so I'm not so easily dissuaded. Will this work? That depends on those who participate more than myself. The problems at Knowledge are entirely too large for one man to fix, and I am certainly not qualified to take them on by myself. I can, however, try to

10290:

he was still blocked. Not for breaking that rule, but for debating whether it was spelled out clearly to him. (And I checked, if you take out the emotion and read it dispassionately, it could, under AGF, be considered a reasonable question, especially given the lack of clear policy on User Talk Pages.) So, was this a block to prevent disruption and harm to Knowledge, or just because an admin was tired of hearing arguments and said 'you don't get it, so I'm blocking you for not agreeing with me.' Even though admins are not supposed to be any more special than anyone else, and are expected to behave dispassionately, I don't find it surprising if they don't always.

10410:

just jump in and restore the user's rollback rights, I only see you attacking my rationale for doing it. You seem to have the ability to find the cloud in the silver lining, and it is a level of negativity that I don't share. I'm all for constructive criticism, but I only see constant criticism. I am not sure why you waste your time talking to someone you obviously have a very low opinion of. All I can do is take the free time I have and try to do the right thing here, that is all. The admin bit isn't as powerful as you think, and I don't consider myself better than any editor here. I'm getting close to 50 years old, and my experience is that most people

4893:

Admittedly, it's subjective, how someone else is going to interpret your statement, and just because the other editor did perceive it as a legal threat doesn't mean their perception was "reasonable". My own feeling is it is a legal threat but I can see that others might disagree with me. Either way, the section called "Rationale for the policy" sums up the situation, even if it is NOT a legal threat: the comment "inhibits free editing" and "creates bad feelings". (As an aside, YRC, I think it's absolutely wonderful that you come to Dennis in these situations and lay yourself open to scrutiny. It shows not only good judgment, but real courage. Kudos.)

5142:. I haven't, nor wouldn't, discourage you from participating in any venue or discussion regarding content of an article or any other topic. Youreallycan doesn't "answer to me", I'm just a friend helping him out. When it comes to BLP matters, I consider him more skilled than I am, so tend to stay out of his way and only comment on singular issues, like on that talk page. My goal is to provide a moderating voice when needed on the side issues, then get out of the way and just let editors do their jobs, with no interference from me. On a personal note, he can be a bit grumpy at times, but he is actually a pretty good guy once you get to know him. 10483:

you see the doulble-standard?), only an attack. You morphed my question into an "attack on your rationale", when I had/have no problem with your basis for restoring the rollback right -- no problem with your rationale for doing that. But the justification of your restore action isn't what my question was about, was it? You seem to consistently misread what I write, you've done that several times now. And you also now show a tendency to use the misreadings as springboard to launch unkind & unfair charges my way, i.e. personal attacks, regarding my attitude, my statements, etc. (Is this demonstrating more of the AGF you practice? And civility?)

1787:

idea) and I think this fall under what I would normally called "heat" or "peppered speech", as it appears that his concerns are in good faith. A little rude, but is predominantly on topic and the slightly insulting tone is still dealing with facts. You pointed it out, properly and politely, but I would move on. Tomorrow, it will still look slightly insulting, but still a bit insulting. I would normally not get involved in cases like this because the overwhelming amount of the discussion is actually healthy debate. The rudeness was unnecessary, and I don't condone it in the least, but pointing it out further will only have a

5745:

of instructions that COIs rarely take the time to read. Additionally, folks like CREWE/PRSA will keep expressing disappointment until the rules and instructions fit their needs (instead of Knowledge's). I think, in order to make a guide simple but also effective, we need to focus on what is ok 100% of the time. On the other hand, I'm still looking at the half-dozen essays/guidelines we have and wondering if we really need more. I like the idea of a task force to clean up and improve COI instructions generally. It's just much easier to create something new than engage in community-wide consensus-building.

5964:, whom I disagree with often, and hold in very high regard. Actually, many of the opposing votes were by people I know and respect. Some of them I work with on projects here on a daily basis, but I still think they were mistaken. As I said, most of the people are wonderful people "not used to seeing common sense being used as a blunt instrument", as History2007's application of common sense IS a bit "in your face". I value independence as the most important trait in an admin candidate, and use common sense more often than policy when making admin decisions myself. 9070:

it was a bit improper. I've been accused of many things, but edit warring isn't one of them. I hadn't crossed paths with MastCell before, and to take such a public and defiant stand on an action I took just seems inappropriate and unnecessary. Perhaps later I will see it differently, but his words seem fairly clear. Not incivil, but certainly defiant in declaring how "strongly" he felt. I would like to think I'm fairly responsive and approachable in these types of matters. By the way, thank you for the vote of confidence, it is appreciated.

6037:

me and others with sourgrape statements, that the collection of !voters does not value "honesty" and "independence", then when these statements of yours are pointed out politely to you, you "stand by them" and go off in some other direction and topic about how RfA is broken, as a dodge. That's civil? Here's another Malleus quote I'm fond of: "Just because xxx says yyy is true, doesn't make it so." [Translation: Just because others say you are the most civil person they every met, and you believe it yourself about yourself, ... doesn't make it true.)

10367:. I don't think Knowledge is a terrible place. Again, if I get to the point that I feel it is, I would just leave. There are a great many flaws but none that aren't fixable, given enough people and time. I'm only one person and only expect to do small things, but yesterday I reviewed a block out of process, asked the admin about it, posted on the policy page and found like minded people, started a project, got a few ideas moving, contacted a few more, and the lever got just a little bit longer. What did you do about the problems? 9357:, perhaps eventually an essay, about how admins should always warn before blocking. I've been vocal in supporting our established editors, even one or two who can be somewhat disruptive, at the risk of upsetting more than a few of my more "mainstream" admins, at ANI and other venues. When possible, I inject myself early in the process to prevent heavier hands from overreacting, and have received a fair amount of grief for being less harsh than some feel I should. If you look above, I just had a talk on another user's talk page 9469:

If one person calls you a horse, you ignore them, if ten people call you a horse, you buy yourself a saddle. Admins tend to think that they should 'back up' each other regardless of their poor decisions, rather than each of them being willing to rely on some other admin to come to a similar, or even different, decision. 'backing each other up' leads inevitably to an 'us and them' mentality that divides the whole community. Relying on each other to make similar decisions reinforces every decision as a good reason to buy a saddle.

10309:

policy. Now, they aren't supposed to use it to edit by proxy, which is what he did, but that isn't why Bwilkins took away his talk page access. I'm hoping it isn't for Calvins last statement, which I don't find particularly problematic, just his opinion of the fairness. Or like I told Bwilkins, maybe I'm missing something, I don't know, but I don't want to jump to conclusions and since Bwilkins made the call, I want to hear it direct from him, to get a better understanding of why the talk page access had to be revoked.

3830: 3667:. We are not here to help you make money. We will happily tolerate you making money, as long as it doesn't get in the way of us building a neutral and trustworthy encyclopedia. Once it does, our tolerance ends. It is that simple. We have enough issues and work to deal with. I had to stop editing articles now to answer this, so you have already cut down how much new data will be added tonight. I'm not thrilled with this, but I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, and give you a proper reply here. 5974:

to participate fully in discussions. I would suggest that in any discussion, you never give an admin's comments any more weight than those of a non-admin, and simply judge the comment on its merits. You probably do not know me very well, but one of my goals is to insure that non-admins do have the same voice here, and that admins don't become a separate class "above" the average registered editor. This is why I prefer voting for admin candidates who I think won't be clique-ish or develop "group think".

7679: 6338: 10167:

aren't accusing someone, when you can point to diffs and say "This is what is broke, this is why, how can we fix this?" in calm voice, and people will actually listen to you. If the only time people see you make a point is when you are on a soapbox, don't be shocked if they only see you as a soapboxer. Knowledge is easier to change from the inside than from bludgeoning it from the outside. I think we have a better chance of success if we calmly discuss ideas and make friends instead of enemies.

6187:

to take a break after an unsuccessful run. As to my civility, all I can do is look at the situation after a day or two with a fresh perspective and reconsider the merits of both your concerns, something I promise I will do. I am fallible, and with two people making this point it does deserve a second look. As to all non-admin's ability to speak out freely, I would hope you know where I stand on that issue, as I've been quite vocal in a number of forums regarding administrative excesses.

9026: 8749: 4725: 31: 7297: 375: 6579:

I can't see why you can't act on some of them. I would urge caution to start, only processing the most obvious cases. Keep in mind, when you close any discussion, you have to determine consensus, and if someone disagrees with your determination, it can go to review or cause further discussion (or arguments) where you will need to participate in discussing your conclusions and actions. This is why I recommend starting on the easy ones and working your way up over time.

983:

place. As you can see, I dropped everything I was doing and handled the situation first. When you state your case poorly on his talk page, you undermine my efforts, and I would ask you please give me enough credit for handling the situation until you have reason to believe I have failed to address it in a timely manner. I did reply only 6 minutes after you brought it to my attention, after posting a notice to his mentoring page only 5 minutes after your notice here.

1986:

illusion that there are any innocent parties here, but I have to still consider first, the issue that is presented, then any other. I can't undo previous leniency, I can only condemn it. And I've started the conversation on IBAN to get the policy clarified. My experience has been that when I forcefully interject a little common sense into a discussion, often it takes root, if only in one or two people, and we are often able to resolve the issue without all the damn

9365:

basis. I've said it 100x before: People don't use Knowledge because of the great admins, they use it because of the great articles. Our goals are the same, even if our methods aren't. I'm against added bureaucracy because in the end, that actually hurts content by offering new methods of wikilawyering, which the bad guys WILL exploit. I am for changing the perspectives of some admins to my way of looking at our role here, which I think is the root of the problem.

3764: 1727: 9955:

reward the people doing it right, you learn from them and co-opt their ideas and methods into your own. Spend at least half your time doing that, instead of spending all of it criticizing the many that do it wrong, and you have a reward for good behavior instead of only a punishment for bad. We don't need a Cabal of "good" admins, but maybe we need a project that focuses on editor retention, and can be a place for admins to learn methods to help with this.

2230: 3409:

playground is the endless collection of elimination shows, and who have a shared "my way or the highway" approach to editing. Yeah, I can revert again (I'm watching 3RR), try to engage her in dialogue, leave an edit summary, ad nauseum, but she'll just come back the next day and take it all out again for no discernible reason other than the apparent need to remove anything from one article that isn't in the rest. Page protection won't solve the problem. --

264: 968:

Third, if YRC permitted you to post on his Talk page, why couldn't you have done it in the same way as you did here, which was perfectly polite, rather than say something like "What planet are you on?" You could still have objected to YRC's phrasing without being insulting. And the choices are not only do I post it at YRC's Talk page or in the forum where YRC made the comment. There are other possibilities. Now back to your regular channels.--

10285:(edit conflict)Remember, we're not a bureaucracy (in theory), and I think we end up sending mixed messages at times because of this. On one hand, we play fast and loose with rules, and simultaneously, we look for exact and particular rules for a situation. So, do we operate by the spirit of the law, or the letter of the law? I think it changes from second to second and admin to admin and editor to editor. 'Editing by proxy' while potentially 7028:

content editor more interested in writing but I seem to find all my time is taken up repairing them. This is supposed to be about writing an encyclopedia not a social experiment in rehabilitating idiots who get a kick out vandalising wikipedia. Those edits were vandalism, I will continue to say so and frankly I don't care if you block me for it. The guys contribution history speaks for itself, he isn't here to improve matters.

10147:

the phone before we ever got there in the first place. So you see, the chef is a moron, the waiters are idiots, and they'll all be happy to see me and take my cash next time (for drinks at most) because that is what they do and what they like about me, I'm a polite customer who pays his bills and gives feedback when asked to do so. If of course I ever go there, I don't care if they stay in business or not, none of my concern.

7185: 6911:

you two work it out on the talk page of the article, find consensus, seek WP:DRN or whatever it takes, or if the warring continues when the protection ends, the next step will be blocks. It is fine to disagree, but there isn't a need to be disagreeable. Go there, stay on topic, discuss, debate, whatever, but I expect no attacks or personal remarks. Both sides have legitimate concerns, find a compromise or consensus.

9052: 7948: 3841: 2829:

Centric requested it and I was the one who implemented it. Those aren't valid objections. The discussion wasn't even about him, it was about Egg Centric and frankly shutting down any suggestion that we use the talk page the way he intended seemed like a good idea. And while it isn't about winning, this very much seems like a case of YRC wanting this to stay open until someone admitted he was right.

1319: 2978: 1289: 8498: 6746: 6503: 7495:, chunks of which has been simply copy-pasted from other articles (also under discussion on mediation) and with 90% of the information not even relevant to the article. Actions like these are themselves currently disruptive to the project and defeating the purpose of the ongoing mediation process. If the editor above carries the notion that he will not get scrutinised, he is mistaken. 5321:

Usually, if they are, they will either drop that account, or eventually show their hand and it can be refiled. You have to err on the side of caution, or you end up blocking people who aren't guilty. Just like the theory of the US justice system, it is better to let 10 guilty people go free than convict one innocent person. Eventually, we will catch them if they are sockpuppeting.

4918:

down the drama and get both sides to not use the L word or refer it anything that implied it should be a concern, would the goal of not coming across as taking a side. Bbb, you are of course welcome to provide your perspectives on that page as well, and I always encourage anyone that thinks I'm mistaken to do so in the same venue. I have been known to be mistaken from time to time.

6245:

minor incivility. As to here, sometimes it takes a day or two to realize a mistake, or just get why it was a mistake, but I'm human after all. Your warning is well received, I'm still new to this admin thing, and it would be wise to not let my passion get the best of me. By the way, regarding your concerns about unenforceable promises at my RfA a while back, you might note

10405:

my style anyway. I apologized to you and others, with the a giant header that said "apology" and you say I was hiding it. I've made it clear I will review any action by an admin long ago on my user page, and do and have started more than a few discussion with admins on their actions, including reversing a couple, but that is insufficient. I've been an admin for just

8405:

well enough as I visit the plant from time to time, but it is still a lot to deal with. I'm a bit distracted, checking up on family and close friends down there. Not much I can do for the situation, however. I also don't close many AFDs, likely less than 5 before, so it isn't habit. No one should give you any problems for cleaning up my mess here.

2305:, and asks what I want, I usually say "I am a large black man", despite my neither being particularly large, nor particularly black. I once owned a percolator that was used for the cowboy coffee while camping, right on the coals, I am sure it is horrible, but camping coffee always tastes good. No matter how bad it actually is. -- 10103:

only affect a single, minor change, it is still better than not trying at all. I will leave before I let Knowledge make me bitter. Life simply has too much to offer, and Knowledge is only one tiny option. While I am here, however, I would like to try to make a positive difference, no matter how unbelievable that might seem.

6883:

request for protection to win a "content dispute". I made it plain in my comment that a source was being dismissed solely because of its nationality. Thats simple racism if you boil it down to the essentials. If you'd taken one second to look at the contribution history, its resplendent with this IP's disruptive behaviour.

10470:

RfA did so because they "feared honesty, even if they wouldn't admit it". Putting title on a section "Apology" is not the same as making one. I did read your "apology". If you want to go over it sometime, how you obscured it and tried to save face, we can. It was all about capability and will to face simple accountability.

3538:

for a second opinion. Or sometimes, you might just be wrong. We all are from time to time. In this case, I don't know since I didn't get into it deeply enough since it didn't belong at ANI, because you didn't try to address it on any talk page first. If you keep dragging people to ANI prematurely, you will suffer from

6007:

variations of that, "scared", "not used to", etc.) I pointed out, after going through every oppose carefully in the RfA, that not one showed any sign if this, even to a small extent. So when you smatter a group of !voters with your opinion they are "afraid of honesty", well, as already asked you, on what do you base that?

8868:

an apology in the summary. I goof from time to time as well, and I find that if I make myself apologize in at least a public a manner as my mistake, it keeps me from making too many mistakes and keeps me honest. And people are usually quick to forgive occasional lapses in judgement when you admit a mistake this way.

8838:

what their criteria is, as that is out of my normal realm of work. I would just wait, you can't really do anything with it until December, and I don't think it will take very long to get a decision in the proper venue. Under the best of circumstances, it usually takes a couple of days to get rights granted properly.

10190:

more grateful. There is no problem that can't be solved, there is no issue that can't be resolved. If we don't get the result we want today, we can try again tomorrow. Luck may favor the bold, but success favors the persistent, and I can't be persistent unless I keep a good attitude and enjoy the journey a bit.

1903:

ANIs. Yes, I'm an old timer who is new to the mop and just now noticing a few things. While some parts of Knowledge are fine, many parts are terribly broken. And I apologize if I seem frustrated, it is certainly not your fault, but there is a shortage of good old fashioned common sense at ANI all too often.

458:

well mentally. If it came across poorly, I would apologize. A look at their recent history is a little troubling. I appreciate you bringing it here, and if you strongly feel that I have made a mistake in this, I will strike it, but my goal is to determine IF there is a problem here, as there very well may be.

5955:

documented troubles with RfA in general, as well as my own frustration with admins who take themselves too seriously. They were more directed at the flawed system of RfA than any individual. While I obviously disagree with your position in the RfA, your comments weren't the basis for my later observations.

10482:

as a condition of any unblock; whereas in Toddst1's case, after echoing the consensus that he (at a minimum) "made a mistake", and after no admission to any degree of having made any sort of "mistake", you seemed perfectly contented to end the matter there and call it done. I never got an answer (do

10469:

You know Dennis, I can answer all your questions. But I see you're not too interested. You'd rather levy more personal insults, untrue disparaging remarks, based on overgeneralizing and the same kind of logic that led you to make a totally baseless assertion that the editors who voted against H2007's

10129:

I agree with both of you, and you are both right, I have the annoying habit of being able to do that, I differ from Dennis's correct view, by having the view that the glass can be either half full or half empty because in the end the glass doesn't need to be the question. Better, I see that change is

10102:

these ideas and seek to develop a consensus on one issue at a time, one problem at a time, using patience and persistence, and maybe I will get more done than had I just sat on the sidelines and complained about the problems, waiting for someone else to fix them. At the end of the day, even if I can

10097:

And I see the glass as half full. Real change will only happen when you have the support of a large number of admins and non-admins alike. It is a long term approach to a problem that has developed over a long time. I can only use the tools at my disposal, and I've a lifetime of experience getting

9900:

You are completely right about bad admins pushing people away. Or more often, when good people make bad mistakes as admin. I don't think all the bad actions are intentional at all, some just get so cynical and settled into blocking at first sight. Others are too busy doing other things to research

9802:

and were raised in different cultures, so we might have different ways of being mellow dramatic. In this case, I think you got very emotionally invested in the conversation, something we all do from time to time. Last week Malleus was kind enough to snap me into reality for doing the same, although

9734:

I'm sorry you feel that way as I've always respected you Penyulap, even when I disagree with you. All I can do is attempt to fix the problems in my own way. I believe I understand the proposal, but I can see 100 ways for it to be abused as well, so I have no choice but to oppose. It wasn't a drive

9578:

Malleus, unless you know something I don't you're being a little harsh on Arbcom there – you might not agree with every position they take, but they do generally try to have a modicum of common sense. I assume the comment you're referring to with "all blocks should be indefinite pending the blockee's

9517:

I don't know to what extent I could be considered to be a typical case, but Penyulap's position resonates with me, and is the fundamental reason why my participation here has drastically declined, and will continue on that path unless something changes. Bad blocks are hard enough to swallow, but then

9494:

to be unblocked to the admin, and got him unblocked, but he is still upset and yet to come back. If you want to admin's to be independent, then you can't lump us all together. Independence is the number 1 reason I vote for a candidate at RfA. More important than any other quality, and an otherwise

9464:

Side-stepping the issue with the pretense that it cannot happen because there are lots of things to prevent it fundamentally misses the point that it does indeed happen. Even if you want to pretend it doesn't, you have to make the absurd dangerous assumption that it cannot ever happen and lay that on

9298:

Unfortunately for me, the content is incredibly beyond my comprehension, which is why sometimes you have to speak slowly and spell it out, to allow me to use the tools I do have, technical and behavioral comparisons, in order to make the call, while not jumping to conclusions prematurely. The system

9111:

No problem, the target of your comments wasn't clear, so we will just chalk this up to a simple communications issue, no harm, no foul. I agree about either redacting or blanking info in general when it might out someone. Have not looked specifically, been at work, but take your word for it. I had

7419:

Go ahead and stare, but it will probably still be confusing. Particularly since the discussion started as looking at the problems with ArbCom, and no one thinks ArbCom is the problem to begin with. It is a more formal RFC type event, but like a town meeting where everyone stands up, says his piece,

6910:

as well, and only use the term when it fits the strict definition. 89.*, your attack is so obvious it doesn't need explaining. Another instance like this and I will block you on the spot, period. I've protected the page for 1 full week, which isn't an endorsement of ANY version. This means either

6859:

does't work that way, nor do I. This isn't the school yard, and if he tags you improperly, yes that is a problem, but doesn't justify your actions. If you keep getting tagged improperly tell me or another admin, with diffs, so we can do something about it, but don't go attack someone or you will be

6838:- is also a personal attack. If you're going to attack me, you need to be prepared to get as good as you give. If you call me a vandal twice, I am entirely justified in calling you fuckbag at least once. I don't "respect no one". I don't respect editors who call others vandals over a content dispute. 6578:

I'm not very familiar with RM policies, which can be tricky as you have to "close" them, so to speak, then act. Some of them may require the tools to move, most will not. Assuming you have spent the time to learn the policies regarding moves, and if you are familiar with closing formal discussions,

6160:

I have just as strong an opinion about the state of affairs at RfA, very likely quite different from yours, and about your rather loose interpretation of what passes for civility here. Unlike you though I am not an administrator, therefore am forbidden to express my opinion. The bottom line though is

6074:

Re your last comment: "While this might not be the answer you were looking for, it is the truth." What? That you were commenting on the RfA "system", and not the RfA editors who opposed? (And that's the "truth"? And that's "maybe not the answer I was looking for"?) I really do not know what you mean.

6046:

If I'm offended by your remarks, you say: "Don't take it so personally." How far does that carry logic? There is only text on WP, no voice. People are held accountable to what they write. So ... you can write anything about anyone? And then if they complain, your retort is: "You're taking what I said

5744:

Absolutely, much of the essay is currently aligned with my personal point of view in an area where Wikipedians have vastly different perspectives. I think where I struggle most is PR types are constantly saying they need clear instructions on how to contribute. As you can see, Knowledge has mountains

5715:

I will have to look at it a bit more, I can see some more tweaks I would like, but don't want to rush into it until i can digest your changes. The pendulum of ideas is swinging wide right now ;) I generally like to see that early in the process, so don't take it personal if I remove or change ideas

5610:

Gerda is right, and if they corrected it, I wouldn't labor it further as the point is already made. Sounds like you did the right thing, and yes, you do have the right to make a request like that on their talk page even if they have asked you to avoid their talk page, in my opinion, as this isn't an

5320:

For the purpose of SPI, we always list the name that had the first edit as Master, regardless of where that edit came from. As for closing, that doesn't mean they are innocent, sometimes it just means I can't definitely connect the two, at least to the point that I'm willing to indef block someone.

5221:

is the guiding light here. You added, he reverted, now you discuss it on the talk page with others. This may take a week or two. But this is how we do things here, to prevent edit warring and disruption. I'm not getting involved in the content itself, as it is outside of my field of expertise and

4851:

I addressed it earlier at that discussion. Any time you mention anything "legal", people tend to get a little hair trigger. I think it was just an honest misunderstanding, so just moving on is best and trying to avoid the "L" word when possible. Linking to the policy should be sufficient. Another

4383:

Just got to work and I see this is at ANI now. It is quite incivil, bordering both on a personal attack and a legal threat, but coming up a little short on both. Normally something I would strongly warn for rather than block for a single incident, but it looks more complicated and getting aired out

2803:

about winning. It is about working our way through problems. Sometimes it is ugly. This one was ugly in every possible way, which is why I'm not wanting to get involved. There is nothing about that conversation that I would have done the way that everyone else did. Well, except Bearcat I guess.

2260:

Yes, well you can't get a regular cup of coffee in this country it seems. If you ask for a cup of coffee, you get a look like you have three heads. Even the single cup machine we bought when we got here makes espresso only, I have to make the espresso, and add hot water. And don't go looking for a

1961:

You are absolutely right in saying that it is violation of the (spirit of) IBAN, I totally agree with you and there are other people who agree with you like Regents Park who also commented on some previous IBAN vio reports with same thoughts but nobody gave it due weight. IBAN can't work this way and

1902:

seems to need work, and more clarity would make this issue moot. If we simply allow him to withdraw his vote (I've tried, he won't), but make it clear that AFD is also off limits, that would be fine with me, as I'm not trying to get anyone blocked, only prevent this needless interaction and constant

1786:

Ok, here is the honest truth. I read the whole thread, but not the article content. What you have done is all that needs to be done. He was a bit insulting, but it is a contentious discussion, he is raising what seems to be legitimate points (I have no comment as to who is right or wrong, I have no

457:

He stated that he "knew" this mythological entity in the link provided. He has a history of good edits, and all of a sudden, very odd edits. It wasn't meant to inflame at all, only to get a feel for their state of mind to determine if the account has been compromised or if the person is not feeling

10472:

I'm not aware of saying the "way forward at WP" is to assume a "combative attitude about other admins"? (How does "reverting a block tainted with abusiveness" lead you to that? Or, what led you to that? I have no idea.) I am *all behind* the effort to get admins to consistently warn before blocking.

10409:

now and don't claim to be an expert at anything, yet have put myself out there as being an admin that is trying to stop bad blocks, who tries to persuade other admins to warn first instead of blocking first, and all you can do is find fault with my every action. I didn't see anyone else willing to

10404:

It was a second opinion. Had it been someone else, I would have re-reviewed as a few days had passed and the heat of the moment was gone. And if I took a combative attitude about other admins, I wouldn't be one very long, would I? An admin can't affect change here by being combative, and it isn't

10289:

seems to imply people getting a big group together to overpower the opposition. Stretching the definition to a blocked user as if they are a mob boss ruling from jail seems a little beyond even the spirit of the law there. Also, I see a problem because Bwilkins warned him, he didn't do it again, but

10254:

It struck me that way at first, but then I realized that he was trying to edit by proxy, so I understood why Bwilkins said he shouldn't have done that, although he does comes off a bit gruff. I think the problem is that there is no clarity regarding proper use of the talk page. I will reply on the

10189:

And if it wasn't already clear, I don't live in an optimist's delusional world, but I usually choose to admire the rainbow rather than bitch about the rain. I used to be much more cynical in my youth, but life has a funny way of throwing things at you and changing your perspective, making you a bit

9764:

I guess in some ways it will need to wait, as the information gathered from putting the question to the mob is more interesting. The answer is often the least interesting thing, and the outcome is hardly relevant, but the workings of the interactions is fascinating. Anyhow, something to doublecheck,

9693:

Nine weeks ago, I didn't think that much about retention, as I saw other problems that still motivate me, even if they don't take up as much time. As time goes on, I see more and more simply because I'm seeing it from the other side, so to speak. Below you see an IP that I blocked, yes, before the

9632:

The number of serving Arbs was reduced for a reason, and assuming Brad, Elen and Casliber are shoo-ins that only leaves five vacancies at the end of this year. Regardless, all the deckchair-rearranging discussions on policy nuances whilst the Holy Shit Slide continues unabated increasingly remind me

9561:

But of course there isn't just one problem here, there are many. I was reminded earlier today of another factor that plays here, that disruptive newbies are treated with kid gloves while established editors "who should know better" are treated as harshly as a strict interpretation of the rules allow

9538:

I agree that the idea that all blocks should be indef is absurd and opens up so many venues of abuse that I would never agree to such a system nor participate in such. I agree with Penyulap as far as the general problems are concerned, but there are two schools of thought when it comes to solutions

9489:

First, the admin reviewing the block shouldn't be the blocking admin. I review blocks from time to time, but I would never, ever consider reviewing a block I made. I might comment about it below, but wouldn't refuse the request. Technically, each request SHOULD have a different admin, each time.

9468:

Community strength and admin strength is found not in backing one admin to make the decision and review them-self, it lays in the same message being given to an editor by different admins, or the community themselves saying the same thing as the original admin, while the original admin stays silent.

9069:

posturing: drawing a line in the sand. He could have just said "I've reverted back because $ x, discuss before you change back", which would have been fine and inline with the spirit of BRD and all that. But by suggesting that an edit war was even possible, he wasn't exactly assuming good faith and

7606:

is a perfect example of POV. Any neutral reader can conclude that only three or four lines of what you added is related, the rest is the usual BS you've pasted all over other articles on Knowledge. How many articles are you going to quote Amin Saikal on? The Ahmed Rashid quotes say nothing about the

7073:

No Dennis, I've asked you politely to desist from delivering another completely inappropriate lecture. You've repeatedly stated that I don't know what vandalism is, when you've acknowledged to another admin that its not so clear cut and a "borderline" case. And you're wrong, because I do know what

6753:

You aren't a nuisance, that one falls into the same camp, so I just did it. I don't ever mind helping, sometimes it just takes a while. I feel compelled to always offer a better way when it exists, to help in the future, but it isn't a problem. I have extended family at the house, and my eyes are

6186:

I always appreciate and respect your candor Malleus, even when I disagree with your conclusions. I still think adminship should be "no big deal", even if some take their admin bit too seriously. You know as well as anyone that RfA is a stressful event, particularly for the unprepared, leading many

5361:

Honestly, I changed it because that is how they tell us to do it, that is all. It isn't about my personal opinion. I'm just a trainee, so I just do the paperwork like they tell me. The account that is the oldest is always listed as the master, no matter the order of the individual edits that lead

5290:

Scott, block reviews are handled by a variety of admins who carefully watch for them and reply on their own time table. No action or reminder is usually ever needed. Sometimes, a request my be put off for many hours because an admin is researching. While I appreciate your concerns, this is likely

4989:

I think Bbb is also worried that your phrasing might also be consider as giving a "chilling" effect, although technically, that kind of was the idea. It is a slippery slope and one where we all need to either tread lightly when telling someone, or perhaps asking someone else that works with BLPs to

4878:

I'm gonna jump in here, not that anyone asked me for my opinion. :-) I've never seen anyone refer me to Wikipeda's terms of use before in a discussion. If I were at the receiving end of it, I would (a) be bewildered because those kinds of documents are VERY long, very legal (despite the fact it says

4052:

It used to be able to be taken away more easily, but I don't think it needs to a matter of permissions as most people use it fine. Snowolf covers one way around this, where it can be taken away, but its a little unusual. It would take an ANI or AN discussion to take it away from someone, which may

3730:

One quick note: Since there are 1500 technical minded administrators who eat, live and breath this stuff, and this has a case report in the archives, trust me, ignoring my requests here would be foolish. Logging in from home and editing the articles, for instance, would take less than 3 minutes to

3381:

I've left a final warning, so any admin will see that as a opportunity if he doesn't begin a dialog. Really can't block until that final is given. Reverting it back shouldn't be an issue, but this isn't vandalism, just disruptive, so 3RR still applies. You might need to go to RFPP if he isn't the

2838:

Maybe, but there is already an admin there and since I don't see an obvious problem that forces me to get involved, I'm not inclined to, and let you work it out yourselves. The situation started out badly. That it continued badly isn't a shocker. But it isn't a situation that I need to interject

2669:

Oh, factually I reinserted (once) some content that you had removed. But there was no mens rea on my part, no reason at all for me to believe the content was disputed by yourself - and I didn't. You had removed it with no comment and an edit summary of "archive". You seem amazed that I couldn't read

2457:

Well played, well it all worked out. Just booking some tickets for Mrs. K and the kids, they get to fly home business class thanks to Aeroplan, me, well we will see. But I have done lots of international business class travel and this will be a first for them. My only regret is not seeing the kids

2434:

Oh no, you don't use a percolator for cowboy coffee, just a pot and a spoon. Simmer, remove from heat, add grounds, wait a tic. I do have a perc unit for camping as well, but usually can't find when the power goes out, which is rare. I pre-grind the beans when weather looks bad, so I don't have to

2274:

I grind and drip fairly strong, something like a European large coffee without the crema. I have owned a few espresso machines, but the $ 200 and less machines don't produce a proper crema, so not the same. I like it prepared in a number of ways, as long as it is black, no creme, no sugar, same as

1005:

I'm grateful for the timely response, but since I wasn't being impatient I'm not sure what the point is. As for rudeness -- though I don't expect that anything at all will lead you to condone it, I note again that this issue has been in play for years, and I'm not the only one who is thoroughly fed

756:

Good to hear. And I actually enjoy working with people like you, that made mistakes but are reasonable, that got into a bad spot and just need a friend to say "hey, go do something different for a while." Seriously consider working in non-controversial areas. I do all the time because I enjoy the

672:

I don't usually do a lot of biographies, and this being sourced primarily in Hindi will be a challenge. On the surface, it looks pretty good, and I see Bgwhite is also working on it, who is more qualified, however I will see what I can do to help. I do like to see this type of article creation, in

584:

Hammer, it is a general pattern, and you have always been at the limits when it comes to deletions. Every time it comes up, I either stay away or take your side, even though I completely see their points. You really have gotten what appears to be, obsessed with the deletions. You *need* a break.

10389:

Ridiculous question Dennis, because I am lowly 1+ years editor and not an admin like you. (You admins have discretionary power I could only dream of. A better question would have been to ask me: "What would you do if you were an admin like me?" The answer to that is simple. I would revert any block

10347:

Don't delude yourself into thinking it stops with inappropriate removal of User Talk page access. How about an admin totally and completely removing *Email* access without any justifiable whatever other than personal grudge? The point is, abusive admins are only stopped thru force, they'll take any

9905:

acknowledge that improper blocks aren't usually bad faith, even if a bad idea. And that most admins, even the ones making what you and I might call "mistakes", are actually trying to do what they think is best for Knowledge. I know it is often hard to see that side of it, but you must if you want

9830:

group of people to participate, and then get out of the way a bit and see what happens, making it clear that everyone is welcome to edit the essay directly. It is all a great experiment, after all, just like democracy. So I am working on retention in a number of ways, perhaps less grand than your

9611:

editors seem afraid to engage, and are probably rightly afraid. Or I guess they are amongst the army that have already abandoned the place. I still contribute here, mostly by trying to pretend the miserable situation doesn't really matter. But that's not really true, and only works up to a point. --

8867:

I don't think revdel wouldn't be appropriate. What I would do if I had done that, is go to the talk page, explain the edit and just apologize for the rude summary. We all have bad days, it isn't the end of the world, but an apology is usually the best sign of good faith. Or make a null edit with

7892:

BWilkins has already blocked access to his talk page, and I collapsed the rant. Collapsing is generally a non-controversial way to not delete, but still deny easy viewing, and not likely to get you in trouble if you do it politely. It is still there if an admin needs to see to consider an unblock.

7639:

This has exceeded the purpose of my talk page at this point. If there is ongoing resolution, then I would expect everyone in this thread (except me) to go and participate there. Mar4d, this includes you, and I would consider it a sign of bad faith if everyone doesn't participate. This is a hint,

7556:

You yourself have given admission in the above comment that despite being an active party in mediation, you choose to flout the rules and still put things the way that you'd like on articles. That is not how it works. Talking about source falsification, what if I tell you that 90% of what you added

7027:

is not a suicide pact that requires we continuously give a disruptive editor chance after chance as you appear to think. I found your lecture patronising and completely misplaced. I'm now at the point of wondering why I bother to try and maintain the quality of articles at all, I've always been a

6244:

in many places here, as not all words mean the same thing on both sides of the pond. I catch myself from time to time, and have to be reminded. It is the conditioning of a lifetime, after all. I wasn't involved in the politics here at that time, but I think you know I'm not one to overreact to a

6036:

I could template you for "not getting the point", but, I have no reason to continue this discussion. You say you are "universally" held in high regard vis-a-vis your civility. Incivility, as Malleus has pointed out, comes in more significant forms than simply "bad words". (Here you go off insulting

6026:

If you "stand by your statements", in spite of my pointing out how rude and irresponsible they were, well then, how civil is that? Again, please don't change the topic. The topic is your sourgrapes statements about opposers in the RfA, voting out of "fear" and "being scared" and "unused to" honesty

6016:

When you participated in the RfA, it was not as Admin as you say, it was as general editor. Fine. But you are also Admin, and held at "higher standard" (acc. Jimbo). (Do you "go for" a lower standard, when you !vote in RfAs? Anyway, it doesn't matter. This is missing the point. I found your remarks

5973:

take themselves or having the admin bit very seriously, only it's use. We admins are not super-editors, our !votes count only as 1, we are not the leaders, we are simply the janitors. We mop up and we fix problems. We serve the community, we do not rule it. Being an admin, however, is not a bar

5913:

and look up, the sky will obviously be black. Then someone will tag it {{cn}}. People are so busy trying to over-analyse and read between the lines that simple truths get lost in the noise. Most people, including most that opposed you, are indeed wonderful people that are just not used to seeing

5012:

Its something I have told users many times when they say as this user did , "I didn't add the content" - Yes you did - the discussion wasn't about anything else than that point. There was no "chilling affect" as the content was cited and just disputed as undue weight in a BLP - it wasn't like I had

3776:

You are really on of the best admins we have! I have seen your archieves and saw your comments (kind of stalking) and I m really impressed. Especially I like the way you handle conflicts and questions brought to you. I also love to see your work at helping editors and your improvements at CSDs. You

3643:

First, you need to understand a few things. If you want to learn editing on Knowledge in a way that is consistent with our goals, fits the needs of the reader, and as a side benefit, make the the bank happy, then you would have to be willing to spend a little time reading what Knowledge is about.

2720:

I was in touch with the user that hatted it. I had no reason to believe you considered the hatted (and that's an important word because it was restored hatted as well) discussion problematic. Nevertheless since then I have indeed been tying to "quietly let it go" but you won't let it drop. It's now

1897:

My main concern was the policy itself, as I'm not used to working iban situations and it seems (for lack of a better term) utterly stupid to not include AFD discussions as part of the interaction ban. Perhaps I'm overcome with common sense in a world obsessed with wikilawyering, but I can't fathom

1121:

I found a good solution: Zenmap, the self installing GUI for nmap on Windows, found at nmap.org. It is actually quite good and I already know the syntax. It does have a couple of small diffs, ie: -P0 is done as -Pn, but generally the same. I don't want to run Linux when on Knowledge, as I like to

10166:

is an excellent concept to talk about at the project on the talk page. Right now, it only gets brought up at a venue when tempers are high, so it's discussion and application seem rather spotty. Seriously, if you want a solution, you have to start the discussion when tempers are flying, when you

10146:

cause any fuss whatsoever, or make my friends uncomfortable by doing so, I'll pay my bill gracefully, not burn bridges, I'll return to the restaurant quite possibly if friends insist, but I'll only order drinks and I'll be happy to explain to my friends why I'm not eating if I haven't done so over

10082:

Dennis, your "Anne-Frank-I-really-believe-all-people-are-essentially-good-Rodney-King-can't-we-all-get-along" pablum is a little bit nauseating since it amounts to passive wishful thinking and won't lead to anything concrete to address real ills. How about an admin who throws away his RfA-promised

10006:

Then we take that step, because it is in the right direction. One at a time. Again, this is why the project makes sense, so we can each take different steps, but in the right direction. Some things, like 1000 year old vendettas, won't be fixed except by traditional methods, but if someone can't

9954:

I believe that to get good results, you have to use the carrot more than the stick. People with good ideas and positive attitudes are successful at getting things done because people like to be around them, will listen to their ideas, and be persuaded by them if they make sense. You seek out and

9930:

Part of the problem, which is indeed multi-faceted, is the very nature of wiki: open editing, anonymity, culture clash (ex: Malleus thought nothing of saying "cunt" but it appalled others. Throw cabals throwing power trips around, centuries old religion and ethnic warring, editors who think anyone

9783:

You are forcing them to abandon empathy for their fellow man, my integrity will not allow me to agree with your demands and I'd sooner be a maytr than do as the rest of you do and go along with this insanity, I will not abandon my humanity, I'd sooner die, or in this case welcome with open arms an

9437:

I'm not entirely sure how to keep the very casual dabbler, who creates one or two articles. My efforts have been on keeping older editors who were here when Knowledge was a different place. Both are important, granted, and encouraging dabblers to become full fledged members of the community is a

9364:

I freely accept my role as janitor and accept that the most important role at Knowledge is the content creator, not the admin. I wouldn't expect you to notice as you have more important things to do than follow my contribs, but I've been quite vocal about this in multiple venues, and on a regular

9360:

about not templating editors with vandalism tags when it is inappropriate. The idea that my role is to keep good people here permeates every action I take here. I even became an SPI clerk trainee, as sockpuppets undermine the quality work of content creators, and this is a way I can fish out the

8837:

Reviewer rights are slow to get doled out because the entire function doesn't exist yet. It was part of a test, but isn't expected to roll out until December. I'm personally not familiar enough with the requirements to grant reviewer rights to anyone. You are still kind of new as well, not sure

8431:

Sorry about the personal stuff, must be dreadful for his family. I think the completion of the closure is good enough. I've never done it before, but, just like with so many things at WP, I sat there with windows open following the step-by-step instructions. Perhaps I'll start looking at non-admin

8146:

I expect to raise the issue, I was just letting you know that we were talking about similar issues. I agree that editors should be careful about how they use the term "sock" when reverting actions and such, and I know he has to deal with a lot of real socks as well, so yes, I want to continue the

8078:

I will look at this in greater detail a bit later, I have a few things I must do first, and this will require devoting more than a few minutes to review properly. This isn't something I would want to just give an offhand opinion on, but agree that here is a better place to discuss it than ANI, at

8031:

I've gone over it fairly well, and it looks clean. Thinking about it, I would still rather put it an BLPN, as they would tell you any diff, or call another admin if needed (two of the regulars call me for admin action regularly). But any port in a storm and the job is done. Bad case, definitely

7099:

Frankly your comments were grossly offensive to all the productive editors seeking to maintain that article's quality. This IP editor showed no evidence he has ever assumed good faith, multiple instance of evidence of bad faith behaviour and in bad faith removing content. Suggesting that all the

7089:

The edit was reverted by multiple editors, British, Argentine and Bulgarian but never once brought to the talk page. All of the comments in edit summaries demonstrate bad faith, the guy demontrated bad faith with his "Yo Fuckbag" comment in my talk page, his contribution history shows a series of

7042:

I haven't come to your talk page except as an administrator, to issue a standard notifications. There hasn't been any other discussion on your talk page, and you are the party that brought the issue to me, but you didn't like the answer you received. If you are asking me to not issue templates or

6882:

For info, he is removing a cite, solely because it is British and therefore he claims it is POV. He's then removing the information cited to that source. This is vandalism pure and simple. I also find it rather insulting that you'd act based on the presumption an established editor would make a

6443:

I just haven't gotten to it. My contribs might show I'm pretty busy ;) And when you copy from one article to another, you can't just copy without giving proper attribution. I know, it is the same encyclopedia, but if you didn't write all those words, you need to make sure your edit summary says

5817:

Sounds like you both are in a bit of heated discussion, which I think is acceptable, as that is how it typically works. Since he has offered to leave you alone, perhaps you both should try to stay away from personal comments, as it looks like the discussion is moving more or less forward. I will

4917:

Well, using the L word does set off red flags at Knowledge, often like a hair trigger. I didn't see YRC's statement as a legal threat, even if I would have worded it differently (I say that a lot, in a lot of conversations it seems), but I didn't see it as a breach of NLT. I tried to simply ramp

3537:

Well, you did drag him to ANI without trying to discuss it first, that might explain why he isn't happy with you. If you find yourself in a situation where no one agrees with you on a point, you are better off asking a respected editor who is uninvolved and edits on that page, on their talk page,

3270:

No, I don't think a block is in order. I think he means well, but he's just gone a bit gung-ho. And, as you've expressed previously, he may run up against someone who may hit back at him hard. I think maybe an explanation will suffice. I thought that should maybe come from you since it looks like

2482:

Glad you asked! If you want it deleted, you can just edit the page, remove all the text, and someone will CSD it as a blank page. This is only proper to do on articles like this, very new, you started it and no one else has added a bunch of other information to it. And please do stay around and

1443:

Dennis, don't feel disheartened, this is a juggernaut of the twitterpedia, there is no stopping it now. This has potential to grow to epic proportions. I won't be happy until I am included in the list, with my 15 followers, how big will the article have to be? And don't get me wrong, I loved the

1420:

I'm quite saddened by the page move. It was my hope to see it eventually go to AFD with all the articles in the list added sneakily to the AFD, so we could delete them all in one easy step. There is no way to express the tremendous pride I had in that title, my only contribution to this batch of

1160:

Yep, what Jasper said. Cygwin has its limitations but virtualization would/should allow the OSs to play nice in the sandbox with each other. I was so used to Debian-based systems that after finishing RedHat Academy a few years ago, I opted to stay Debian-based...usually Ubuntu but also Linux Mint,

9982:

That's certainly a step in the right direction, but it's only part of the solution. You can't ignore the bad elements; they won't go away because you ignore them or be nice to them. Being nice is going to change some ethnic warrior trying to carry out some 1000 year old vendetta. I will join your

9460:

I see the problem this way, there are many good editors who have a mature thoughtful approach to justice. I see little to no acknowledgment in policy that the 'justice' here is not perfect, and there is an appalling reliance on people investigating themselves. I feel and see that many of the best

8404:

oh, I should have thought to do that. I'm a bit out of it today. Our plant manager at the factory several hours south of here died of a sudden heart attack yesterday evening, never had heart issues before. Young guy, in his 30s, been with us for over a decade. I wasn't that close but knew him

7103:

You have displayed some appallingly bad judgement and to be honest as far as I can see from my perspective, its because of your presumption of bad faith on my part at the outset and you've never wavered in your faith in your snap judgement. Its been like a dialogue of the deaf, you've simply not

7085:

source. Its an uncontentious fact, acknowledged by all sides in the dispute and not really up for debate. Yet he repeatedly removes it, claiming its contentious solely because it is mentioned by the FCO ignoring all the others. He was removing content in bad faith and it was designed to detract

6173:

And let's be brutally frank. Your mate History displayed a significant degree of dishonesty in claiming repeatedly that adminship was no big deal, that he would continue whatever it is that he does regardless of the outcome of the RfA, and then retiring in a huff when it was unsuccessful; which I

6056:

I already told you I didn't personalize your remark, and you also went out of your way to say it wasn't meant for me specifically. That's just fine. But then, who were your remarks meant for? (I already asked that one. You deflected.) And what basis to make your remarks? (There's no indication in

5588:

diff] - so that has resolved this specific request although I would like some feedback from Dennis as regards whet I could have done to communicate better in this instance, here or via emailI - I have had similar previous issues with editors and good faith discussion has occurred between us and

3716:

Finally, don't log in with this IP again, please. Technically, this was a policy violation itself, but I understand that you didn't know that, so trying to help. If you want to be unblocked, you need to log in with the IBCKGB account, ask to be unblocked and convince another admin that you will

3571:

Short version: Judgement is worrisome. Uncommunicative at times, which makes determination very difficult from here, sometimes unresponsive. Seemingly young and a bit careless, often looking only at the surface and missing the nuances in other's actions, misinterprets because of this. Somewhat

3022:

Normally I would say no because I am currently training in two different areas, mentoring another editor and my plate is quite full. However, if you are patient, I will take the time and review and offer you any guidance I can. Keep in mind, I will be honest and blunt, much more so than in your

967:

I have a couple of comments for what they're worth (I participated in the brief discussion on YRC's Talk page). First, if YRC doesn't want you to post to his Talk page, you shouldn't. Second, if your objective is to make it "less visible", then you could always come to Dennis, as you've done now.

10488:

Kool-Aid, you have the standard faults including easy hypocrisy and lack of civility. Getting a stream of compliments to reinforce a princely self-concept can be deforming. I wanted to heat you up and bend you the other way a little. (I definitely heated you up!) Cheers, & good luck for all.

8245:, someone I've never worked with before, but a little research seems to indicate that he would be perfect for the job. He has said he will see what he can do to fix it up. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, as this is an article that should be worthwhile, particularly in an election year. 7769:

Not a problem. I have strong opinions on many things. I find it serves me better if I don't air them out all the time, because sometimes I might be right but airing them out undermines my arguments. Other times, I find that I was wrong, and it is better to be silent and thought a fool than to

6901:

Curry, calling his edits vandalism is simply wrong because they are in good faith and not designed to undermine the encyclopedia. Like it or not, if you continue to label edits that you think are wrong as vandalism, that can actually get you blocked, by any admin, as it is seen as incivil and a

6468:

No problem, I would rather give you some tips and help you actually KEEP the articles you create, than to go and redirect and tag them. If you find sources for the one I redirected, reverting back and adding the source is fine. Just make sure to use good quality sources, such as chart info and

6161:

exactly as Ihardlythinkso expresses it; you made a personal attack on all those who opposed History's RfA, and your continued obfuscation does you no credit. Neither does your ridiculous claim that your civility is universally held in high regard, unless your universe is a different one to mine.

5979:

Thank you for politely expressing your concerns. While I wasn't acting as an admin in this event, and only as a fellow editor, I will always try to take the time and explain when someone has a genuine concern. I'm universally considered a civil person, yet there are times when being polite but

906:

Firstly, thank you for explaining that so clear and precise; I understood every word you wrote in your response. It was a bit of a tricky one, and admittedly I should be more explanatory with my edit summaries, something that I shall take on board and implement in future. Of the 4 edits on the

10487:

I've enjoyed our little chats, I haven't found it a waste of time. But only for a time, since I find unpleasant the way you process information and argument, especially when it is about you. I am sure you are a great guy and neighbor. But as WP admin, I think you should lessen drinking your own

9610:

Occasionally when I'm bored, I snipe from the sidelines about these issues on admin notice boards. Snipping from the sidelines seems to be the nearest a content editor can get to having a voice. What I say there is routinely ignored or misrepresented by admins and admin wantabees. Other content

8534:

It has been a rough weekend on many fronts (see above), and I expect to soon but have been swamped with RFPP and SPI backlogs, plus requests on this page, which were urgent. The next day or two I expect to jump back in and reincorporate some ideas I have. I will check your discussion tomorrow

8204:

The topic is actually very worth an article on, but this isn't that article and the sourcing is certainly lacking. I need to make sure an existing article doesn't already exist, in which I would just send it to CSD#A10, but otherwise I may try to recruit a helper or two and clean it up. I can

7726:

What one man calls racist, another calls nationalistic, and another calls neutral. Unless a remark is clearly over the line, using an objective standard, then I ignore it, and allow for a difference of opinion. Personally, I find your threshold of tolerance to be entirely too low, and you are

7539:

Furthermore, the mediation, in the content discussion of which Mar4d ironically has refused to participate so far, is about whether a majority position needs to be written with attribution. In order not to touch that dispute, everything added by me to the article, has been fully attributed. The

6809:

I left a warning on his page, but I'm guessing you improperly tagged him for vandalism a couple times? Doesn't justify his personal attack, but if you did tag him improperly, that is considered an incivility as well. Doesn't justify, even if it might explain. And blocking or protecting pages

5091:

You might find this odd, but I actually go out of my way to seek advice from people whom I often disagree, but respect and are friendly with. This gives me a more balanced set of opinions than seeking only those that agree with me. I find that for improving myself, this is a better solution.

2101:. It isn't right for me to expect someone else to publicly correct themselves if I am not just as willing to do the same, so I have. I wouldn't be serving a very good example for someone I am mentoring, nor anyone else had I not. A little humble pie is good for the soul. Thank you friend. 1183:

That is pretty fancy. I wear many hats at the company (technically, I'm in marketing) so I don't get to tweak nearly as much as I would like to. I'm subpar at Linux on the desktop, but have been doing the backend stuff for forever. I remember the internet before the web was created. Gopher,

982:

I just saw that comment, as I went to the mentoring page, not YRC's talk page. To put it bluntly, Nomoskedasticity, you weren't leading by example on YRC's talk page. Feel free to bring any concerns directly to me, but Bbb23 is correct, and I would say that during mentoring, here is the right

201:

By all means, do what you feel is best. I'm quite easy, you are always welcome to take action and just tell me afterwards. Even after I've been here a while, you will find I'm easy about these things. I trust your judgement, more than my own in these cases. Right now, I'm probably a bit too

10414:

good people, even if a situation brings out the worst in them. You have equated this to "Anne Franks" naïveté, but I'm no fool. I simply try to make a positive difference and keep a positive perspective on life and people, which is a bit rare here perhaps, but not so rare in the real world.

10308:

I've left a message on Bwilkins talk page, which speaks for itself. Basically I'm trying to find out if there is more than meets the eye here. Blocked users are not restricted to only use their talk page for unblock requests, I'm not sure where that came from, as I don't see that anywhere in

9816:

Make no mistake about it, I'm passionate about many things, and don't let my (usually) calm demeanor mislead you about this. I try very hard to keep a cool, rational method of communication here because when people see a bias in your speaking, it has a way of pushing them into playing devil's

5954:

I respect your opinion and appreciate you taking the time to kindly word it, but I would have to stand by my original statements. No blowout was experienced, even if passion was involved. Perhaps my statements aren't being seen in the full context of my experiences with the editor, the well

5114:

I avoided this before because it seemed like a mentor discussion, but I should point out that I'm not going to avoid a topic, or avoid debating an issue about it, just because one editor with an extreme opposing position says to stay away from it based on my opinions of how Knowledge should do

2828:

Not the response I was expecting either, and I'm not sure how closely you've read things. Egg Centric's post was awful and he shouldn't have restored it, but he certainly didn't revert war. And YRC didn't say he objected to the hatting because there was more to discuss. He objected because Egg

1985:

I'm not sure watching me will be very educational. I'm constantly told that I'm different than other admins. Personally, I wear those comments like badges of honor. I do prefer common sense over policy, and it usually serves me well, but it does bite me from time to time. Also I'm under no

1584:

This may have the unintended consequence of being a good thing, sort of. I know that you had no intention of this Drmies, but if Dr. Blofeld has his way (and I support his way), then you will have the proud distinction of being the original creator of the only article on Knowledge that covers

9472:

When admins cannot, or are unwilling to trust each other to come to a similar decision based on the same set of circumstances, it is an admission that the circumstances involved do not speak for themselves. In the eyes of the blocked editor, who sees that someone else would consider the block

9391:

Just a comment since I saw this. Do you think the more important change for editor retention is going to be found in keeping editors from being blocked or by keeping editors who fade away? I see many editors who create an account for one purpose and leave when it is done or who never become

6084:

Let me get this straight: Is your "and that's the truth" supposed to mean that your statements about a group of editors (people), should now be interpreted as a statement about a "system" (i.e., a thing, process, not a person or people)? And so your comments about people, should "not be taken

4751:

It will be fine. The discussion should be closed by someone not involved, after allowing anyone to object who cares to. This is part of the normal process. My request to close wasn't really trying to get someone to hurry up and close, but to just let others know that the situation has been

10477:

You say I "attacked rationale for restoring rollback rights". No, I didn't. As explained at ANI where you made the same charge, what I did do was to ask you if you saw the huge double-standard or not: one whereby it is virtually automatically demanded of any blocked editor that they address

10475:"Find fault with your every action." Another exaggeration, Dennis. I've brought up *two* things. (How did two things, become "every thing"? Do you like to manufacture hyperbole, then turn it into a "spear of accusation" and then hurl it at me? Is this more AGF and civility coming from you?) 2070:

Point taken, friend. I try to not be dogmatic, even while I try to keep things orderly and in their proper place. I have seen many closes over the years that were consistent with my belief that one should never propose a merge directly in a nomination, and had just assumed this was correct.

6006:

Dennis, read your remarks (there were three) listed in this section, again. They are remarks about opposers in the RfA, not remarks about the "system" that is RfA. You essentially accused the group of opposers as having a fear of honesty, that explains their rejection of the nom. (And other

4892:

As for NLT itself, it's one of WP's wonderful policies where it never clearly defines what a legal threat is. Instead, it defines what it isn't and expects the reader to figure out the rest. That said, I think your comment, YRC, might fall under the section called "Perceived legal threats".

3408:

Well, we can but hope he/she will respond, but I'm not optimistic. The multiple daily fiddly edits are annoying, but the repetitive removal of good content is just unacceptable, as is her blanket refusal to engage in any consensus building. We seem to have a cadre of IP editors whose sole

879:

It is a Catch 22. I don't have to wait for the 4th revert to block someone, I can revert on the 2nd if I feel it is disruptive enough, although I will likely have to explain to my peers and be subject to their interpretation. The 4th is just the "line in the sand" to which all admins will

1313: 9255:... and now apparently I'm deluded as well. Evn tought you endorse this "ugliness", I do not have to put up with it. No need to bother to check over my edits, just cancel my account. There's a list of topics I was planning to address on my user page, someone else can do that now. 757:

work without all the drama, then I can just edit and it is actually fun. That is what I'm doing right now, making redirects, adding some sources, etc. I try to limit my "drama" to no more than 30% of my daily intake at Knowledge :) There is much to do and make a difference at here.

3271:

you were his "first contact" here at WP (and you have such a diplomatic style). I'm out the door, (and I need to get some notes ready for a conference call in the morning) but I'll try to offer him some advice when I'm back online if you don't get there first. Maybe point him to the

1898:

why AFD would be an exception, as it should instead be at the top of the list. In this case in particular, since one author clearly created the article, it should be obvious. I'm not one to easily accept that "we've always done it like that", as I'm far to independent for that.

10142:. Incidentally, if more than the given percentage didn't understand my passage wherever it was on martyrdom, I'll point out, that just because I think the chef is a moron who cannot cook a meal to save his life, and all the waiters back the chef's view that he can, doesn't mean I 6027:

and independence, which is a totally irresponsible opinion to form (unless you know the voters all personally, that they are hiding their feelings behind their texts), and your remarks voicing your opinion about the opposers and their reasons for voting, equally irresponsible.

5659:

Thank you Dennis and to you Gerda for the advice and investigation of the issue - I wanted to just remove it myself but held back as I am editing under a voluntary one revert condition, this is helping me a lot and I will be continuing it for the foreseeable - Best regards -

4821:

It doesn't matter that I'm am admin, my voice is no greater than yours in the matter. I supported a merge because I felt they were redundant. I would suggest just discussing it on the talk page, it is active there, but everyone seems pretty reasonable in the conversation.

6065:; you were commenting on people/editors/the collection of opposers. If your words did not reflect your real message, then who is accountable other than you, to correct them? Saying "I stand by my statements" is hardly correcting them, so I infer, no correction is intended.) 3658:, including stuff about your client, and be respectful of the system here, then I will show you some links worth reading, below. If this is too much work, then your stay won't be pleasant and it wont' be long until the entire IP bank is range blocked for policy violations. 3653:

Anything that looks like spam in any way is generally deleted or reverted instantly, be it a website or editor. If you are simply wanting to add this info and insure it stays here, you are wasting your time and mine. If you want to actually learn how to add material here

3572:

binary thinking. Not malicious in the least, but can be accidentally disruptive (BITEy via templates, etc.) even when he means well. Possibly CIR concerns, and has struggled enough that a couple of us have been keeping an eye out since day one. Borderline in many ways.

9637:, where every significant part of the Empire has seceded but the Emperor refuses to recognise this and continues issuing edicts to people who no longer even realise he's still alive. If Jimmy Wales really wants the noble title it's occasionally suggested he's angling for ( 9803:

your comments were more civil than my transgression. Your words could be taken in a couple of different ways, but no one is that upset. After all, most took them in good faith and replied with on topic questions rather than dwell on the wording. I wouldn't dwell on it.

4266:

No problem, and it is a good idea. I think a mention of his full name might be discussed as well, rather than a day, we may take some time longer, there is the article to do, and that is going to turn up a great many interesting things to consider. The man was a genius.

1255:

Just doing what I thought was right. I hope it helps as well. I looked a little at the other editors, who haven't edited in a while, and couldn't see anything that require immediate action at any. If another admin looks and concludes differently, that will be fine.

5909:", 3 people will start saying how clueless you are because sometimes it has clouds, so it is blue and white. Two more will call you culturally biased because they live in Western Europe and the sky is often grey. 1 will argue that that if you go up high enough in an 10348:

slack rope you give them. This is nothing to do with attitude or personal philosophy orientation towards life, Dennis, rather simple observation. George Carlin was smarter than any of us and said he saw the glass as neither half empty nor half full but as: "too big".

9583:

thoughtful contribution to the debate from Sandstein – in the unlikely event that Sandstein were ever elected to Arbcom, the job of Knowledge's admins would become considerably easier given that a substantial portion of the editor base would leave Knowledge there and

3699:- Anything you write here, you give Knowledge and the whole world an irrevocable license to use pretty any way they want, only giving credit back to you. This is why we can't use text that is already copyrighted except in limited circumstances. It must be original. 7640:

if you haven't already figured that out. There is a reason we have the venues for content resolution, and this is it. I don't care what is in the article, as long as it is a consensus and within policy. To be clear, we are done on my talk page for now, go there.

2075:

does say this is discouraged, but you are correct that it is not an absolute bar, and perhaps there are times when it does make sense. I will redouble my efforts to speak less in absolutes, and perhaps think a bit less in absolutes as well. I stand corrected.

10007:

edit without being a warrior, then they need to be blocked because they are interfering with quality editors that CAN edit in a collegiate manner. The idea of the project is that we can discuss all these different problems and solutions, in one neutral area.

6418:

for a general overview. The sources should be about that particular topic, not just the band themselves. When stand alone notability can't be demonstrated, usually the best result is to redirect to the band, or a subsection of the band that covers that EP.

4781:

That probably won't be possible. That photo really isn't about the airport. To qualify as Fair Use, the photo must be substantially covering the subject matter, and this photo isn't. If you found a photo of the airport itself, then you might have a case.

427:

Hearing you say that is truly heartwarming! I hope that I am able to live up to your words every day. When I don't, do me the favor of kindly letting me know that as well. I am human, and I do err. You just brightened up my day considerably, thank you!

2261:

coffee maker here, they only have three models, I had to order my single cup unit (a different one I keep at work that makes just regular coffee as I can't handle instant for too long) from the US. I ordered two in case the first one crapped out on me :) --

312:

No problem, you and I agree on this. I'm not quite sure how to "fix" this problem, but I know that ANI isn't going to be the answer. I'm working on ideas even now, but have no solution yet. And thank you for your compliment, it means a great deal to me.

9096:, it really wasn't intended as a swipe at you. Like you said, I don't think we've really crossed paths, but the vague impression I have of your work is very positive. I certainly don't have any reason to think you'd edit-war over the courtesy-blanking. I 6228:". Let me remind you how different the rules are for administrators and the peasantry. My recent Arbcom case stemmed from a comment I made about some administrators being cunts. That wasn't directed towards any individual either, but it got me lynched. 2184:

Oh yes, I keep forgetting, when people attack me with utterly bullshit allegations, cast aspersions on my mental health, make truly bizarre comments about the times at which I edit (I'm a chef, we have odd hours) and so on, I'm supposed to be nice and

9935:, which was TFA yesterday, is a shining example of wiki being what it should be--editors coming together to make an article the best it can be, not what it too often is. Cracks in the old way are starting to show, but there's a long long way to go. 8131:

I see this but the problem is the civility issue.If the suspected sock doesn't add any material that need to be reverted right away(vandalism or blp or extreme pov push)why not wait day or two so he could be blocked if he is really a sock and then

6644:

and followed the instructions. However, the original article is semi-protected, and the move option isn't available for non-admins. Would you be able to do the move for me, and I'll finish off the cleaning up steps as part of the move. Thanks.

9064:

Maybe a little, but since I was the one that unblanked the page, it seemed directed at me. So did the discussion above by another admin, who pointed me out by name. In this case, MastCell didn't need to threaten to protect the page, which to me

5589:

they have all accepted my request to use my new username - I was surprised in this case when I opened a discussion in a polite manner on the users talk page when they failed to discuss at all and just deleted it without even an edit summary . =

4902:

And so now, Dennis, we have to add the "L" word to the list of no-nos in the English language? It's gonna be particularly tough on lawyers, of which there are many at WP. "Your Honor, my client's conduct was perfectly L." Heh. End of long-winded

9931:

that doesn't agree with them is an idiot, blocking productive editors, good editors leaving because the bad ones abuse them and are more determined to stick it out til they get what they want, etc. and you have what we have. What happened with

4879:

it isn't), and generally hard to understand - and, here, YRC, you referred to the entire document without pinpointing a particular section and (b) be somewhat intimdated by the reference. Therefore, regardless of whether the statement violates

5040:

If I were an admin, I would absolutely not block you for the "threat". My argument that it constitutes a threat would not be persuasive to many other editors, and even I acknowledge it isn't clear. To block you in such circumstances would be

9145:

PS - There's another Ip who added, in what would seem to be good faith edits, some detail about a Lionel Richie look-alike. This wouldn't seem to be vandalism either would it, as this other IP added what he thought was a relevant detail?

5563:(watching, because of the request above) It reveals more about the other one than about you, I would not argue, perhaps just respond with something like "you probably meant me, using my old name", or something more witty, - putting things 10130:

the law of the universe, and believing that change can only happen given xyz conditions doesn't need to apply. I will happily help with change on all fronts, because it's the law. So while I am here, I'll work with Ihardlythinkso on the

6444:"copied from xyz article", so it can be traced back to the original authors. That is part of the Creative Commons licensing. Keep in mind, a redirect isn't a death sentence, it is just a place holder until you can properly source it. 4940:

Unlike you, Dennis, I've never been mistaken about anything. Well, there was that time in 1854, but it doesn't really count as I wasn't born yet. Besides, if you really examine the transcript of the trial, I was probably more right than

5436:

You need to discuss this with your mentor. As I stated in the WP:AN discussion, I am leaving all decision making in their hands, on their time table. For me to grant anything wouldn't be fair, and would sound like I don't trust him.

1064:, but an honest mistake. I would also note that YRC has made a tremendous amount of improvement, and has taken the whole mentoring quite serious. It wasn't forced upon him it was suggested and he chose it. We just aren't done yet. 5754:

If you two don't mind, I'll also take a look at the essay. I would love to see Knowledge engage the COI editors rather than ban them all. It would certainly improve our coverage of small notable organizations which is currently very

7402:

Thanks for the pointer - I've commented. Believe it or not, that's my first time at such a page, and it's mightily confusing. I've put it on my watchlist - maybe some of the confusion will dissipate if I stare at it long enough. :-)

1059:

That is good. And again, I have no issue with anyone bringing a concern here. In fact, I encourage it. Better to just let me know and let me deal with it. If you don't like how I deal with it, chew me out. I'm convinced it was a

3293:

I've tried talking to him before, but with no luck unless he asks one question, gets one answer. Maybe having his head bit off a bit will do him good, to see the consequences of his actions. We've tried so many other approaches.

7361:

Sorry to butt in, and I'll let Dennis deal with the specific problem, but we really need to do something about Twinkle and the fact that anyone can use it, even someone who hasn't even been granted rollback rights. It makes zero

9821:

which I'm working on, addressing another problem. I posted notices on prominent pages of editors whom I trust, and watching it grow. It isn't exactly going in the direction I intended, but it is interesting to watch it grow.

9269:

I only endorsed checking the account, not his statements, due to technical reasons. Accounts can't be cancelled, but you can black both your user and talk page and put only this tag: {{retired}} on each if you wish to leave.

9112:

just assumed the blanking was only due to the RTV, as that is standard procedure. The big deal was relinking the account anyway, both for convenience and because he has violated the terms, and a pledge should mean something.

7487:

where it has been said in clear words "Participants have agreed to avoid disputes outside of these pages". An editor above comes to an article I created on a terrorist incident and adds a whopping 10,000 bytes of single-agenda

5398:

No problem, that is why we have procedures there to fix it. People do it all the time, it is an easy mistake to make, and usually people are more focused on the problem, not the paperwork. That is why they call us "clerks".

5980:

blunt is a better option. My comments shouldn't be taken so personally by anyone, as they were a statement on the system rather than any one person. While this might not be the answer you were looking for, it is the truth.

6350:

It's not-quite-but-nearly two months since you got handed a mop - having glanced over your edits at ANI this morning I just wanted to say that I think you're doing an excellent job; clearly your adminship was well-deserved.

6249:. Anyone is welcome to comment there. As flawed as I am, character means a lot to me, which is why I will always apologize in as public a manner as the mistake was made, and do try to keep my word when humanly possible. 7919:

Well, it was reverted, and BWilkins is trying to work with them on this, so I'm kind of in limbo as it isn't good to step on another toes in a delicate situation. I would agree that having it on that page is not optimal.

4406:

I see a number of admins and known reliable BLP familiar editors are on the talk page for the article, so I will leave it in their capable hands. If I see more legal sounding threats, I will warn the user, and may still.

1036:

YRC has corrected his comment at BLPN and acknowledged the error on his Talk page, which is good enough for me. As for "those who actually know something", All Hallow's Wraith is accusing me at BLPN of not knowing anything

6945:

for 1 week by another admin. If he's not given the chance to reach a consensus with Wee (or at least have a civil discussion) he'll just come back after that week equally upset and revert Wee's edit back. Just my 2 cents.

6702:

Not to worry. I thought that one was simple, and hadn't noticed the semi-protect at the time. I have made a note on the closure that an admin will come along in due course to complete the move due to the semi in place.

3102:

I didn't want to say too much, as I'm technically too involved and you are not, and you seem to have it under control. Just wanted to let you know I was aware. Pretty odd to copy all that text, what an odd axe to grind.

3175:

By all means, you don't need my permission, whatever makes the article better. I reverted because there was a question about them and I had blocked the sock. If I misjudged the content, you do me a favor by fixing it.

7377: 6125:

Then we will just have to disagree on the issue of civility. I have strong feelings about the current state of affairs at RfA, and you take exception with how I express them. Sometimes good people just disagree.

3375: 5583:

Thank you for commenting Gerda and yes, perspective is a good thing to remember as per your posts in regards to the above issue - The user has now remover my previous username and replaced it with my current one ,

7586:

The additional fully attributed text added by me is completely relevant per established scholar William Maley see talk for citation. Mar4d may not agree with it, but we go by reliable sources not by Mar4d's pov.

2700:

You created a violating discussion thread - Your thread had already been hatted and objected to - easy peasy - "archive" was your opportunity to quietly let it go, but you revert warred it back to the talkpage

10362:

Perhaps I'm not as simple minded as I seem. You speak of using only force, but you are a single person. What force do you have? By yourself, no more than I. So you and I can sit here and just complain, or

4809: 8386:, figuring that what I did was more ministerial than substantive. I said the result was "keep", even though that isn't what you wrote. Feel free to change that if you think I was wrong to label it that way.-- 5137:

That is between you two. He asked me to offer an opinion, I did, that both of you probably need to worry about content and less about legal issues. If there is a concern about a BLP, I suggest taking it to

9959:

would be one idea. So I started it. So let us all put our money where our mouth is, join, actually participate, and develop a real strategy for dealing with the many reasons for editor retention issues.

6996:

I see the IP had replied on TC's page, and that you have deleted my post on your talk page. Hopefully, you read it first, because that is the definition of vandalism that will be used in any dispute here.

2777:

You see, thats not what its all about, there is no winning and losing in this vague Wiki world, - its more about getting over hurdles as this when as contributing volunteers we all want the same options -

1460:

would be proud. It is a shame that we can't create articles that automatically expire and delete themselves. In the larger scheme of things, these article have a shelf life only slightly longer than milk.

10415:

Sometimes this means compromise and being pragmatic about things. It would seem that you and I just have a very different view on people and life in general, so I doubt I will ever meet your standards.

5057:

Hm, anyway in my position its clearly better when they say, "I didn't add it" that I avoid telling them that they did and their responsibilities in regards to that - thanks for the feedback - regards -

3721:, fine, but you aren't special, so you follow the same rules that I follow. Oh, and one of the rules is one PERSON per account. We do not allow company or shared accounts. You can read about that at 4228:

Per me is cool. thanks, at the moment, that is all we are after, although, now you mention it, would you add a redlink to his article, per above, that is all that is needed in the foreseeable future.

9392:

involved in the Knowledge community and one day stop editing. Generally, we block editors who would otherwise keep editing, so that may be more important, but there's also the issue of editors like

7100:

good faith editors who reverted this IP editor in recent days also don't recognise vandalism when they see it is stretching things too far. This was vandalism and it was trolling, plain and simple.

7081:

source was a poll commissioned by an Argentine newspaper. The same material is sourced to a number of secondary sources such as newspapers and magazines. Its also mentioned on the FCO website as a

8147:

discussion with all of us later in the day. This is a common concern with many users that do the same thing, call many people socks that may or may not be, in good faith, but sometimes in excess.

4786:

is probably the best person on Knowledge for determining what is and isn't proper for Fair Use as she works with Copyright all the time. She is always a good person to get a second opinion from.

5716:

as well. Some things will get added, removed, added back, removed again, then finally added finally, so any removal doesn't always mean "no" as much as "I'm not sure that is needed, but maybe".

4244:

I would say give it a day, come up with anything you think is appropriate after talking with others on your page, then make one change. Since it will be a redlink for now, another day won't hurt.

2378:

I put that in my training log for review from the warden, to demonstrate how I've reformed and can hopefully soon enter CSD society, as I'm now saving Knowledge from button happy deletionists ;)

9598:

That was indeed the observation I was referring to, but I see that I was a little premature in attributing it to an ArbCom member, as Sandstein won't be one until the next elections roll around.

6810:

solely because of a content dispute isn't going to happen, as that would be favoring one side over the others. Sometimes, there isn't a good answer, so you pick the least ugly one and work it.

276:

Since I started editing actively again I have seen you appear several times. Very few editors know when the best action is not to take action. I believe you are excellent at recognizing that.

9229:

I have endorsed the CU process, so we should wait and see what comes of it for now. SPI's do get ugly sometimes, something I don't particularly like, but sometimes this ugliness bears fruit.

7484: 702:

Normally, you want to stay in process and do them individually for these requests if it isn't urgent. You can mention that I added 3 months, but any admin is free to use their own judgement.

8356:

Not a problem, I'm just in high demand today, and I've some personal issues I'm having to deal with, so not as available as I would like, but still don't want to ignore people who need help.

8994:

sorry about that, I missed your message or I would have been happy to help. During the day here, around 1200UTC to 1700UTC, I'm at work so it is hit and miss, so I sometimes miss comments.

7420:

and others can agree or disagree. It doesn't change policy, but it gives ideas on what direction policy may need to move at the Pump. I don't participate in those events very often either.

5347:

I was mainly pointing out the funny business about older as I thought I had followed the directions properly and I couldn't figure out why you changed it and I still can't but suit yourself.

7124:

My consideration to not block was only for the Falklands article, which was brought to me here on my talk page, not at ANI (which I didn't see until much later). This one article was the

6414:

Actually, you do need to source the individual article or it is likely to be at AFD to be deleted. All articles on Knowledge must be sourced, and demonstrate stand alone notability. See

5013:

removed it and was trying to stop him replacing it - the discussion was only about the I didn't add it /responsibility point and the user was fine about it. To be honest I am bemused that

4440:

I'm at work, so a bit in and out, thus I would recommend an SPI so that others can look at it. If I have time, I would participate, but duty calls when you are on someone else's clock.

3148:

Thank you, Dennis Brown, for !voting at my successful RFA; I am humbled that you put your trust in me. I grant you this flower, which, if tended to properly, will grow to be the fruit of

1388:

How did you know? I'm sad K-stick moved the article--the longer title did a great job of indicating what's happening here: nothing masquerading as something. Welcome to the future of WP.

9831:

vision, but hopefully in small but fruitful ways. I'm stretched a bit thin right now, but would try to help as best I could if you wanted to start a similar essay project of your own.

8227:

Thanks for looking into it, Dennis, and I hope you get a helper to fix it up nice and proper. It would be quite a worthwhile little "pig" with accurate numbers and reliable sourcing.

7380:. As to this specific issue, I've left a msg asking why for now, if he keeps doing it where it doesn't apply, it is a blockable issue, although I try to use that as a last resort only. 6085:

personally" even though they were written as applying to people, and not to a "thing"? (Well, if I got that right now, cheerio to me, because, it is really ... a stretch, and a dodge.)

3676:

These are linkes, policies and rules reviewed and agreed on by many thousands of editors here, not just a few people, and have stood the test of time (Knowledge isn't new, by the way.)

7519:

Mediation is not a reason to keep blatant source falsifications as they are damaging to the wikipedia project. Mar4d has misused the twinkle feature to restore source falsifications.

1868:

I think you might let someone else a bit more neutral consider filing. I was hoping that Drmies or DGG might decide the next step, or at least play a part. No need to do it today.

9348: 7755:

Fair enough. Perhaps you're right, and my threshold is too low, but I cannot help my own opinions and feelings on the matter. Thanks for the explanation and straight-forward answer.

7128:

consideration in my decision to issue a warning and not block. I've gone ahead and blocked him for one week, which was TC's initial term for a different reason, for edit warring on

8918:

That looked good, and will be obvious from the history. We all have bad moments, and I always have tremendous respect for people who are willing to correct a mistake in this way.

8174: 6960:

I had chosen to not block, and another admin has decided to override my decision without notifying me, so it will have to be reviewed. I've left a note on the other admin's page.

4955:

Then I'm grateful that I wasn't born with the burdens of perfection. Perhaps this is why I am more tolerant and forgiving of other's shortcomings, as I have plenty of my own. ;-)

1010:. The best solution for all concerned would be (as suggested not just by me but by quite a few others) for him to leave editing in this area to those who actually know something. 5077:

You're welcome, and I hope my feedback was constructive (Dennis's always is), even if you didn't agree with everything I said. It certainly wasn't my intent to pick on you. Best.--

2538:

Indeed. Nor do we issue cool-down blocks, except when we do, nor do we protect the right version of an article, except when we do. You'll get the hang of it soon enough...! See

7807:

My brain farted. Should have been "ready to hand to editor" or similar I suppose. Didn't even think about that until you said something :) Just glad it ended without a block.

1522:

I can't believe it took me over an hour to pick up on the Warhol joke (and I am just seeing the link now, I had thought you had linked to the page). Too long a day, and too much

231:

Thanks for the kind words. I didn't take any opposes personally, I'm not so easy a person to pin down at a glance. And I appreciate the offer, I will likely take you up on it.

6803: 3870:

with that source. We can maybe add an article later. I might need to check that out this weekend, that is only 30-40 minutes from the house, depends on the wife's schedule.

6094:

No more to add from me. If you really value honesty and straightforwardness, as you seem to proclaim to, they why should discussing anything with you, be such a guessing game?

2098:

I slept on your words, and thought about it this morning a great deal, and concluded my comments above were correct but were insufficient. I have rectified the situation here

520:

No problem. You are always welcome to come here and ask, I will always gladly explain any action I make. I appreciate you bringing HERE first, as to reduce any drama there.

8205:

imagine that tons of sources exist. But I appreciate the challenge you gave me here, I bet we can put some lipstick on this pig and dress her up nice with a little effort.

9818: 9412:

to spend their time here? (This isn't to say that there aren't editors like you, Penlyap, and I who want to spend their time here, but how do we make new editors want to?)

9566:

didn't know any better after having been warned umpteen times? Blocked now at last, yes, but at what cost to the editors who had to put up with that shit for far too long?

6312: 10473:(Did you think I wasn't? It seems you're implying I didn't. On what basis? I've never thought that nor even suggested so. Do you practice the AGF that you often preach?) 6510:

Full Protection 7 days, warning on user's page for not using article talk and calling good faith edits vandalism, strong warning on article talk page to all parties.

1990:

links, and instead just find the right solution that works and is fair to everyone. I find the average editor respects this, even if some of the old blood doesn't.

8175: 7963:

This is only a suggestion, but I think it might be decent practice to not repeat language that you find offensive from others. Better gone and forgotten, I think. -

7756: 7764: 3648:

get you blocked from editing. Knowledge is a community supported, corroborative project, designed to build a free and open encyclopedia. It isn't a phone book ad.

9784:

indef ban. There is always thewik.net, wikialpha, or any number of Carpathias where people wind back the clock to the better days, and carefully avoid this idiocy.

8338:

Oops, you did it anyway, thanks! And if I had noticed your comment in the section just above this one, I would never have even posted this request. My apologies.--

7607:

embassy attack, the Sharia law sentences are again quoted out of context. Don't get me started on the rest. This discussion is concluded as far as I am concerned.

7090:

aggressive edits, a refusal to go to talk, repeated misuse of admin boards and frivolous RFC. He also has a history of making offensive remarks to other editors.

7037: 2602:

revert warred it back into the talkpage (other users had objected to the discussion also) and then the reverter and TPG violator deleted the whole discussion and

6304: 733: 9181:

Thanks for clearing this up for me. The idea of "erring on the conservative side" makes perfect sense, as does the advice of getting the help of other editors.

6609:

which i=gives instructions, which is a bonus help, and it does mention about non-admin closures. I'll see what I can do, and try to help reduce the back-log.

6317: 3445:

I understand; I wasn't nagging, just commenting, and as you say, we do have to give the final warning a chance. I'll keep an eye on things in the meantime. --

9287: 9264: 9246: 8989: 7787: 7748: 6847: 3481: 867: 643:

Ah. It was their discouragement that concerned me. Likely nothing, but to be honest it seemed a better use of my time than anything else happening at ANI.

9798:

Well, that is a bit of a line in the sand, at least how I read it, but I don't take it quite as serious as others might. You and I use different version of

9650: 9605: 9593: 7113: 7060: 7014: 6928: 6892: 6827: 4137: 3780: 3067:

I had not gotten to it yet is all. As I said, you must be patient. I have been quite busy and forced to deal with some things here and in the real world.

2347:

I pulled tags and prod'ed, will AFD if needed. I'm in CSD Jedi training because I was declared a menace to society in my RfA. I must do what I must do K.

2126: 9711: 9573: 9556: 9533: 6297: 6266: 6235: 6204: 6181: 6168: 5960:

RfA is a rediculously demeaning guantlet, one which I've been active in trying to change for some time. I discussed some of my concern with one opposer at

5222:

would choose to be the objective admin in this case. I will say that comparing it to another article is generally ignored as a rationale at Knowledge, via

2056: 1019: 960: 359: 10544: 9321:

I appreciate that. As with Ansatz, the discussions at SPI are a bit tricky. In this case they made a fatal error ... But again, many thanks for your help.

9011: 8935: 8913: 8885: 6075:

What I do know, is what you wrote; and I quoted that. And now what I do know, is that you "stand by statements", without either modification, or apology.)

4479: 3818: 3559: 3523: 3505: 10497: 10432: 10399: 10384: 10357: 10120: 9620: 7974:

I don't find the word offensive, I find the comparison between what he went through and what a rape victim goes through as equivalent, to be offensive. --

6143: 6112: 5997: 5835: 4367: 602: 10294:

happens because we are human beings and because once we gain authority, we tend to take it personally at times if people don't respect our authority. --

6877: 5454: 5308: 4803: 4769: 4561: 4523: 4501: 4457: 4027: 4005: 3983: 3961: 3939: 3913: 3887: 3705:

Neutral Point of View. As an encyclopedia, we document facts that are covered by reliable sources. We are not here to extol the virtues of your client.

2874:

I've seen stuff flying around here, but still lost as to what this actually means. I've seen a dozen people here that were supposed to be this person.

2539: 1535:

I like obscurity, it's my specialty. I made a slight change to Drmies article, to keep it from getting dated. And left Drmies a "barnstar". Sort of.

1139: 128: 10207: 10184: 9848: 9512: 8968: 8855: 8796: 8741: 8693: 8671: 8653: 8639: 8618:

I went and read the entire article. Very good, worthy of FA. And now I'm very flattered that you gave me one a while back! (It is safely stored in my

8613: 8596: 8574: 8122: 7937: 7874: 6725: 6693: 6667: 6631: 6596: 5674: 5650: 5628: 5603: 5576: 5483: 5269: 5115:

things. He keeps saying over and over that he's given me this command as if that means something. And it's wrong to say that I "accused of violating

5035: 5007: 4869: 4694: 4378: 4300: 4261: 4223: 4201: 4179: 3896:

If you go, take a camera. Good chance for photos but you will need lots of napkins to keep your hands and face clean. I'll add the festival to the list.

3120: 2913: 2821: 2418: 2364: 2118: 1711: 1178: 929: 897: 5931: 4664: 4424: 4401: 4110: 3084: 3051: 3040: 2999: 2969: 2947: 2891: 2792: 2772: 2739: 2715: 2688: 2664: 2578: 2550: 2533: 2476: 1383: 1350: 1273: 1235: 1213: 1201: 1155: 737: 729: 719: 10560: 10024: 10001: 9977: 9871: 9455: 9432: 7281: 7250: 7232: 7096:. I've repeatedly asked you look at his contribution history and can only conclude you never did as his disruptive behaviour is immediately apparent. 6795: 6771: 5797: 5281: 4070: 3361: 3339: 3311: 3288: 3261: 3235: 3062: 2627:

Since it's been brought up, it would also be nice if you could check if his definition and/or diagnosis of a "revert war" makes any sense whatsoever.

2462: 2452: 2395: 2373: 2342: 2309: 2296: 2265: 2044: 1650: 1565: 1552: 1530: 1517: 1495: 1478: 1452: 631: 330: 219: 150: 9923: 9895: 9211: 9189: 9176: 9087: 9039: 8762: 8659: 7242: 6274: 5545: 5525: 5503: 4839: 4738: 3193: 2504: 1852: 1826: 1808: 1781: 1445: 1050: 977: 834: 690: 445: 9129: 9106: 8552: 8276: 8262: 8236: 8222: 8199: 7958: 7910: 7510: 7371: 7149: 6563: 5749: 5733: 5206: 2007: 1980: 1949: 1920: 803: 537: 515: 497: 475: 9949: 9330: 9316: 8601: 7714: 6486: 6436: 4710: 4641: 4619: 4599: 4104: 3454: 3440: 3418: 3399: 2856: 2833: 2620: 1885: 1415: 1397: 774: 660: 547: 415: 10049:

I've joined the project, I hope that doesn't completely poison the well, feel free to delete my comment or edit, whatever. I'll reply here later.

9154: 8825: 8164: 8141: 7801: 7167: 6977: 6955: 5775: 5703: 5585: 4339: 3615: 3593: 2645: 2099: 1602: 1438: 186: 10539: 10326: 10303: 10272: 8441: 8422: 8395: 8373: 8329: 8311: 8049: 8026: 7437: 7412: 7397: 6527: 6402: 5109: 5086: 5072: 5050: 4972: 4950: 4935: 4912: 1099: 1081: 1000: 572: 8522: 8490: 7852: 7835: 7824: 5416: 5393: 5379: 5356: 5338: 2209: 2179: 1579: 248: 5159: 5132: 3919: 3748: 2093: 1403: 7493: 7201: 8005:

Ah, I see your point, I will take a look. I get very cautious with BLPs, and see so much debate on them at ANI, I try to avoid them there.

7840:

I just try to be the admin that doesn't actually get hit by his own boomerang. Gotta remember to not throw it to them, and just hand it....

6540: 6534: 4810: 2315: 555:

Ah, well, it would appear I have a cranial-rectal inversion issue going on here. I fixed it. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

141:. For a while, people who blocked these socks were making an effort to keep Dori Smith's list updated. Sadly it has not continued past 2010. 7980: 7969: 3631: 3096: 1325: 873: 8347: 7622: 7596: 7576: 7551: 7528: 7470: 6942: 6461: 5881: 3787: 3218:

It will have to wait a bit, and I was actually trying to earlier today, but I keep getting called to other tasks. I will look in a bit.

9580: 9139: 2251: 8951:

My mistake, still not used to all the new buttons and boxes over at SPI. I've corrected it. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

5949:"... most that opposed you, are indeed wonderful people that are just not used to seeing common sense being used as a blunt instrument." 3988:

I've watchlisted it and will see what I can do later. I've got to get some things done before the afternoon slips by. Enjoy the ribfest!

2152: 5183: 1745: 4053:

be happening there now. I took it to AN rather than ANI, as it tends to slightly slower and more thoughtful, with a bit less drama.

3542:

syndrome, where no one wants to jump in in the times when it is needed. ANI is the last resort, not the first. You should know this.

9826:, something I quote a lot, applies here, and I find it is easier to get consensus and others on board when I start an idea, invite a 8831: 8802: 8096: 8066: 10092: 8622:) Thanks again, and for the link as well. I needed to just stop and read a really interesting article, and that one certainly is. 7700: 7093:

As to your comments you missed the evidence of other disruptive behaviour, please note that I drew this to your attention yesterday

3161: 298: 9752: 9382: 6364: 3244:

on the edit as a potential BLP issue, and just acted on it. Improperly. Not sure what to do. Can't block him for just that. :/

3209: 548: 389: 7829:

lol Oh I dunno, I kinda like the image of: "There he is, admin at the ready, trusty mop in one hand, boomerang in the other..." -

7094: 6057:*any* oppose as to the fear you label.) But I am in a group of editors, to which your remarks were directed or applied. (You were 7258: 7175: 2721:

you insisting on discussion on what is now four separate talk pages - trying to get me to admit... what? that I made an edit?

451: 342:

I was noticing a few problems at AFD related to this. The RFC/U of Agent00f is still ongoing with no action, which is related.

8061: 7952:. Will wait and see what happens, but I do find the rape references somewhat...tasteless, as a comparison to a 24 hour block. -- 3423:

I'm a bit tied at the moment, at my day job, so a bit hard to examine as close as I would like. Will look at it later though.

9956: 8718: 6308: 4699:

More seriously, would you mind revoking talk page access? That PA been put back post-block. I revoked it, but self-reverted.

3867: 3565: 786:

And thank you for the kindness! I actually enjoy helping people here, and it is nice to be appreciated once in a while, too.

5686:

Looks like more socks were started. I went ahead and protected a month, which should discourage the creation of more socks.

5586:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Knowledge:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=497678902&oldid=497678244

5243: 8907: 7944:

I wouldn't have thought of hatting it (for all the good it did anyway), I guess that's why you get the big bucks around here

7657: 2929:

Anyhoo thought you might be amused with that little "clipping", I've notified everyone else involved with this discussion...

1218:

I do need to read up on it. There isn't a use for it at my work, but for my own uses it could be interesting here at home.

9345: 7727:

entirely too quick to use the word "racist" in how you describe everyone who doesn't instantly agree with you. Please read

7691:

For making the tough call on the FishingKing sockpuppet case. I hope he grows up a bit, then comes back with more control.

7023:

Dennis, please stay off my talk page, you're continuing to demonstrate extremely poor judgement. I know what vandalism is,

3711:

Conflict of interest. If you can't cope with your conflict and write in a neutral manner, then you don't edit at Knowledge.

7604: 7352: 3637: 380:

A hard-working Wikipedian such as yourself deserves to relax with a cup of tea! Thank you for your valuable contributions.

9438:

worthy goal, but many have no interest in the community, they just want to add a couple of articles on things they like.

8071: 7665:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

7459: 7319: 9642: 9585: 9405: 8861: 6839: 5937: 4318: 3014: 1090:

Being his mentor, you would know far better than I, but from the little I've actually seen, he has definitely improved.--

138: 8644:

Love to hear that! (I knew why I used it.) Tell the author also, or - perhaps even better - support the nomination ;) --

5863: 1932:, but previous discussions seem to indicate that AFD is not an approved interaction for ibaned users, per my thoughts. 10534: 10427: 10379: 10321: 10267: 10202: 10179: 10115: 10019: 9972: 9918: 9843: 9747: 9706: 9551: 9507: 9450: 9408:

respectively) and have discontinued editing since. Do you have any idea how we can create an environment where people

9377: 9311: 9282: 9241: 9206: 9171: 9124: 9082: 9006: 8963: 8930: 8880: 8850: 8820: 8791: 8736: 8688: 8634: 8591: 8547: 8517: 8485: 8417: 8368: 8306: 8257: 8217: 8194: 8159: 8117: 8091: 8044: 8021: 7932: 7905: 7819: 7782: 7743: 7652: 7432: 7392: 7347: 7276: 7227: 7144: 7055: 7009: 6972: 6923: 6872: 6822: 6766: 6711: 6688: 6653: 6617: 6591: 6558: 6522: 6481: 6456: 6431: 6397: 6292: 6261: 6199: 6138: 5992: 5926: 5830: 5792: 5728: 5698: 5623: 5520: 5478: 5449: 5411: 5374: 5333: 5303: 5238: 5201: 5154: 5104: 5002: 4967: 4930: 4864: 4834: 4798: 4764: 4745: 4689: 4636: 4594: 4518: 4474: 4452: 4419: 4396: 4295: 4256: 4218: 4196: 4174: 4132: 4099: 4065: 4022: 3978: 3956: 3934: 3882: 3813: 3743: 3610: 3588: 3554: 3500: 3435: 3394: 3356: 3306: 3256: 3230: 3188: 3115: 3079: 3035: 3023:

RfA, and you might not like everything I have to say. If you are in agreement, then I will find the time when I can.

2964: 2908: 2886: 2851: 2816: 2573: 2528: 2499: 2447: 2413: 2390: 2359: 2337: 2291: 2174: 2113: 2088: 2039: 2002: 1944: 1915: 1880: 1847: 1803: 1776: 1706: 1685: 1680: 1645: 1597: 1547: 1512: 1473: 1433: 1279: 1268: 1230: 1196: 1134: 1076: 995: 955: 915: 892: 862: 829: 798: 769: 714: 685: 655: 626: 597: 567: 532: 492: 470: 440: 410: 354: 325: 243: 214: 181: 123: 6546:

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I always appreciate knowing when my actions are discussed, good or bad.

10138:

I'm out of here, working on the starter projects, as there are solutions, easy ones, to all the supposed reasons why

9100:

feel strongly about the blanking, and wanted to convey that, but not as an attack on your handling of the situation.

8562: 8182:

Thanks, I have four windows open and trying to get outside as well :p I will take a look this evening or tomorrow.

4658: 2993: 2941: 2766: 2733: 2682: 2639: 97: 7215:

You are absolutely correct. I'm a clerk trainee there, and it was a simple but silly mistake. I've corrected it.

9427: 7209: 6605:

Thank you for replying back. You've raised some good pointers there, which I shall bear in mind. I've just found

6218: 5770: 5249: 2220: 293: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 10076: 3317: 2952:

This was causing controversy elsewhere here, someone had a list of Knowledge editors who this person "might be".

6408: 3717:

comply with the above, explain the issues there, get a new user name there. That is the breaks. If you want to

745: 10212:+1 because yes I agree, and +1 for making me out to be an eternal optimist who is also an eternal pessimist :D 7196: 6372: 5564: 3135: 2839:

my opinions into. There are times when I need to jump in, and times I need to stay out. This is the latter.

840: 8320:

Poor Dennis. No urgency and it's not even a big deal if you can't get to it. I hate to add to your workload.--

2693: 943:

I've brought up the issue on our mentoring page. I think he meant well, but yes, that was expressed poorly.

9817:

advocate. It isn't easy, and I'm not as successful with it as I would like to be. As for essays, I started

7669: 7129: 7074:

vandalism is. Its any action designed to detract from the quality of a wikipedian article done in bad faith.

6492: 6360: 6328: 5638: 5430: 3754: 3531: 1717: 365: 306: 8432:

closures so I can get some practice, but I feel like I have a fair amount on my plate lately, so not sure.--

5508:

I've protected the user page. I'm assuming the talk page should be left open, unless requested otherwise.

202:

conservative. Of course, this is better than overly bold, when equipped with a brand new bag of tools. :)

111:

Wow, not exactly light reading. Thanks for the heads up. Adding a few articles to my watch list as well.

10163: 9260: 8619: 7760: 7458:

A now Mar4d misused the tool to revert an established editor putting back in blatant source falsifications.

5894: 5466:

Done and msg left there. Let me know when it is ready for full protection and I will be happy to assist.

5314: 4775: 2023:

I was quite sincere. I wasn't trying to flatter him, only speak from the heart, and I meant every word.

192: 8808:

Not a problem, DQ is very experienced SPI clerk, I would defer to his greater experience in this as well.

2369:

hmmm, I though it was a person, I must have read too fast. Good pickup. Glad I dropped in. Thanks :) --

2239:. Australia's only acceptable contribution to coffee, in my opinion. And only acceptable because of the 7109: 7033: 6888: 5257: 1862: 1690:

Hopefully this will clear up any misunderstanding by putting everything on the table at the proper venue

254: 8073:

Violating article talk page guidelines and accusing other editor of socking instead opening an SPI case.

7302:

After your work fighting the backlogs at RfPP and SPI, I think you deserve this. Enjoy responsibly! --

7158:

Since the IP editor is now blocked, is there any point in maintaining the lock on the article? Regards,

10245: 10131: 9602: 9570: 9530: 8079:

least for now. If OhioStandard wants to offer come guidance here as well, that would be appreciated.

8055: 7992: 7886: 6637: 6246: 6232: 6178: 6165: 4544:

yet. I'm not feeling impatient, there's no hurry, but i'm wondering if the document needs to be marked

3126: 2053: 1758: 1015: 38: 5946:"I think you just scared some people with your honesty and independence, even if they won't admit it." 5905:

RfA is an odd place, where the candidate is under a very powerful and faulty microscope. If you say "

2754:

Wow, not the response I was expecting. Ok YRC, you "win", I admit to the henious offence of whatever.

2606:

a user with citable strong objections to my editing walked by closing without even a simple comment -

2487:

is a great place to start, as are the links someone added in the welcome template on your talk page.

2132:

Thank you, but a week isn't long enough at all. I want him to retract his accusations, and promise to

9046: 8985: 8945: 8900: 4010:

I'm back! Great ribs, lots of cold beer and music. Think I will wait a while til I edit though....

3519: 3477: 336: 9194:

Not a problem, I'm happy to offer advice anytime. We are all players on the same team, after all.

5854:

You must be mystified or amused (or both) by this, Dennis. I think Bremner means me, not you. Heh.--

10493: 10395: 10353: 10088: 9983:

project. Check out one some of us formed a few days ago to help with issues with quality articles:

9338: 8528: 7583:

Mar4d added source falsifications to an article. I removed them. Mar4d restored them using twinkle.

6108: 5910: 3169: 1753: 9857:

Wiki is not what it once was. The way we operate needs a rework from the top down and inside out.

5943:"I personally like your style . It appears others have trouble dealing with that kind of honesty." 3275:

where I've been helping out a little with its resurrection. He may be a perfect candidate for the

2162:

I have replied at the ANI. To say that I'm non-plussed with your tone here is an understatement.

9646: 9589: 9401: 9256: 8769: 8464: 7287: 6843: 6834:

Calling me a vandal -twice, the second time being after I had already directed your attention to

6676:

I would suggest a simpler one. I'm out the door as we speak, and can't check it out right now.

6385:

Full Protected 1 day. Any admin should feel free to unprotect if warranted without permission.

5869: 4573: 4557: 4497: 4112: 1377: 1344: 3918:

Not sure if this is notable enough to include yet, but I've started a sandbox to find out here:

1817:

Okey dokey, Ima go eat some chocolate and read a book, and come back again tomorrow =) G'night.

10529: 10422: 10374: 10316: 10262: 10197: 10174: 10110: 10014: 9967: 9913: 9838: 9742: 9701: 9546: 9502: 9445: 9372: 9306: 9277: 9236: 9201: 9166: 9119: 9077: 9032: 9025: 9001: 8958: 8925: 8875: 8845: 8815: 8786: 8755: 8748: 8731: 8683: 8667: 8649: 8629: 8609: 8586: 8570: 8542: 8512: 8480: 8412: 8363: 8301: 8252: 8212: 8189: 8154: 8112: 8086: 8039: 8016: 7927: 7900: 7869: 7847: 7814: 7777: 7738: 7728: 7720: 7647: 7427: 7387: 7342: 7271: 7241:

No worries, thanks for the quick correction! I appreciate your attention to the investigation.

7222: 7139: 7105: 7050: 7029: 7004: 6967: 6918: 6884: 6867: 6817: 6761: 6716: 6683: 6658: 6622: 6586: 6553: 6517: 6476: 6451: 6426: 6392: 6287: 6256: 6194: 6133: 5987: 5921: 5825: 5787: 5723: 5693: 5669: 5646: 5618: 5598: 5572: 5515: 5473: 5444: 5406: 5369: 5328: 5298: 5233: 5226:, which is a worthwhile read for newer editors wishing to get involved in heated discussions. 5196: 5149: 5099: 5067: 5030: 4997: 4962: 4925: 4859: 4829: 4793: 4759: 4684: 4631: 4589: 4513: 4469: 4447: 4414: 4391: 4290: 4251: 4213: 4191: 4169: 4127: 4094: 4060: 4017: 3973: 3951: 3929: 3877: 3808: 3738: 3605: 3583: 3549: 3539: 3495: 3430: 3389: 3351: 3301: 3251: 3225: 3183: 3110: 3074: 3030: 3013: 2959: 2903: 2881: 2846: 2811: 2787: 2710: 2659: 2615: 2568: 2523: 2510: 2494: 2442: 2408: 2385: 2354: 2332: 2286: 2169: 2108: 2083: 2064: 2049:

No worries Dennis, even I find myself insufferable at times. I'm complicated that way too. ;-)

2034: 1997: 1939: 1910: 1875: 1842: 1798: 1771: 1701: 1675: 1640: 1592: 1542: 1507: 1468: 1428: 1263: 1225: 1191: 1129: 1071: 990: 950: 920: 887: 857: 824: 793: 764: 709: 680: 650: 621: 608: 592: 562: 527: 487: 465: 435: 405: 349: 320: 238: 209: 176: 118: 47: 17: 9562:

without the blocking admin getting into desysop territory. Does anyone seriously believe that

1835:

Good idea. Not everyone is as nice and you and I, but we still have to tolerate each other.

10522:

And thanks for bringing that to my attention. I have so many irons in the fire right now....

9599: 9567: 9527: 8775:

I don't know, I revert vandalism and all, but I don't organize it. Likely, the guys over at

7043:

notifications when they are applicable or appropriate, I'm afraid I can't comply with that.

6569: 6493: 6377: 6229: 6175: 6162: 5278: 5266: 4814: 4653: 4161:

The page isn't edit protected, only move protected. You should be able to edit it just fine.

4076: 4046: 3966:

Oh, and we ARE going. Likely Saturday after she closes the shop. Thanks for the heads up!

3944:

I also added a bunch of sources on the talk page. I think it can pass wp:n with some help.

3210: 3157: 2988: 2936: 2761: 2728: 2677: 2634: 2546: 2050: 2017: 1740: 1210: 1152: 1011: 666: 614:

I will try to keep an eye out. I'm not likely to block him over that one redlink, however.

7541: 7077:

Let me educate you a little bit. The IP editor was being disingenous about the source. The

4677:

Oh, and I didn't bother templating them, so they can figure it out on their own I suppose.

10555: 9996: 9944: 9866: 9616: 9420: 8981: 8892: 7246: 7190:

I thereby award you with this bowl of strawberries. Hope it tastes good. Have a great day.

6941:

agree) and protecting the article for 1 week so they can do that, if the IP editor is then

6788: 5846: 5763: 4852:

one of those areas that isn't about right or wrong, just about the best way to get along.

4845: 3515: 3473: 3335: 3284: 2586: 286: 158: 146: 6226:

I don't feel they were a personal attack since they weren't directed at any individual ...

4646:

ooohh ooooh ooooh can I decline the blatant coming unblock request? please please please?

8: 10489: 10391: 10349: 10084: 9891: 9393: 9351: 9182: 9147: 9058: 8974: 8459: 8288: 7082: 6533: 6104: 5557: 5540: 5498: 5212: 4783: 4624:

BTW, I almost blocked him before this incident, but I'm forever the optimist I suppose.

4434: 3722: 3696: 3690: 3149: 1821: 225: 105: 9886:

admins. IJS. (and no .. that's not an implication - I think you're doing a fine job).

9361:

POV and problem editors, paving the road for higher productivity of the neutral editors.

8779:

would have some ideas about that, fighting vandalism is what they do most of the time.

3326:

edits. I notice the activity on his talk page is heating up. I'm seriously wondering if

10220: 10155: 10057: 9773: 9627: 9563: 9481: 9019: 8272: 8232: 7696: 7558: 7194: 5811: 5780:

Of course, you are always welcome in any project I start. The more eyes, the better.

4553: 4493: 4353: 4275: 4236: 4152: 3991: 3899: 3848: 2650:

A revert war is if you replace good faith removed disputed content - did you do that?

2279:

over the open fire. Most people can't drink it that way. I just floss afterwards. ;)

1956: 1891: 1457: 1369: 1336: 1164: 696: 511: 2868: 10523: 10416: 10368: 10310: 10256: 10246:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Blocking_policy#Use_of_talk_page_while_blocked

10191: 10168: 10104: 10008: 9961: 9907: 9832: 9736: 9695: 9540: 9496: 9491: 9439: 9366: 9326: 9300: 9271: 9230: 9195: 9160: 9113: 9071: 8995: 8952: 8919: 8869: 8839: 8809: 8780: 8725: 8677: 8663: 8645: 8623: 8605: 8580: 8566: 8536: 8506: 8474: 8406: 8357: 8295: 8246: 8206: 8183: 8148: 8106: 8080: 8033: 8010: 7921: 7894: 7861: 7857: 7841: 7808: 7795: 7771: 7732: 7641: 7421: 7381: 7336: 7265: 7216: 7133: 7078: 7044: 6998: 6961: 6912: 6861: 6835: 6811: 6755: 6704: 6677: 6646: 6610: 6580: 6547: 6511: 6470: 6445: 6420: 6386: 6356: 6323: 6281: 6250: 6188: 6127: 5981: 5915: 5819: 5781: 5717: 5709: 5687: 5661: 5642: 5612: 5590: 5568: 5509: 5467: 5438: 5400: 5363: 5322: 5292: 5227: 5190: 5143: 5093: 5059: 5022: 4991: 4956: 4919: 4853: 4823: 4787: 4753: 4705: 4678: 4625: 4614: 4583: 4541: 4507: 4489: 4463: 4441: 4408: 4385: 4284: 4245: 4207: 4185: 4163: 4121: 4088: 4054: 4011: 3967: 3945: 3923: 3871: 3834: 3802: 3732: 3599: 3577: 3543: 3489: 3466: 3450: 3424: 3414: 3383: 3345: 3295: 3245: 3219: 3177: 3104: 3068: 3024: 2953: 2897: 2875: 2840: 2830: 2805: 2779: 2702: 2651: 2607: 2562: 2517: 2488: 2436: 2402: 2379: 2348: 2326: 2280: 2163: 2102: 2077: 2072: 2028: 1991: 1933: 1904: 1869: 1836: 1792: 1765: 1695: 1669: 1634: 1586: 1536: 1501: 1462: 1422: 1257: 1219: 1185: 1123: 1115: 1065: 984: 944: 908: 881: 851: 818: 787: 780: 758: 703: 674: 644: 615: 586: 578: 556: 521: 481: 459: 429: 399: 385: 343: 314: 232: 203: 170: 112: 4206:

Make a draft and I will unprotect long enough for you to add, or just add per you.

4144:

I'm wanting to edit despite the page protection, after a suggestion on my talkpage.

4087:

Give me a bit and I will take a look and see if there is anything I can help with.

1558: 10238: 9355: 9223: 8383: 8137: 7327: 7163: 6951: 6907: 5889: 5275: 5263: 4718: 4648: 4373: 4120:

Looks like Alison beat me to it. Let me know if there is anything else I can do.

3627: 3204: 3153: 3057: 3046: 2983: 2931: 2756: 2723: 2672: 2629: 2599: 2543: 1788: 1575: 1411: 1393: 1207: 1149: 8104: 3829: 10547: 10299: 10291: 9988: 9936: 9858: 9612: 9413: 9397: 8437: 8391: 8343: 8325: 7616: 7592: 7570: 7547: 7524: 7504: 7466: 7408: 7367: 6783: 6737: 6415: 5961: 5877: 5859: 5756: 5460: 5082: 5046: 4946: 4908: 3824: 3795: 3573: 3331: 3280: 3199: 2459: 2370: 2306: 2262: 2248: 2240: 1562: 1527: 1492: 1449: 1364: 1356: 1322: 1309: 1296: 1095: 1046: 973: 809: 279: 142: 9761:

Yes, you are quite right as always, hey, hang on a minute, as *almost* always :D

9641:, and all that), "Holy Roman Emperor of the Internet" has a certain ring to it. 8579:

Nice to see a kind word with the first sip of coffee of the day. Appreciated.

8009:

has more admins less gawkers, might be better for getting admins only to look.

3152:. I feel a little sheepish for the stuff my connection did, but no harm done. — 46:

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

10286: 9887: 9799: 8465: 8242: 7678: 7311: 6606: 6337: 6241: 6103:

This thread is about *you* Dennis, your civility (in case you were wondering).

5906: 5841: 5532: 5490: 5389: 5352: 5139: 3702: 3685: 3664: 3276: 2484: 2201: 2144: 1929: 1899: 1818: 1360: 1249: 9358: 9344:

I think editor retention is a very important subject. I've addressed it here

2301:

I like the cut of your jib Brown. In Canada, when someone is doing a trip to

10214: 10149: 10051: 9984: 9932: 9901:

properly. If you want to change the way admins react to situation, you also

9767: 9475: 9102: 8776: 8713: 8268: 8228: 7975: 7953: 7692: 7489: 7296: 7191: 7024: 6903: 6856: 6378: 5746: 5223: 5218: 5128: 5116: 5018: 4880: 4347: 4325: 4269: 4230: 4146: 3777:

are doing great and I hope that you'll continue the good work. All the best!

3708: 3327: 3272: 2697: 2595: 2276: 1963: 847: 507: 193: 9354:'s talk page after his block. My sandbox has a pledge in it's early stages 374: 10135: 9522:

blocks should be indefinite pending the blockee's self-abasement is a step

9322: 9093: 8006: 7710: 6570: 6352: 5847: 5680: 4731: 4724: 4700: 4609: 4041: 3446: 3410: 2603: 2319: 1691: 1665: 1658: 1523: 1484: 381: 5384:

Sorry looking at it again I must have misread the logs and contributions.

5021:, something I can be blocked indefinitely for until I retract the threat. 3376:

User:50.81.90.92 and The Next Food Network Star/Food Network Star articles

8133: 7492:-enforcing smokescreen under the garb of "removing source falsification" 7159: 6947: 6754:

about shot for some reason today, so I'm only running at partial speed.

6641: 5899: 3763: 3623: 2302: 1726: 1571: 1407: 1389: 1306: 937: 750: 637: 163: 2974:

I saw that, quite the list! I was torn between AnomieBOT and Iridescent

2229: 10295: 8676:

Cool! I love articles like this, a part of the culture of that area.

8433: 8387: 8339: 8321: 7609: 7588: 7563: 7543: 7520: 7497: 7462: 7404: 7363: 5873: 5855: 5078: 5042: 5014: 4942: 4904: 4329: 4081: 2244: 2236: 1145: 1091: 1042: 1006:

up with this editor making offensive comments in a topic area where he

969: 421: 263: 8294:

Ok, now five windows. Give me a few minutes and I will take a look.

4384:

at ANI, so will let that process work. May pipe in there if needed.

3382:

only one. I'm a bit in and out today, so hard to follow everything.

1526:

perhaps (I can't always blame it on the beer, but I do when I can). --

9823: 8382:

I took the liberty of finishing up for you on the article itself per

7965: 7831: 7304: 5385: 5348: 4492:

is yet another instance. I'll see if there are more before i submit.

4324:

Note that I'm one more attack edit from the IP from bringing this to

3693:- Until you read this short page, you have no idea what Knowledge is. 2896:

Oh, this is the source of your "message" the other day. Bad egg....

2194: 2137: 1585:

celebrities on Twitter. If that isn't irony, I don't know what is.

6933:

Quick comment: there's not much point in you asking both editors to

2318:

before or after it gets deleted, my second favorite NPP find, after

8890:

Thanks for the advice, and for responding extraordinarily quickly.

5488:

I think this page can be protected again now. Thanks for you help.

5124: 5123:, which obviously indicates by my reading he hadn't quite done so. 3922:

Help would be appreciated, so we can determine if it passes WP:N.

1041:

being "highly disruptive". I'm genuinely touched by his concerns.--

8505:

But can't get Knowledge's CSS to load. Very ugly on this end....

7184: 5362:

it to SPI. I don't know enough to question it too deeply yet.

4581:

For trolling, WP:NPA, and because it appears that I'm also a dick.

2516:

So, we don't preemptively protect articles, except when we do? ;)

480:

I did modify the tone just a bit since no one has replied to it.

10239:

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Calvin999#For_whoever_sees_this

6017:

about "fear of honesty" insulting whether you are Admin, or not.)

810: 3725:. If this is too much, then editing at Knowledge isn't for you. 3316:

Thanks for the heads up on his user name change. I just had to

10139: 9051: 7540:

relevance of the text has been explained on the article's talk.

4883:, it's not a constructive thing to say in a content discussion. 1987: 7104:

listened. Seriously, how did you ever expect DR to work here?

3837:

technology for its images, I !vote that this is the first one

4506:

Good idea, and ask to check for a CU to check for sleepers.

1557:

Awesome barnstar, probably my second favorite (after the one

817:

I was sleeping, but it looks like someone already fixed it.

506:

Thank you for responding and thank you for the explanation.--

9042:

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

8765:

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

4741:

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

2235:

Because you shouldn't edit before your first cup, here is a

1288: 9490:

And not all admins think the same. I went and pitched for

7264:

Interesting possibility, I've asked for opinions offwiki.

6174:

guess is what prompted your own rather misguided outburst.

9880:

People don't use Knowledge because of the great admins,...

7709:

That's exactly what I would have done. Good call, Dennis.

4283:

Sounds good, I will be ready to help when you are ready.

2804:

That doesn't matter. You guys can handle it yourselves.

8176:

Voter turnout in the United States presidential elections

7993: 6280:

Revdel'ed the edits, let me know if I missed anything.

4752:

settled, and they are free to close it if they choose.

3472:

Forgot to mention that their locations seem to match. §§

2435:

try to grind them with a hammer should the power fail.

6804:

How does DR work with an IP editor who respects no one?

2325:

And K, that article isn't a CSD#A7, you know. or G11.

1402:

BTW, someone seems to have vandalized the article, and

4372:

And if it's a legal threat, I advise on speedy block.

1363:. Drmies was just trying to emulate that scene in his 846:

I've given permission for any other admin to do so at

9159:

I've answered on Anderson's page, to make it easier.

4328:. Accusations of inserting libel are unacceptable. -- 3344:

Waiting, giving rope, WP:AN might be in the future.

2561:

I do suck. Blame this blasted new mop. Apologies.

10134:

and Dennis on the long term solution, whilst saying

8561:(watching) repeating in rough times that you are an 5017:

considers my comments in that thread a violation of

4990:

make the point to them, perhaps in their own words.

1500:A long sheet of relists because no one would care. 9882:" ... true; but often good people leave because of 6705: 6647: 6611: 909: 673:a sandbox, getting input from others. Good work. 9299:works, it just isn't as quick as a light switch. 7132:. And thank you for assuming good faith here. 6897:Since you are both here, let me make this clear. 5274:I also see no request that needs to be reviewed.-- 3045:I agree. Never mind. Thanks, and I'll be patient. 2540:Knowledge:What you won't learn in new admin school 137:In case that's not enough reading, take a look at 6717: 6659: 6623: 4354: 3992: 3900: 3849: 1561:, look for one by Drmies on 11 Feb this year.) -- 1355:You know what happens when you given Wikipedians 1165: 921: 9465:top of ignoring the many people who say it does. 7998: 5914:common sense being used as a blunt instrument. 2136:make them again before he is allowed to edit. → 398:Why thank you! Earl Grey, no sugar, no cream. 9031:Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at 8754:Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at 6636:Dennis, I've attempted a simple RM request for 4730:Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at 3920:User:Dennis Brown/Texas Pete Twin City RibFest 2598:violating thread - the user that created it - 8103:I'm discussing similar issues with him here, 7461:This is starting to truely damage wikipedia. 4811:Use of Twitter by celebrities and politicians 2127:I want Danceking5 blocked, and I want it now. 9183: 9148: 4462:Oh, and usually 2 to 8 diffs are plenty ;-) 3598:This page and my archives might be useful. 3056:Did you forget giving me the editor review? 2401:I am a bit dramatic this morning, aren't I? 850:, since I'm not up on all the particulars. 9400:. Both of these editors created articles ( 2025:His editing skills do make Knowledge better 1487:. What do you think an AfD would look like 8063:Accusing user of socking and reverting him 2477:how can I remove an article that I posted? 2275:my tea. When the power goes out, we make 6275:Looking for a neutral opinion on a matter 4346:No, not a personal attack. It borders on 4184:It's early, or I'm an idiot. Pick one. 728:Ok, I will make another request. Thanks. 169:Thank you, that was kind of you to say. 10365:Give me a lever and I can move the world 3828: 1316:, and someone has to clean up after him 549:Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Jenks24 7483:Dennis, you may wish to take a look at 3240:At a quick glance, it seems he saw the 2247:also provides the same comic relief. 14: 9957:Knowledge:WikiProject Editor Retention 6240:I'm aware that there is an US-centric 3868:List of festivals in the United States 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 9518:to see an ArbCom member arguing that 6541:Martial arts sockpuppet investigation 3866:No I didn't, you need to add that to 2975: 7999:_BLPN-2012-06-24T00:58:00.000Z": --> 7994:_BLPN-2012-06-24T00:58:00.000Z": --> 7945: 3838: 3097:Your recent meassage on my talk page 874:A question about blocking procedures 25: 9406:Herbert Greene (Broadway conductor) 9140:Question on Lionel Richie/vandalism 5969:As to your ideas of admins: Admins 5818:try to look in from time to time. 5641:line, the last one, thank you ;) -- 5291:an area you need not worry about. 2483:learn about editing at Knowledge. 1822: 139:User talk:DoriSmith/PoliticianTexas 23: 9050: 9024: 8747: 8724:I will answer on your talk page. 7557:very aptly fits this description: 5262:I'd just wait for another admin.-- 5184:Request for review of another user 4723: 1633:All Your Pedia Are Belong to Us. 1206:Hey, VirtualBox can also be CLI.-- 24: 10576: 8832:Requests for Permissions/reviewer 8803:Re: Northern Arrow / Factocop SPI 7770:speak out and remove all doubt. 7603:Sure, let's talk about POV. This 6712: 6654: 6618: 5530:That sounds about right, thanks. 3622:Thanks for the helpful comments. 1664:I have opened up a discussion at 916: 8980:Ignore, Tom has done it for me. 8496: 7946: 7677: 7661:The discussion above is closed. 7376:I am doing something about it. 7295: 7183: 7086:from the quality of the article. 6744: 6501: 6336: 3839: 3762: 3134: 2976: 2228: 1725: 1317: 1287: 373: 262: 29: 10140:they'll never replace wikipedia 7259:VanishedUser314159 / SA socking 7176:A bowl of strawberries for you! 6937:in the Talk page (with which I 1570:We do what we can on a budget. 452:A post you recently made on ANI 8719:How to change user name style? 5868:The picture at issue has been 3566:Counter Vandalism Unit Academy 13: 1: 8267:Cool, appreciate ya Dennis. 7617: 7610: 7571: 7564: 7505: 7498: 7130:Prince Aimone, Duke of Apulia 6469:such. Not iTunes or Amazon. 5533: 5491: 3665:here to build an encyclopedia 3638:Dennis Nixon (IBC Bank) page 3320:for templating people making 2322:. --12:21, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2243:it provides. Consequently a 1694:, including my own actions. 1444:title. Now we have to start 8908: 8901: 8893: 1148:instead if you need Linux.-- 7: 10164:Innocent prisoner's dilemma 9819:User:Dennis Brown/EASYMONEY 8862:Strikethrough edit summary? 6860:the one on the sidelines. 4319:Was this a personal attack? 3719:use Knowledge to make money 10: 10581: 8068:Striking new user comments 6780:No worries. Thanks again. 6638:F.C. Internazionale Milano 6247:User talk:Dennis Brown/CSD 4746:Discussion at wikipedia:AN 1280:The Kelapstick Beans Award 9753:12:59, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9712:00:57, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9651:01:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9621:00:52, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9606:00:47, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9594:00:43, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9574:00:38, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9557:00:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9534:00:02, 30 June 2012 (UTC) 9513:21:41, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9486:20:56, 29 Jun 2012 (UTC) 9456:18:17, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9433:18:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9383:18:05, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9331:18:54, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9317:18:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9288:18:13, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9265:18:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9247:17:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9212:17:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9190:17:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9177:11:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9155:05:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC) 9130:21:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC) 9107:21:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC) 9088:19:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC) 9012:19:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC) 8990:19:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8969:14:05, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8936:14:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8914:13:53, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8886:13:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8856:02:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8826:12:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC) 8797:02:41, 26 June 2012 (UTC) 8742:01:07, 26 June 2012 (UTC) 8694:17:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8672:17:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC) 8654:06:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC) 8640:23:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8614:22:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8597:11:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8575:07:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8553:01:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8523:23:40, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8491:23:29, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8442:19:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8423:19:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8396:19:43, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8374:19:13, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8348:18:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8330:18:39, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8312:18:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8277:16:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC) 8263:22:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8237:21:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8223:11:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8200:18:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8165:11:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8142:06:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC) 8123:19:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8097:13:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8050:01:14, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 8027:01:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 7981:01:28, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 7970:01:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 7959:01:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 7938:00:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 7911:00:33, 24 June 2012 (UTC) 7875:23:30, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7853:23:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7836:22:48, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7825:22:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7788:18:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7765:18:43, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7749:18:42, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7715:16:28, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7701:14:14, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7676: 7658:16:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7623:16:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7597:16:24, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7577:16:20, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7552:16:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7529:16:13, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7511:16:08, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7471:15:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7438:01:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7413:01:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7398:00:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7372:00:39, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7353:16:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7320:01:51, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7282:01:27, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7251:00:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7233:00:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC) 7202:11:47, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7168:22:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7150:17:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7114:18:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7061:16:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7038:16:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 7015:16:23, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6978:14:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6956:14:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6929:13:16, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6893:11:24, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6878:11:15, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6848:11:10, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6828:11:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6796:01:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6772:00:57, 22 June 2012 (UTC) 6726:18:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 6694:18:37, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 6668:18:32, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 6632:16:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 6597:16:25, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 6564:16:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 6528:15:04, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6487:01:41, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6462:01:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6437:00:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6403:00:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6365:10:41, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6335: 6318:01:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6298:01:34, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6267:11:20, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6236:00:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC) 6205:12:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6182:12:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6169:12:24, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6144:11:57, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 6113:10:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC) 5998:13:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC) 5932:20:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC) 5882:01:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC) 5864:01:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC) 5836:13:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5798:16:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5776:15:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5750:14:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5734:13:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5704:09:05, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5675:02:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5651:12:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5629:12:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5604:11:18, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5577:09:36, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5546:11:13, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5526:11:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5504:11:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5484:12:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5455:00:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5417:20:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5394:20:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5380:18:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5357:18:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 5339:14:18, 14 June 2012 (UTC) 5309:22:00, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5282:21:57, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5270:21:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5244:14:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5207:14:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5189:I will take a look now. 5160:19:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5133:19:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 5119:". I said he was coming 5110:17:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 5087:17:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 5073:16:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 5051:16:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 5036:16:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 5008:15:58, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 4973:16:07, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 4951:16:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 4936:15:22, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 4913:13:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 4870:00:34, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 4840:11:54, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 4804:11:57, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 4770:00:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 4711:20:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4695:20:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4665:20:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4642:20:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4620:20:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4600:20:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4562:04:44, 13 June 2012 (UTC) 4524:18:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4502:18:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4480:18:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4458:18:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4425:12:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 4402:12:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 4379:06:46, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 4368:03:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 4340:02:44, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 4301:12:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4280:12:33, 12 Jun 2012 (UTC) 4262:12:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4241:12:23, 12 Jun 2012 (UTC) 4224:12:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4202:12:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4180:12:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4157:12:12, 12 Jun 2012 (UTC) 4138:11:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 4105:22:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC) 4071:20:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC) 3761: 3133: 1724: 1286: 270:The Barnstar of Diplomacy 261: 10561:21:31, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10540:20:50, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10498:14:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC) 10433:20:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC) 10400:19:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC) 10385:11:46, 2 July 2012 (UTC) 10358:07:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC) 10327:21:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10304:21:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10273:20:43, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10208:18:26, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10185:18:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10160:17:48, 1 Jul 2012 (UTC) 10121:16:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10093:16:11, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10025:15:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 10002:15:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9978:15:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9950:14:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9924:14:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9896:13:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9872:13:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9849:13:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC) 9778:10:09, 1 Jul 2012 (UTC) 9033:Anderson9990's talk page 8756:Anderson9990's talk page 7663:Please do not modify it. 7561:, which makes it worse. 7210:Sockpuppet Investigation 6935:"hammer out a consensus" 5250:Blocked IP:125.236.44.45 4028:23:11, 9 June 2012 (UTC) 4006:18:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3984:17:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3962:17:44, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3940:17:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3914:16:22, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3888:16:14, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3819:12:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3788:11:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC) 3749:03:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC) 3632:02:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC) 3616:02:27, 7 June 2012 (UTC) 3594:02:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC) 3560:16:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 3524:17:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 3506:13:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 3482:13:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 3455:19:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 3441:19:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 3419:19:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 3400:18:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 3362:19:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 3340:19:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 3312:00:54, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 3289:00:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 3262:00:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 3236:23:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 3194:12:14, 4 June 2012 (UTC) 3162:11:33, 3 June 2012 (UTC) 3121:15:53, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 3085:16:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC) 3063:16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC) 3052:15:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 3041:11:03, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 3000:16:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 2970:16:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 2948:16:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 2914:16:01, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 2892:15:56, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 2857:00:17, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2834:23:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2822:23:49, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2793:23:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2773:23:40, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2740:23:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2716:23:30, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2689:23:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2665:23:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2646:22:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2621:23:13, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2579:11:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC) 2551:20:38, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 2534:20:30, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 2505:12:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2463:13:24, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2453:12:23, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2419:12:52, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2396:12:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2374:12:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2365:12:34, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2343:12:27, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2310:12:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2297:12:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2266:11:52, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2252:11:41, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2221:A cup of coffee for you! 2210:11:27, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2189:and not ever get angry. 2180:11:23, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2153:11:14, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2119:14:16, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2094:01:33, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 2057:00:39, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 2045:23:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 2008:00:52, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 1981:00:36, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 1950:00:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC) 1921:23:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1886:14:48, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1853:01:01, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1827:00:59, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1809:00:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1782:00:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1746:18:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1712:18:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1686:18:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1651:22:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1603:19:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1580:14:06, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1566:12:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1553:12:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1531:12:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1518:12:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1496:11:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1479:11:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1453:10:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1439:10:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1416:04:43, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1398:04:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1384:03:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1351:03:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1326:02:39, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 1274:17:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 1236:23:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1214:23:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1202:23:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1179:22:59, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1156:22:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1140:22:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1100:18:21, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1082:18:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1051:17:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1020:17:38, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1001:16:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 978:16:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 961:16:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 930:13:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 898:12:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 868:11:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 835:11:38, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 804:01:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 775:00:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 738:15:47, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 720:15:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 691:10:15, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 661:10:36, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 632:23:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 603:22:01, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 573:19:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 538:21:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 516:21:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 498:17:56, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 476:17:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 446:21:56, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 416:10:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 390:04:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 360:10:40, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 331:19:49, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 299:18:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 249:11:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 220:23:35, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 187:22:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 151:14:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 10225:19:43, 1 Jul 2012 (UTC) 10062:15:49, 1 Jul 2012 (UTC) 9402:Sweet Revenge (liqueur) 8032:needed the redaction. 7335:see my comment below. 6409:Bonfire Cry For Help EP 4488:OK, thanks. Turns out, 4113:User:Claude A. R. Kagan 2458:trash the lounges :) -- 2314:Oh, and have a look at 1928:I've left a message at 746:Resource-based economy! 129:23:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC) 9055: 9029: 8752: 7729:The Boy Who Cried Wolf 6373:McKinsey & Company 4728: 3862: 3540:The Boy Who Cried Wolf 1739:Deserving of this.. ♦ 841:Resource-based economy 18:User talk:Dennis Brown 9054: 9028: 8751: 8535:morning, 10pm here. 7860:likes this comment - 6494:N. R. Narayana Murthy 5431:Requesting permission 4815:List of Twitter users 4727: 3832: 3801:I've replied there. 3770:The Editor's Barnstar 3532:So I took your advice 3211:User:Scottdelaney1067 1008:doesn't know anything 366:A cup of tea for you! 307:a couple minor points 42:of past discussions. 7685:The Admin's Barnstar 6344:The Admin's Barnstar 5895:SPI Juanmramirez2012 5315:Older in Sockpuppets 4776:Invercargill airport 3142:at my successful RFA 1733:The Surreal Barnstar 1406:is an amusing read. 9579:self-abasement" is 9352:User:Parrot of Doom 8241:I've handed off to 7670:A barnstar for you! 7198:The Undertaker 20–0 6899:You are both wrong. 6329:A barnstar for you! 4784:User:Moonriddengirl 4111:Hi Dennis, (about 3755:A barnstar for you! 3576:is also familiar. 3150:Knowledge's labours 1863:Your comment at ANI 1718:A barnstar for you! 1144:Personally I'd use 255:A barnstar for you! 9257:Gangs of Wasseypur 9056: 9040:remove this notice 9030: 8763:remove this notice 8753: 8563:awesome Wikipedian 8056:Civility and socks 7887:just a question... 7757:Leaf Green Warrior 6061:commenting on any 5870:deleted at Commons 4739:remove this notice 4729: 3863: 3127:Thanks for !voting 1759:An outside opinion 1305:Please don't give 10537: 10532: 10430: 10425: 10382: 10377: 10324: 10319: 10270: 10265: 10205: 10200: 10182: 10177: 10132:innocent prisoner 10118: 10113: 10022: 10017: 9975: 9970: 9921: 9916: 9846: 9841: 9750: 9745: 9709: 9704: 9631: 9554: 9549: 9510: 9505: 9492:User:FleetCommand 9453: 9448: 9430: 9380: 9375: 9314: 9309: 9285: 9280: 9244: 9239: 9209: 9204: 9174: 9169: 9127: 9122: 9085: 9080: 9047:A kitten for you! 9009: 9004: 8966: 8961: 8946:Query about block 8933: 8928: 8883: 8878: 8853: 8848: 8823: 8818: 8794: 8789: 8739: 8734: 8691: 8686: 8637: 8632: 8594: 8589: 8550: 8545: 8520: 8515: 8488: 8483: 8420: 8415: 8371: 8366: 8309: 8304: 8260: 8255: 8220: 8215: 8197: 8192: 8162: 8157: 8120: 8115: 8094: 8089: 8047: 8042: 8024: 8019: 7935: 7930: 7908: 7903: 7858:User:Youreallycan 7850: 7822: 7817: 7785: 7780: 7746: 7741: 7706: 7705: 7655: 7650: 7435: 7430: 7395: 7390: 7350: 7345: 7325: 7324: 7279: 7274: 7230: 7225: 7207: 7206: 7147: 7142: 7112: 7106:Wee Curry Monster 7058: 7053: 7036: 7030:Wee Curry Monster 7012: 7007: 6975: 6970: 6926: 6921: 6891: 6885:Wee Curry Monster 6875: 6870: 6825: 6820: 6794: 6769: 6764: 6691: 6686: 6594: 6589: 6561: 6556: 6525: 6520: 6484: 6479: 6459: 6454: 6434: 6429: 6400: 6395: 6370: 6369: 6295: 6290: 6264: 6259: 6202: 6197: 6141: 6136: 6047:too personally."? 5995: 5990: 5938:"Fear of honesty" 5929: 5924: 5833: 5828: 5795: 5790: 5773: 5731: 5726: 5701: 5696: 5626: 5621: 5523: 5518: 5481: 5476: 5452: 5447: 5414: 5409: 5377: 5372: 5336: 5331: 5306: 5301: 5258:talk page stalker 5241: 5236: 5204: 5199: 5157: 5152: 5107: 5102: 5005: 5000: 4970: 4965: 4933: 4928: 4867: 4862: 4837: 4832: 4801: 4796: 4767: 4762: 4709: 4692: 4687: 4639: 4634: 4618: 4597: 4592: 4579:Blocked 72 hours 4521: 4516: 4477: 4472: 4455: 4450: 4422: 4417: 4399: 4394: 4348:legal threatening 4298: 4293: 4259: 4254: 4221: 4216: 4199: 4194: 4177: 4172: 4135: 4130: 4102: 4097: 4068: 4063: 4025: 4020: 3981: 3976: 3959: 3954: 3937: 3932: 3885: 3880: 3835:Scratch and sniff 3833:If Wiki develops 3816: 3811: 3793: 3792: 3746: 3741: 3686:General help page 3613: 3608: 3591: 3586: 3557: 3552: 3503: 3498: 3438: 3433: 3397: 3392: 3359: 3354: 3309: 3304: 3259: 3254: 3233: 3228: 3191: 3186: 3167: 3166: 3118: 3113: 3082: 3077: 3038: 3033: 2967: 2962: 2911: 2906: 2889: 2884: 2854: 2849: 2819: 2814: 2576: 2571: 2531: 2526: 2502: 2497: 2450: 2445: 2421: 2416: 2411: 2393: 2388: 2362: 2357: 2340: 2335: 2294: 2289: 2257: 2256: 2212: 2177: 2172: 2155: 2116: 2111: 2091: 2086: 2042: 2037: 2005: 2000: 1960: 1947: 1942: 1918: 1913: 1883: 1878: 1850: 1845: 1806: 1801: 1779: 1774: 1751: 1750: 1709: 1704: 1683: 1678: 1648: 1643: 1600: 1595: 1550: 1545: 1515: 1510: 1476: 1471: 1436: 1431: 1331: 1330: 1271: 1266: 1233: 1228: 1199: 1194: 1137: 1132: 1079: 1074: 998: 993: 958: 953: 895: 890: 865: 860: 832: 827: 801: 796: 772: 767: 717: 712: 688: 683: 658: 653: 629: 624: 600: 595: 570: 565: 535: 530: 495: 490: 473: 468: 443: 438: 413: 408: 395: 394: 357: 352: 337:More MMA problems 328: 323: 304: 303: 296: 246: 241: 217: 212: 184: 179: 126: 121: 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 10572: 10558: 10553: 10550: 10535: 10530: 10428: 10423: 10380: 10375: 10322: 10317: 10268: 10263: 10223: 10219: 10203: 10198: 10180: 10175: 10158: 10154: 10116: 10111: 10060: 10056: 10020: 10015: 9999: 9994: 9991: 9973: 9968: 9947: 9942: 9939: 9919: 9914: 9869: 9864: 9861: 9844: 9839: 9776: 9772: 9748: 9743: 9707: 9702: 9633:of the scene in 9625: 9552: 9547: 9508: 9503: 9484: 9480: 9451: 9446: 9428: 9378: 9373: 9339:Editor retention 9312: 9307: 9283: 9278: 9242: 9237: 9207: 9202: 9187: 9172: 9167: 9152: 9125: 9120: 9083: 9078: 9043: 9007: 9002: 8964: 8959: 8931: 8926: 8912: 8910: 8905: 8898: 8881: 8876: 8851: 8846: 8821: 8816: 8792: 8787: 8766: 8737: 8732: 8689: 8684: 8635: 8630: 8592: 8587: 8548: 8543: 8529:Your perspective 8518: 8513: 8504: 8500: 8499: 8486: 8481: 8418: 8413: 8369: 8364: 8307: 8302: 8258: 8253: 8218: 8213: 8195: 8190: 8160: 8155: 8118: 8113: 8092: 8087: 8045: 8040: 8022: 8017: 8000: 7995: 7951: 7950: 7949: 7933: 7928: 7906: 7901: 7872: 7868: 7864: 7848: 7820: 7815: 7783: 7778: 7744: 7739: 7681: 7674: 7673: 7653: 7648: 7619: 7612: 7573: 7566: 7507: 7500: 7433: 7428: 7393: 7388: 7348: 7343: 7316: 7315: 7309: 7308: 7299: 7292: 7291: 7277: 7272: 7228: 7223: 7187: 7180: 7179: 7145: 7140: 7108: 7056: 7051: 7032: 7010: 7005: 6973: 6968: 6924: 6919: 6887: 6873: 6868: 6823: 6818: 6793: 6791: 6786: 6781: 6767: 6762: 6752: 6748: 6747: 6723: 6714: 6709: 6689: 6684: 6665: 6656: 6651: 6629: 6620: 6615: 6592: 6587: 6559: 6554: 6523: 6518: 6509: 6505: 6504: 6482: 6477: 6457: 6452: 6432: 6427: 6398: 6393: 6340: 6333: 6332: 6293: 6288: 6262: 6257: 6200: 6195: 6139: 6134: 5993: 5988: 5927: 5922: 5831: 5826: 5793: 5788: 5771: 5729: 5724: 5699: 5694: 5672: 5668: 5664: 5624: 5619: 5615: 5601: 5597: 5593: 5565:into perspective 5539: 5535: 5521: 5516: 5497: 5493: 5479: 5474: 5470: 5450: 5445: 5441: 5412: 5407: 5375: 5370: 5334: 5329: 5325: 5304: 5299: 5295: 5261: 5239: 5234: 5230: 5202: 5197: 5193: 5155: 5150: 5146: 5105: 5100: 5096: 5070: 5066: 5062: 5041:unjustifiable.-- 5033: 5029: 5025: 5003: 4998: 4994: 4968: 4963: 4959: 4931: 4926: 4922: 4865: 4860: 4856: 4835: 4830: 4826: 4799: 4794: 4790: 4765: 4760: 4756: 4742: 4703: 4690: 4685: 4681: 4663: 4661: 4656: 4651: 4637: 4632: 4628: 4612: 4608:Muchas gracias. 4595: 4590: 4586: 4519: 4514: 4510: 4475: 4470: 4466: 4453: 4448: 4444: 4420: 4415: 4411: 4397: 4392: 4388: 4376: 4366: 4364: 4336: 4335: 4296: 4291: 4287: 4278: 4274: 4257: 4252: 4248: 4239: 4235: 4219: 4214: 4210: 4197: 4192: 4188: 4175: 4170: 4166: 4155: 4151: 4133: 4128: 4124: 4100: 4095: 4091: 4066: 4061: 4057: 4023: 4018: 4014: 4004: 4002: 3979: 3974: 3970: 3957: 3952: 3948: 3935: 3930: 3926: 3912: 3910: 3883: 3878: 3874: 3861: 3859: 3844: 3843: 3842: 3814: 3809: 3805: 3783: 3766: 3759: 3758: 3744: 3739: 3735: 3611: 3606: 3602: 3589: 3584: 3580: 3555: 3550: 3546: 3501: 3496: 3492: 3436: 3431: 3427: 3395: 3390: 3386: 3357: 3352: 3348: 3330:applies here... 3307: 3302: 3298: 3257: 3252: 3248: 3231: 3226: 3222: 3189: 3184: 3180: 3170:Sockpuppet edits 3138: 3131: 3130: 3116: 3111: 3107: 3080: 3075: 3071: 3060: 3049: 3036: 3031: 3027: 2998: 2996: 2991: 2986: 2981: 2980: 2979: 2965: 2960: 2956: 2946: 2944: 2939: 2934: 2909: 2904: 2900: 2887: 2882: 2878: 2852: 2847: 2843: 2817: 2812: 2808: 2790: 2786: 2782: 2771: 2769: 2764: 2759: 2738: 2736: 2731: 2726: 2713: 2709: 2705: 2687: 2685: 2680: 2675: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2644: 2642: 2637: 2632: 2618: 2614: 2610: 2600:User:Egg Centric 2574: 2569: 2565: 2529: 2524: 2520: 2500: 2495: 2491: 2448: 2443: 2439: 2414: 2409: 2405: 2400: 2391: 2386: 2382: 2360: 2355: 2351: 2338: 2333: 2329: 2292: 2287: 2283: 2241:double entendres 2232: 2225: 2224: 2208: 2206: 2199: 2175: 2170: 2166: 2151: 2149: 2142: 2114: 2109: 2105: 2089: 2084: 2080: 2040: 2035: 2031: 2003: 1998: 1994: 1978: 1973: 1968: 1954: 1945: 1940: 1936: 1916: 1911: 1907: 1881: 1876: 1872: 1848: 1843: 1839: 1824: 1804: 1799: 1795: 1789:Streisand effect 1777: 1772: 1768: 1754:Factseducado FYI 1743: 1729: 1722: 1721: 1707: 1702: 1698: 1681: 1676: 1672: 1646: 1641: 1637: 1598: 1593: 1589: 1548: 1543: 1539: 1513: 1508: 1504: 1483:Case in point - 1474: 1469: 1465: 1434: 1429: 1425: 1382: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1349: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1321: 1320: 1291: 1284: 1283: 1269: 1264: 1260: 1231: 1226: 1222: 1197: 1192: 1188: 1177: 1175: 1135: 1130: 1126: 1077: 1072: 1068: 1012:Nomoskedasticity 996: 991: 987: 956: 951: 947: 927: 918: 913: 893: 888: 884: 863: 858: 854: 830: 825: 821: 799: 794: 790: 770: 765: 761: 715: 710: 706: 686: 681: 677: 656: 651: 647: 627: 622: 618: 598: 593: 589: 568: 563: 559: 533: 528: 524: 493: 488: 484: 471: 466: 462: 441: 436: 432: 411: 406: 402: 377: 370: 369: 355: 350: 346: 326: 321: 317: 294: 278: 266: 259: 258: 244: 239: 235: 215: 210: 206: 182: 177: 173: 124: 119: 115: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 10580: 10579: 10575: 10574: 10573: 10571: 10570: 10569: 10556: 10551: 10548: 10292:Contempt of cop 10221: 10213: 10156: 10148: 10079: 10077:arbitrary break 10058: 10050: 9997: 9992: 9989: 9945: 9940: 9937: 9867: 9862: 9859: 9781:Specifically: 9774: 9766: 9482: 9474: 9341: 9226: 9142: 9061: 9049: 9044: 9037: 9022: 8982:Darkness Shines 8977: 8948: 8891: 8864: 8834: 8805: 8772: 8770:False positives 8767: 8760: 8721: 8716: 8602:New perspective 8531: 8497: 8495: 8473:Working on it. 8470: 8462: 8291: 8179: 8058: 8002: 7947: 7889: 7870: 7866: 7862: 7798: 7723: 7672: 7667: 7666: 7357: 7356: 7355: 7330: 7313: 7312: 7306: 7305: 7290: 7288:A beer for you! 7261: 7212: 7199: 7192:Armbrust, B.Ed. 7178: 6806: 6789: 6784: 6782: 6745: 6743: 6740: 6575: 6543: 6538: 6502: 6500: 6497: 6411: 6382: 6375: 6331: 6326: 6305:Mr.Wikipediania 6277: 6221: 5962:User talk:Bbb23 5940: 5907:The sky is blue 5902: 5897: 5892: 5851: 5844: 5814: 5712: 5683: 5670: 5666: 5662: 5613: 5599: 5595: 5591: 5560: 5531: 5489: 5468: 5463: 5439: 5433: 5323: 5317: 5293: 5255: 5252: 5228: 5215: 5191: 5186: 5144: 5094: 5068: 5064: 5060: 5031: 5027: 5023: 4992: 4957: 4920: 4854: 4848: 4824: 4818: 4788: 4778: 4754: 4748: 4743: 4736: 4721: 4679: 4659: 4654: 4649: 4647: 4626: 4584: 4576: 4574:Would you mind? 4508: 4464: 4442: 4437: 4409: 4386: 4374: 4352: 4333: 4331: 4321: 4285: 4276: 4268: 4246: 4237: 4229: 4208: 4186: 4164: 4153: 4145: 4122: 4117: 4089: 4084: 4079: 4055: 4049: 4044: 4012: 3990: 3968: 3946: 3924: 3898: 3872: 3847: 3840: 3827: 3803: 3798: 3781: 3757: 3733: 3640: 3600: 3578: 3568: 3544: 3534: 3516:AnimeshKulkarni 3490: 3474:AnimeshKulkarni 3469: 3425: 3384: 3378: 3346: 3296: 3246: 3220: 3215: 3207: 3202: 3178: 3172: 3129: 3105: 3099: 3069: 3058: 3047: 3025: 3019: 2994: 2989: 2984: 2982: 2977: 2954: 2942: 2937: 2932: 2930: 2898: 2876: 2871: 2841: 2806: 2788: 2784: 2780: 2767: 2762: 2757: 2755: 2734: 2729: 2724: 2722: 2711: 2707: 2703: 2683: 2678: 2673: 2671: 2660: 2656: 2652: 2640: 2635: 2630: 2628: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2589: 2563: 2518: 2513: 2489: 2479: 2437: 2403: 2380: 2349: 2327: 2281: 2223: 2202: 2195: 2164: 2145: 2138: 2129: 2103: 2078: 2067: 2029: 2020: 1992: 1974: 1969: 1964: 1934: 1905: 1894: 1870: 1865: 1837: 1793: 1766: 1761: 1756: 1741: 1720: 1696: 1670: 1661: 1635: 1587: 1537: 1502: 1491:the election?-- 1463: 1446:2012 in Twitter 1423: 1404:the related AfD 1378: 1374: 1370: 1368: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1335: 1334:Well said, K.! 1318: 1314:follows through 1312:, sometimes he 1295:The Kelapstick 1282: 1258: 1252: 1220: 1186: 1163: 1124: 1118: 1066: 985: 945: 940: 882: 876: 852: 843: 819: 814: 788: 783: 759: 753: 748: 704: 699: 675: 669: 645: 640: 616: 611: 587: 581: 557: 552: 522: 482: 460: 454: 430: 424: 400: 368: 344: 339: 315: 309: 277: 257: 233: 228: 204: 198: 171: 166: 161: 113: 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 10578: 10568: 10567: 10566: 10565: 10564: 10563: 10517: 10516: 10515: 10514: 10513: 10512: 10511: 10510: 10509: 10508: 10507: 10506: 10505: 10504: 10503: 10502: 10501: 10500: 10490:Ihardlythinkso 10486: 10484: 10480:their behavior 10476: 10474: 10471: 10450: 10449: 10448: 10447: 10446: 10445: 10444: 10443: 10442: 10441: 10440: 10439: 10438: 10437: 10436: 10435: 10392:Ihardlythinkso 10350:Ihardlythinkso 10336: 10335: 10334: 10333: 10332: 10331: 10330: 10329: 10278: 10277: 10276: 10275: 10249: 10248: 10242: 10241: 10235: 10234: 10233: 10232: 10231: 10230: 10229: 10228: 10227: 10226: 10187: 10136:Screw you guys 10124: 10123: 10085:Ihardlythinkso 10078: 10075: 10074: 10073: 10072: 10071: 10070: 10069: 10068: 10067: 10066: 10065: 10064: 10063: 10036: 10035: 10034: 10033: 10032: 10031: 10030: 10029: 10028: 10027: 9927: 9926: 9875: 9874: 9855: 9854: 9853: 9852: 9851: 9809: 9808: 9807: 9806: 9805: 9804: 9791: 9790: 9789: 9788: 9787: 9786: 9762: 9756: 9755: 9731: 9730: 9729: 9728: 9727: 9726: 9725: 9724: 9723: 9722: 9721: 9720: 9719: 9718: 9717: 9716: 9715: 9714: 9674: 9673: 9672: 9671: 9670: 9669: 9668: 9667: 9666: 9665: 9664: 9663: 9662: 9661: 9660: 9659: 9658: 9657: 9656: 9655: 9654: 9653: 9623: 9470: 9466: 9462: 9394:Sebastian Lake 9386: 9385: 9362: 9340: 9337: 9336: 9335: 9334: 9333: 9295: 9294: 9293: 9292: 9291: 9290: 9250: 9249: 9225: 9222: 9221: 9220: 9219: 9218: 9217: 9216: 9215: 9214: 9141: 9138: 9137: 9136: 9135: 9134: 9133: 9132: 9060: 9057: 9048: 9045: 9036: 9023: 9021: 9018: 9017: 9016: 9015: 9014: 8976: 8973: 8972: 8971: 8947: 8944: 8943: 8942: 8941: 8940: 8939: 8938: 8863: 8860: 8859: 8858: 8833: 8830: 8829: 8828: 8804: 8801: 8800: 8799: 8771: 8768: 8759: 8746: 8745: 8744: 8720: 8717: 8715: 8712: 8711: 8710: 8709: 8708: 8707: 8706: 8705: 8704: 8703: 8702: 8701: 8700: 8699: 8698: 8697: 8696: 8620:barnstar vault 8556: 8555: 8530: 8527: 8526: 8525: 8493: 8469: 8463: 8461: 8458: 8457: 8456: 8455: 8454: 8453: 8452: 8451: 8450: 8449: 8448: 8447: 8446: 8445: 8444: 8426: 8425: 8399: 8398: 8377: 8376: 8351: 8350: 8333: 8332: 8315: 8314: 8290: 8287: 8286: 8285: 8284: 8283: 8282: 8281: 8280: 8279: 8243:User:JayJasper 8202: 8178: 8173: 8172: 8171: 8170: 8169: 8168: 8167: 8126: 8125: 8100: 8099: 8075: 8074: 8069: 8064: 8057: 8054: 8053: 8052: 8029: 8001: 7996:Re: ANI -: --> 7991: 7990: 7989: 7988: 7987: 7986: 7985: 7984: 7983: 7941: 7940: 7914: 7913: 7888: 7885: 7884: 7883: 7882: 7881: 7880: 7879: 7878: 7877: 7804: 7803: 7797: 7794: 7793: 7792: 7791: 7790: 7752: 7751: 7722: 7721:Quick question 7719: 7718: 7717: 7704: 7703: 7688: 7687: 7682: 7671: 7668: 7660: 7638: 7637: 7636: 7635: 7634: 7633: 7632: 7631: 7630: 7629: 7628: 7627: 7626: 7625: 7584: 7534: 7533: 7532: 7531: 7514: 7513: 7480: 7479: 7478: 7477: 7476: 7475: 7474: 7473: 7449: 7448: 7447: 7446: 7445: 7444: 7443: 7442: 7441: 7440: 7358: 7334: 7333: 7332: 7331: 7329: 7326: 7323: 7322: 7300: 7289: 7286: 7285: 7284: 7260: 7257: 7256: 7255: 7254: 7253: 7236: 7235: 7211: 7208: 7205: 7204: 7197: 7188: 7177: 7174: 7173: 7172: 7171: 7170: 7153: 7152: 7121: 7120: 7119: 7118: 7117: 7116: 7101: 7097: 7091: 7087: 7075: 7066: 7065: 7064: 7063: 7020: 7019: 7018: 7017: 6991: 6990: 6989: 6988: 6987: 6986: 6985: 6984: 6983: 6982: 6981: 6980: 6851: 6850: 6831: 6830: 6805: 6802: 6801: 6800: 6799: 6798: 6775: 6774: 6739: 6736: 6735: 6734: 6733: 6732: 6731: 6730: 6729: 6728: 6697: 6696: 6671: 6670: 6634: 6600: 6599: 6574: 6568: 6567: 6566: 6542: 6539: 6537: 6532: 6531: 6530: 6496: 6491: 6490: 6489: 6465: 6464: 6440: 6439: 6410: 6407: 6406: 6405: 6381: 6376: 6374: 6371: 6368: 6367: 6347: 6346: 6341: 6330: 6327: 6325: 6322: 6321: 6320: 6300: 6276: 6273: 6272: 6271: 6270: 6269: 6220: 6217: 6216: 6215: 6214: 6213: 6212: 6211: 6210: 6209: 6208: 6207: 6171: 6151: 6150: 6149: 6148: 6147: 6146: 6118: 6117: 6116: 6115: 6105:Ihardlythinkso 6098: 6097: 6096: 6095: 6089: 6088: 6087: 6086: 6079: 6078: 6077: 6076: 6069: 6068: 6067: 6066: 6051: 6050: 6049: 6048: 6041: 6040: 6039: 6038: 6031: 6030: 6029: 6028: 6021: 6020: 6019: 6018: 6011: 6010: 6009: 6008: 6001: 6000: 5976: 5975: 5966: 5965: 5957: 5956: 5951: 5950: 5947: 5944: 5939: 5936: 5935: 5934: 5901: 5898: 5896: 5893: 5891: 5888: 5887: 5886: 5885: 5884: 5850: 5845: 5843: 5840: 5839: 5838: 5813: 5810: 5809: 5808: 5807: 5806: 5805: 5804: 5803: 5802: 5801: 5800: 5737: 5736: 5711: 5708: 5707: 5706: 5682: 5679: 5678: 5677: 5656: 5655: 5654: 5653: 5632: 5631: 5607: 5606: 5580: 5579: 5559: 5556: 5555: 5554: 5553: 5552: 5551: 5550: 5549: 5548: 5462: 5459: 5458: 5457: 5432: 5429: 5428: 5427: 5426: 5425: 5424: 5423: 5422: 5421: 5420: 5419: 5342: 5341: 5316: 5313: 5312: 5311: 5287: 5286: 5285: 5284: 5251: 5248: 5247: 5246: 5214: 5211: 5210: 5209: 5185: 5182: 5181: 5180: 5179: 5178: 5177: 5176: 5175: 5174: 5173: 5172: 5171: 5170: 5169: 5168: 5167: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5162: 4984: 4983: 4982: 4981: 4980: 4979: 4978: 4977: 4976: 4975: 4897: 4896: 4895: 4894: 4887: 4886: 4885: 4884: 4873: 4872: 4847: 4844: 4843: 4842: 4817: 4808: 4807: 4806: 4777: 4774: 4773: 4772: 4747: 4744: 4735: 4722: 4720: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4714: 4713: 4674: 4673: 4672: 4671: 4670: 4669: 4668: 4667: 4603: 4602: 4575: 4572: 4571: 4570: 4569: 4568: 4567: 4566: 4565: 4564: 4531: 4530: 4529: 4528: 4527: 4526: 4483: 4482: 4460: 4436: 4433: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4404: 4351: 4343: 4342: 4320: 4317: 4316: 4315: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4309: 4308: 4307: 4306: 4305: 4304: 4303: 4204: 4141: 4140: 4116: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4083: 4080: 4078: 4075: 4074: 4073: 4048: 4045: 4043: 4040: 4039: 4038: 4037: 4036: 4035: 4034: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4030: 3989: 3964: 3942: 3897: 3891: 3890: 3846: 3826: 3823: 3822: 3821: 3797: 3794: 3791: 3790: 3773: 3772: 3767: 3756: 3753: 3752: 3751: 3727: 3726: 3713: 3712: 3706: 3700: 3694: 3688: 3682: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3677: 3669: 3668: 3660: 3659: 3650: 3649: 3639: 3636: 3635: 3634: 3619: 3618: 3596: 3567: 3564: 3563: 3562: 3533: 3530: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3526: 3509: 3508: 3485: 3484: 3468: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3403: 3402: 3377: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3364: 3265: 3264: 3238: 3214: 3208: 3206: 3203: 3201: 3198: 3197: 3196: 3171: 3168: 3165: 3164: 3145: 3144: 3139: 3128: 3125: 3124: 3123: 3098: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3018: 3012: 3011: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 2927: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2870: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2588: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2512: 2511:La Tour Eiffel 2509: 2508: 2507: 2478: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2269: 2268: 2255: 2254: 2233: 2222: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2157: 2156: 2128: 2125: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2066: 2065:Purpose of afd 2063: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2019: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2010: 1923: 1893: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1864: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1830: 1829: 1812: 1811: 1784: 1760: 1757: 1755: 1752: 1749: 1748: 1736: 1735: 1730: 1719: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1688: 1660: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1400: 1365:favorite movie 1359:, right? They 1353: 1329: 1328: 1310:any more ideas 1302: 1301: 1292: 1281: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1251: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1181: 1162: 1117: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1085: 1084: 1054: 1053: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 964: 963: 939: 936: 935: 934: 933: 932: 901: 900: 875: 872: 871: 870: 842: 839: 838: 837: 813: 808: 807: 806: 782: 779: 778: 777: 752: 749: 747: 744: 743: 742: 741: 740: 723: 722: 698: 695: 694: 693: 668: 665: 664: 663: 639: 636: 635: 634: 610: 609:99.251.114.120 607: 606: 605: 580: 577: 576: 575: 551: 546: 545: 544: 543: 542: 541: 540: 501: 500: 478: 453: 450: 449: 448: 423: 420: 419: 418: 393: 392: 378: 367: 364: 363: 362: 338: 335: 334: 333: 308: 305: 302: 301: 273: 272: 267: 256: 253: 252: 251: 227: 224: 223: 222: 197: 191: 190: 189: 165: 162: 160: 157: 156: 155: 154: 153: 132: 131: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 10577: 10562: 10559: 10554: 10546: 10543: 10542: 10541: 10538: 10533: 10527: 10526: 10521: 10520: 10519: 10518: 10499: 10495: 10491: 10481: 10468: 10467: 10466: 10465: 10464: 10463: 10462: 10461: 10460: 10459: 10458: 10457: 10456: 10455: 10454: 10453: 10452: 10451: 10434: 10431: 10426: 10420: 10419: 10413: 10408: 10403: 10402: 10401: 10397: 10393: 10388: 10387: 10386: 10383: 10378: 10372: 10371: 10366: 10361: 10360: 10359: 10355: 10351: 10346: 10345: 10344: 10343: 10342: 10341: 10340: 10339: 10338: 10337: 10328: 10325: 10320: 10314: 10313: 10307: 10306: 10305: 10301: 10297: 10293: 10288: 10284: 10283: 10282: 10281: 10280: 10279: 10274: 10271: 10266: 10260: 10259: 10255:policy page. 10253: 10252: 10251: 10250: 10247: 10244: 10243: 10240: 10237: 10236: 10224: 10218: 10217: 10211: 10210: 10209: 10206: 10201: 10195: 10194: 10188: 10186: 10183: 10178: 10172: 10171: 10165: 10162: 10161: 10159: 10153: 10152: 10145: 10141: 10137: 10133: 10128: 10127: 10126: 10125: 10122: 10119: 10114: 10108: 10107: 10101: 10096: 10095: 10094: 10090: 10086: 10081: 10080: 10061: 10055: 10054: 10048: 10047: 10046: 10045: 10044: 10043: 10042: 10041: 10040: 10039: 10038: 10037: 10026: 10023: 10018: 10012: 10011: 10005: 10004: 10003: 10000: 9995: 9986: 9981: 9980: 9979: 9976: 9971: 9965: 9964: 9958: 9953: 9952: 9951: 9948: 9943: 9934: 9933:Yogo sapphire 9929: 9928: 9925: 9922: 9917: 9911: 9910: 9904: 9899: 9898: 9897: 9893: 9889: 9885: 9881: 9877: 9876: 9873: 9870: 9865: 9856: 9850: 9847: 9842: 9836: 9835: 9829: 9825: 9820: 9815: 9814: 9813: 9812: 9811: 9810: 9801: 9797: 9796: 9795: 9794: 9793: 9792: 9785: 9780: 9779: 9777: 9771: 9770: 9763: 9760: 9759: 9758: 9757: 9754: 9751: 9746: 9740: 9739: 9733: 9732: 9713: 9710: 9705: 9699: 9698: 9692: 9691: 9690: 9689: 9688: 9687: 9686: 9685: 9684: 9683: 9682: 9681: 9680: 9679: 9678: 9677: 9676: 9675: 9652: 9648: 9644: 9643:188.28.117.86 9640: 9636: 9629: 9628:edit conflict 9624: 9622: 9618: 9614: 9609: 9608: 9607: 9604: 9601: 9597: 9596: 9595: 9591: 9587: 9586:188.28.117.86 9582: 9577: 9576: 9575: 9572: 9569: 9565: 9560: 9559: 9558: 9555: 9550: 9544: 9543: 9537: 9536: 9535: 9532: 9529: 9525: 9521: 9516: 9515: 9514: 9511: 9506: 9500: 9499: 9493: 9488: 9487: 9485: 9479: 9478: 9471: 9467: 9463: 9459: 9458: 9457: 9454: 9449: 9443: 9442: 9436: 9435: 9434: 9431: 9426: 9425: 9424: 9419: 9418: 9417: 9411: 9407: 9403: 9399: 9395: 9390: 9389: 9388: 9387: 9384: 9381: 9376: 9370: 9369: 9363: 9359: 9356: 9353: 9349: 9346: 9343: 9342: 9332: 9328: 9324: 9320: 9319: 9318: 9315: 9310: 9304: 9303: 9297: 9296: 9289: 9286: 9281: 9275: 9274: 9268: 9267: 9266: 9262: 9258: 9254: 9253: 9252: 9251: 9248: 9245: 9240: 9234: 9233: 9228: 9227: 9213: 9210: 9205: 9199: 9198: 9193: 9192: 9191: 9188: 9186: 9180: 9179: 9178: 9175: 9170: 9164: 9163: 9158: 9157: 9156: 9153: 9151: 9144: 9143: 9131: 9128: 9123: 9117: 9116: 9110: 9109: 9108: 9105: 9104: 9099: 9095: 9092:As I said at 9091: 9090: 9089: 9086: 9081: 9075: 9074: 9068: 9063: 9062: 9053: 9041: 9034: 9027: 9013: 9010: 9005: 8999: 8998: 8993: 8992: 8991: 8987: 8983: 8979: 8978: 8970: 8967: 8962: 8956: 8955: 8950: 8949: 8937: 8934: 8929: 8923: 8922: 8917: 8916: 8915: 8911: 8906: 8904: 8899: 8897: 8889: 8888: 8887: 8884: 8879: 8873: 8872: 8866: 8865: 8857: 8854: 8849: 8843: 8842: 8836: 8835: 8827: 8824: 8819: 8813: 8812: 8807: 8806: 8798: 8795: 8790: 8784: 8783: 8778: 8774: 8773: 8764: 8757: 8750: 8743: 8740: 8735: 8729: 8728: 8723: 8722: 8695: 8692: 8687: 8681: 8680: 8675: 8674: 8673: 8669: 8665: 8661: 8657: 8656: 8655: 8651: 8647: 8643: 8642: 8641: 8638: 8633: 8627: 8626: 8621: 8617: 8616: 8615: 8611: 8607: 8603: 8600: 8599: 8598: 8595: 8590: 8584: 8583: 8578: 8577: 8576: 8572: 8568: 8564: 8560: 8559: 8558: 8557: 8554: 8551: 8546: 8540: 8539: 8533: 8532: 8524: 8521: 8516: 8510: 8509: 8503: 8494: 8492: 8489: 8484: 8478: 8477: 8472: 8471: 8467: 8443: 8439: 8435: 8430: 8429: 8428: 8427: 8424: 8421: 8416: 8410: 8409: 8403: 8402: 8401: 8400: 8397: 8393: 8389: 8385: 8381: 8380: 8379: 8378: 8375: 8372: 8367: 8361: 8360: 8355: 8354: 8353: 8352: 8349: 8345: 8341: 8337: 8336: 8335: 8334: 8331: 8327: 8323: 8319: 8318: 8317: 8316: 8313: 8310: 8305: 8299: 8298: 8293: 8292: 8278: 8274: 8270: 8266: 8265: 8264: 8261: 8256: 8250: 8249: 8244: 8240: 8239: 8238: 8234: 8230: 8226: 8225: 8224: 8221: 8216: 8210: 8209: 8203: 8201: 8198: 8193: 8187: 8186: 8181: 8180: 8177: 8166: 8163: 8158: 8152: 8151: 8145: 8144: 8143: 8139: 8135: 8130: 8129: 8128: 8127: 8124: 8121: 8116: 8110: 8109: 8105: 8102: 8101: 8098: 8095: 8090: 8084: 8083: 8077: 8076: 8072: 8070: 8067: 8065: 8062: 8060: 8059: 8051: 8048: 8043: 8037: 8036: 8030: 8028: 8025: 8020: 8014: 8013: 8008: 8004: 8003: 7982: 7979: 7978: 7973: 7972: 7971: 7968: 7967: 7962: 7961: 7960: 7957: 7956: 7943: 7942: 7939: 7936: 7931: 7925: 7924: 7918: 7917: 7916: 7915: 7912: 7909: 7904: 7898: 7897: 7891: 7890: 7876: 7873: 7865: 7859: 7856: 7855: 7854: 7851: 7845: 7844: 7839: 7838: 7837: 7834: 7833: 7828: 7827: 7826: 7823: 7818: 7812: 7811: 7806: 7805: 7802: 7800: 7799: 7789: 7786: 7781: 7775: 7774: 7768: 7767: 7766: 7762: 7758: 7754: 7753: 7750: 7747: 7742: 7736: 7735: 7730: 7725: 7724: 7716: 7712: 7708: 7707: 7702: 7698: 7694: 7690: 7689: 7686: 7683: 7680: 7675: 7664: 7659: 7656: 7651: 7645: 7644: 7624: 7620: 7614: 7613: 7605: 7602: 7601: 7600: 7599: 7598: 7594: 7590: 7585: 7582: 7581: 7580: 7579: 7578: 7574: 7568: 7567: 7560: 7555: 7554: 7553: 7549: 7545: 7542: 7538: 7537: 7536: 7535: 7530: 7526: 7522: 7518: 7517: 7516: 7515: 7512: 7508: 7502: 7501: 7494: 7491: 7486: 7482: 7481: 7472: 7468: 7464: 7460: 7457: 7456: 7455: 7454: 7453: 7452: 7451: 7450: 7439: 7436: 7431: 7425: 7424: 7418: 7417: 7416: 7415: 7414: 7410: 7406: 7401: 7400: 7399: 7396: 7391: 7385: 7384: 7379: 7375: 7374: 7373: 7369: 7365: 7360: 7359: 7354: 7351: 7346: 7340: 7339: 7321: 7318: 7317: 7310: 7301: 7298: 7294: 7293: 7283: 7280: 7275: 7269: 7268: 7263: 7262: 7252: 7248: 7244: 7240: 7239: 7238: 7237: 7234: 7231: 7226: 7220: 7219: 7214: 7213: 7203: 7200: 7195: 7193: 7189: 7186: 7182: 7181: 7169: 7165: 7161: 7157: 7156: 7155: 7154: 7151: 7148: 7143: 7137: 7136: 7131: 7127: 7123: 7122: 7115: 7111: 7107: 7102: 7098: 7095: 7092: 7088: 7084: 7080: 7076: 7072: 7071: 7070: 7069: 7068: 7067: 7062: 7059: 7054: 7048: 7047: 7041: 7040: 7039: 7035: 7031: 7026: 7022: 7021: 7016: 7013: 7008: 7002: 7001: 6995: 6994: 6993: 6992: 6979: 6976: 6971: 6965: 6964: 6959: 6958: 6957: 6953: 6949: 6944: 6940: 6936: 6932: 6931: 6930: 6927: 6922: 6916: 6915: 6909: 6905: 6902:violation of 6900: 6896: 6895: 6894: 6890: 6886: 6881: 6880: 6879: 6876: 6871: 6865: 6864: 6858: 6855: 6854: 6853: 6852: 6849: 6845: 6841: 6840:89.100.207.51 6837: 6833: 6832: 6829: 6826: 6821: 6815: 6814: 6808: 6807: 6797: 6792: 6787: 6779: 6778: 6777: 6776: 6773: 6770: 6765: 6759: 6758: 6751: 6742: 6741: 6727: 6724: 6722: 6721: 6715: 6710: 6708: 6701: 6700: 6699: 6698: 6695: 6692: 6687: 6681: 6680: 6675: 6674: 6673: 6672: 6669: 6666: 6664: 6663: 6657: 6652: 6650: 6643: 6639: 6635: 6633: 6630: 6628: 6627: 6621: 6616: 6614: 6608: 6604: 6603: 6602: 6601: 6598: 6595: 6590: 6584: 6583: 6577: 6576: 6572: 6565: 6562: 6557: 6551: 6550: 6545: 6544: 6536: 6529: 6526: 6521: 6515: 6514: 6508: 6499: 6498: 6495: 6488: 6485: 6480: 6474: 6473: 6467: 6466: 6463: 6460: 6455: 6449: 6448: 6442: 6441: 6438: 6435: 6430: 6424: 6423: 6417: 6413: 6412: 6404: 6401: 6396: 6390: 6389: 6384: 6383: 6380: 6379:Hosni Mubarak 6366: 6363: 6362: 6358: 6354: 6349: 6348: 6345: 6342: 6339: 6334: 6319: 6316: 6314: 6310: 6306: 6301: 6299: 6296: 6291: 6285: 6284: 6279: 6278: 6268: 6265: 6260: 6254: 6253: 6248: 6243: 6239: 6238: 6237: 6234: 6231: 6227: 6223: 6222: 6206: 6203: 6198: 6192: 6191: 6185: 6184: 6183: 6180: 6177: 6172: 6170: 6167: 6164: 6159: 6158: 6157: 6156: 6155: 6154: 6153: 6152: 6145: 6142: 6137: 6131: 6130: 6124: 6123: 6122: 6121: 6120: 6119: 6114: 6110: 6106: 6102: 6101: 6100: 6099: 6093: 6092: 6091: 6090: 6083: 6082: 6081: 6080: 6073: 6072: 6071: 6070: 6064: 6060: 6055: 6054: 6053: 6052: 6045: 6044: 6043: 6042: 6035: 6034: 6033: 6032: 6025: 6024: 6023: 6022: 6015: 6014: 6013: 6012: 6005: 6004: 6003: 6002: 5999: 5996: 5991: 5985: 5984: 5978: 5977: 5972: 5968: 5967: 5963: 5959: 5958: 5953: 5952: 5948: 5945: 5942: 5941: 5933: 5930: 5925: 5919: 5918: 5912: 5908: 5904: 5903: 5883: 5879: 5875: 5871: 5867: 5866: 5865: 5861: 5857: 5853: 5852: 5849: 5837: 5834: 5829: 5823: 5822: 5816: 5815: 5799: 5796: 5791: 5785: 5784: 5779: 5778: 5777: 5774: 5769: 5768: 5767: 5762: 5761: 5760: 5753: 5752: 5751: 5748: 5747:User:King4057 5743: 5742: 5741: 5740: 5739: 5738: 5735: 5732: 5727: 5721: 5720: 5714: 5713: 5705: 5702: 5697: 5691: 5690: 5685: 5684: 5676: 5673: 5665: 5658: 5657: 5652: 5648: 5644: 5640: 5636: 5635: 5634: 5633: 5630: 5627: 5622: 5616: 5609: 5608: 5605: 5602: 5594: 5587: 5582: 5581: 5578: 5574: 5570: 5566: 5562: 5561: 5547: 5544: 5543: 5538: 5537: 5529: 5528: 5527: 5524: 5519: 5513: 5512: 5507: 5506: 5505: 5502: 5501: 5496: 5495: 5487: 5486: 5485: 5482: 5477: 5471: 5465: 5464: 5456: 5453: 5448: 5442: 5435: 5434: 5418: 5415: 5410: 5404: 5403: 5397: 5396: 5395: 5391: 5387: 5383: 5382: 5381: 5378: 5373: 5367: 5366: 5360: 5359: 5358: 5354: 5350: 5346: 5345: 5344: 5343: 5340: 5337: 5332: 5326: 5319: 5318: 5310: 5307: 5302: 5296: 5289: 5288: 5283: 5280: 5277: 5273: 5272: 5271: 5268: 5265: 5259: 5254: 5253: 5245: 5242: 5237: 5231: 5225: 5220: 5217: 5216: 5208: 5205: 5200: 5194: 5188: 5187: 5161: 5158: 5153: 5147: 5141: 5136: 5135: 5134: 5130: 5126: 5122: 5118: 5113: 5112: 5111: 5108: 5103: 5097: 5090: 5089: 5088: 5084: 5080: 5076: 5075: 5074: 5071: 5063: 5056: 5055: 5054: 5053: 5052: 5048: 5044: 5039: 5038: 5037: 5034: 5026: 5020: 5016: 5011: 5010: 5009: 5006: 5001: 4995: 4988: 4987: 4986: 4985: 4974: 4971: 4966: 4960: 4954: 4953: 4952: 4948: 4944: 4939: 4938: 4937: 4934: 4929: 4923: 4916: 4915: 4914: 4910: 4906: 4901: 4900: 4899: 4898: 4891: 4890: 4889: 4888: 4882: 4877: 4876: 4875: 4874: 4871: 4868: 4863: 4857: 4850: 4849: 4841: 4838: 4833: 4827: 4820: 4819: 4816: 4812: 4805: 4802: 4797: 4791: 4785: 4780: 4779: 4771: 4768: 4763: 4757: 4750: 4749: 4740: 4733: 4726: 4712: 4707: 4702: 4698: 4697: 4696: 4693: 4688: 4682: 4676: 4675: 4666: 4662: 4657: 4652: 4645: 4644: 4643: 4640: 4635: 4629: 4623: 4622: 4621: 4616: 4611: 4607: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4601: 4598: 4593: 4587: 4582: 4578: 4577: 4563: 4559: 4555: 4554:Richard Myers 4551: 4547: 4543: 4539: 4538: 4537: 4536: 4535: 4534: 4533: 4532: 4525: 4522: 4517: 4511: 4505: 4504: 4503: 4499: 4495: 4494:Richard Myers 4491: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4481: 4478: 4473: 4467: 4461: 4459: 4456: 4451: 4445: 4439: 4438: 4426: 4423: 4418: 4412: 4405: 4403: 4400: 4395: 4389: 4382: 4381: 4380: 4377: 4371: 4370: 4369: 4365: 4363: 4360: 4357: 4349: 4345: 4344: 4341: 4338: 4337: 4327: 4323: 4322: 4302: 4299: 4294: 4288: 4282: 4281: 4279: 4273: 4272: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4260: 4255: 4249: 4243: 4242: 4240: 4234: 4233: 4227: 4226: 4225: 4222: 4217: 4211: 4205: 4203: 4200: 4195: 4189: 4183: 4182: 4181: 4178: 4173: 4167: 4162: 4159: 4158: 4156: 4150: 4149: 4143: 4142: 4139: 4136: 4131: 4125: 4119: 4118: 4114: 4106: 4103: 4098: 4092: 4086: 4085: 4077:Twitter issue 4072: 4069: 4064: 4058: 4051: 4050: 4047:Scott Delaney 4029: 4026: 4021: 4015: 4009: 4008: 4007: 4003: 4001: 3998: 3995: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3982: 3977: 3971: 3965: 3963: 3960: 3955: 3949: 3943: 3941: 3938: 3933: 3927: 3921: 3917: 3916: 3915: 3911: 3909: 3906: 3903: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3892: 3889: 3886: 3881: 3875: 3869: 3865: 3864: 3860: 3858: 3855: 3852: 3836: 3831: 3820: 3817: 3812: 3806: 3800: 3799: 3789: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3775: 3774: 3771: 3768: 3765: 3760: 3750: 3747: 3742: 3736: 3729: 3728: 3724: 3720: 3715: 3714: 3710: 3707: 3704: 3701: 3698: 3695: 3692: 3689: 3687: 3684: 3683: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3666: 3662: 3661: 3657: 3652: 3651: 3647: 3642: 3641: 3633: 3629: 3625: 3621: 3620: 3617: 3614: 3609: 3603: 3597: 3595: 3592: 3587: 3581: 3575: 3570: 3569: 3561: 3558: 3553: 3547: 3541: 3536: 3535: 3525: 3521: 3517: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3510: 3507: 3504: 3499: 3493: 3487: 3486: 3483: 3479: 3475: 3471: 3470: 3456: 3452: 3448: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3439: 3434: 3428: 3422: 3421: 3420: 3416: 3412: 3407: 3406: 3405: 3404: 3401: 3398: 3393: 3387: 3380: 3379: 3363: 3360: 3355: 3349: 3343: 3342: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3329: 3325: 3324: 3319: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3310: 3305: 3299: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3286: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3263: 3260: 3255: 3249: 3243: 3239: 3237: 3234: 3229: 3223: 3217: 3216: 3212: 3195: 3192: 3187: 3181: 3174: 3173: 3163: 3159: 3155: 3151: 3147: 3146: 3143: 3140: 3137: 3132: 3122: 3119: 3114: 3108: 3101: 3100: 3086: 3083: 3078: 3072: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3061: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3050: 3044: 3043: 3042: 3039: 3034: 3028: 3021: 3020: 3016: 3015:Review please 3001: 2997: 2992: 2987: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2968: 2963: 2957: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2945: 2940: 2935: 2928: 2926:What message? 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2915: 2912: 2907: 2901: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2890: 2885: 2879: 2873: 2872: 2858: 2855: 2850: 2844: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2832: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2820: 2815: 2809: 2802: 2798: 2794: 2791: 2783: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2770: 2765: 2760: 2753: 2752: 2741: 2737: 2732: 2727: 2719: 2718: 2717: 2714: 2706: 2699: 2695: 2692: 2691: 2690: 2686: 2681: 2676: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2663: 2655: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2643: 2638: 2633: 2626: 2622: 2619: 2611: 2605: 2601: 2597: 2593: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2580: 2577: 2572: 2566: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2552: 2549: 2548: 2545: 2541: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2532: 2527: 2521: 2515: 2514: 2506: 2503: 2498: 2492: 2486: 2481: 2480: 2464: 2461: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2451: 2446: 2440: 2433: 2420: 2417: 2412: 2406: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2394: 2389: 2383: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2372: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2363: 2358: 2352: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2341: 2336: 2330: 2324: 2323: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2295: 2290: 2284: 2278: 2277:cowboy coffee 2273: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2267: 2264: 2259: 2258: 2253: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2231: 2227: 2226: 2211: 2207: 2205: 2200: 2198: 2192: 2188: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2178: 2173: 2167: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2154: 2150: 2148: 2143: 2141: 2135: 2131: 2130: 2120: 2117: 2112: 2106: 2100: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2092: 2087: 2081: 2074: 2069: 2068: 2058: 2055: 2052: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2043: 2038: 2032: 2026: 2022: 2021: 2018:Insufferable? 2009: 2006: 2001: 1995: 1989: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1979: 1977: 1972: 1967: 1958: 1957:edit conflict 1953: 1952: 1951: 1948: 1943: 1937: 1931: 1927: 1924: 1922: 1919: 1914: 1908: 1901: 1896: 1895: 1887: 1884: 1879: 1873: 1867: 1866: 1854: 1851: 1846: 1840: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1828: 1825: 1820: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1810: 1807: 1802: 1796: 1790: 1785: 1783: 1780: 1775: 1769: 1763: 1762: 1747: 1744: 1738: 1737: 1734: 1731: 1728: 1723: 1713: 1710: 1705: 1699: 1693: 1689: 1687: 1684: 1679: 1673: 1667: 1663: 1662: 1652: 1649: 1644: 1638: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1604: 1601: 1596: 1590: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1564: 1560: 1556: 1555: 1554: 1551: 1546: 1540: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1516: 1511: 1505: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1477: 1472: 1466: 1459: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1451: 1447: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1437: 1432: 1426: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1413: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1399: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1381: 1373: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1354: 1352: 1348: 1340: 1333: 1332: 1327: 1324: 1315: 1311: 1308: 1304: 1303: 1300: 1298: 1293: 1290: 1285: 1275: 1272: 1267: 1261: 1254: 1253: 1237: 1234: 1229: 1223: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1212: 1209: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1200: 1195: 1189: 1182: 1180: 1176: 1174: 1171: 1168: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1154: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1138: 1133: 1127: 1120: 1119: 1101: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1083: 1080: 1075: 1069: 1063: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1052: 1048: 1044: 1040: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1021: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1004: 1003: 1002: 999: 994: 988: 981: 980: 979: 975: 971: 966: 965: 962: 959: 954: 948: 942: 941: 931: 928: 926: 925: 919: 914: 912: 905: 904: 903: 902: 899: 896: 891: 885: 878: 877: 869: 866: 861: 855: 849: 845: 844: 836: 833: 828: 822: 816: 815: 812: 805: 802: 797: 791: 785: 784: 776: 773: 768: 762: 755: 754: 739: 735: 731: 727: 726: 725: 724: 721: 718: 713: 707: 701: 700: 692: 689: 684: 678: 671: 670: 667:Need feedback 662: 659: 654: 648: 642: 641: 633: 630: 625: 619: 613: 612: 604: 601: 596: 590: 583: 582: 574: 571: 566: 560: 554: 553: 550: 539: 536: 531: 525: 519: 518: 517: 513: 509: 505: 504: 503: 502: 499: 496: 491: 485: 479: 477: 474: 469: 463: 456: 455: 447: 444: 439: 433: 426: 425: 417: 414: 409: 403: 397: 396: 391: 387: 383: 379: 376: 372: 371: 361: 358: 353: 347: 341: 340: 332: 329: 324: 318: 311: 310: 300: 297: 292: 291: 290: 285: 284: 283: 275: 274: 271: 268: 265: 260: 250: 247: 242: 236: 230: 229: 221: 218: 213: 207: 200: 199: 195: 194:Marketing mix 188: 185: 180: 174: 168: 167: 152: 148: 144: 140: 136: 135: 134: 133: 130: 127: 122: 116: 110: 109: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 10525:Dennis Brown 10524: 10479: 10418:Dennis Brown 10417: 10411: 10406: 10370:Dennis Brown 10369: 10364: 10312:Dennis Brown 10311: 10258:Dennis Brown 10257: 10215: 10193:Dennis Brown 10192: 10170:Dennis Brown 10169: 10150: 10143: 10106:Dennis Brown 10105: 10099: 10052: 10010:Dennis Brown 10009: 9963:Dennis Brown 9962: 9909:Dennis Brown 9908: 9902: 9883: 9879: 9834:Dennis Brown 9833: 9827: 9782: 9768: 9738:Dennis Brown 9737: 9697:Dennis Brown 9696: 9638: 9634: 9542:Dennis Brown 9541: 9523: 9519: 9498:Dennis Brown 9497: 9476: 9441:Dennis Brown 9440: 9422: 9421: 9415: 9414: 9409: 9368:Dennis Brown 9367: 9302:Dennis Brown 9301: 9273:Dennis Brown 9272: 9232:Dennis Brown 9231: 9197:Dennis Brown 9196: 9184: 9162:Dennis Brown 9161: 9149: 9115:Dennis Brown 9114: 9101: 9097: 9073:Dennis Brown 9072: 9066: 8997:Dennis Brown 8996: 8954:Dennis Brown 8953: 8921:Dennis Brown 8920: 8903:Swashbuckler 8902: 8895: 8871:Dennis Brown 8870: 8841:Dennis Brown 8840: 8811:Dennis Brown 8810: 8782:Dennis Brown 8781: 8727:Dennis Brown 8726: 8679:Dennis Brown 8678: 8664:Gerda Arendt 8646:Gerda Arendt 8625:Dennis Brown 8624: 8606:Gerda Arendt 8582:Dennis Brown 8581: 8567:Gerda Arendt 8538:Dennis Brown 8537: 8508:Dennis Brown 8507: 8501: 8476:Dennis Brown 8475: 8408:Dennis Brown 8407: 8359:Dennis Brown 8358: 8297:Dennis Brown 8296: 8248:Dennis Brown 8247: 8208:Dennis Brown 8207: 8185:Dennis Brown 8184: 8150:Dennis Brown 8149: 8108:Dennis Brown 8107: 8082:Dennis Brown 8081: 8035:Dennis Brown 8034: 8012:Dennis Brown 8011: 7976: 7964: 7954: 7923:Dennis Brown 7922: 7896:Dennis Brown 7895: 7843:Dennis Brown 7842: 7830: 7810:Dennis Brown 7809: 7773:Dennis Brown 7772: 7734:Dennis Brown 7733: 7684: 7662: 7643:Dennis Brown 7642: 7608: 7562: 7496: 7423:Dennis Brown 7422: 7383:Dennis Brown 7382: 7338:Dennis Brown 7337: 7303: 7267:Dennis Brown 7266: 7218:Dennis Brown 7217: 7135:Dennis Brown 7134: 7125: 7083:WP:SECONDARY 7046:Dennis Brown 7045: 7000:Dennis Brown 6999: 6963:Dennis Brown 6962: 6938: 6934: 6914:Dennis Brown 6913: 6898: 6863:Dennis Brown 6862: 6813:Dennis Brown 6812: 6757:Dennis Brown 6756: 6749: 6719: 6718: 6706: 6679:Dennis Brown 6678: 6661: 6660: 6648: 6625: 6624: 6612: 6582:Dennis Brown 6581: 6549:Dennis Brown 6548: 6513:Dennis Brown 6512: 6506: 6472:Dennis Brown 6471: 6447:Dennis Brown 6446: 6422:Dennis Brown 6421: 6388:Dennis Brown 6387: 6355: 6343: 6303: 6283:Dennis Brown 6282: 6252:Dennis Brown 6251: 6225: 6190:Dennis Brown 6189: 6129:Dennis Brown 6128: 6062: 6058: 5983:Dennis Brown 5982: 5970: 5917:Dennis Brown 5916: 5848:Anne Bremner 5821:Dennis Brown 5820: 5783:Dennis Brown 5782: 5765: 5764: 5758: 5757: 5719:Dennis Brown 5718: 5689:Dennis Brown 5688: 5643:Gerda Arendt 5614:Dennis Brown 5569:Gerda Arendt 5541: 5536: 5511:Dennis Brown 5510: 5499: 5494: 5469:Dennis Brown 5440:Dennis Brown 5402:Dennis Brown 5401: 5365:Dennis Brown 5364: 5324:Dennis Brown 5294:Dennis Brown 5229:Dennis Brown 5192:Dennis Brown 5145:Dennis Brown 5120: 5095:Dennis Brown 4993:Dennis Brown 4958:Dennis Brown 4921:Dennis Brown 4855:Dennis Brown 4846:Mentor issue 4825:Dennis Brown 4789:Dennis Brown 4755:Dennis Brown 4732:Knowledge:AN 4680:Dennis Brown 4627:Dennis Brown 4585:Dennis Brown 4580: 4549: 4545: 4540:No response 4509:Dennis Brown 4490:Cbislingtion 4465:Dennis Brown 4443:Dennis Brown 4410:Dennis Brown 4387:Dennis Brown 4361: 4358: 4355: 4330: 4286:Dennis Brown 4270: 4247:Dennis Brown 4231: 4209:Dennis Brown 4187:Dennis Brown 4165:Dennis Brown 4160: 4147: 4123:Dennis Brown 4090:Dennis Brown 4056:Dennis Brown 4013:Dennis Brown 3999: 3996: 3993: 3969:Dennis Brown 3947:Dennis Brown 3925:Dennis Brown 3907: 3904: 3901: 3873:Dennis Brown 3856: 3853: 3850: 3804:Dennis Brown 3779: 3778: 3769: 3734:Dennis Brown 3723:WP:USERNAMES 3718: 3697:WP:COPYRIGHT 3655: 3645: 3601:Dennis Brown 3579:Dennis Brown 3545:Dennis Brown 3491:Dennis Brown 3426:Dennis Brown 3385:Dennis Brown 3347:Dennis Brown 3322: 3321: 3297:Dennis Brown 3247:Dennis Brown 3241: 3221:Dennis Brown 3179:Dennis Brown 3141: 3106:Dennis Brown 3070:Dennis Brown 3026:Dennis Brown 2955:Dennis Brown 2899:Dennis Brown 2877:Dennis Brown 2842:Dennis Brown 2807:Dennis Brown 2800: 2604:User:AniMate 2594:I removed a 2587:Youreallycan 2564:Dennis Brown 2547: 2519:Dennis Brown 2490:Dennis Brown 2438:Dennis Brown 2404:Dennis Brown 2381:Dennis Brown 2350:Dennis Brown 2328:Dennis Brown 2320:Angela Lopez 2282:Dennis Brown 2203: 2196: 2190: 2186: 2165:Dennis Brown 2146: 2139: 2133: 2104:Dennis Brown 2079:Dennis Brown 2030:Dennis Brown 2024: 1993:Dennis Brown 1975: 1970: 1965: 1935:Dennis Brown 1925: 1906:Dennis Brown 1871:Dennis Brown 1838:Dennis Brown 1794:Dennis Brown 1767:Dennis Brown 1732: 1697:Dennis Brown 1671:Dennis Brown 1636:Dennis Brown 1588:Dennis Brown 1538:Dennis Brown 1503:Dennis Brown 1488: 1485:Seamus (dog) 1464:Dennis Brown 1424:Dennis Brown 1421:rock soup. 1294: 1259:Dennis Brown 1221:Dennis Brown 1187:Dennis Brown 1172: 1169: 1166: 1125:Dennis Brown 1067:Dennis Brown 1061: 1038: 1007: 986:Dennis Brown 946:Dennis Brown 923: 922: 910: 883:Dennis Brown 853:Dennis Brown 820:Dennis Brown 789:Dennis Brown 760:Dennis Brown 705:Dennis Brown 676:Dennis Brown 646:Dennis Brown 617:Dennis Brown 588:Dennis Brown 558:Dennis Brown 523:Dennis Brown 483:Dennis Brown 461:Dennis Brown 431:Dennis Brown 401:Dennis Brown 345:Dennis Brown 316:Dennis Brown 288: 287: 281: 280: 269: 234:Dennis Brown 205:Dennis Brown 172:Dennis Brown 159:RfC/U notice 114:Dennis Brown 78: 43: 37: 9347:, and here 9059:first blush 8975:You online? 8460:Tinga Tinga 8289:AfD closure 7559:WP:COATRACK 7378:You can too 6785:Gamezero05 6642:Inter Milan 6535:Alicia Wade 6302:Thank you. 5558:My username 5276:Jasper Deng 5264:Jasper Deng 5213:David Steen 4548:instead of 4435:Sockpuppets 3154:Crisco 1492 2670:your mind. 2544:Bencherlite 2303:Tim Hortons 1764:Looking.... 1742:Dr. Blofeld 1458:Andy Warhol 1208:Jasper Deng 1150:Jasper Deng 730:History2007 226:Just a note 106:Banned user 36:This is an 9635:Foundation 9613:Epipelagic 9429:Review me! 9398:Adambrower 7243:Corbomiteo 7079:WP:PRIMARY 6836:WP:NOTVAND 6219:An apology 5812:DanceKing5 5772:Review me! 5015:User:Bbb23 4903:opinion.-- 4552:. Thanks, 3574:Mojoworker 3514:Thanks! §§ 3488:Blocked. 3332:Mojoworker 3281:Mojoworker 3213:once again 2460:kelapstick 2371:kelapstick 2307:kelapstick 2263:kelapstick 2249:kelapstick 2245:flat white 2237:long black 2134:never ever 2073:WP:Merging 1892:DS/TG IBAN 1563:kelapstick 1528:kelapstick 1493:kelapstick 1450:kelapstick 1323:kelapstick 1146:VirtualBox 697:Protection 295:Review me! 143:EdJohnston 98:Archive 10 9888:Chedzilla 9824:Rock soup 9639:allegedly 9564:this user 9526:too far. 9185:INeverCry 9150:INeverCry 8384:WP:AFD/AI 8132:revert.-- 7977:Despayre 7955:Despayre 7796:Boomerang 6908:WP:VANDAL 6324:Thank you 5971:shouldn't 5710:EASYMONEY 5534:Richerman 5492:Richerman 4350:, though. 3691:5 pillars 3467:Sock case 1926:Follow up 1116:Dual boot 781:Thanks... 579:Webcomics 90:Archive 7 85:Archive 6 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 10407:2 months 10216:Penyulap 10151:Penyulap 10100:organize 10053:Penyulap 9769:Penyulap 9603:Fatuorum 9571:Fatuorum 9531:Fatuorum 9477:Penyulap 9224:Bullying 9103:MastCell 9038:You can 9020:Talkback 8761:You can 8658:Thanks, 8269:Textorus 8229:Textorus 7693:Ebikeguy 7362:sense.-- 7328:Question 6906:. Read 6416:WP:MUSIC 6233:Fatuorum 6179:Fatuorum 6166:Fatuorum 5890:Daft SPI 5639:precious 5637:Another 4941:wrong.-- 4737:You can 4719:Talkback 4375:Dipankan 4271:Penyulap 4232:Penyulap 4148:Penyulap 3656:properly 3318:warn him 3059:Dipankan 3048:Dipankan 2799:Egg, it 2193:that. → 2054:Fatuorum 1357:WP:BEANS 1297:WP:BEANS 508:Rockfang 10549:Pumpkin 10287:WP:MEAT 10144:have to 9990:Pumpkin 9938:Pumpkin 9860:Pumpkin 9828:diverse 9800:English 9600:Malleus 9568:Malleus 9528:Malleus 9350:and on 9323:Mathsci 8468:request 8466:WP:RFPP 7711:Keilana 6943:blocked 6738:UFC 148 6607:WP:RMCI 6573:backlog 6353:Yunshui 6230:Malleus 6176:Malleus 6163:Malleus 5461:Philcha 5140:WP:BLPN 4701:Toddst1 4610:Toddst1 4359:ean–Hun 3997:ean–Hun 3905:ean–Hun 3854:ean–Hun 3825:Ribfest 3796:Request 3703:WP:NPOV 3663:We are 3447:Drmargi 3411:Drmargi 3323:sandbox 3279:there. 3277:academy 3200:WP:RFPP 2831:AniMate 2485:WP:HELP 2051:Malleus 1930:WP:IBAN 1900:WP:IBAN 1379:Shalott 1361:WP:FART 1346:Shalott 1170:ean–Hun 1062:mistake 811:Friends 39:archive 9985:WP:QAI 9584:then. 8777:WP:CVU 8660:helped 8134:Shrike 7867:really 7314:(Talk) 7160:Gaba p 7025:WP:AGF 6948:Gaba p 6904:WP:AGF 6857:WP:NPA 6707:Wesley 6649:Wesley 6613:Wesley 6063:system 5842:Revert 5755:poor. 5667:really 5596:really 5542:(talk) 5500:(talk) 5279:(talk) 5267:(talk) 5224:WP:ATA 5219:WP:BRD 5117:WP:NLT 5065:really 5028:really 5019:WP:NLT 4881:WP:NLT 4655:Centri 4550:closed 4326:WP:ANI 3709:WP:COI 3624:Dan653 3328:WP:CIR 3273:WP:CVU 3205:Thanks 2990:Centri 2938:Centri 2801:is not 2785:really 2763:Centri 2730:Centri 2708:really 2698:WP:TPG 2679:Centri 2657:really 2636:Centri 2613:really 2596:WP:TPG 2187:polite 1988:policy 1572:Drmies 1408:Drmies 1390:Drmies 1307:Drmies 1250:Thanks 1211:(talk) 1153:(talk) 911:Wesley 848:WP:DRN 382:Dianna 196:at AN3 10296:Avanu 9423:Vesey 9094:WP:AN 8714:Socks 8662:;) -- 8604:;) -- 8434:Bbb23 8388:Bbb23 8340:Bbb23 8322:Bbb23 8007:WP:AN 7611:Mar4d 7589:JCAla 7565:Mar4d 7544:JCAla 7521:JCAla 7499:Mar4d 7463:JCAla 7405:Bbb23 7364:Bbb23 6939:fully 6790:talk 6720:Mouse 6662:Mouse 6626:Mouse 6571:WP:RM 6309:Stalk 5911:SR-71 5874:Bbb23 5856:Bbb23 5766:Vesey 5121:close 5079:Bbb23 5043:Bbb23 4943:Bbb23 4905:Bbb23 4362:ter—► 4356:⋙–Ber 4000:ter—► 3994:⋙–Ber 3908:ter—► 3902:⋙–Ber 3857:ter—► 3851:⋙–Ber 1692:WP:AN 1666:WP:AN 1489:after 1299:award 1173:ter—► 1167:⋙–Ber 1092:Bbb23 1043:Bbb23 970:Bbb23 924:Mouse 289:Vesey 16:< 10557:talk 10494:talk 10396:talk 10354:talk 10300:talk 10089:talk 9998:talk 9946:talk 9903:must 9892:talk 9884:poor 9868:talk 9647:talk 9617:talk 9590:talk 9581:this 9416:Ryan 9410:want 9404:and 9327:talk 9261:talk 8986:talk 8668:talk 8650:talk 8610:talk 8571:talk 8565:, -- 8502:Done 8438:talk 8392:talk 8344:talk 8326:talk 8273:talk 8233:talk 8138:talk 7997:BLPN 7966:jc37 7832:jc37 7761:talk 7697:talk 7618:talk 7593:talk 7572:talk 7548:talk 7525:talk 7506:talk 7485:this 7467:talk 7409:talk 7368:talk 7307:Luke 7247:talk 7164:talk 7126:only 7110:talk 7034:talk 6952:talk 6889:talk 6844:talk 6750:Done 6507:Done 6313:Talk 6242:bias 6109:talk 5878:talk 5860:talk 5759:Ryan 5681:RFPP 5647:talk 5573:talk 5567:. -- 5390:talk 5386:Dmcq 5353:talk 5349:Dmcq 5129:talk 5083:talk 5047:talk 4947:talk 4909:talk 4813:and 4706:talk 4615:talk 4558:talk 4546:open 4542:here 4498:talk 4332:Neil 4042:Sock 3782:→TSU 3646:will 3628:talk 3520:talk 3478:talk 3451:talk 3415:talk 3336:talk 3285:talk 3158:talk 2694:diff 2316:this 2197:ROUX 2191:Fuck 2140:ROUX 1823:Chan 1819:Gwen 1659:Ban? 1576:talk 1559:here 1524:Hahn 1448:. -- 1412:talk 1394:talk 1371:Lady 1338:Lady 1161:too. 1096:talk 1047:talk 1016:talk 974:talk 734:talk 512:talk 386:talk 282:Ryan 147:talk 10552:Sky 10545:bye 10412:are 9993:Sky 9941:Sky 9863:Sky 9524:way 9520:all 9396:or 8896:Zen 7871:can 7863:You 7490:POV 6640:to 6059:not 5900:Rfa 5872:.-- 5671:can 5663:You 5600:can 5592:You 5125:Wnt 5069:can 5061:You 5032:can 5024:You 4650:Egg 3522:) 3480:) 3242:tag 2985:Egg 2933:Egg 2869:Lol 2789:can 2781:You 2758:Egg 2725:Egg 2712:can 2704:You 2674:Egg 2661:can 2653:You 2631:Egg 2617:can 2609:You 1668:. 1039:and 938:YRC 751:ANI 638:FYI 164:Hey 10531:2¢ 10528:- 10496:) 10424:2¢ 10421:- 10398:) 10376:2¢ 10373:- 10356:) 10318:2¢ 10315:- 10302:) 10264:2¢ 10261:- 10199:2¢ 10196:- 10176:2¢ 10173:- 10112:2¢ 10109:- 10091:) 10016:2¢ 10013:- 9987:. 9969:2¢ 9966:- 9915:2¢ 9912:- 9894:) 9840:2¢ 9837:- 9744:2¢ 9741:- 9703:2¢ 9700:- 9649:) 9619:) 9592:) 9548:2¢ 9545:- 9504:2¢ 9501:- 9447:2¢ 9444:- 9374:2¢ 9371:- 9329:) 9308:2¢ 9305:- 9279:2¢ 9276:- 9263:) 9238:2¢ 9235:- 9203:2¢ 9200:- 9168:2¢ 9165:- 9121:2¢ 9118:- 9098:do 9079:2¢ 9076:- 9067:is 9003:2¢ 9000:- 8988:) 8960:2¢ 8957:- 8927:2¢ 8924:- 8909:.☠ 8894:☯. 8877:2¢ 8874:- 8847:2¢ 8844:- 8817:2¢ 8814:- 8788:2¢ 8785:- 8733:2¢ 8730:- 8685:2¢ 8682:- 8670:) 8652:) 8631:2¢ 8628:- 8612:) 8588:2¢ 8585:- 8573:) 8544:2¢ 8541:- 8514:2¢ 8511:- 8482:2¢ 8479:- 8440:) 8414:2¢ 8411:- 8394:) 8365:2¢ 8362:- 8346:) 8328:) 8303:2¢ 8300:- 8275:) 8254:2¢ 8251:- 8235:) 8214:2¢ 8211:- 8191:2¢ 8188:- 8156:2¢ 8153:- 8140:) 8114:2¢ 8111:- 8088:2¢ 8085:- 8041:2¢ 8038:- 8018:2¢ 8015:- 7929:2¢ 7926:- 7902:2¢ 7899:- 7849:2¢ 7846:- 7816:2¢ 7813:- 7779:2¢ 7776:- 7763:) 7740:2¢ 7737:- 7731:. 7713:| 7699:) 7649:2¢ 7646:- 7621:) 7595:) 7575:) 7550:) 7527:) 7509:) 7469:) 7429:2¢ 7426:- 7411:) 7403:-- 7389:2¢ 7386:- 7370:) 7344:2¢ 7341:- 7273:2¢ 7270:- 7249:) 7224:2¢ 7221:- 7166:) 7141:2¢ 7138:- 7052:2¢ 7049:- 7006:2¢ 7003:- 6969:2¢ 6966:- 6954:) 6920:2¢ 6917:- 6869:2¢ 6866:- 6846:) 6819:2¢ 6816:- 6763:2¢ 6760:- 6685:2¢ 6682:- 6588:2¢ 6585:- 6555:2¢ 6552:- 6519:2¢ 6516:- 6478:2¢ 6475:- 6453:2¢ 6450:- 6428:2¢ 6425:- 6394:2¢ 6391:- 6311:• 6289:2¢ 6286:- 6258:2¢ 6255:- 6196:2¢ 6193:- 6135:2¢ 6132:- 6111:) 5989:2¢ 5986:- 5923:2¢ 5920:- 5880:) 5862:) 5827:2¢ 5824:- 5789:2¢ 5786:- 5725:2¢ 5722:- 5695:2¢ 5692:- 5649:) 5620:2¢ 5617:- 5575:) 5517:2¢ 5514:- 5475:2¢ 5472:- 5446:2¢ 5443:- 5408:2¢ 5405:- 5392:) 5371:2¢ 5368:- 5355:) 5330:2¢ 5327:- 5300:2¢ 5297:- 5235:2¢ 5232:- 5198:2¢ 5195:- 5151:2¢ 5148:- 5131:) 5101:2¢ 5098:- 5085:) 5049:) 4999:2¢ 4996:- 4964:2¢ 4961:- 4949:) 4927:2¢ 4924:- 4911:) 4861:2¢ 4858:- 4831:2¢ 4828:- 4795:2¢ 4792:- 4761:2¢ 4758:- 4686:2¢ 4683:- 4633:2¢ 4630:- 4591:2¢ 4588:- 4560:) 4515:2¢ 4512:- 4500:) 4471:2¢ 4468:- 4449:2¢ 4446:- 4416:2¢ 4413:- 4393:2¢ 4390:- 4292:2¢ 4289:- 4253:2¢ 4250:- 4215:2¢ 4212:- 4193:2¢ 4190:- 4171:2¢ 4168:- 4129:2¢ 4126:- 4096:2¢ 4093:- 4082:IP 4062:2¢ 4059:- 4019:2¢ 4016:- 3975:2¢ 3972:- 3953:2¢ 3950:- 3931:2¢ 3928:- 3879:2¢ 3876:- 3845:- 3810:2¢ 3807:- 3740:2¢ 3737:- 3630:) 3607:2¢ 3604:- 3585:2¢ 3582:- 3551:2¢ 3548:- 3497:2¢ 3494:- 3453:) 3432:2¢ 3429:- 3417:) 3391:2¢ 3388:- 3353:2¢ 3350:- 3338:) 3303:2¢ 3300:- 3287:) 3253:2¢ 3250:- 3227:2¢ 3224:- 3185:2¢ 3182:- 3160:) 3112:2¢ 3109:- 3076:2¢ 3073:- 3032:2¢ 3029:- 2961:2¢ 2958:- 2905:2¢ 2902:- 2883:2¢ 2880:- 2848:2¢ 2845:- 2813:2¢ 2810:- 2696:- 2570:2¢ 2567:- 2542:. 2525:2¢ 2522:- 2496:2¢ 2493:- 2444:2¢ 2441:- 2410:2¢ 2407:- 2387:2¢ 2384:- 2356:2¢ 2353:- 2334:2¢ 2331:- 2288:2¢ 2285:- 2171:2¢ 2168:- 2110:2¢ 2107:- 2085:2¢ 2082:- 2036:2¢ 2033:- 1999:2¢ 1996:- 1941:2¢ 1938:- 1912:2¢ 1909:- 1877:2¢ 1874:- 1844:2¢ 1841:- 1800:2¢ 1797:- 1773:2¢ 1770:- 1703:2¢ 1700:- 1677:2¢ 1674:- 1642:2¢ 1639:- 1594:2¢ 1591:- 1578:) 1544:2¢ 1541:- 1509:2¢ 1506:- 1470:2¢ 1467:- 1430:2¢ 1427:- 1414:) 1396:) 1375:of 1367:. 1342:of 1265:2¢ 1262:- 1227:2¢ 1224:- 1193:2¢ 1190:- 1131:2¢ 1128:- 1098:) 1073:2¢ 1070:- 1049:) 1018:) 992:2¢ 989:- 976:) 952:2¢ 949:- 889:2¢ 886:- 859:2¢ 856:- 826:2¢ 823:- 795:2¢ 792:- 766:2¢ 763:- 736:) 711:2¢ 708:- 682:2¢ 679:- 652:2¢ 649:- 623:2¢ 620:- 594:2¢ 591:- 564:2¢ 561:- 529:2¢ 526:- 514:) 489:2¢ 486:- 467:2¢ 464:- 437:2¢ 434:- 422:Hi 407:2¢ 404:- 388:) 351:2¢ 348:- 322:2¢ 319:- 240:2¢ 237:- 211:2¢ 208:- 178:2¢ 175:- 149:) 120:2¢ 117:- 94:→ 64:← 10536:© 10492:( 10429:© 10394:( 10381:© 10352:( 10323:© 10298:( 10269:© 10222:☏ 10204:© 10181:© 10157:☏ 10117:© 10087:( 10059:☏ 10021:© 9974:© 9920:© 9890:( 9878:" 9845:© 9775:☏ 9749:© 9708:© 9645:( 9630:) 9626:( 9615:( 9588:( 9553:© 9509:© 9483:☏ 9452:© 9379:© 9325:( 9313:© 9284:© 9259:( 9243:© 9208:© 9173:© 9126:© 9084:© 9035:. 9008:© 8984:( 8965:© 8932:© 8882:© 8852:© 8822:© 8793:© 8758:. 8738:© 8690:© 8666:( 8648:( 8636:© 8608:( 8593:© 8569:( 8549:© 8519:© 8487:© 8436:( 8419:© 8390:( 8370:© 8342:( 8324:( 8308:© 8271:( 8259:© 8231:( 8219:© 8196:© 8161:© 8136:( 8119:© 8093:© 8046:© 8023:© 7934:© 7907:© 7821:© 7784:© 7759:( 7745:© 7695:( 7654:© 7615:( 7591:( 7569:( 7546:( 7523:( 7503:( 7465:( 7434:© 7407:( 7394:© 7366:( 7349:© 7278:© 7245:( 7229:© 7162:( 7146:© 7057:© 7011:© 6974:© 6950:( 6925:© 6874:© 6842:( 6824:© 6768:© 6713:☀ 6690:© 6655:☀ 6619:☀ 6593:© 6560:© 6524:© 6483:© 6458:© 6433:© 6399:© 6361:水 6359:‍ 6357:雲 6315:) 6307:( 6294:© 6263:© 6224:" 6201:© 6140:© 6107:( 5994:© 5928:© 5876:( 5858:( 5832:© 5794:© 5730:© 5700:© 5645:( 5625:© 5584:{ 5571:( 5522:© 5480:© 5451:© 5413:© 5388:( 5376:© 5351:( 5335:© 5305:© 5260:) 5256:( 5240:© 5203:© 5156:© 5127:( 5106:© 5081:( 5045:( 5004:© 4969:© 4945:( 4932:© 4907:( 4866:© 4836:© 4800:© 4766:© 4734:. 4708:) 4704:( 4691:© 4660:c 4638:© 4617:) 4613:( 4596:© 4556:( 4520:© 4496:( 4476:© 4454:© 4421:© 4398:© 4334:N 4297:© 4277:☏ 4258:© 4238:☏ 4220:© 4198:© 4176:© 4154:☏ 4134:© 4115:) 4101:© 4067:© 4024:© 3980:© 3958:© 3936:© 3884:© 3815:© 3745:© 3626:( 3612:© 3590:© 3556:© 3518:( 3502:© 3476:( 3449:( 3437:© 3413:( 3396:© 3358:© 3334:( 3308:© 3283:( 3258:© 3232:© 3190:© 3156:( 3117:© 3081:© 3037:© 3017:? 2995:c 2966:© 2943:c 2910:© 2888:© 2853:© 2818:© 2768:c 2735:c 2684:c 2641:c 2575:© 2530:© 2501:© 2449:© 2415:© 2392:© 2361:© 2339:© 2293:© 2204:₪ 2176:© 2147:₪ 2115:© 2090:© 2041:© 2004:© 1976:S 1971:M 1966:S 1959:) 1955:( 1946:© 1917:© 1882:© 1849:© 1805:© 1778:© 1708:© 1682:© 1647:© 1599:© 1574:( 1549:© 1514:© 1475:© 1435:© 1410:( 1392:( 1270:© 1232:© 1198:© 1136:© 1094:( 1078:© 1045:( 1014:( 997:© 972:( 957:© 917:☀ 894:© 864:© 831:© 800:© 771:© 732:( 716:© 687:© 657:© 628:© 599:© 569:© 534:© 510:( 494:© 472:© 442:© 412:© 384:( 356:© 327:© 245:© 216:© 183:© 145:( 125:© 50:.

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

Index