User talk:Equazcion/Archive 5

280:

have been working so hard to just edit in peace and get along and do what I'm supposed to in order to be a valuable editor and then you pull this charge about my archives out of the air. And for what? Are you going to police everyone's archives now to see if they, too, have made an infraction they weren't even aware *was* an infraction? It's stuff like this that makes me wonder why in the world I'm even here at Knowledge. Not only have I been a decent editor, I've made a number of good contributions with photo downloads, article creation, and watching pages for vandalism. And then, of course, there's the sizeable $ $ donation I just made to Knowledge...but who cares? No one remembers the good stuff - just the bad - and *then* they have to make sure they jump on the persecution bandwagon with everyone else so they can put in their two-cents as if it's the most valuable and most important opinion for the most important decision in the world. But, hey - as long as some people get to use Knowledge as their own personal battleground that makes them feel as if they own their own little kingdom within the encyclopedia (I'm not suggesting you are one), I should be happy, right? Whatever. It's just the internet, right...? Feh. --

662:

communication having to be reinterpreted...no. Language is a code that needs to be interpreted by the receiver, however, what you are doing here is interpreting the code and then adding your own definition of what the code really means. You're interpreting the words but then adding to the meaning. That's dishonest and it's unfair to the one trying to communicate with you. I realize that in today's world there are people who no longer speak plainly or with clear meaning - but I'm not one of them. Why do you seem to think that in what I say I have mal-intent behind my words - even if my words on their face don't convey that at all? You did the same thing with tearing apart my reasons for having my talk-archive they way I did. I had them the way I did for the reasons I stated: they were there to keep chronological evidence of a chain of events in case I needed them for future reference. That was all. There was nothing more. There was no "list of wrongs". It was what I said it was. But you refused to believe me, inserted your own prejudices into what I really must have meant, and wouldn't take my word for it. That is wrong. It's unfair to me and it's actually doing a disservice to you in the end.

522:

particular accusation doesn't surprise me (nor will it surprise me when Skag accuses me of something as a result of this posting)" is just not necessary, not NPOV, and downright wrong. The comment you made about me at Rschen's talk page was out of line and POV as well, "She generally chooses to pump accusations back at them instead of arguing the issues, so this particular accusation doesn't surprise me (nor will it surprise me when Skag accuses me of something as a result of this posting)". Was that really necessary? As far as the sockpuppet report, why can't you just let those who investigate sockpuppet reports investigate? Making comments is one thing, but taking it upon yourself to provide information that they probably already have discovered and then adding your editorial comment, "Aside from which the case was very thin to begin with"...you think they can't decide for themselves whether a case is "very thin" or not? As it so happens, I realized myself that I either looked at Wildhartlivie's posting information incorrectly or incompletely late last night (actually very early this morning) after the report had already been filed. There was not obfuscation or dishonesty involved.

878:. What in the world is that supposed to mean? Are you of the belief that I suggested you take a break because I would see it as benefitting me and my activities in Knowledge? Dude - seriously, you need to get over yourself. My suggestion for you to take the break you keep saying you're going to take had everything to do with you obviously needing to take a break from your compulsion and obsession with Knowledge and the apparent belief that the place just can't do without your assistance. Whether you are still around or not is neither here nor there to me. I'm an established editor who didn't even know you existed here until what? A month-or-so ago? And somehow, prior to a month ago I've been able to actually function without you all that time...go figure. (yes, that was intended sarcasm) 346:

could have been done sooner than after you nominated the page for deletion. When I brought this to your attention, you blew me off with something along the lines of, "I didn't know I needed to state the obvious to you". Yes, indeed, try to assume the best - did you do that with me? I don't think so. As far as a "smidgen of humility" goes...please don't suggest something that neither you, nor anyone else (save the one keep voter) in this whole mess has really taken time to demonstrate. IMO and experience, Knowledge's notice boards have become nothing but kangaroo courts that Knowledge hypocrites utilize and where they lay in wait to pounce according to their own agendas. Like I said above, no one notices the good, but by golly they are sure there to notice punish the bad. --

310:

and MfD is the appropriate process. The fact that the person who created the page happens to be dealing with personal issues doesn't factor in to how those pages get dealt with. I certainly sympathize with your plight in life, especially when it comes to recent deaths. You seem to have brought that frustration here though. Not that I can really blame you, but still, there's going to be some resulting unavoidable unpleasantness from conducting yourself in a less-than-ideal state of mind. If Knowledge adds undesired stress to your life, I'd suggest taking a break from it. I've definitely had to do that myself in the past. Knowledge should not be such a priority when you have too many real-life things to deal with already.

3856:]. Since you know the editor, I thought you might be interesting in giving them an idea about what is going on around this editor too. Being a bit cryptic I know but I don't want all the heat that usually follows. It just seems like these administrators could use the full understanding of everything that you are aware of. I've got to go and thought since I've been a target of some of it, that it would be better for someone like you who have only tried to mediate situations to clarify things if you feel this is needed. If not interested, please feel free to ignore. I just think both editors contributions should be looked at to be fair. Hope you are well, -- 682:

and viewing them as an annoying presence that doesn't belong in the debate. I've felt like telling people to go mind their own business too on occasion, but on Knowledge, you've gotta take it all, from everyone. People insert themselves into situations that don't involve them all the time here. That's the essence of the project. It's a collaboration, and we all volunteer wherever we feel like we have something to say or offer. Again: Telling someone to "just stay out of it" or that it's "none of your business" (not direct quotes) is a completely irrelevant, ridiculous and inappropriate gesture on Knowledge, and will never accomplish anything.

2293:

pages, I think it's a good idea to retain the style they set. So in this case, you posted on my page, then I on yours, which set a style, which is "each message on the respective talk page". By moving the entire the thread to mine, you effectively set another, more awkward, style, which is "move the entire thread to each talk page to keep it together." The best would have been for you to just respond on my page, and let me respond on yours. This way we both get message alerts, and the communication is most efficient. Also, posting a comment about an editor "hiding mistakes" is uncivil, even if you think it's true, because it violates

792:. Wrong again. I have learned in my near half-century of life when to speak, when to listen, and when to just completely shut up and/or walk away. There have been plenty of times here in Knowledge (as well as IRL) when I haven't even responded to something someone has said - that I would have been well within my rights to address and respond to - but felt it better to just let it go. Telling someone who has just pointed out something to you that you have difficulty with that they do the same thing is, well...a very immature answer that basically says, "I don't have to change because you have the same problem". Not. 4664:, Neil :) Ludwig, things rarely end up in mediation because both sides mutually say "This is a complicated issue and should probably be mediated." It's generally because people are pissed off and deadlocked. As far as the VP proposal goes, I don't think that belongs at mediation -- a policy proposal either has wide support or it doesn't, and this one didn't. The ejaculation page might possibly benefit from some mediation, but I have my doubts there too. Consensus there appears to fall on inclusion of the content, IMO. I acknowledge I haven't looked thoroughly through the discussion there so I could be wrong. 2385:. There were mostly BLP, 3RR, and "vandalism" summary concerns, all of which could be taken care of by editing the statement for accuracy, which I felt was a good compromise. You should discuss the possible inclusion of the information on the talk page (I just created a section for it), rather than reverting again. I also think it would be a good idea to let my version of the incident remain in the article for some time, so that people can see and base their decision on an accurate version, rather than the bad version that was originally fought over. 840:"You don't only have this problem with me. Whatever I'm doing, everyone else is doing too". Again...really? Can you cite your source for this information or are you, once again, over-generalizing? Children do that too, BTW (over-generalizing) - it's one of the benchmarks in early childhood behavior. Thing is, they usually get over it at by about age 2 1/2. When an adult insists on doing it - it's a definite sign of emotional maturity and the inability to exercise the give-and-take communication necessary in healthy, adult relationships. 754:, and any of the dozens of other Knowledge processes, to test these boundaries you think exist. Provide your input on any, and as many you like, of the discussions you find there. I'm sure they'll all be glad to have you. If you get complaints that you're inserting yourself into matters that don't concern you, you'll know you were right about those boundaries. Most likely though, your participation will be appreciated, because the community is spread rather thin over all these processes, and they need all the input they can get. 6630:

that is not the intention of what I wrote and taken out of context. I have had innumerable teachers and still do, i have a root Guru in body, but that said my principal guru resides in my heartmind in secret aspect and I no longer need a teacher in the way that it was being presented to me is mandatory. It amazes me that a fervent, unaware, bigot has the floor in an Administrator thread, frightening really that these people are my peers, well nonduality is peerless and I have no fear. thanx for the headzup it was appreciated.

1016:-- "We" are the people who discuss and vote on proposed deletions -- which is everyone. Administrators only make the final call, judging the arguments put forth by regular users. Indeed, if pages were judged purely based on the authors' stated intentions, they would all have to be kept. That's just not how it works. I know because pages get deleted all the time, even when the authors say they didn't mean to do anything that violates policy. I'm not sure why you think that argument should hold up in your case. 31: 490:), at which point I was forced to take a different route. Whether or not I pointed out an alternative option, I tried exhaustively to be diplomatic about this. If you still think I should have handled this better, I think your expectations for this place fall under coddling. It's not everyone else's job to come up with desirable alternatives for you whenever they need to point out a problem to you. If you expect that in every case, you're going to have a terrible time here. 655:

IMO, a healthy sense of boundries and knowing when you should cross one and when you shouldn't. This is particularly evidenced in your seeming compulsive need to insert yourself in discussions that don't necessarily involve you, in providing evidence that would have been found by others in the sock case, in your obsession with Knowledge, in your feeling that Knowledge somehow needs you specifically, and your seeming need always be right and have the last word.

2405:

understand what you're saying, but you should have looked at the edit history before reverting, otherwise you don't see what is contained in edit summaries. I was a bit miffed that I linked to a couple of guidelines, and hey presto - you reverted it, but if you didn't see it, that's fine. I know it was all in good faith. I agree the best course of action is to allow discussion to continue with the material in the article, so I will not remove it.

1032:-- I'll decide when my butting in is appropriate. Just as you will, and should, for yourself. Again I'm not sure what makes this case different from any of the dozens of processes where both our input would be appreciated. You can go comment on 20 discussions right now that don't involve you at all, and no one would tell you to stop (as long as you made a sincere attempt at providing constructive input, and had something useful to say). 890:. Suspect all you'd like (you seem to have a lot of suspicions about me - why, I haven't the foggiest - more eisegesis, I guess), but you'd again be completely wrong. Be here, don't be here. As I stated above, my suggestion that you leave this place for a while has everything to do with you getting a grip on the reality that the sun still rises whether you see it happen or not, and that Knowledge still functions just fine without you. 1106: 1682: 666:

decoded (not your words - but it's what you have demonstrated with me over and over). My suggestion to you is that you really do take that break from Knowledge (and not just talk about it this time - but seriously do it). From what I've seen, this "addiction" you have to Knowledge and belief that Knowledge needs you is quite unhealthy and has damaged your view of other people, yourself, and the world in general. --

5470:

the way to go; maybe not the best decision I guess. Anyway, as I mentioned above in reply to Woogee, I think we should wait and see if Q continues criticizing you following my explanation to him about usernames. There's really nothing anyone can do in the way of punishing him or preventing him from contacting you right now. If this becomes actual harassment (extended, relentless criticism) then we can take it to

376:, and B) it should have been obvious that although I was asking you to remove things from the page, that I would have had no issue or control with regard to your saving the material locally on your computer. You contest this now, by saying it wasn't necessarily obvious, since you didn't know you couldn't have those things on the page. But as soon as I told you, which was in my very first comment, you knew. 830:. Again, not. Anytime you "interpret" (as you claim you always do when communicating with others) in such a manner that you are totally twisting the meaning of the other communicator and then telling that person what they really meant, that's eisegesis, rather than appropriate exegesis. There's no fine, invisible line there - it's very blatant and it's very wrong (as well as arrogant and self-focused). 479:-- You may, and everyone is always encouraged to, edit the page in question during a deletion debate in order to fix problems (only certain edits are not allowed, like blanking the page or removing the deletion notice). I've already told you this more than once. If the only reason you are waiting to edit the page is because you thought you weren't allowed to, then you have no reason to wait anymore. 4585: 4068:

and Unitanode was happily doing some good edits the more I saw that block the more unfair it seemed to me. So as talk was ongoing on ANI I unblocked. I don't think that's wheel warring, that's a straight decision reversal. But I take on board the points others have made about discussing the unblock. I do note that I doubt that Unitanode will be blocked again, if he does I will strenuously object! -

1838: 2822:. Those are serious accusations. To be clear, I have also now been accused of harassment and baiting, of reverting without discussion, that I do not try to discuss issues with editors before I take to ANI (which is a point you yourself found lacking) and of disruption to make a point. None of these things are accurate, fair or warranted. This is indeed something that should be reviewed on ANI. - 622:

argued. If you find my comments disparaging, I suppose that's unfortunate, but also unavoidable. I'm not on a campaign to disparage you "all over Knowledge". In processes that I've been made aware of, I state my honest assessment. If you find my assessments inaccurate, you may post your counter-arguments; but you may not reasonably demand that I stop commenting negatively on your behavior.

780:. Sorry, but everything in life has boundries. The boundries I was speaking to specifically were life boundries, not boundries strictly within the rules and confines of Knowledge. You seem to have a poor understanding of when it's appropriate for you to invite yourself into something happening in Knowledge. IOW - you seem to think you are needed everywhere in Knowledge. 3567:

about advertising the ban proposal and getting enough participation, I should think you'd be glad I took that initiative. Again there was nothing selective or otherwise against policy about my actions, so if you feel anything further needs to be done, you need not suggest I do it for you in rectification of some unknown violation. Do what you feel must be done yourself.

5386:) is now starting to harass me. For what, I don't know but I have absolutely no knowledge on what to do. I think if you looked at my contributions, you can tell I have no need for protection. I attempt to better baseball articles, and that's all I want to do. I feel that it is unproductive for me to have to deal with this nonsense. Hope you can help. Thanks. -- 3722:

annoying but FeralDruid, the changing of the blue/purple would be lovely since I too have trouble telling the difference at times. How can I get the color changed in my watchlist so that when I read something it isn't that light purple that is so hard to see? Thanks, (you can take it to my talk or email if you don't want to clutter this talk page, :) )--

6111:

to the now-relevant talk page on the topic. When articles are moved, their talk pages become redirects then too, if that gives us any clue (since merges are a similar action to moves). Anyway I copied the pertinent discussion to the new talk page, so I don't see the need to maintain the old talk page, and would see it as only serving to confuse people.

6669:

misdirection and untrue. It amazes me that a person can escalate a matter to the Administrators' noticeboard when they have no editing history of providing any cited inclusion upon Knowledge. It amazes me that Mitsube lies out of spite and removes appropriate, reputable cited content from articles that I have qualitatively improved. I am perplexed.

3203:

stickler for accuracy is a poor reason for this concern to have come here. A dispute is ongoing and starting up new exchanges doesn't help anyone. I think you know that because you don't seem that stupid. Again: If you weren't actually concerned about this, why did you bring it here? As you say, "seriously, this is looking bad dude."

1479:, but you reverted to a version prior to my good-faith edits. At first, I thought you were purposely being deceptive (and my re-reverting edit summary might reflect that); after further thought, I remembered to AGF and I assume either you didn't realize you were going too far back, or you disagreed with my edits in the first place. 3602:

the credibility of your opponents or technicality of their actions. This crap gets no one anywhere, and that's partly why you're in this mess to begin with. It's the very definition of "muddying the waters". You would do well to re-examine your behavior and take people's suggestions to heart, rather than brushing them all off.

2316:). I apologize. I've been dealing with one too many idiots tonight and got testy. I disagree though on the style thing... Dicussions should generally be kept together so they can be read through easily in the future. I know that's not policy (yet... fingers crossed), but I do have this request in my talk page's edit notice. 5943: 1000:. Your intentions were irrelevant to the deletion discussion. The page's contents alone were the problem. You could've meant to praise the individual in question, it doesn't matter. The contents were a problem nonetheless, and there are plenty of delete votes in the discussion that agree with this assessment. 6648:

who was recently blocked indefinitely, due partly to incessantly communicating via poems even in tense situations. You seem to be headed down a similar road. Just friendly advice. I won't be the one to block you (I don't have the ability), so this shouldn't be seen as any sort of threat. Just advice.

6399:

Well, it's over (for a year). My comments to SRQ were never designed to get her to "freak out" as she and others like to characterize what were attempts at rational conversation; I kind of resent it too. While the many names and judgments were hurled at me often, I never reciprocated. Rather, I've

6024:"Ok" is a complicated word. It's not as simple as "ok" and "not ok". While I'm not necessarily thrilled that there's possibly inaccurate information in the encyclopedia, there's a sliding scale of what kinds of problems warrant which measure of response. You're suggesting sending out a bot to plaster 5907:

I'm not sure where it's stated but the general credo is that policy should be "descriptive, not prescriptive". The merits of that can be debated (it's sometimes pointed out that it's a fallacy, because then you have the question of "what's the purpose in describing...", and the answer invariably ends

5832:

Glad I could help make your experience at least a little satisfying. Sorry about the drama that ensued; you had the misfortune of stumbling into a rivalry between two editors that has been brewing for a long time. Both editors have actually been put on restriction since then, so they basically aren't

5816:

I've been hesitant to start editing for a long, long time, out of fear that Wikipedians were jerks and I would do everything wrong. So I covered my bases all along the way, making comments, waiting a few days for responses, being civil when folks reverted but didn't engage me.... And I still got some

3601:

So again, that's three groundless accusations following my proposed ban on you, four if you include this previous interaction nonsense that neither of us remembered and has no bearing on anything. You'd do a lot better for yourself if you'd discuss the relevant issues rather than attempting to attack

3071:

Thanks. I doubt it'll be accepted as is though. It's not completely clear what particular problem the case is regarding. I don't think ArbCom will want to rule on whether past blocks were right or wrong. A case regarding the future, ie. whether or not Proofreader should be banned, would have a better

2616:

to your page in which you forged my signature and managed to sneak in an unfounded accusation of forum shopping when I was simply looking for any response 10 hours after a post, led to my ending discussion with you. Do not post to me again, your tone and attitude toward me is completely unwelcome and

1870:

they are referring. <- Notice there I could've ended the sentence, "it may be obvious what they are referring to", with the preposition on the end. It's more grammatically accurate to have the object, in this case "what", follow the preposition more immediately. Hope that clarifies things somewhat

598:

I realize that NPOV is for articles, however...it goes without saying that NPOV is part of good faith and that POV and personal editorializing doesn't belong in the Knowledge report process. You want to tell me something about me to my face - do it. But don't start disparaging me all over Knowledge

315:

To clear up the mystery, I was actually on a wiki-break myself, when I was contacted regarding your archive page. Someone felt they were too previously involved to objectively do anything about it (and considering your previous concerns about participants with grudges against you, you should probably

6130:

Thanks for your reply. Redirecting the Talk page is not uncommon, but I disagree that it is general practice. If there is nothing meaningful about the article redirect (e.g. move), it's fine to redirect the Talk page also. Mergers are not the same as moves. A merger creates an attribution dependency

6110:

The policy and help pages are bit vague on this. My understanding is that talk pages of merged articles are generally redirected to the new article's talk page. This is done for the same reason that the article page itself is redirected -- so that if anyone seeks out the old name, they're redirected

6004:

Since you think it's ok for an encyclopaedia to have large numbers of players nationalities listed incorrectly , would you be happy to ignore it if it was their squad number, position, age, height , sexual preference, martial status? Why is it ok for an encyclopaedia to wrong on one set of facts and

5612:

Also, did you notice that somebody tried to re-add that story about a french guy curing gas-gangrene with lavendar oil. It's such a preposterous story but if we could find a source for that I'd love to re-include along with a reference to what gas-gangrene is (the only known cure is amputation). :-)

4850:

Mediation isn't for policy proposals. With a policy proposal, there needs to be a clear demonstration of wide support. Here we have no wide support demonstrated, just a few parties arguing endlessly over it, which doesn't mean there's any more of a chance it has wide support. Mediation is irrelevant

4067:

Look, I'm not at all happy about the ban discussion, but Unitanode still does good work. So do you. Unitanode was readding the tag, and I know that he was trying to remove a personal attack, but he did get warned not to war on this. But given that the block was done for something that had died down,

4041:

I saw, thanks, I just hadn't gotten around to deciding how to respond. I suppose as long as you plan to use the page soon in some process, it's alright. Just keep in mind that SRQ is probably going to continue using its existence against you in the interim, and if it's still up in say another month,

3721:

I don't understand any of the above that the two of you are saying. So being unsavy on the computer would one or both of you care to explain how an idiot like me could do what the two of you are doing? I am on IE7(?) and I really don't care about blocking images though the Jimmy head is definitely

3129:

If that's true then it was years ago. I think it would be a little petty and ridiculous of you to feel such a need or to think it's actually relevant. I'm going to leave it entirely up to you. You can let everyone know if you feel you must; but you should really think about what this need says about

2335:

Apology accepted, thank you. I guess the messaging style is a matter of personal preference. I see a lot of apparent vandalism, and depending on my other ongoing activities, I make a judgment call based on circumstances, deciding whether to just rollback or to pursue it further. The good thing about

1825:

You know, I seem to have a habit of leaving "dangling prepositions", since others have pointed that out as a problem in things I have written before. For the life of me though, I can't seem to get a good explaination for why it's a problem, or what the definition of a "dangling preposition" actually

1497:

My edit wasn't intended to be deceptive at all. The revert was discussed on the talk page. In addition to reasons discussed there, my full revert of the paragraph was because I simply felt the older version was better-worded. I'm not too crazy about having mention of the book in parenthesis, for one

665:

Do you see suspicious behavior and mal-intent and dishonesty in every person you encounter in Knowledge? In life? Do you think that when everyone says to you one thing that they really mean another? It would seem so if you believe "all communications have to be interpreted" and the *real* meaning

621:

I've continually been telling you my thoughts on your behavior directly to your face for quite some time now. NPOV is neither an explicit nor an unwritten rule for Knowledge processes. Expression of points of view and "editorializing" do indeed factor legitimately into disputes. That's how cases are

525:

You keep saying you're going to take a Knowledge break, yet you keep coming back as if the place can't function without your help. It seems to me that you may not only need to take a break from Knowledge, but you need to get over yourself, get over your idea of self-importance in this realm, and get

436:

I can't do anything to the archive page until the issue has a resolution,correct? That's the only reason why I am waiting (and because I seriously *don't* have time to weed through the thing right now - it's Christmas week, remember? - I already told you I would need time to do it. I told you what I

126:

What are you talking about? Mine has parenthesis. It makes all the difference :) Actually it's no accident... I came across a comment of yours somewhere and fell madly in love with your signature design. I spent a good amount of time trying to merely use cues from it without copying it outright, but

5869:

view of policy - that guidelines are about formally documenting our current practice, rather than providing a prescriptive set of rules governing practice? I'm coming at it from the other end, that guidelines are effectively Knowledge legislation and as such shouldn't be introduced without a clear

5469:

Actually you were notified, by me and another editor -- but I later decided to remove the notices and some useless discussion about what should be done with your user page. The consensus seemed to be that no one should ever have bothered you with that stuff so I thought removing most of it would be

5081:

Thanks. Some of that has been percolating for a while. Other parts of it just came today. I want to wait for the RfC/U until Lar comments on the identification we submitted and (probably) when the AN/I thread has come to a close. An RfC/U will detail the 25 pages that I mentioned where she suddenly

4820:

interestingly, the policy thing seems to be a bit of a vacuum. medcom deals with user problems on specific pages, which doesn't necessarily expand to policy; Arbcom deals with policy, but won't deal with content issues - where do you go for decisions about content policy? but I don't want to keep

4337:

is still sitting around as a result of your laudable but doomed effort to get this editor on track. You are the only author of the page (well, almost), it's kind-of a GFDL vio, and it's cluttering up the what-links-here tables. Do you still want it there or can I nuke it as house-cleaning? Or maybe

2404:

That's fair enough. I did not intend reverting you, and I have commented on the talk page. The main basis of the ANI report was about the relevance of the content rather than the sourcing - everything kind of flowed on from that, but it was buried in a lot of diffs and extra information. I can

708:

I'm sure you'd love it if I took that break (you might get your wish), but suspect you'd be singing a different tune if I had "inserted myself" on your side in these cases instead. Get used to people butting in on your business. Take it in and argue the issues with them, rather than telling them to

560:

Stop complaining whenever someone says something you don't like. It's getting really irritating. Argue the issues like an adult, rather than crying "why'd you have to say that?!?!" every time. For the umpteenth time: People will say things you don't like. There's no policy against that, so get used

389:

You still know, and yet you're still unwilling to do anything about it. You've essentially acknowledged the problem, but you're instead waiting for someone to force action as a result of the MfD. You're not interested in peaceful resolution. You're not interested in being remotely constructive. You

345:

As I stated the other day, you could have handled this a whole lot better than you did. Suggesting I take what was there and keeping it on my own computer (which I never even considered because I didn't think I had to hide any of it since I didn't know what I was doing was a violation of any kind)

309:

That starts with your calling my nomination of your page a "charge". I'm not charging you with anything. I saw a page that violates policy, I asked you to fix it, you refused, so I nominated it. It wasn't personal and it wasn't even a commentary on you. It's just a page that needs to be dealt with,

295:

You have to understand that the place has rules; rules that you might not completely understand yet. Your response when people inform you that you're infringing on any of those rules has been to lash out at them, which has, I think, created a more stressful situation for everyone than need be. When

279:

I just want to take the time to thank you for bringing this added stress to my world at this time of year. I have a hard enough time dealing with Christmas since a close relative has died, add to that the fact that I just attended on Monday yet another funeral of another close friend. You know, I

6668:

Noted. You are the first editor for quite some time that I have encountered on Knowledge that is good-natured. I am not eccentric, I am a straight shooter. I am really focused on theology but I'm not preachy. Most of the dross that the editors were talking about in regards to me is misattribution,

5743:

You should move it yourself. There seems to be some agreement that the report doesn't belong at ANI, so eventually someone might take the initiative and move your report(s) off that page, but you can do it yourself. I would start by moving them onto a subpage in your user space, so you can work on

5588:

Thanks. I'd be open to putting that info in in some form, as long as it's sourced; but even then, it really shouldn't be the defining paragraph of the article. We shouldn't be defining things based on a judgment of them. Although many forms of alternative medicine are sold as unregulated products,

5006:

You know, the way you used it gave an idea that maybe solves a problem. In your page I can only see a portion of it. Is it because you are using a version of it or is it because there is a way of showing a portion of an image. I'm interested in doing the latter. Having a picture uploaded show only

3532:

Notifying those who participated in the first AN thread seemed unnecessary, as it seemed likely they were already watching the page. It wasn't selective. I made no distinction based on who was on which side. I sought to notify people only to ensure that those who might not be watching the AN page,

2443:

I apologise. "Revert" was a very poor way to express my thoughts, and I'm glad you pointed that out. "Revert" is a very specific word and it's very loaded and I used it carelessly. What you did was fine, although I didn't see it that way at first, to be honest. Thanks for pointing out that

2128:

Spoke too soon. The RFC bot removed my closing font tag. I have an irregular signature, with a formatted date, so that may be why. I hope the font doesn't bother people too much, because I don't know if there's anything we can do about it, short of changing my signature or asking the bot author to

975:

I wasn't suggesting that because everyone else makes bad communication choices that I can as well. I'm saying that rather than characterizing other people's choices as poor, examine your own. "Everyone" was an exaggeration, but you've had this problem with multiple people. I could provide diffs if

961:

Re. The last word -- It was immature of you to begin with to basically say "stop trying to get the last word in" when you're doing the same thing yourself. I was just pointing that out. Your viewing this as needing to "right a wrong" basically applies to everyone who tries to get the last word in.

681:

There's no boundary. I provided evidence to the case, and whether or not you think that evidence was obvious is irrelevant. IMO, your opinion that I've crossed boundaries stems from my having a point of view that opposes your own. There's a thin line between viewing someone as disagreeing with you

654:

First of all, I want to briefly address your claim that I was believing there is a "rule" about who can and can't take part in a sock investigation. My point was never about a "rule", but about boundries. You seem to have a problem with understanding your boundries in Knowledge. You don't have,

454:

But, beyond all of this, I do want to apologize for taking my frustration out on you. I still wish you had handled things a little better - maybe along the lines of giving me some options other than what I read to be, "do it my way or else I'm reporting you" Honestly, I don't know a whole lot of

403:

Barring such proof, I'm now through trying to help you, and I'm done being polite with you. I'm sorry for whatever life events have brought you to your current state of mind, but won't feed your need for drama. Find someone else. If you want to reply once more, make it good, because it will be the

6629:

flowery obscuration, love it. being linked with cults, wonderful. and my dear wikipedian-collegiates wonder why I rarely enter into conversation with such bland stupidity, all of them, those MOANING, have justly had their egos branded by the Hummingbird, this is true. as for not having a Teacher,

6221:

for that rather than just doing it and attempting to convince one person at a time. If people generally agree with you in a centralized discussion then maybe the practice can change, but I believe things are the way they are for good reason, and I think consensus for change should be demonstrated

5765:

Due to the lengthy discussions already undertaken, and continuing abuse past the wikiquette report, I do not think further discussion will do any good. As an alternative, I greatly shortened my report and refiled it at ANI. Since this involves long-term and escalating abuse, and teaming up of the

5454:

I think starting a administrator notice board discussion about me, then editing my user page, and finally coming dangerously close to threatening me on my talk page are some signs of harassment. I also think that I should have been notified that there was a discussion about me by some one. I just

5028:

I actually copied this code from someone else's page where I saw it done. It looks like the image is enclosed in a "div" with a "width" specified that's smaller than the image, and "overflow:hidden" specified. It might be possible to create a template that does this, but it would be a complicated

3877:

I haven't been up to speed on the SRQ/JoyDiamond rivalry, and never really was, aside from a couple of isolated article disputes. Until SRQ got blocked I thought it had been completely replaced by the SRQ/Wildhartlivie rivalry. I don't really have any useful input to contribute in that discussion

2514:

I haven't tried the video, but remember, the video itself isn't all that important. The text of the article is what's most important to us. The reference you inserted doesn't contain any actual report of the incident, as far as I saw; it just had the video clip, which wouldn't source the incident

2292:

No, I was not trying to hide any facts. I am not even sure it was a mistake, since the combination of the vandalism filter, excessive length, and the misformatting made it seem like a vandalism edit, of which I revert quite a few. As a general point, when you communicate with others on their talk

902:

That's never been a problem for me here. In fact, that's never been a problem for me in a lot of areas of my life. As someone who grew is a former Marine as well as someone who spent a lot of years working in corporate business, I don't have a problem with people scrutinizing what I do. What I

692:

Whatever people are doing, whether you want to call it misinterpreting or "adding meaning" (a very fine and almost invisible line separating those), it's something everyone does here. You don't only have this problem with me. Whatever I'm doing, everyone else is doing too, and in the end you have

482:

Your age has nothing to do with it. Many people don't like ultimatums; but if a concern has merit, you still need to address it, even if you don't like the way it was put to you. Push back at the person if you must, but at the same time acknowledge the problem and do your part to try and fix it.

5788:

for. With respect, you say this would be your first ANI report, so you should listen to people who are more experienced with it. You will have a much greater chance of success at RFC. People don't want to read very much at ANI, and you're not likely to get very much participation from uninvolved

5572:

Good edits on that article, it's slowly becoming vaguely readable! :-) My only qibble is that Aromatherapy may be a form of alternative medicine, however 95% of the public's interraction with it is via consumer products. The key thing is that aromatherapy is a non-regulated term which means that

3566:

You're allowed to think that. I, however, think you're wrong. Canvassing policy allows for the notification of parties indiscriminately on both sides of a debate if the notification is worded neutrally. And I'm sorry you now think it was out of order, but since you were the one who was concerned

2599:

watchlist your talk page and don't much care who posts there. I simply posted to you that I didn't upload the Black Dahlia image and asked you to notify the original uploader. It wasn't an argument, it wasn't a debate and I didn't much appreciate the argumentative nature of your responses to me,

521:

What is your problem? Now you're gossipping about me all over Knowledge because you and I didn't see eye to eye on a few things? Making editorial comments like you did (on the sockpuppet report page), "She generally chooses to pump accusations back at them instead of arguing the issues, so this

4728:

Honestly, I have been studiously avoiding the ejaculation page because I am tired of squabbling with people fruitlessly (I don't mind squabbling fruitfully, mind you, but there has to be some progress for it to be worthwhile). I think the idea itself will eventually need to go to mediation - I

3389:

involving off-wiki activities, which was ambiguous, groundless and also untrue; and now of canvassing, which has also been shown to be untrue. In addition you seem to have accused me of not fully disclosing our previous history, when our only contact was a dispute that occurred years ago, which

2366:. Rewriting the information so that it accurately reflects what is reported in the source material is well and good but why would you override my edit summary without even commenting on it? I gave a specific reason for removing the information but you haven't given a reason for restoring. 1261:

one way or the other about the video or the Ann Rule book on the judge’s comments. This note is to let you know about this discussion so that if you wish you can voice your opinions. It’s time to put this dispute to rest so hopefully a real consensus will show up for one or the other of these

661:

You ended up overgeneralizing and making claims about me that are patently false. I have never said to you or anyone else in Knowledge that others have "misinterpreted communications" or that "everyone continually misinterprets" me. That is complete falsehood. As far as your understanding of

321:

To sum up, even people who make valuable contributions have to follow the rules, and while I sympathize with your situation, a smidgen of effort towards humility on your part would really go a long way. We're not out to get you. Try to assume the best rather than the worst intentions, even when

5608:

Actually, yes it does. The logic is perfectly clear. My point was not so much that aromatherapy is defined by it's lack of regulation but that aromatherapy is really more about the non-regulated products than it is an alternative medicine. It's not a very important point in the grand scheme of

5268:

specifically approved, and was commented on when the table was approved. The table heading was changed to wikitable format when it was brought up and I have never seen anyone comment or complain about it, or use other prior to Jack Merridew's involvement. Consensus was for 90% and 95%, which I

5208:

resent being talked down to and disregarded because anyone thinks I'm incapable of understanding and blatantly says so. If you mean "whining" instead of "whinging", my complaints are valid, even if Lar didn't care to deal with it. And we still aren't mentioning that changes he made implemented

3202:

Yes, I know what you said. I'm asking why you brought it here if you weren't actually concerned with it. Tbsdy, your behavior continues to suggest your priorities don't actually lie with a peaceful resolution, but rather with extending the fight. There was no reason to bring this here. Being a

2929:

That's fine. Yeah I'm very aware of the problems with the essay as I was a big proponent of deleting it in the first nomination (the only reason I didn't comment on the second nom was that I wasn't aware of it). The page can be blanked, I can just use the history, and will of course avoid any

2798:

What slurs? This is about a template removal. It belongs at the article talk page. If someone makes characterizations of another editor as a result of that discussion, that's not a reason to go to ANI -- unless you're calling for sanctions regarding the slur itself. If you want to resolve the

2548:

It doesn't really matter what people claim about what they see in a video, if we have a reliable source where the incident is reported. As long as we have that, users' interpretations of the video are pretty much irrelevant. That's why the text reports are so important -- they make it so that

4138:

I'd never describe an unblock as "unfair", since the only person it might hurt is the blocking admin. It might be "unwise" though if it allows someone to continue disruption etc. If you're asking if the block was warranted to begin with, I don't have any position on that, as I stated at ANI.

4871:

That's what I meant by an '...Com' vacuum. This is an issue that has (potentially) broad implications for the nature of wikipedia - i.e. is wikipedia as a whole going to give the appearance of being a bit stuffy or a bit skanky? - but everyone is so reactive about the issue that meaningful

2419:

Thanks. Just as a minor point, I didn't exactly revert you. I inserted an entirely new summary of the event. When someone comes to ANI complaining of a revert war, the last thing I'd generally do is revert again. That's why I made the effort to craft a new paragraph -- so as to specifically

6691:

Thank you for supporting the suggestion for improvement to the logo and/or tag line ("...that anyone can edit"). This is just to remind you that the thread still exists and that someone asked if we want to draft a proposal. As nobody has replied I'm afraid you forgot about it. It's at

2652:

and not just delete their comments, even the ones you find irritating. Show that you can rise above, take an "argumentative" comment and fire back with a cool-headed answer. Let's act as though we were adults, or even diplomats. Rise above. Show that you're more mature than the other

541:

Hey, guess what? People are allowed to comment on, and even provide evidence for, things that don't directly involve them. That's the essence of a collaborative volunteer project. We all pitch in. People are going to make comments you don't like, and you're gonna have to real used to

2015:

Hi Equazcion, I noticed the editor counter on your user page, noting the number of editors watching your page. I had the tool for it, but can't remember were it was, the last count I got was 79. Do you have the tool? If possible could you post it on my talk page? Thanks in advance,

1223:

The truth is I'm not really sure. My take would be that if the article is just stating something that happened in a video, then using that video as a reference is probably okay. In this particular case I'm not sure that the site the video is posted on really matters. It's more of a

924:

Take care of yourself - and do consider a serious vacation from here (for all the reasons I stated previously - nothing more, nothing less). Unless we interact in regard to an article or something else Knowledge-article/issue-only related, this is the last you will hear from me.

801:

My response here to you lying and misrepresenting me is not a compulsion nor evidence of anything other than I am not someone who allows others get away with blatant dishonesty. Posting here had nothing to do with me needing the last word - it had everything to do with righting a

4895:

It's not for Arbcom either. I think they'd reject the case as forum shopping, if you presented them with your policy proposal. If it didn't gain enough support at the venue where it was originally presented, Arbcom isn't going to let you try pushing it through there instead.

3015:

Thank you for alerting me to the discussion, Equazcion. Please don't forget you're supposed to notify editors who have expressed disagreement with you also, as well as those in agreement. (If you're simply notifying everybody who's commented at all, then that's OK, too.)

4549:

Someone smart decided the discussion @ ejaculation should be archived since it's not getting anywhere, to which DMS responded by carrying on his points at the VP page. In the interest of truly closing the matter I carried the archival over to VP. I agree, there certainly

2852:

where they'd like to complain, and try your best to resolve the issue outside ANI first. If you're that bothered by "false accusations", to the point that you feel they all belong at ANI? Then you've got a major misconception, and I think you need to grow a thicker skin.

2662:

And Chowbok, as I said on your talk page, if someone has deleted your comment twice, just stop posting to their talk page. Just because you have the right to post there doesn't mean it's a super idea. You of course realized you were annoying her, so just answer her on

1865:

Ha, surely. It's simply when you leave a preposition on the end of a sentence (or sentence fragment). Prepositions are supposed to link two objects together, so on the end of a sentence they are seen as a problem to grammar freaks like me, though it may be obvious

4083:

A "decision reversal"? That seems like a pretty original synonym for "disagreement". I'm glad you'll be taking the advice in the future about discussing unblocks first, as I'm pretty sure that's a policy or guideline somewhere. Might be best to leave it at that.

1777:

Thanks, hopefully this is the end but I doubt it is as sad as that seems. I don't think the mediation will be used since it's more than two editors disagreeing never mind I doubt the one will be accepting more interactions. Still, thanks for taking the time,

6361:" I won't make a comment there again. I missed all of this, having just got on WP today for the first time in days. I don't know how a community-banned user can continue launching personal attacks on a page owned by the project; doesn't seem right to me... 6212:

The afd discussion can be found through the merge tag on the destination page, along with the redirect and attribution. It sounds to me like you're recognizing the general practice but trying to change it, and I really think you should start a discussion at

3626:

I wanna thank you too Equazcion for your help in notifying me. I sent you an email since I had problems with my user page. Please do notify me when you read it and tell me if there is a problem with the user account. Thank you in advance and all the best!

4646:

It probably should have in the first place - it's not a subject people are inclined to be reasonable about on either side. but it would have been nicer if it went there on the merits rather than because people are getting pissed off at each other.

3153:

I remembered you from something-or-other. Look, you've not gone through dispute resolution on this, I don't really appreciate it and I'd have thought you experienced enough now to know that you are escalating something that has now come to an end. -

6034:-type tags on a lot of articles just because the little flags next to players' names could be unsourced. I can't justify that response to the given problem, and from my experience here I really doubt that proposal is going to gain consensus. Sorry. 1228:; ie. No one can argue that what happened in the video didn't really happen based on which site it's posted on. Whereas with text claims, anyone can say anything they want, and the reputation of the site does tell us whether or not we can trust it. 493:

At any rate, I accept your apology. If you don't have the time to fix the page within the next 2 or 3 days, then I suggest you copy the page code to a local text file in that time, because the chances look good that it will be deleted. Good luck.

6297:, and I know next to nothing about Linux nor do I even have any Linux machines to test with, so dealing with that would be more trouble for me. I've been waiting for some more experienced developer to take an interest (I once had a section at 962:

Most people wouldn't say "I'm just trying to get the last word in". "The last word" is an external characterization of the behavior. You don't realize you're doing it, but you are. I'm doing it too at the moment. The difference is, I admit it.

252: 1976:

Thanks for taking the time out to nip a conflict in the bud! You didn't have to put in the work but, since you did, things have calmed down and you came up with a great solution to please both parties. You deserve this for your time! Cheers,

5727:

You suggested my report would be better as a RFC. Is moving it there something I should do now, or so wait for further input. Or does an administrator move it. This is my first ANI filing and it would be my first RFC. Please advise. Thanks.

4733:

for any gross image that someone has a hard-on for (and can justify in some trivial way), and I don't think reasoned voices will ever make any headway on that. I'm just trying to decide whether I'm currently up to the task of pushing it.

6292:

The coding for Firefox addons seems sort of convoluted to me, so even the simple features of the current version were a real uphill battle to get working. Also, my last revision got blocked at Mozilla pending my fixing a bug present under

3270:

On a point of information, Tbsdy when reclaiming admin tools stated that he had not retired under a block, when in fact he had. I hope he will extend the same understanding to others with less than perfect recall that was extended to him.

3236:

Why? I asked if you feel this must be disclosed and you said "no, not at all". So then why was it so important as to risk further inflammation of the situation by contacting someone you're arguing with yet again? Explain it to me, please.

5401:

I can try. How's he harassing you? Are you just referring to what he's saying on your talk page, or is there more? If so link me to the other pages where he's been harassing you. I left a comment on your talk page regarding his concerns.

5862:(a) While we're disagreeing, I really respect the calibre of your argument and your contributions on Knowledge generally and it's a pleasure to debate with someone like yourself. (That goes for the other contributors on the thread too.) 5817:

backlash. Anyway, it was nice of you to respond to me kindly on the Atkins talk page. I was actually hoping for some interaction, and while I didn't get what I was hoping for, at least one or two of you were helpful. Ok, gushings over.

853:

Again...really? So assume good faith is only for newbies and then once you get your footing in Knowledge you just forget all about it? Funny...I see others in Knowledge (non-admins and admins alike) taking others' word for it all the

455:

people at my age (45+) who take to that kind of a demand well unless it's work related. Unfortunately, you were in the way of my great frustration and ended up being a target. I hope you can accept my sincere and humble apology. --

3384:

This canvassing claim is roughly the third ill-considered accusation you've brought against me. You've accused me of not waiting the requested 24 hours before posting my proposal, which was shown to be untrue; you've accused me of

3187:

I never said this. I asked you to clarify the fact that you said you have never had any interaction with me. I was trying to give you a chance to do this yourself! That offer is still open. Seriously, this is looking bad dude. -

3970:

Note: The arbs are quickly declining, but as I just got unblocked today I did go ahead and add some documentation which includes that collapsed topic in which I addressed questions to you. I have also included a partial quote

4589:

still, I do hate those presumptuous closures - they are the kind of thing that almost invariably lead to nasty thoughts and comments. doesn't look good at all form any perspective (except maybe that of the closer).

3977:

Also note: Newyorkbrad changed his mind from decline to accept because he believes a motion rather than a case might address my behavior. Some arbs were following his lead, but it appears this version of the case is

702:

it to be, it can still be a violation. "Believing you" or "taking your word for it" was irrelevant. If we had to take everyone's word for it whenever their pages were threatened with deletion, nothing would ever get

3678:

From My Preferences, above, select Appearance. I'm using the Vector appearance, and use the aforementioned CSS to hide the image. I don't know if it'll work for the other appearances, as I haven't tested it.

1755:

TP. There is a dispute there between two editors which you know. I am about to go there myself but if you have the time and/or energy, your opinions could be useful to the discussion. Hope to see you there,

1387:

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

3091:

Yes but as you point out this can end the documentation crap. It's a means to a end. He can make his case here or shut up at which point a better case can be made for disruptin if he doeesn't take the hint.

947:

Again: Collaborative project. We volunteer our opinions wherever we can. In certain other areas of life you can expect that only qualified or previously-involved individuals will involve themselves, but not

693:

found yourself being misinterpreted and having to "correct" people and admonish them for their "assumptions". After a certain amount of that you should think about whether it's really everyone else's fault.

6643:

No problem, glad I could be of service. If I can be of further service, I would suggest toning down your eccentricities while on-wiki, if possible. Because if not, it may really end up costing you. We had

2648:. Though you have the right to delete things off your talk page, it would make it easier on everyone, and show you're willing to work with people, if you'd be prepared and willing to carry on the exchange 4291: 3697:

Thanks -- I've actually already got it hidden using FF3/Adblock/Element Hiding Helper though. Very handy to basically instantly hide any element on any web page permanently. Thanks for the tip though :)

5870:

rationale detailing their necessity. If you're able to point to documentation showing that your view of the role of guidelines is the Knowledge-preferred one it could very quickly end our disagreement.

1928:

No problem :) Yeah formal writing is all I meant; rest assured I make those grammar "errors" myself all the time in conversation etc. Your edits really fixed up that article too, by the way. Nice job.

1393: 2549:

Knowledge editors don't have to argue over what they see and don't see. :-) It is good to have a link to the video clip, but it's not as important as the textual report from a reliable publication.

2595:

Um, Chowbok, I asked you to stop posting to my talk page. Is Equazcion the person to whom everyone complains? I responded to your posts and stopped and would appreciate it if you would stop. I do

1293:' because it was the entire message from the band's website. Quoting a thing in its entirety seems extensive to me. The same amount of text from a larger work wouldn't have concerned me. Regards, 5913:

Anyway, thanks for the compliments :) ...and for amending your position. The best collaborators are the ones who are actually open to the possibility of changing their opinions, which is rare.

3390:

neither of us actually recalled. Muddying the waters with groundless concerns is part of your behavior issue, Tbsdy, and I hope you think seriously about how you handle disputes in the future.

1382: 5833:

allowed to talk to each other anymore. That should hopefully make the Atkins article a little more welcoming in the future. If you need anything feel free to let me know and I'll try to help.

5933: 1426:

Thanks for trying to help. She won't listen and came with the assumption of bad faith and didn't even check out what it was all about. But thanks for trying to talk some sense into her. --

6783:

Thanks. Well, as I really don't have any experience with this, I've come to the conclusion that it'll be better to let you do it. Hopefully, you will find time for this soon. Thanks again.

6149:

Having two talk pages for discussion of the same content is what might be confusing, and I don't see any need for it. The tag on the destination talk page is enough to address attribution.

5204:

use wikitable style. All that was necessary was to say that, rather than be told I'm too stupid to understand it. The sizing is used on the preponderance of tables on actor articles. And I

1482:

If, in fact, you disagree with my work, please let me know, and please try to improve the writing, or suggest how I could do so, rather than simply reverting to an older version. Thanks :)

4367:

You can nuke it, by all means; no reason to keep it around. Based on the name, and the comment at the rollback request page, I'd say they are indeed the same user, so, good block I say :)

269: 4872:

discussion is largely impossible. I suppose ArbCom would be the better choice, except I suspect that any attempt to present it will get misrepresented as a content dispute and rejected.

1262:

references. If not interested, please feel free to just ignore. I am notifying every editor that I see on the talk page who has been in the recent discussions. Thanks for your time, --

2227:

So have you. The official Korn website uses the character, so it's probably safe to use it in our article. Also see the talk page and make any pertinent arguments there, please. Thanks.

1696:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also 4515: 1609:

edit to WHL's talk by Versageek is the correct one. Apologies for any confusion. Please do everyone involved the courtesy of acknowledging there that your request has been satisfied. ++

812:"Whatever people are doing, whether you want to call it misinterpreting or "adding meaning" (a very fine and almost invisible line separating those), it's something everyone does here." 5159:" is not needed as what follows are th-elements and they get centered by the class, too. This whole mess was started by WHL messing up the code when, ironically, she changed it to 95% 3901:

That's ok, but you are thinking along the same lines as I am. Anyways, I thought you would want to know to sort of stay in the loop of things. No problem though, I do understand, --

1707:

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

1335:

Thanks. I'm pretty busy this week, so I won't be able to give this much attention. I'll try to read through it and comment at some point (if I think it has some chance of helping).

1100: 1962: 6762:

clearly and concisely, while providing a convincing argument for why it would be an improvement. Check out the other proposal discussions on that page to see what they look like.

437:

would do - telling me I am "unwilling" is completely inaccurate and unfair considering that from what I understand I'm not to do anything to the page until the issue is resolved.

3788:

I've provided a copy of SRQ's talk page so admins can review her unblock request without the Jimbo pic that has thus far prevented it. I just commented on it at her talk page.

2914:

applies even in userspace. You can restore the language that's fine, but I'd say do not use the first paragraph with his name. Not that I'll be watching really though =) --

2882: 1894:

Gotcha! That's a good succinct explaination, thanks! I'd argue about the applicability of that as a rule, but... now that I think about it, it's probably a good rule of thumb

5650:

out, look at the edit under history. Interesting eh, obviously false but most probably one of the founding myths of aromatherapy. Now if only a WP:R citation can be found. --

3552:

I think it was entirely out of order for you to have done that at all. But as you have, perhaps you would like to notify the rest of the participants of the other threads? -

818:

Again, you're excusing your bad behavior and poor choices in communicating with others by using a child's answer: "everyone else does it so it must be okay!"...? Good grief.

4352:)? Speaking of which, could you take a look at that account? I skipped the SPI step 'cause it's really quite obvious they're the same, but always nice to have confirmation. 3359:

I notified everyone who participated at the ANI thread and the article talk page thread. None were spared. Check my contribs and compare against the names in those threads.

2600:

which included charging me with hunting down your posts to verify that you'd notifed Jennavecia, so thus, I do not want you to continue to post to me. Your comment you left

2089: 1415: 1141:

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following

6675: 3492: 5972: 3957: 1708: 1361: 5029:

process of trial and error with position and dimension parameters to try and get a particular portion of an image to show up without the rest. You could try contacting

1161: 5160: 3963: 5722: 3114:

Ummm... you got into a dispute with me over trivia sections. Would it not be a good idea to disclose this on that ban thread? I can provide the diffs if you like. -

2972: 2612:

in which you stated that you intended to continue posting to my page, as if it were a race to post last and the last poster won some prize or got the last word, and

1498:

thing. Parenthesis should generally be avoided, and the book is a prominent enough aspect of the event that it shouldn't be treated as a sidebar. I'm open to ideas.

3995: 3986: 698:

As for the archive, the judgment wasn't one of intent but of content. When a page contains certain things, arranged in a certain way, regardless of what the author

687:

As for the last word, well, that's a universal compulsion of which you're a victim too. This posting on my talk page would be evidence. The case is over, after all.

5682: 5245:. I'm not saying this is necessarily indicative of the majority of actor articles, but is there any counter-evidence, that the 95% size is the consensus practice? 2907: 555:. No one in a dispute has a neutral point of view, and they're all allowed to express their points of view as much as they damn well please. Get used to that too. 3518:

So you didn't bother notifying anyone from the other ban thread? Whyever not? Very selective of you. Why did you think it necessary to message them anyway?!? -

5296: 5694: 5541:

There's no policy in particular that deals with racism in articles, as far as I'm aware. If you mean presenting a topic with a racially-biased point of view,

2765:

I saw your comment on this at ANI, and responded there. Yes of course I didn't see that the discussion occurred there since it was blanked. Sorry about that.

6637: 5312: 4334: 3101: 1670: 1062: 934: 608: 464: 355: 223: 5737: 3344:

It appears that you were canvassing all the supporters of the previous ban attempt, but none who opposed it. I don't suppose you have an answer for this? -

6736:

to give it a go, I don't have any experience with making such formal proposals. Is there a tutorial or guidelines for that? If so, I might try it. Thanks.

6456: 5435:

Harassment is a bit more relentless than the comment or two made there. Let's see how Q reacts to me explanation there before we pull the harassment card.

1741: 866:. Excuse me, but who's "we"? You're not an administrator, so...? Unfortunately, this is another sign of you not having appropriate relational boundries. 2840:

don't automatically belong at ANI, as "serious" as you see them. And, it's up to the accuser which forum he uses to handle the accusations, not you. And,

296:

someone's trying to explain rules to you that you weren't fully aware of before, it would help to respond a bit more humbly than that. Perhaps assume you

4535:

so, you simply decided to close the discussion unilaterally? not like it was going anywhere, mind you, but there was no need to get pissy about it. --

476: 6555: 5278: 5222: 2644:

Anyway... Debate/argument, argument/debate.... does it really matter? Anyone's comment will, more likely than not, turn into an exchange of some sort,

1362:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Proofreader77_Established_record_of_continuous_unrelenting_Disruptive_Editing

6758:

directly; no one expects any kind of special format or anything. There's no tutorial, and no trick to it really. You just try to present the idea at

5669: 5659: 5622: 5290: 651:

Since the sock case is now closed, and I cannot defend myself against the falsehoods in your last statement to me there, I will have to do so here.

5019: 4126: 4112: 3561: 3527: 3482: 3437: 3327: 3231: 3197: 3163: 2831: 2499:

Hi Equazcion, I tried the ref you added to gibson , and it did not work. It says :"sorry the video is not available" Does it work for you?Thanks.--

1606: 1209: 262: 6053:

No I'm not I'd suggest you read the suggestion again . The suggestion is too change Fs start to show a unref template if no reference is provided

5464: 5430: 3473:, with the edit summary "refactoring Ludwig's comment to first section-- Ludwig may revert me if they want", I find that a bit hard to believe. - 3294: 3280: 3031:

I know, thanks. If you check my contribs you'll see I've basically alerted everyone who participated at the article talk page and the ANI thread.

486:

The problem in this case especially was that I began by making a friendly statement, and only resorted to the ultimatum after you stonewalled me (

5545:

would probably cover that by default; though talking about the phenomenon of racism is okay, as long as it's relevant to the topic and verified.

5373: 4252:

Thanks, that was nice to hear :) It would've been nothing without your original thoughts coming first though. You've been making good additions.

2962: 2626: 1406:

ascertain whether there is support for a 'two-phase' poll at the eventual RfC (not far off now), where CDA will finally be put to the community.

258: 6713:

Thanks. I didn't really forget about it, I've just been too lazy to craft a proposal. I might soon, but anyone else is welcome to give it a go.

903:

have problem with is people who don't know when their butting in isn't appropriate (and now we're back to understanding boundries) or necessary.

289: 6409: 6362: 6344: 5155:

is not in the style attribute and will not be used, and the border, cellspacing, and cellpadding are all taken care of by "wikitable". And the

5163:. These tables should properly be be ordinary "wikitables" and any "standard" enforced via template a implementation. See also the thread she 4231: 3759: 3737: 2109:

You're right, that was odd. For some reason the RFC bot cut off the closing font tag in my signature. I fixed it. Thanks for letting me know.

6844: 6792: 6777: 6376:

I'm not gonna be the one to make that call. Those probably are personal attacks, but I'll wait for someone else to notice it. You can notify

6250: 6207: 6144: 4743: 4599: 3783: 2784:

It is not appropriate to discuss slurs on other editors at the talk page of an article. ANI is an appropriate place to have this resolved. -

2613: 1915: 1524: 163: 6693: 6824: 6745: 6417: 5775: 5319: 4478: 3916: 2983: 2345: 2075: 1793: 176:

Please see Knowledge talk:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:SkagitRiverQueen/Archive 1 for a response to your questions re: compromise. --

6707: 4954: 4932: 4830: 4787: 4656: 4629: 4544: 3065: 2578:

I don't see why she can post to my talk page but I can't do likewise. Anyway, she's apparently stopped, so I'll stop, as I said I would. —

6062: 3816: 3646:

No problem. I actually can't find any email from you though. I see you've posted a response on your talk page so I'll have a look there.

2461: 2414: 6306:

So I guess the short answer is I got lazy :) Maybe I'll take another look at it again sometime, but I don't have any plans to as of now.

6186:

is unlikely. The user must type it directly into the search box, backtrack the article redirect, or follow one of the few direct links (

4117:

Sorry, I missed the last bit. I'll move away now, if you have an issue with the unblock itself then feel free to message me directly. -

3149:

Not at all, it's just that you said that you had never had any interactions with me. You did. Seriously, I'll leave it up to you, but I

2749:

I think there must be some sort of misunderstanding. I did take my concerns to Unitanode's talk page before I came to ANI. He has since

2103: 6624: 5455:

happened to stumble upon it. All I want to do is edit. I shouldn't have to deal with any of this, especially if I did nothing wrong. --

5306: 5175: 4287: 2092:

looks odd to me and it seems to start with your signature, i.e. it looks like the font is leaking into text it was not intended for. --

1065:. When I'm miffed, my exposition skills are usually the first to go, so your clarification is very much appreciated by me. ;) Regards, 3871: 6176: 5164: 2543: 1441: 6018: 5535: 5082:

showed an interest. The Kate Winslet appearance was over the top. Appreciate your comments and I have through the whole discussion.

5007:

portions of it in different articles without having to upload different files with the different crops. Do you know how to do that?

4463:

I know you have trouble getting my eamils so I just want to know if it was received? I really want you to see what I had to say. --

675: 5110: 4193:...about this whole mess is that I discovered the Knowledge toolbar by looking at your userpage. How cool! Thanks for making that.— 3470: 1662: 1576: 6271:

Hi Equazcion. I have been using your Knowledge toolbar for a few weeks now and I was wondering why you ended development on it? —

6104: 4204: 2261: 6683: 5690: 5337: 4302: 4103:

It is indeed. I will make sure I do so. Do you feel that the unblock was unfair (aside from not discussing it with the admin)? -

3353: 1859: 1564:

Eh? You asked that some other CU corroborate my findings. Another CU did. What do you mean by "similar source" or "medium" ??? ++

1447:

No problem, though I'm not sure if I'd call it trying to talk sense into her. I've tried that before and it didn't get anywhere.

261:

re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at

6563: 5901: 5883: 5647: 5395: 4772:

Not sure if MEDCOM mediates on policy issues (rather than the contents of specific articles). The list of parties involved in a

4361: 3771: 2923: 2221: 1771: 1376: 6401: 3024: 1217: 4442:

Hi, there is an important email I sent to you this morning. Well important to me. :) Just want to make sure you see it. --

3691: 3423: 2534:

I see, thanks. I believe the video is important also because some people claimed they watched the video and heard nothing. --

2381:

I didn't even look at your revert. My edit was in response to the ANI report, which didn't (as far as I saw) make mention of

2031: 5582: 3682:

I also like having my visited links be red, as I have trouble distinguishing the default blue and purple on my watchlist. -

2208:

C. A. Russell's 2010, February 9, 02:13 edit to the "Korn" article, removing the use of the Cyrillic Я in place of a Latin R

185: 6751: 6358: 6187: 5892:

makes it clear your approach is the preferred one. I'll go amend my position on the quotations discussion accordingly. -

2099: 1014:"If we had to take everyone's word for it whenever their pages were threatened with deletion". Excuse me, but who's "we"? 274: 6694:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28development%29#Users_who_don.27t_know_what_Wikipedia_is_are_being_misled

1491: 120: 6370: 5908:

with prescribing action to someone in some sense...), and are, endlessly, but it's still what we go by, at least for now.

5627:

Thanks for understanding. I didn't see that story, but I agree it does sound like it would make an interesting addition.

5527: 5091: 4396:. I found a similar bon mot left on your talk and rolled it back. I hope you don't mind me butting in. See ya 'round 3847: 3640: 3636: 2171: 1149: 127:

that didn't really work out in the end. I'm not proud of what I've done. I'll understand if you want to report me to the

6457:

http://tlt.fandm.edu/2010/03/24/wikipedia-pushes-for-users-to-add-videos-wired-campus-the-chronicle-of-higher-education/

6241:

Another discussion with outside input is a good idea. I'll leave a note here if/when I start one. Thanks for your time.

4981: 4077: 2896: 2609: 2589: 1981: 6759: 6755: 5999: 4411: 2150: 1421: 709:"stop" doing this or that (as you do a lot). It'll save you a lot of grief, on Knowledge, and in the world in general. 535: 3299:

I'm not panning on it since I don't think it's relevant. I'm again not against you doing so if you feel it necessary.

1621: 1539: 1329: 5826: 5766:

offending editors, I truly think ANI should take a look at it. It needs a resolution. Thanks for your consideration.

5096: 4886: 4393: 4035: 3123: 6286: 2844:

accused of something is also no reason to go to ANI -- as an administrator, you should be telling people who accuse

2793: 2750: 2375: 2306: 1074: 2601: 1302: 6491: 4851:

for something like this because it doesn't matter how our argument turns out; the support isn't there either way.

4529: 2508: 5229:

Out of curiosity I took a look at a few random filmographies, and they all seem to have 90% font size specified:

4457: 4188: 2178: 1671: 915:. Sorry to dissapoint you, but "grief" here and "in the world is general" isn't something I have a problem with. 6501:

I'd like to close this; if there is a reply from someone else to what I just posted, please do not answer it.

4246: 2718: 322:

people are informing you that you violated a policy. If you honestly can't do that, it may be time for a break.

6512: 6070: 5383: 5136: 4349: 4183: 3051: 2083: 1911: 1855: 1130: 5526:

Hi. Where can I find about Knowledge's policy about racism? I mean, not racism against users but in articles.

5507:

I see no reason to even attempt to tread carefully. Thanks for the notice, but I don't take threats easily.

3339: 3168:

If you aren't trying to get me to disclose this previous interaction, why did you bring this to my talk page?

2247: 1277: 888:"but suspect you'd be singing a different tune if I had "inserted myself" on your side in these cases instead" 6598: 6469: 5516: 4821:

cross-talking on EQ's page. unless he expresses an interest in this discussion, let's move it elsewhere. --

1820: 1113: 94: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 6193:

If information about the redirect was not desired, the merge destination's Talk page is only two links away.

2252:

I've just restored my talk page. Thanks for pointing out those other socks! I'll take care of him ASAP. --

6670: 6632: 4329: 3496: 3447: 2635:

He didn't complain to me. I commented on the situation on his talk page first, and he responded to me here.

1746: 1545:

Thanks. I'm not seeing any evidence of that being from a similar source though, or even the same "medium".

368:

You're really obfuscating things here. I repeatedly told you of the problems with the page, at which point

1477: 5686: 5521: 5311: 4298: 4283: 3933:

if I don't actually know the details of the Joy situation. And I do appreciate your keeping me apprised.

1693: 1675: 1205: 599:

just because "NPOV is for articles only". It's *not* okay (but you already knew that, didn't you...) --

1142: 6798: 3672: 3097: 3061: 3010: 2010: 1732:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- 1689: 930: 671: 604: 575:

personal attacks? That's interesting. That is far worse than anything anyone has said to you thus far.

531: 460: 351: 285: 219: 181: 38: 3379: 2604:

did not approach basic common courtesy and included snarky, snide commentary about my "hanging out at

6538: 5460: 5391: 5101:

You're right. I was trying to be conciliatory and came across as condescending. Sorry about that.

4279: 3285:

Certainly. I'm sure that Equazcion will be happy to clarify that he has interacted with me before. -

2901: 2449: 2207: 1659: 1618: 1573: 1536: 1199: 4703:

lol - damn, now I have no idea what to do with this plate of beans on my table. Thanks a bunch, EQ!

5897: 5879: 3991:

PS (I've gone overlimit in size). Don't know if anything will be left regarding above. (Analyzing)

2149: 1355: 646: 5858:

While we're going back and forth over on the Quotations page, I thought I'd drop by here and say:

1397:(intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to; 390:

like the fight. It helps you vent your frustrations. If I'm wrong then prove it. Resolve this now.

5531: 5274: 5269:

inadvertently inserted from some example sent me by someone, was never considered for consensus.

5218: 5087: 4581:

Hah! sorry, I have a piss-pot life lately, so I claim exemption from the rule (within reason).

4031: 3666: 3632: 2622: 2216: 1518: 1325: 5052:

To clarify, I'm not using a custom version of the image. The cropping effect is done with code.

4026:

Just to note that I replied to you last night on my talk page, per your talk page instructions.

3853: 2818:

The editor who added the template has now been accused of self-aggrandizement and violations of

1313: 6488: 6352: 5957:

I award you this for all the good work you have done to help the project and its volunteers. --

5853: 5655: 5618: 5578: 5242: 5200:

Gee, was that so hard to say? The table heading was changed over from the previous style which

4294: 3487:

I think you're misunderstanding. I said I notified everyone from the article talk page thread (

2201: 1627:

No problem at all. I do acknowledge that another checkuser corroborated your findings, thanks.

992:-- Yes, really. Again, you're missing the point. The assumption of good faith is a question of 102: 1401:

gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

566:

Yes I'm finding it hard to stay away. Knowledge is my addiction, as I said in my notice above.

6559: 5367: 4773: 3093: 3057: 3056:

There is a link under the Arbitration section to the case. I filed it to get this over with.

2573: 2257: 1467: 1372: 1317: 1157: 926: 864:"If we had to take everyone's word for it whenever their pages were threatened with deletion" 667: 600: 527: 456: 347: 281: 215: 177: 1718:

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

5678: 5565: 5456: 5387: 5330: 5238: 5145:{|class="wikitable" style="font-size: 90%;" border="2" cellpadding="4" background: #f9f9f9; 4404: 4272: 4122: 4108: 4073: 3755: 3687: 3557: 3523: 3478: 3433: 3419: 3349: 3323: 3290: 3276: 3227: 3193: 3159: 3119: 2958: 2919: 2887: 2827: 2789: 2758: 1737: 1697: 1411: 1117: 1070: 1080:

Yeah tell me about it! You were basically babbling incoherently :) Kidding. No problem :)

8: 6839: 6772: 6723: 6659: 6614: 6579: 6528: 6484: 6436: 6390: 6337: 6316: 6279: 6232: 6172: 6159: 6121: 6044: 5990: 5923: 5893: 5889: 5875: 5843: 5822: 5799: 5754: 5712: 5637: 5599: 5555: 5484: 5445: 5412: 5357: 5255: 5191: 5126: 5062: 5043: 4997: 4906: 4861: 4674: 4564: 4497: 4427: 4377: 4319: 4262: 4220: 4149: 4094: 4052: 4011: 3943: 3888: 3878:

cause I really don't know anything about it... sorry. Thanks for letting me know though.

3831: 3798: 3708: 3656: 3612: 3577: 3543: 3509: 3460: 3400: 3369: 3309: 3247: 3213: 3178: 3140: 3082: 3041: 2998: 2940: 2863: 2809: 2775: 2734: 2686: 2559: 2525: 2476: 2434: 2395: 2326: 2277: 2237: 2191: 2139: 2119: 2094: 2047: 2000: 1938: 1881: 1808: 1637: 1591: 1555: 1508: 1487: 1457: 1345: 1258: 1238: 1213: 1183: 1090: 1042: 1030:

What I have problem with is people who don't know when their butting in isn't appropriate

764: 719: 632: 585: 504: 414: 332: 238: 201: 141: 47: 17: 1289:

I didn't explain myself fully on the talk page. I felt the edit request constituted an '

1116:. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Knowledge takes 790:"As for the last word, well, that's a universal compulsion of which you're a victim too" 6645: 6594:

I may have just edit conflicted with you, I hope I didn't cut out any of your comment.

6377: 6246: 6203: 6140: 6100: 6092: 5377: 5303: 5270: 5214: 5172: 5168: 5083: 4946: 4878: 4822: 4735: 4648: 4591: 4536: 4357: 4343: 4242: 4133: 4027: 3992: 3983: 3628: 3021: 2618: 2494: 2353: 2211: 1978: 1907: 1851: 1798:

No problem. I left a comment at the mediation page too, in case it does get looked at.

1321: 1298: 158: 115: 6168:

It doesn't seem like either of us is convincing the other, so I'll try one last time.

6135:

and be confused? I think that anyone reading it would have gotten there deliberately.

4417:

No problem, and thanks for the rollback. You can butt in to undo vandalism anytime :)

3450:, all the participants of which I also notified. I don't see Ludwig at either thread. 1688:

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for

253:

Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Knowledge:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC

6799:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29#Improve_the_WP_tagline

6788: 6741: 6703: 6539: 6413: 6366: 6080: 5970: 5771: 5733: 5651: 5614: 5574: 4964: 4509: 4476: 4455: 4387: 4199: 4181: 4062: 3914: 3869: 3735: 2716: 2584: 2341: 2302: 2287: 2068: 2024: 1791: 1769: 1722:

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

1439: 1275: 1225: 5318:

Someone "new" to Knowledge generally doesn't as their first edit, add themselves to

4877:

well, like I said, I'll consider my options as the goatse thing works itself out. --

6496: 6480: 6426:

reciprocated... I'm no angel. But I tried. Anyhoo, it's over now, time to move on.

6408:

with an editor on WP issues is wrong, then color me very wrong. Cheers, Equazcion

6058: 6014: 5811: 5512: 5426: 5210: 5106: 5076: 5010: 4972: 4615: 4487:

I got it, I just hadn't figured out how to respond yet. I'll try to do so tonight.

4118: 4104: 4069: 3812: 3779: 3621: 3553: 3519: 3474: 3429: 3415: 3345: 3319: 3286: 3223: 3189: 3155: 3115: 2823: 2785: 2754: 2457: 2445: 2410: 2371: 2363: 2253: 1368: 1153: 171: 4921:

It'd have to be a community-wide RfC like the ongoing BLP matter. Loads of fun! --

1290: 6422:

I think most of us resented most of her characterizations. I'm not gonna claim I

6266: 6171:

There is meaningful information regarding the redirect itself: attribution and {{

6088: 5323: 5265: 4661: 4397: 3751: 3683: 3272: 2954: 2915: 2837: 2819: 2382: 2359: 1952: 1733: 1407: 1282: 1135: 1066: 214:

Thanks for the recent "Duh...!" on my talk page. I have done as you suggested. -

6754:

came along a month ago, all you could do when you had an idea was present it at

6131:

that should be recorded with the appropriate tags. How will someone navigate to

3964:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Case#.28Preliminary.29_statement_by_Proofreader77

990:"Believing you" or "taking your word for it" was irrelevant. -- Again...really? 46:

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

6831: 6764: 6715: 6651: 6606: 6571: 6520: 6467: 6428: 6382: 6332: 6308: 6298: 6274: 6224: 6183: 6151: 6132: 6113: 6076: 6036: 6028: 5982: 5915: 5835: 5818: 5791: 5746: 5704: 5629: 5591: 5547: 5542: 5476: 5437: 5404: 5349: 5247: 5183: 5118: 5054: 5035: 4989: 4898: 4853: 4666: 4556: 4489: 4437: 4419: 4369: 4311: 4254: 4212: 4141: 4086: 4044: 4003: 3935: 3880: 3823: 3790: 3700: 3648: 3604: 3569: 3535: 3501: 3452: 3392: 3361: 3301: 3239: 3205: 3170: 3132: 3109: 3074: 3033: 2990: 2981: 2932: 2855: 2801: 2767: 2726: 2678: 2551: 2539: 2517: 2504: 2468: 2426: 2387: 2318: 2269: 2229: 2183: 2131: 2111: 2039: 1992: 1930: 1873: 1800: 1629: 1583: 1547: 1500: 1483: 1473: 1449: 1337: 1230: 1175: 1082: 1056: 1034: 756: 747: 711: 624: 577: 552: 496: 406: 324: 230: 193: 133: 6301:

where they were welcomes to "sign on" to help out), but I never got any bites.

2676:

If you both heed this advice in the future, similar incidents can be avoided.

2608:" which was an improper characterization and flatly untrue, and this one left 1842:(don't worry if you can't though, as you wouldn't be the first by a long shot) 6589: 6508: 6450: 6242: 6218: 6214: 6199: 6136: 6096: 5471: 5344: 5030: 4969:

Hey, you also got that image as a wallpaper! That use is being very popular.

4353: 4339: 4238: 3671:

I noticed you also find that "peeping Jimmy" image annoying. Take a look at

3411: 3017: 2911: 2744: 2698: 2605: 2313: 2294: 1901: 1845: 1729: 1719: 1712: 1701: 1655: 1614: 1569: 1532: 1307: 1294: 751: 739: 735: 731: 266: 152: 128: 109: 6329:

Well, for what it's worth, I've had no problems with it in Firefox 3.6. :) —

1360:

I believe I should give you a heads-up on this ANI regarding Proofreader77

6801: 6784: 6737: 6699: 6084: 5958: 5767: 5729: 5566: 5234: 4464: 4443: 4230: 4194: 4169: 4163: 4021: 3902: 3857: 3723: 3488: 2704: 2579: 2337: 2298: 2062: 2018: 1779: 1757: 1752: 1427: 1263: 743: 658:

Now, back to the final claims you made about me in the sock-case comments.

913:"It'll save you a lot of grief, on Knowledge, and in the world in general" 828:"adding meaning" (a very fine and almost invisible line separating those)" 477:

Knowledge:Guide to deletion#You may edit the article during the discussion

300:

already know more than the more experienced people here, and that they're

150:

It's ok! I'm glad that you like it. You're the second one I've caught! :)

6054: 6010: 6006: 5508: 5502: 5422: 5102: 3808: 3775: 3222:

I answered that already. I want you to have a chance to disclose this. -

2453: 2406: 2367: 1248: 516: 5942: 4987:

I'm just trying it on, might still change it again. Great photo though.

1254: 571:

Oh and "Get a life"???? ...and you're really complaining about everyone

6474: 5230: 4922: 4777: 4619: 4519: 3930: 2157: 3130:

you, and whether or not that's the kind of guy you really want to be.

6595: 6460: 3929:

It does seem that way :) Though saying so would be rightly viewed as

3533:

but who nevertheless might have an interest, could come participate.

2976: 2535: 2500: 1650:, where you originally asked, if you have not yet done so. Thanks. ++ 1120:

very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the

1105: 6503: 6380:

if you want, as he's the admin who's been dealing with her mostly.

1961: 1681: 1651: 1610: 1565: 1528: 1312:

You should be aware that your name came up in a complaint filed at

6548:

Thank you very much for your help and assistance in this article.

5702:

Yes. There's no child porn in the talk page comments you removed.

5589:

that's not their defining characteristic. Hope that makes sense.

4001:

I'm not sure why you're telling me all this, but thanks I guess.

2177:

Probably not, but it's a nice thought :) In my opinion we've all

1283: 6400:

always tried to stick to the issues, as is clearly evidenced in

6079:? Redirecting the Talk page of a merged article isn't in either 5181:

Thanks for the explanation Jack. I replied at WHL's talk page.

1383:

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

1148:

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the

5934:

I just feel that editors need recognition when they work hard.

5291:

MediaWiki talk:Common.css/Archive 9#Header color in wikitables

1128:

of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a

6294: 4776:

policy dispute would be quite interesting to put together. --

2090:

Knowledge:Requests_for_comment/Maths,_science,_and_technology

5784:

Long-term abuse is exactly what RFC is for, and what ANI is

5573:

anybody is free to their product an aromatherapy product. --

5297:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers#Filmography

3675:

for an idea on how you might hide it from within Knowledge.

851:"Believing you" or "taking your word for it" was irrelevant. 372:

of the following occurred simultaneously: A) you did indeed

1709:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Knowledge Generation Bureau

6009:

and would be happy to make up every fact about a player ?

5372:

Hey, thanks for the comments on my talk page. I feel that

5866: 5209:

British date style to an American biography, contrary to

5033:

for input, as his userpage is where I got the code from.

4042:

I'll be making the same request again. Good luck though.

1101:

File copyright problem with File:Giles_Corey_restored.jpg

3428:

I don't recall Bishonen being part of the discussion. -

2156:

I take it we'll all live happily ever after as well? :P

4729:

really don't think that NOTCENSORED was intended to be

1990:

Thanks! Always nice to know my work is appreciated :)

4518:? You know that DMSBel isn't going to let this go. -- 2836:

Accusations of self-aggrandizement and violations of

3958:

Mention at ArbCom RfAR (appears dead case, but fyi)

3499:). Ludwig is at none of those, as far as I can see. 1472:

Hey, I noticed you reverted a disputed paragraph in

5865:(b) So I'm clear, your argument is essentially the 2336:WP is that if you get it wrong, it's easy to undo. 6198:I would like to restore/add the tags I mentioned. 5286:You might be interested in this prior discussion: 3495:), and an ANI notice thread on Giano's talk page ( 2646:as this one did, with each of you replying 3 times 1898:. Nice work copy editing what I added, by the way. 1581:Nevermind. Thanks for your help until now though. 5723:Question re:ANI report on Tom Reedy and Nishidani 900:"Get used to people butting in on your business." 5421:Q's comments on Brian's page are over the pale. 4945:well, as I said, I'm considering my options. -- 4614:Sigh. How much you wanna bet this will go up to 2971:Just FYI I moved the relevant "general" text to 263:Knowledge:WikiProject Administrator/Admin Recall 404:last time I allow you to post on my talk page. 259:Knowledge talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC 6005:not an other? Maybe you just don't believe in 2881:Since you have just asked here is your answer 730:PS. Regarding the boundaries, I invite you to 6797:Hi, just FYI, a proposal has been posted at: 4338:you want to move it over to her new account, 2910:but only if it is courtesy blanked for now. 1871:-- I'm not great at explaining these things. 876:"I'm sure you'd love it if I took that break" 5320:Knowledge:Requests for permissions/Confirmed 4282:as uncontroversial: I made no histmerge, as 3973:"I bet they made fun of you in high school . 547:Another correction for you: NPOV applies to 5674:Equazcion Do you know what child porn is? 4554:no reason to get "pissy" about it, Ludwig. 1320:was listed, if you are interested. Thanks. 6483:with that crap we’d let some other people 5264:Not that I know about. It's the size that 4292:Knowledge talk:Trading card game/archive/1 4288:Knowledge talk:Trading card game/Archive 1 257:You are invited to join the discussion at 6075:Hi. Would you explain why you redirected 5940: 5670:Equazcion Do you know what child porn is? 1959: 1316:where a "conspiracy of bullies" named by 5151:The table declaration is malformed; the 3852:Hi, I thought you might have some input 2452:. I appreciate you letting me know. 2448:was the wrong page. I was thinking of 1751:Hi, could use your opinion over at the 1728:This is an automatic notification by a 14: 6551:From Portugal, keep up the good work, 6404:lengthy discussion. If attempting to 6359:harbinger of negativity and disruption 6095:}} would also be appropriate. Thanks. 5141:Hi. The core bit of bad code is this: 3772:User talk:SkagitRiverQueen/TalkNoJimbo 3750:Moving over to Crohnie's talk page. - 1204:Have I captured the source guidelines 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2799:template issue, ANI isn't the place. 1152:. Thanks again for your cooperation. 374:"know what doing was a violation..." 6188:Special:WhatLinksHere/Talk:Coke mini 5888:- Never mind, a quick re-reading of 4582: 4210:No problem, I'd glad you like it :) 3410:Show me the diff where you informed 3318:I think it would be for the best. - 1835: 1605:Apologies, that was the wrong diff. 25: 5744:making them into an RFC (or RFCs). 4237:is beautiful. Just wanted to say. 2930:reference to the person. Thanks :) 23: 6625:Thank u very much for the courtesy 6177:WP:Articles for deletion/Coke mini 1680: 1104: 316:appreciate that course of action). 107:Is strikingly similar to mine! ;) 24: 6867: 6604:No, you didn't cut anything out. 2358:I removed the information citing 2179:been poisoned by those fairytales 6545:Hi there EQUAZCION, VASCO here, 6479:I figured instead of filling up 5941: 4583: 4168:Hi, I've sent you an email. :(-- 2988:Thanks very much to you both :) 1960: 1836: 265:. Best Wishes for the Holidays, 29: 6684:Village pump thread, forgotten? 3770:Eh, can you explain this edit, 2753:, accusing me of harassment. - 2060:That's sound a chara, thanks -- 1257:going on to see if there is a 1150:media copyright questions page 13: 1: 6752:WP:Village pump (development) 4955:22:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 4933:20:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 4887:16:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 4831:08:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 4788:00:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 4744:22:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4657:22:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4630:21:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4600:21:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4545:21:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4530:21:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4479:21:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4458:13:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 4412:03:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 4362:20:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC) 4303:06:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC) 4247:23:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC) 4205:21:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC) 4184:14:23, 20 February 2010 (UTC) 4127:13:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC) 4113:13:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC) 4078:13:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC) 4036:08:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 3996:07:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 3987:07:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 3917:20:28, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3872:20:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3817:18:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3784:18:28, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3760:15:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3738:12:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3692:08:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 3641:11:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3562:18:17, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3528:18:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3483:17:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3438:17:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3424:17:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3354:15:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3328:17:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3295:17:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3281:16:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3232:16:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3198:15:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3164:15:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3124:14:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3102:03:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3066:03:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 3025:00:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 2984:07:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 2963:07:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 2924:21:17, 14 February 2010 (UTC) 2897:15:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2832:14:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2794:14:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2719:12:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2627:10:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2590:07:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2544:04:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2509:04:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2462:05:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2415:04:51, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2376:04:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2346:01:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2307:01:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2262:02:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC) 2222:02:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC) 1278:13:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC) 1218:20:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC) 1162:00:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC) 1114:File:Giles_Corey_restored.jpg 1075:12:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC) 935:02:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC) 676:17:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC) 609:19:16, 25 December 2009 (UTC) 551:, not editors' comments. See 536:18:52, 25 December 2009 (UTC) 465:22:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 356:19:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 290:17:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 270:05:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 224:03:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 186:21:57, 23 December 2009 (UTC) 164:20:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 121:22:42, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 5980:Thanks, much appreciated :) 5167:and the further whinging at 2172:05:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC) 2104:08:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC) 2088:The formatting on this page 2076:21:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2032:21:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 1982:21:27, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 1916:18:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 1860:17:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 1794:18:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC) 1772:10:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC) 1742:01:05, 25 January 2010 (UTC) 1663:00:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 1622:19:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC) 1577:11:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC) 1540:04:03, 20 January 2010 (UTC) 1492:17:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1442:23:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 1416:01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 1377:09:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 275:Just wanting to thank you... 7: 6760:WP:Village pump (proposals) 6756:WP:Village pump (proposals) 6182:Accidentally navigating to 4392:I came by to thank you for 3848:Since you know about things 2906:I am willing to move it to 1694:Knowledge Generation Bureau 1692:. The nominated article is 1676:Knowledge Generation Bureau 1330:21:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC) 1303:06:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC) 488:"the rest of it is staying" 10: 6872: 6708:14:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 6676:20:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 6638:02:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 6599:17:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC) 6564:02:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC) 6492:04:27, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 6470:20:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC) 6418:18:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC) 6371:22:25, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 6345:01:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 6287:18:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 6251:05:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 6208:04:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC) 6145:05:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 6105:06:13, 21 March 2010 (UTC) 6063:15:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC) 6019:15:12, 20 March 2010 (UTC) 6000:Where do you draw the line 5973:17:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC) 5902:23:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC) 5884:23:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC) 5827:23:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 5776:16:02, 14 March 2010 (UTC) 5738:07:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC) 5695:05:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC) 5660:09:19, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 5623:01:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 5583:00:31, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 3673:User:FeralDruid/vector.css 1422:Since my talk page is busy 6513:23:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC) 5951:The Barnstar of Diligence 5947: 5536:04:24, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 5517:06:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 5465:18:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 5431:07:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 5396:04:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 5338:23:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 5307:18:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 5279:00:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 5223:23:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 5176:22:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 5111:01:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 5097:User talk:Halvorsen brian 5092:03:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC) 5020:17:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 4982:04:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 4280:Knowledge:Requested moves 2206:You have been reverted. ( 1970:The Barnstar of Diplomacy 1966: 1834:if you could explain it! 1715:with four tildes (~~~~). 1314:WP:WQA#User:Wildhartlivie 129:board of signature review 6829:Thanks, I've commented. 6728:17:54, 30 Apr 2010 (UTC) 6664:11:50, 30 Apr 2010 (UTC) 6619:18:02, 23 Apr 2010 (UTC) 6584:03:01, 15 Apr 2010 (UTC) 6441:19:50, 23 Mar 2010 (UTC) 6395:22:28, 22 Mar 2010 (UTC) 6357:I guess, as an alleged " 6321:18:55, 22 Mar 2010 (UTC) 6237:10:17, 23 Mar 2010 (UTC) 6164:05:12, 22 Mar 2010 (UTC) 6126:07:17, 21 Mar 2010 (UTC) 6049:15:18, 20 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5995:17:22, 17 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5928:02:08, 17 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5848:00:06, 16 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5804:16:07, 14 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5759:15:17, 14 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5717:05:54, 14 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5642:01:25, 12 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5604:00:40, 12 Mar 2010 (UTC) 4911:20:21, 26 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4866:15:34, 26 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4679:22:11, 25 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4569:21:34, 25 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4502:21:58, 25 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4432:12:31, 22 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4382:20:44, 20 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4324:13:39, 20 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4267:01:19, 20 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4225:22:51, 20 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4154:13:41, 19 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4099:13:17, 19 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4057:13:23, 17 Feb 2010 (UTC) 4016:13:18, 17 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3948:20:35, 16 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3893:20:21, 16 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3836:18:38, 16 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3803:18:33, 16 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3713:11:44, 16 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3661:20:06, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3617:19:46, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3582:18:23, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3548:18:13, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3514:18:03, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3465:17:31, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3405:17:14, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3374:16:06, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3314:17:36, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3252:16:22, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3218:16:02, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3183:15:40, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3145:15:21, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3087:03:34, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3046:00:11, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 3003:15:41, 15 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2945:21:21, 14 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2868:15:03, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2814:14:56, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2780:14:32, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2739:13:59, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2691:13:58, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2564:04:50, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2530:04:40, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2481:05:51, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2439:04:54, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2400:04:16, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2331:01:19, 13 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2282:02:35, 12 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2242:02:26, 10 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2005:21:34, 31 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1943:18:10, 31 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1886:18:01, 31 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1813:18:17, 25 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1642:19:44, 20 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1596:18:55, 20 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1560:04:16, 20 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1513:18:13, 19 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1462:23:08, 18 Jan 2010 (UTC) 1243:00:25, 31 Dec 2009 (UTC) 1188:00:26, 30 Dec 2009 (UTC) 1112:Thank you for uploading 1095:14:34, 28 Dec 2009 (UTC) 1047:03:23, 28 Dec 2009 (UTC) 769:20:14, 27 Dec 2009 (UTC) 724:19:46, 27 Dec 2009 (UTC) 637:19:27, 25 Dec 2009 (UTC) 590:19:03, 25 Dec 2009 (UTC) 509:23:53, 24 Dec 2009 (UTC) 419:22:05, 24 Dec 2009 (UTC) 337:18:36, 24 Dec 2009 (UTC) 243:03:43, 24 Dec 2009 (UTC) 206:22:06, 23 Dec 2009 (UTC) 146:01:38, 18 Dec 2009 (UTC) 6845:14:31, 7 May 2010 (UTC) 6825:13:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC) 6793:18:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 6778:13:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 6746:07:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 6672:B9 hummingbird hovering 6634:B9 hummingbird hovering 6533:00:09, 5 Apr 2010 (UTC) 5560:11:14, 9 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5489:18:43, 7 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5450:06:57, 7 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5417:06:13, 7 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5362:23:46, 6 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5293:and the current one at: 5260:23:18, 6 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5196:23:07, 6 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5169:User talk:Lar#Your note 5131:01:35, 6 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5067:18:39, 3 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5048:18:04, 3 Mar 2010 (UTC) 5002:04:53, 3 Mar 2010 (UTC) 4189:Well, one nice thing... 2973:User:Equazcion/Footshot 2196:11:31, 9 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2144:12:05, 8 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2124:11:52, 8 Feb 2010 (UTC) 2052:21:27, 5 Feb 2010 (UTC) 1350:22:04, 4 Jan 2010 (UTC) 814:Baloney. "Everyone"... 6071:Redirecting Talk pages 5243:Tom Cruise filmography 5137:the filmographies code 4309:Understood, thanks :) 3052:You may be interested/ 2908:User:Equazcion/Plaxico 2703:Ping you have mail, -- 2084:Problem with your sig? 1685: 1136:image description page 1109: 191:I've responded there. 2466:No problem at all :) 1821:Dangling prepositions 1720:articles for deletion 1702:What Knowledge is not 1684: 1108: 304:trying to attack you. 42:of past discussions. 5239:Sarah Jessica Parker 5153:background: #f9f9f9; 4330:User:Caro 08 cleanup 4286:and all messages in 4284:WP:Parallel versions 1830:. I'd appreciate it 1747:More opinions please 1711:. Please be sure to 1698:Knowledge:Notability 1527:edit of interest. ++ 778:"There's no boundry" 5522:policy about racism 5313:User:Queenofthejews 4335:User:Caro 08/Canada 3491:), the ANI thread ( 3469:Given you moved it 2248:Sorry 'bout that... 1291:extensive quotation 18:User talk:Equazcion 6378:User:SarekOfVulcan 6175:}} with a link to 5147:|- align="center" 3340:And another thing. 3011:Topic ban on tbsdy 2751:blanked the thread 2667:talk page instead. 2450:WP:Handling trivia 2065: 2021: 2011:A hand with a link 1896:for formal writing 1713:sign your comments 1686: 1110: 6843: 6776: 6727: 6663: 6618: 6583: 6540:Stefano Borgonovo 6532: 6485:get in on the fun 6440: 6394: 6320: 6236: 6163: 6125: 6048: 5994: 5978: 5977: 5927: 5847: 5803: 5758: 5716: 5698: 5683:GodBlessOurTroops 5681:comment added by 5641: 5603: 5559: 5488: 5449: 5416: 5361: 5259: 5195: 5130: 5066: 5047: 5018: 5001: 4980: 4910: 4865: 4678: 4568: 4501: 4431: 4381: 4323: 4295:Anthony Appleyard 4266: 4224: 4153: 4137: 4098: 4056: 4015: 3947: 3892: 3835: 3802: 3712: 3660: 3616: 3581: 3547: 3513: 3464: 3446:Bishonen is from 3404: 3373: 3313: 3251: 3217: 3182: 3144: 3086: 3045: 3002: 2944: 2902:Knowledge:Plaxico 2895: 2867: 2813: 2779: 2738: 2724:Thanks, replied. 2690: 2563: 2529: 2480: 2438: 2399: 2330: 2312:You're right (on 2281: 2241: 2219: 2195: 2143: 2123: 2097: 2063: 2051: 2019: 2004: 1987: 1986: 1942: 1885: 1812: 1641: 1595: 1559: 1523:... you may find 1512: 1461: 1394:finalisation poll 1349: 1242: 1200:The guidelines... 1187: 1094: 1046: 768: 723: 636: 589: 508: 418: 336: 242: 205: 145: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 6863: 6847: 6838: 6836: 6821: 6820: 6816: 6813: 6809: 6780: 6771: 6769: 6729: 6722: 6720: 6673: 6665: 6658: 6656: 6635: 6620: 6613: 6611: 6585: 6578: 6576: 6534: 6527: 6525: 6465: 6442: 6435: 6433: 6396: 6389: 6387: 6342: 6340: 6335: 6322: 6315: 6313: 6284: 6282: 6277: 6238: 6231: 6229: 6165: 6158: 6156: 6127: 6120: 6118: 6087:. I had added {{ 6050: 6043: 6041: 6033: 6027: 5996: 5989: 5987: 5968: 5963: 5945: 5938: 5937: 5929: 5922: 5920: 5849: 5842: 5840: 5805: 5798: 5796: 5760: 5753: 5751: 5718: 5711: 5709: 5697: 5675: 5643: 5636: 5634: 5605: 5598: 5596: 5561: 5554: 5552: 5490: 5483: 5481: 5451: 5444: 5442: 5418: 5411: 5409: 5363: 5356: 5354: 5335: 5328: 5261: 5254: 5252: 5197: 5190: 5188: 5132: 5125: 5123: 5068: 5061: 5059: 5049: 5042: 5040: 5017: 5015: 5008: 5003: 4996: 4994: 4979: 4977: 4970: 4952: 4949: 4929: 4928: 4912: 4905: 4903: 4884: 4881: 4867: 4860: 4858: 4828: 4825: 4784: 4783: 4741: 4738: 4680: 4673: 4671: 4654: 4651: 4626: 4625: 4597: 4594: 4588: 4587: 4586: 4570: 4563: 4561: 4542: 4539: 4526: 4525: 4514:What's with the 4503: 4496: 4494: 4474: 4469: 4453: 4448: 4433: 4426: 4424: 4408: 4401: 4383: 4376: 4374: 4325: 4318: 4316: 4268: 4261: 4259: 4226: 4219: 4217: 4202: 4197: 4179: 4174: 4155: 4148: 4146: 4131: 4100: 4093: 4091: 4058: 4051: 4049: 4017: 4010: 4008: 3949: 3942: 3940: 3912: 3907: 3894: 3887: 3885: 3867: 3862: 3837: 3830: 3828: 3807:Gotcha. Thanks. 3804: 3797: 3795: 3733: 3728: 3714: 3707: 3705: 3662: 3655: 3653: 3618: 3611: 3609: 3583: 3576: 3574: 3549: 3542: 3540: 3515: 3508: 3506: 3466: 3459: 3457: 3406: 3399: 3397: 3375: 3368: 3366: 3315: 3308: 3306: 3253: 3246: 3244: 3219: 3212: 3210: 3184: 3177: 3175: 3146: 3139: 3137: 3094:Hell In A Bucket 3088: 3081: 3079: 3058:Hell In A Bucket 3047: 3040: 3038: 3004: 2997: 2995: 2946: 2939: 2937: 2894: 2892: 2885: 2869: 2862: 2860: 2848:that it's up to 2815: 2808: 2806: 2781: 2774: 2772: 2740: 2733: 2731: 2714: 2709: 2692: 2685: 2683: 2587: 2582: 2565: 2558: 2556: 2531: 2524: 2522: 2482: 2475: 2473: 2440: 2433: 2431: 2401: 2394: 2392: 2332: 2325: 2323: 2283: 2276: 2274: 2243: 2236: 2234: 2215: 2197: 2190: 2188: 2169: 2151:Into the sunset? 2145: 2138: 2136: 2125: 2118: 2116: 2093: 2074: 2053: 2046: 2044: 2030: 2006: 1999: 1997: 1964: 1957: 1956: 1944: 1937: 1935: 1887: 1880: 1878: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1814: 1807: 1805: 1789: 1784: 1767: 1762: 1643: 1636: 1634: 1597: 1590: 1588: 1561: 1554: 1552: 1514: 1507: 1505: 1463: 1456: 1454: 1437: 1432: 1356:New ANI created. 1351: 1344: 1342: 1318:SkagitRiverQueen 1273: 1268: 1244: 1237: 1235: 1189: 1182: 1180: 1096: 1089: 1087: 1048: 1041: 1039: 927:SkagitRiverQueen 770: 763: 761: 725: 718: 716: 668:SkagitRiverQueen 647:Overgeneralizing 638: 631: 629: 601:SkagitRiverQueen 591: 584: 582: 528:SkagitRiverQueen 510: 503: 501: 457:SkagitRiverQueen 420: 413: 411: 348:SkagitRiverQueen 338: 331: 329: 282:SkagitRiverQueen 244: 237: 235: 216:SkagitRiverQueen 207: 200: 198: 178:SkagitRiverQueen 160: 155: 147: 140: 138: 117: 112: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 6871: 6870: 6866: 6865: 6864: 6862: 6861: 6860: 6832: 6830: 6818: 6814: 6811: 6804: 6803: 6765: 6763: 6716: 6714: 6686: 6671: 6652: 6650: 6633: 6627: 6607: 6605: 6592: 6572: 6570: 6543: 6521: 6519: 6499: 6477: 6461: 6453: 6429: 6427: 6383: 6381: 6355: 6338: 6333: 6331: 6309: 6307: 6280: 6275: 6273: 6269: 6225: 6223: 6152: 6150: 6114: 6112: 6073: 6037: 6035: 6031: 6025: 6002: 5983: 5981: 5964: 5959: 5936: 5916: 5914: 5856: 5836: 5834: 5814: 5792: 5790: 5747: 5745: 5725: 5705: 5703: 5676: 5672: 5630: 5628: 5592: 5590: 5570: 5548: 5546: 5524: 5505: 5477: 5475: 5457:Brian Halvorsen 5438: 5436: 5405: 5403: 5388:Brian Halvorsen 5370: 5350: 5348: 5331: 5324: 5316: 5248: 5246: 5184: 5182: 5149: 5139: 5119: 5117: 5099: 5079: 5055: 5053: 5036: 5034: 5011: 5009: 4990: 4988: 4973: 4971: 4967: 4950: 4947: 4926: 4924: 4899: 4897: 4882: 4879: 4854: 4852: 4826: 4823: 4781: 4779: 4739: 4736: 4667: 4665: 4652: 4649: 4623: 4621: 4595: 4592: 4584: 4557: 4555: 4540: 4537: 4523: 4521: 4512: 4490: 4488: 4470: 4465: 4449: 4444: 4440: 4420: 4418: 4406: 4399: 4390: 4370: 4368: 4332: 4312: 4310: 4275: 4255: 4253: 4235: 4213: 4211: 4200: 4195: 4191: 4175: 4170: 4166: 4142: 4140: 4123:Ta bu shi da yu 4109:Ta bu shi da yu 4087: 4085: 4074:Ta bu shi da yu 4065: 4045: 4043: 4024: 4004: 4002: 3960: 3936: 3934: 3908: 3903: 3881: 3879: 3863: 3858: 3850: 3824: 3822: 3791: 3789: 3729: 3724: 3701: 3699: 3669: 3667:Hiding an Image 3649: 3647: 3624: 3605: 3603: 3570: 3568: 3558:Ta bu shi da yu 3536: 3534: 3524:Ta bu shi da yu 3502: 3500: 3479:Ta bu shi da yu 3453: 3451: 3434:Ta bu shi da yu 3420:Ta bu shi da yu 3393: 3391: 3382: 3362: 3360: 3350:Ta bu shi da yu 3342: 3324:Ta bu shi da yu 3302: 3300: 3291:Ta bu shi da yu 3240: 3238: 3228:Ta bu shi da yu 3206: 3204: 3194:Ta bu shi da yu 3171: 3169: 3160:Ta bu shi da yu 3133: 3131: 3120:Ta bu shi da yu 3112: 3075: 3073: 3054: 3034: 3032: 3013: 2991: 2989: 2933: 2931: 2904: 2888: 2886: 2856: 2854: 2828:Ta bu shi da yu 2802: 2800: 2790:Ta bu shi da yu 2768: 2766: 2759:Ta bu shi da yu 2747: 2727: 2725: 2710: 2705: 2701: 2679: 2677: 2617:inappropriate. 2585: 2580: 2576: 2552: 2550: 2518: 2516: 2497: 2469: 2467: 2427: 2425: 2388: 2386: 2356: 2319: 2317: 2290: 2270: 2268: 2250: 2230: 2228: 2204: 2184: 2182: 2164: 2158: 2154: 2132: 2130: 2112: 2110: 2102: 2086: 2071: 2061: 2040: 2038: 2027: 2017: 2013: 1993: 1991: 1955: 1931: 1929: 1874: 1872: 1837: 1823: 1801: 1799: 1785: 1780: 1763: 1758: 1749: 1679: 1630: 1628: 1584: 1582: 1548: 1546: 1521: 1519:Since you asked 1501: 1499: 1470: 1450: 1448: 1433: 1428: 1424: 1385: 1358: 1338: 1336: 1310: 1287: 1269: 1264: 1253:Hi, there is a 1251: 1231: 1229: 1202: 1176: 1174: 1103: 1083: 1081: 1059: 1035: 1033: 757: 755: 712: 710: 649: 625: 623: 578: 576: 519: 497: 495: 407: 405: 325: 323: 277: 255: 231: 229: 194: 192: 174: 157: 153: 134: 132: 114: 110: 105: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 6869: 6859: 6858: 6857: 6856: 6855: 6854: 6853: 6852: 6851: 6850: 6849: 6848: 6732:If you'd like 6698:Best regards, 6688:Hi Equazcion, 6685: 6682: 6681: 6680: 6679: 6678: 6631: 6626: 6623: 6622: 6621: 6591: 6588: 6587: 6586: 6569:No problem :) 6542: 6537: 6536: 6535: 6498: 6495: 6476: 6473: 6452: 6449: 6448: 6447: 6446: 6445: 6444: 6443: 6354: 6353:Community Ban? 6351: 6350: 6349: 6348: 6347: 6324: 6323: 6303: 6302: 6268: 6265: 6264: 6263: 6262: 6261: 6260: 6259: 6258: 6257: 6256: 6255: 6254: 6253: 6196: 6195: 6194: 6191: 6184:Talk:Coke mini 6180: 6133:Talk:Coke mini 6077:Talk:Coke mini 6072: 6069: 6068: 6067: 6066: 6065: 6001: 5998: 5976: 5975: 5954: 5953: 5948: 5946: 5935: 5932: 5931: 5930: 5910: 5909: 5894:DustFormsWords 5876:DustFormsWords 5872: 5871: 5863: 5855: 5854:Re: Quotations 5852: 5851: 5850: 5813: 5810: 5809: 5808: 5807: 5806: 5779: 5778: 5762: 5761: 5724: 5721: 5720: 5719: 5671: 5668: 5667: 5666: 5665: 5664: 5663: 5662: 5644: 5610: 5569: 5564: 5563: 5562: 5523: 5520: 5504: 5501: 5500: 5499: 5498: 5497: 5496: 5495: 5494: 5493: 5492: 5491: 5369: 5366: 5365: 5364: 5315: 5310: 5300: 5299: 5294: 5284: 5283: 5282: 5281: 5227: 5226: 5225: 5158: 5154: 5146: 5143: 5138: 5135: 5134: 5133: 5116:No problem :) 5098: 5095: 5078: 5075: 5074: 5073: 5072: 5071: 5070: 5069: 5050: 5023: 5022: 4966: 4963: 4962: 4961: 4960: 4959: 4958: 4957: 4938: 4937: 4936: 4935: 4916: 4915: 4914: 4913: 4890: 4889: 4874: 4873: 4848: 4847: 4846: 4845: 4844: 4843: 4842: 4841: 4840: 4839: 4838: 4837: 4836: 4835: 4834: 4833: 4803: 4802: 4801: 4800: 4799: 4798: 4797: 4796: 4795: 4794: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4774:WP:NOTCENSORED 4757: 4756: 4755: 4754: 4753: 4752: 4751: 4750: 4749: 4748: 4747: 4746: 4715: 4714: 4713: 4712: 4711: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4707: 4706: 4705: 4704: 4690: 4689: 4688: 4687: 4686: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4681: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4634: 4633: 4632: 4607: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4603: 4602: 4574: 4573: 4572: 4571: 4511: 4508: 4507: 4506: 4505: 4504: 4482: 4481: 4439: 4436: 4435: 4434: 4389: 4386: 4385: 4384: 4331: 4328: 4327: 4326: 4306: 4305: 4274: 4271: 4270: 4269: 4234: 4229: 4228: 4227: 4190: 4187: 4165: 4162: 4161: 4160: 4159: 4158: 4157: 4156: 4129: 4064: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4023: 4020: 4019: 4018: 3980: 3979: 3975: 3967: 3966: 3959: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3950: 3922: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3896: 3895: 3849: 3846: 3845: 3844: 3843: 3842: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3821:No problem :) 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3762: 3743: 3742: 3741: 3740: 3716: 3715: 3668: 3665: 3664: 3663: 3623: 3620: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3586: 3585: 3584: 3441: 3440: 3426: 3381: 3380:For the record 3378: 3377: 3376: 3341: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3264: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3258: 3257: 3256: 3255: 3254: 3111: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3053: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3012: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2948: 2947: 2903: 2900: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2746: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2700: 2697: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2639: 2638: 2637: 2636: 2630: 2629: 2575: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2496: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2355: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2349: 2348: 2289: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2249: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2203: 2202:Revert to Korn 2200: 2199: 2198: 2162: 2153: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2126: 2098: 2095:JohnBlackburne 2085: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2078: 2069: 2055: 2054: 2025: 2012: 2009: 2008: 2007: 1985: 1984: 1973: 1972: 1967: 1965: 1954: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1899: 1889: 1888: 1843: 1822: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1748: 1745: 1678: 1674:nomination of 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1520: 1517: 1516: 1515: 1474:Charles Manson 1469: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1423: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1403: 1402: 1384: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1357: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1309: 1306: 1286: 1281: 1255:new discussion 1250: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1226:primary source 1201: 1198: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1102: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1061:Thank you for 1058: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 982: 981: 980: 979: 978: 977: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 954: 953: 952: 951: 950: 949: 940: 939: 938: 937: 919: 918: 917: 916: 907: 906: 905: 904: 894: 893: 892: 891: 882: 881: 880: 879: 870: 869: 868: 867: 858: 857: 856: 855: 845: 844: 843: 842: 834: 833: 832: 831: 822: 821: 820: 819: 806: 805: 804: 803: 796: 795: 794: 793: 784: 783: 782: 781: 772: 771: 727: 726: 705: 704: 695: 694: 689: 688: 684: 683: 648: 645: 644: 643: 642: 641: 640: 639: 614: 613: 612: 611: 593: 592: 568: 567: 563: 562: 557: 556: 544: 543: 518: 515: 513: 474: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 445: 444: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 438: 426: 425: 424: 423: 422: 421: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 382: 381: 380: 379: 378: 377: 361: 360: 359: 358: 340: 339: 318: 317: 312: 311: 306: 305: 276: 273: 254: 251: 250: 249: 248: 247: 246: 245: 228:No problem :) 209: 208: 173: 170: 169: 168: 167: 166: 104: 103:Your signature 101: 98: 97: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6868: 6846: 6842: 6841: 6837: 6835: 6828: 6827: 6826: 6823: 6822: 6817: 6808: 6800: 6796: 6795: 6794: 6790: 6786: 6782: 6781: 6779: 6775: 6774: 6770: 6768: 6761: 6757: 6753: 6749: 6748: 6747: 6743: 6739: 6735: 6731: 6730: 6726: 6725: 6721: 6719: 6712: 6711: 6710: 6709: 6705: 6701: 6696: 6695: 6689: 6677: 6674: 6667: 6666: 6662: 6661: 6657: 6655: 6647: 6642: 6641: 6640: 6639: 6636: 6617: 6616: 6612: 6610: 6603: 6602: 6601: 6600: 6597: 6582: 6581: 6577: 6575: 6568: 6567: 6566: 6565: 6561: 6557: 6552: 6549: 6546: 6541: 6531: 6530: 6526: 6524: 6517: 6516: 6515: 6514: 6510: 6506: 6505: 6494: 6493: 6490: 6486: 6482: 6472: 6471: 6468: 6466: 6464: 6458: 6439: 6438: 6434: 6432: 6425: 6421: 6420: 6419: 6415: 6411: 6407: 6403: 6398: 6397: 6393: 6392: 6388: 6386: 6379: 6375: 6374: 6373: 6372: 6368: 6364: 6360: 6346: 6343: 6341: 6336: 6328: 6327: 6326: 6325: 6319: 6318: 6314: 6312: 6305: 6304: 6300: 6296: 6291: 6290: 6289: 6288: 6285: 6283: 6278: 6252: 6248: 6244: 6240: 6239: 6235: 6234: 6230: 6228: 6220: 6216: 6211: 6210: 6209: 6205: 6201: 6197: 6192: 6189: 6185: 6181: 6178: 6174: 6170: 6169: 6167: 6166: 6162: 6161: 6157: 6155: 6148: 6147: 6146: 6142: 6138: 6134: 6129: 6128: 6124: 6123: 6119: 6117: 6109: 6108: 6107: 6106: 6102: 6098: 6094: 6090: 6086: 6082: 6078: 6064: 6060: 6056: 6052: 6051: 6047: 6046: 6042: 6040: 6030: 6023: 6022: 6021: 6020: 6016: 6012: 6008: 5997: 5993: 5992: 5988: 5986: 5974: 5971: 5969: 5967: 5962: 5956: 5955: 5952: 5949: 5944: 5939: 5926: 5925: 5921: 5919: 5912: 5911: 5906: 5905: 5904: 5903: 5899: 5895: 5891: 5886: 5885: 5881: 5877: 5868: 5864: 5861: 5860: 5859: 5846: 5845: 5841: 5839: 5831: 5830: 5829: 5828: 5824: 5820: 5802: 5801: 5797: 5795: 5787: 5783: 5782: 5781: 5780: 5777: 5773: 5769: 5764: 5763: 5757: 5756: 5752: 5750: 5742: 5741: 5740: 5739: 5735: 5731: 5715: 5714: 5710: 5708: 5701: 5700: 5699: 5696: 5692: 5688: 5684: 5680: 5661: 5657: 5653: 5649: 5645: 5640: 5639: 5635: 5633: 5626: 5625: 5624: 5620: 5616: 5611: 5607: 5606: 5602: 5601: 5597: 5595: 5587: 5586: 5585: 5584: 5580: 5576: 5568: 5558: 5557: 5553: 5551: 5544: 5540: 5539: 5538: 5537: 5533: 5529: 5528:99.231.81.164 5519: 5518: 5514: 5510: 5487: 5486: 5482: 5480: 5473: 5468: 5467: 5466: 5462: 5458: 5453: 5452: 5448: 5447: 5443: 5441: 5434: 5433: 5432: 5428: 5424: 5420: 5419: 5415: 5414: 5410: 5408: 5400: 5399: 5398: 5397: 5393: 5389: 5385: 5382: 5379: 5375: 5368:User:Qpwoeial 5360: 5359: 5355: 5353: 5346: 5343:I know. But, 5342: 5341: 5340: 5339: 5336: 5334: 5329: 5327: 5321: 5314: 5309: 5308: 5305: 5304:Jack Merridew 5298: 5295: 5292: 5289: 5288: 5287: 5280: 5276: 5272: 5271:Wildhartlivie 5267: 5263: 5262: 5258: 5257: 5253: 5251: 5244: 5240: 5236: 5232: 5228: 5224: 5220: 5216: 5215:Wildhartlivie 5212: 5207: 5203: 5199: 5198: 5194: 5193: 5189: 5187: 5180: 5179: 5178: 5177: 5174: 5173:Jack Merridew 5170: 5166: 5162: 5157:align="center 5156: 5152: 5148: 5142: 5129: 5128: 5124: 5122: 5115: 5114: 5113: 5112: 5108: 5104: 5094: 5093: 5089: 5085: 5084:Wildhartlivie 5065: 5064: 5060: 5058: 5051: 5046: 5045: 5041: 5039: 5032: 5031:User:iMatthew 5027: 5026: 5025: 5024: 5021: 5016: 5014: 5005: 5004: 5000: 4999: 4995: 4993: 4986: 4985: 4984: 4983: 4978: 4976: 4956: 4953: 4944: 4943: 4942: 4941: 4940: 4939: 4934: 4931: 4930: 4920: 4919: 4918: 4917: 4909: 4908: 4904: 4902: 4894: 4893: 4892: 4891: 4888: 4885: 4876: 4875: 4870: 4869: 4868: 4864: 4863: 4859: 4857: 4832: 4829: 4819: 4818: 4817: 4816: 4815: 4814: 4813: 4812: 4811: 4810: 4809: 4808: 4807: 4806: 4805: 4804: 4789: 4786: 4785: 4775: 4771: 4770: 4769: 4768: 4767: 4766: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4758: 4745: 4742: 4732: 4731:carte blanche 4727: 4726: 4725: 4724: 4723: 4722: 4721: 4720: 4719: 4718: 4717: 4716: 4702: 4701: 4700: 4699: 4698: 4697: 4696: 4695: 4694: 4693: 4692: 4691: 4677: 4676: 4672: 4670: 4663: 4660: 4659: 4658: 4655: 4645: 4644: 4643: 4642: 4641: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4631: 4628: 4627: 4617: 4613: 4612: 4611: 4610: 4609: 4608: 4601: 4598: 4580: 4579: 4578: 4577: 4576: 4575: 4567: 4566: 4562: 4560: 4553: 4548: 4547: 4546: 4543: 4534: 4533: 4532: 4531: 4528: 4527: 4517: 4500: 4499: 4495: 4493: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4483: 4480: 4477: 4475: 4473: 4468: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4459: 4456: 4454: 4452: 4447: 4430: 4429: 4425: 4423: 4416: 4415: 4414: 4413: 4410: 4409: 4403: 4402: 4395: 4380: 4379: 4375: 4373: 4366: 4365: 4364: 4363: 4359: 4355: 4351: 4348: 4345: 4341: 4336: 4322: 4321: 4317: 4315: 4308: 4307: 4304: 4300: 4296: 4293: 4290:were also in 4289: 4285: 4281: 4277: 4276: 4265: 4264: 4260: 4258: 4251: 4250: 4249: 4248: 4244: 4240: 4233: 4223: 4222: 4218: 4216: 4209: 4208: 4207: 4206: 4203: 4198: 4186: 4185: 4182: 4180: 4178: 4173: 4152: 4151: 4147: 4145: 4135: 4134:edit conflict 4130: 4128: 4124: 4120: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4101: 4097: 4096: 4092: 4090: 4082: 4081: 4080: 4079: 4075: 4071: 4055: 4054: 4050: 4048: 4040: 4039: 4038: 4037: 4033: 4029: 4028:Wildhartlivie 4014: 4013: 4009: 4007: 4000: 3999: 3998: 3997: 3994: 3993:Proofreader77 3989: 3988: 3985: 3984:Proofreader77 3976: 3974: 3969: 3968: 3965: 3962: 3961: 3946: 3945: 3941: 3939: 3932: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3918: 3915: 3913: 3911: 3906: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3891: 3890: 3886: 3884: 3876: 3875: 3874: 3873: 3870: 3868: 3866: 3861: 3855: 3834: 3833: 3829: 3827: 3820: 3819: 3818: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3805: 3801: 3800: 3796: 3794: 3787: 3786: 3785: 3781: 3777: 3773: 3769: 3768: 3761: 3757: 3753: 3749: 3748: 3747: 3746: 3745: 3744: 3739: 3736: 3734: 3732: 3727: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3717: 3711: 3710: 3706: 3704: 3696: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3689: 3685: 3680: 3676: 3674: 3659: 3658: 3654: 3652: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3638: 3634: 3630: 3629:Empathictrust 3619: 3615: 3614: 3610: 3608: 3580: 3579: 3575: 3573: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3559: 3555: 3551: 3550: 3546: 3545: 3541: 3539: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3525: 3521: 3517: 3516: 3512: 3511: 3507: 3505: 3498: 3494: 3490: 3486: 3485: 3484: 3480: 3476: 3472: 3468: 3467: 3463: 3462: 3458: 3456: 3449: 3445: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3439: 3435: 3431: 3427: 3425: 3421: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3403: 3402: 3398: 3396: 3388: 3372: 3371: 3367: 3365: 3358: 3357: 3356: 3355: 3351: 3347: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3317: 3316: 3312: 3311: 3307: 3305: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3292: 3288: 3284: 3283: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3269: 3268: 3250: 3249: 3245: 3243: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3229: 3225: 3221: 3220: 3216: 3215: 3211: 3209: 3201: 3200: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3186: 3185: 3181: 3180: 3176: 3174: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3161: 3157: 3152: 3148: 3147: 3143: 3142: 3138: 3136: 3128: 3127: 3126: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3103: 3099: 3095: 3090: 3089: 3085: 3084: 3080: 3078: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3063: 3059: 3044: 3043: 3039: 3037: 3030: 3029: 3028: 3026: 3023: 3019: 3001: 3000: 2996: 2994: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2982: 2980: 2979: 2974: 2970: 2969: 2964: 2960: 2956: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2943: 2942: 2938: 2936: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2921: 2917: 2913: 2909: 2899: 2898: 2893: 2891: 2883: 2866: 2865: 2861: 2859: 2851: 2847: 2843: 2839: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2829: 2825: 2821: 2817: 2816: 2812: 2811: 2807: 2805: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2782: 2778: 2777: 2773: 2771: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2760: 2756: 2752: 2737: 2736: 2732: 2730: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2717: 2715: 2713: 2708: 2689: 2688: 2684: 2682: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2666: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2651: 2647: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2619:Wildhartlivie 2615: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2598: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2591: 2588: 2583: 2574:Wildhartlivie 2562: 2561: 2557: 2555: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2532: 2528: 2527: 2523: 2521: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2479: 2478: 2474: 2472: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2442: 2441: 2437: 2436: 2432: 2430: 2423: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2412: 2408: 2403: 2402: 2398: 2397: 2393: 2391: 2384: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2361: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2334: 2333: 2329: 2328: 2324: 2322: 2315: 2311: 2310: 2309: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2280: 2279: 2275: 2273: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2259: 2255: 2240: 2239: 2235: 2233: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2218: 2213: 2212:C. A. Russell 2209: 2194: 2193: 2189: 2187: 2180: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2170: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2152: 2142: 2141: 2137: 2135: 2127: 2122: 2121: 2117: 2115: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2101: 2096: 2091: 2077: 2073: 2072: 2066: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2050: 2049: 2045: 2043: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2029: 2028: 2022: 2003: 2002: 1998: 1996: 1989: 1988: 1983: 1980: 1975: 1974: 1971: 1968: 1963: 1958: 1941: 1940: 1936: 1934: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1904: 1897: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1884: 1883: 1879: 1877: 1869: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1848: 1833: 1829: 1811: 1810: 1806: 1804: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1792: 1790: 1788: 1783: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1770: 1768: 1766: 1761: 1754: 1744: 1743: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1721: 1716: 1714: 1710: 1705: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1683: 1677: 1673: 1664: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1646:Please do so 1645: 1644: 1640: 1639: 1635: 1633: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1594: 1593: 1589: 1587: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1575: 1571: 1567: 1563: 1562: 1558: 1557: 1553: 1551: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1511: 1510: 1506: 1504: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1478: 1475: 1468:Recent revert 1460: 1459: 1455: 1453: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1440: 1438: 1436: 1431: 1417: 1413: 1409: 1405: 1404: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1396: 1395: 1389: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1348: 1347: 1343: 1341: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1327: 1323: 1322:Wildhartlivie 1319: 1315: 1305: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1285: 1280: 1279: 1276: 1274: 1272: 1267: 1260: 1256: 1241: 1240: 1236: 1234: 1227: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1186: 1185: 1181: 1179: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1146: 1144: 1139: 1137: 1133: 1132: 1131:copyright tag 1127: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1107: 1093: 1092: 1088: 1086: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1045: 1044: 1040: 1038: 1031: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1015: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 999: 995: 991: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 960: 959: 958: 957: 956: 955: 946: 945: 944: 943: 942: 941: 936: 932: 928: 923: 922: 921: 920: 914: 911: 910: 909: 908: 901: 898: 897: 896: 895: 889: 886: 885: 884: 883: 877: 874: 873: 872: 871: 865: 862: 861: 860: 859: 852: 849: 848: 847: 846: 841: 838: 837: 836: 835: 829: 826: 825: 824: 823: 817: 813: 810: 809: 808: 807: 800: 799: 798: 797: 791: 788: 787: 786: 785: 779: 776: 775: 774: 773: 767: 766: 762: 760: 753: 749: 745: 741: 737: 733: 729: 728: 722: 721: 717: 715: 707: 706: 701: 697: 696: 691: 690: 686: 685: 680: 679: 678: 677: 673: 669: 663: 659: 656: 652: 635: 634: 630: 628: 620: 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 610: 606: 602: 597: 596: 595: 594: 588: 587: 583: 581: 574: 570: 569: 565: 564: 559: 558: 554: 550: 546: 545: 540: 539: 538: 537: 533: 529: 523: 514: 511: 507: 506: 502: 500: 491: 489: 484: 480: 478: 466: 462: 458: 453: 452: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 435:<sigh: --> 434: 433: 432: 431: 430: 429: 428: 427: 417: 416: 412: 410: 402: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 388: 387: 386: 385: 384: 383: 375: 371: 367: 366: 365: 364: 363: 362: 357: 353: 349: 344: 343: 342: 341: 335: 334: 330: 328: 320: 319: 314: 313: 308: 307: 303: 299: 294: 293: 292: 291: 287: 283: 272: 271: 268: 264: 260: 241: 240: 236: 234: 227: 226: 225: 221: 217: 213: 212: 211: 210: 204: 203: 199: 197: 190: 189: 188: 187: 183: 179: 165: 161: 159: 156: 149: 148: 144: 143: 139: 137: 130: 125: 124: 123: 122: 118: 116: 113: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 6840: 6833: 6810: 6806: 6802: 6773: 6766: 6733: 6724: 6717: 6697: 6690: 6687: 6660: 6653: 6628: 6615: 6608: 6593: 6580: 6573: 6556:Vasco Amaral 6553: 6550: 6547: 6544: 6529: 6522: 6502: 6500: 6489:Wiki Wikardo 6478: 6462: 6454: 6437: 6430: 6423: 6405: 6391: 6384: 6356: 6330: 6317: 6310: 6272: 6270: 6233: 6226: 6160: 6153: 6122: 6115: 6085:Help:Merging 6074: 6045: 6038: 6003: 5991: 5984: 5979: 5965: 5960: 5950: 5924: 5917: 5890:WP:GUIDELINE 5887: 5873: 5857: 5844: 5837: 5815: 5800: 5793: 5785: 5755: 5748: 5726: 5713: 5706: 5673: 5652:Salimfadhley 5638: 5631: 5615:Salimfadhley 5600: 5593: 5575:Salimfadhley 5571: 5567:Aromatherapy 5556: 5549: 5525: 5506: 5485: 5478: 5446: 5439: 5413: 5406: 5380: 5371: 5358: 5351: 5332: 5325: 5317: 5301: 5285: 5256: 5249: 5235:Steve Martin 5205: 5201: 5192: 5185: 5150: 5144: 5140: 5127: 5120: 5100: 5080: 5063: 5056: 5044: 5037: 5012: 4998: 4991: 4974: 4968: 4923: 4907: 4900: 4862: 4855: 4849: 4778: 4730: 4675: 4668: 4620: 4565: 4558: 4551: 4520: 4513: 4498: 4491: 4471: 4466: 4450: 4445: 4441: 4428: 4421: 4405: 4398: 4391: 4378: 4371: 4346: 4333: 4320: 4313: 4273:Move request 4263: 4256: 4236: 4221: 4214: 4192: 4176: 4171: 4167: 4150: 4143: 4095: 4088: 4066: 4053: 4046: 4025: 4012: 4005: 3990: 3981: 3972: 3944: 3937: 3909: 3904: 3889: 3882: 3864: 3859: 3851: 3832: 3825: 3799: 3792: 3730: 3725: 3709: 3702: 3681: 3677: 3670: 3657: 3650: 3625: 3613: 3606: 3600: 3578: 3571: 3544: 3537: 3510: 3503: 3461: 3454: 3401: 3394: 3386: 3383: 3370: 3363: 3343: 3310: 3303: 3248: 3241: 3214: 3207: 3179: 3172: 3150: 3141: 3134: 3113: 3083: 3076: 3055: 3042: 3035: 3014: 2999: 2992: 2977: 2941: 2934: 2905: 2889: 2880: 2864: 2857: 2849: 2845: 2841: 2810: 2803: 2776: 2769: 2748: 2735: 2728: 2711: 2706: 2702: 2687: 2680: 2664: 2649: 2645: 2596: 2577: 2560: 2553: 2526: 2519: 2498: 2477: 2470: 2435: 2428: 2421: 2396: 2389: 2357: 2327: 2320: 2291: 2278: 2271: 2251: 2238: 2231: 2205: 2192: 2185: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2155: 2140: 2133: 2120: 2113: 2087: 2067: 2048: 2041: 2023: 2014: 2001: 1994: 1969: 1939: 1932: 1902: 1895: 1882: 1875: 1867: 1846: 1831: 1827: 1824: 1809: 1802: 1786: 1781: 1764: 1759: 1753:Susan Atkins 1750: 1726:Please note: 1725: 1724: 1717: 1706: 1687: 1647: 1638: 1631: 1604: 1592: 1585: 1556: 1549: 1522: 1509: 1502: 1481: 1471: 1458: 1451: 1434: 1429: 1425: 1392: 1390: 1386: 1359: 1346: 1339: 1311: 1288: 1270: 1265: 1252: 1239: 1232: 1203: 1184: 1177: 1147: 1140: 1129: 1125: 1121: 1111: 1091: 1084: 1060: 1043: 1036: 1029: 1013: 997: 993: 989: 912: 899: 887: 875: 863: 850: 839: 827: 815: 811: 789: 777: 765: 758: 720: 713: 699: 664: 660: 657: 653: 650: 633: 626: 586: 579: 572: 548: 524: 520: 512: 505: 498: 492: 487: 485: 481: 475: 415: 408: 373: 369: 333: 326: 301: 297: 278: 256: 239: 232: 202: 195: 175: 151: 142: 135: 108: 106: 78: 43: 37: 5677:—Preceding 4278:Request at 3448:this thread 2254:PMDrive1061 1369:Tombaker321 1208:? Thanks, 1154:Chris G Bot 36:This is an 6554:VASCO - -- 6173:oldafdfull 6091:}}, and {{ 6081:WP:Merging 5874:Thanks! - 5231:Jon Voight 5171:. Cheers, 4121:(formerly 4107:(formerly 4072:(formerly 3931:ad hominem 3774:? Thanks. 3752:FeralDruid 3684:FeralDruid 3556:(formerly 3522:(formerly 3477:(formerly 3432:(formerly 3418:(formerly 3348:(formerly 3322:(formerly 3289:(formerly 3273:DuncanHill 3226:(formerly 3192:(formerly 3158:(formerly 3118:(formerly 2955:Ricky81682 2916:Ricky81682 2826:(formerly 2788:(formerly 2757:(formerly 2495:Gibson ref 2354:Mel Gibson 2267:Thanks :) 2129:tweak it. 1734:Erwin85Bot 1408:Matt Lewis 1067:Paradoctor 526:a life. -- 6834:Equazcion 6767:Equazcion 6718:Equazcion 6654:Equazcion 6609:Equazcion 6574:Equazcion 6523:Equazcion 6431:Equazcion 6385:Equazcion 6311:Equazcion 6227:Equazcion 6154:Equazcion 6116:Equazcion 6093:merged-to 6039:Equazcion 5985:Equazcion 5918:Equazcion 5838:Equazcion 5819:Katiedert 5794:Equazcion 5789:parties. 5749:Equazcion 5707:Equazcion 5632:Equazcion 5594:Equazcion 5550:Equazcion 5479:Equazcion 5440:Equazcion 5407:Equazcion 5352:Equazcion 5347:and all. 5250:Equazcion 5211:WP:ENGVAR 5186:Equazcion 5121:Equazcion 5057:Equazcion 5038:Equazcion 5013:franklin 4992:Equazcion 4975:franklin 4965:wallpaper 4901:Equazcion 4856:Equazcion 4669:Equazcion 4616:WP:MEDCOM 4559:Equazcion 4516:archiving 4510:Archiving 4492:Equazcion 4422:Equazcion 4388:Greetings 4372:Equazcion 4314:Equazcion 4257:Equazcion 4215:Equazcion 4144:Equazcion 4089:Equazcion 4063:Unitanode 4047:Equazcion 4006:Equazcion 3938:Equazcion 3883:Equazcion 3826:Equazcion 3793:Equazcion 3703:Equazcion 3651:Equazcion 3607:Equazcion 3572:Equazcion 3538:Equazcion 3504:Equazcion 3455:Equazcion 3395:Equazcion 3387:something 3364:Equazcion 3304:Equazcion 3242:Equazcion 3208:Equazcion 3173:Equazcion 3135:Equazcion 3077:Equazcion 3036:Equazcion 2993:Equazcion 2953:Done. -- 2935:Equazcion 2858:Equazcion 2804:Equazcion 2770:Equazcion 2729:Equazcion 2681:Equazcion 2650:somewhere 2554:Equazcion 2520:Equazcion 2471:Equazcion 2446:WP:TRIVIA 2429:Equazcion 2390:Equazcion 2364:WP:TRIVIA 2321:Equazcion 2288:Your note 2272:Equazcion 2232:Equazcion 2186:Equazcion 2134:Equazcion 2114:Equazcion 2042:Equazcion 1995:Equazcion 1933:Equazcion 1903:V = I * R 1876:Equazcion 1847:V = I * R 1803:Equazcion 1632:Equazcion 1586:Equazcion 1550:Equazcion 1503:Equazcion 1484:Eaglizard 1452:Equazcion 1340:Equazcion 1259:consensus 1233:Equazcion 1210:MoodFreak 1178:Equazcion 1143:this link 1118:copyright 1085:Equazcion 1063:this edit 1037:Equazcion 976:you like. 759:Equazcion 714:Equazcion 627:Equazcion 580:Equazcion 499:Equazcion 409:Equazcion 327:Equazcion 233:Equazcion 196:Equazcion 136:Equazcion 95:Archive 8 90:Archive 7 85:Archive 6 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 6481:his page 6243:Flatscan 6200:Flatscan 6137:Flatscan 6097:Flatscan 5691:contribs 5679:unsigned 5384:contribs 5374:Qpwoeial 5302:Cheers, 5266:WP:ACTOR 5165:archived 5077:re: AN/I 4662:WP:BEANS 4354:Franamax 4350:contribs 4340:Caro7440 4239:Mackan79 3637:contribs 3412:Ludwigs2 3018:Bishonen 2838:WP:POINT 2820:WP:POINT 2614:this one 2424:revert. 2383:WP:UNDUE 2360:WP:UNDUE 2070:'fenian' 2037:Done :) 2026:'fenian' 1912:Contribs 1856:Contribs 1690:deletion 1476:recently 1295:Celestra 1124:and the 703:deleted. 549:articles 267:Jusdafax 172:Response 154:iMatthew 111:iMatthew 6785:Xnquist 6750:Before 6738:Xnquist 6700:Xnquist 6410:Doc9871 6363:Doc9871 6299:WP:WPTB 6267:Toolbar 6222:first. 5961:Crohnie 5768:Smatprt 5730:Smatprt 5543:WP:NPOV 4948:Ludwigs 4880:Ludwigs 4824:Ludwigs 4737:Ludwigs 4650:Ludwigs 4593:Ludwigs 4538:Ludwigs 4467:Crohnie 4446:Crohnie 4196:Chowbok 4172:Crohnie 3905:Crohnie 3860:Crohnie 3726:Crohnie 2707:Crohnie 2581:Chowbok 2338:Crum375 2299:Crum375 2064:Domer48 2020:Domer48 1953:Thanks! 1868:to what 1832:greatly 1782:Crohnie 1760:Crohnie 1430:Crohnie 1284:The Rev 1266:Crohnie 1173:Fixed. 1134:to the 1122:license 998:content 816:really? 748:WP:COIN 553:WP:NPOV 39:archive 6646:a user 6497:thanks 6406:reason 6219:WP:VPR 6215:WP:VPP 6089:Copied 6055:Gnevin 6011:Gnevin 5812:Thanks 5646:Check 5609:things 5509:Woogee 5472:WP:ANI 5423:Woogee 5345:WP:AGF 5333:Shadow 5202:didn't 5103:Woogee 3809:Drmies 3776:Drmies 3622:Thanks 3110:Trivia 3072:shot. 2912:WP:BLP 2890:Giano 2606:WP:WQA 2515:well. 2454:Rossrs 2407:Rossrs 2368:Rossrs 2314:WP:AGF 2295:WP:AGF 2210:.) -- 1126:source 1057:Thanks 996:, not 994:intent 802:wrong. 752:WP:RSN 740:WP:TFD 736:WP:MFD 732:WP:AFD 573:else's 561:to it. 6509:talk 6455:Lol: 6451:Beans 6424:never 6339:Allen 6295:Linux 6281:Allen 6029:unref 4407:rolls 4119:Tbsdy 4105:Tbsdy 4070:Tbsdy 3978:done. 3554:Tbsdy 3520:Tbsdy 3475:Tbsdy 3430:Tbsdy 3416:Tbsdy 3346:Tbsdy 3320:Tbsdy 3287:Tbsdy 3224:Tbsdy 3190:Tbsdy 3156:Tbsdy 3116:Tbsdy 2842:being 2824:Tbsdy 2786:Tbsdy 2755:Tbsdy 2745:I did 2100:deeds 1700:and " 1648:there 948:here. 854:time. 744:WP:AC 700:meant 298:don't 16:< 6789:talk 6742:talk 6704:talk 6596:SGGH 6560:talk 6518:Ok. 6463:xeno 6414:talk 6402:this 6367:talk 6334:Mike 6276:Mike 6247:talk 6204:talk 6141:talk 6101:talk 6059:talk 6015:talk 6007:WP:V 5898:talk 5880:talk 5823:talk 5772:talk 5734:talk 5687:talk 5656:talk 5648:this 5619:talk 5579:talk 5532:talk 5513:talk 5461:talk 5427:talk 5392:talk 5378:talk 5326:Half 5322:... 5275:talk 5219:talk 5161:here 5107:talk 5088:talk 4925:Neil 4780:Neil 4622:Neil 4618:? -- 4522:Neil 4438:Ping 4400:Tide 4394:this 4358:talk 4344:talk 4299:talk 4243:talk 4232:This 4164:Ping 4032:talk 4022:Note 3854:here 3813:talk 3780:talk 3756:talk 3688:talk 3633:talk 3497:here 3493:here 3489:here 3471:here 3414:. - 3277:talk 3151:knew 3098:talk 3062:talk 3022:talk 2978:xeno 2959:talk 2920:talk 2850:them 2665:your 2653:guy. 2623:talk 2610:here 2602:here 2540:talk 2536:Mbz1 2505:talk 2501:Mbz1 2458:talk 2411:talk 2372:talk 2362:and 2342:talk 2303:talk 2258:talk 2217:talk 2165:warm 1908:Talk 1852:Talk 1738:talk 1704:"). 1607:This 1525:this 1488:talk 1412:talk 1373:talk 1326:talk 1299:talk 1214:talk 1206:here 1158:talk 1071:talk 931:talk 672:talk 605:talk 532:talk 461:talk 370:both 352:talk 286:talk 220:talk 182:talk 6590:ANI 6504:DGG 6487:. — 6217:or 6083:or 5966:Gal 5867:ISO 5786:not 5503:ANI 4472:Gal 4451:Gal 4177:Gal 4125:) 4111:) 4076:) 3982:-- 3910:Gal 3865:Gal 3731:Gal 3560:) 3526:) 3481:) 3436:) 3422:) 3352:) 3326:) 3293:) 3230:) 3196:) 3162:) 3122:) 2975:. – 2846:you 2830:) 2792:) 2761:) 2712:Gal 2699:FYI 2597:not 2422:not 1787:Gal 1765:Gal 1730:bot 1672:AfD 1652:Lar 1611:Lar 1566:Lar 1529:Lar 1435:Gal 1308:FYI 1271:Gal 1249:FYI 542:it. 517:??? 302:not 162:at 119:at 6815:is 6812:qu 6791:) 6744:) 6734:me 6706:) 6562:) 6511:) 6475:rm 6416:) 6369:) 6249:) 6206:) 6190:). 6143:) 6103:) 6061:) 6032:}} 6026:{{ 6017:) 5900:) 5882:) 5825:) 5774:) 5736:) 5693:) 5689:• 5658:) 5621:) 5613:-- 5581:) 5534:) 5515:) 5474:. 5463:) 5429:) 5394:) 5277:) 5241:, 5237:, 5233:, 5221:) 5213:. 5206:do 5109:) 5090:) 4734:-- 4647:-- 4590:-- 4552:is 4360:) 4301:) 4245:) 4034:) 3815:) 3782:) 3758:) 3690:) 3639:) 3635:• 3279:) 3100:) 3064:) 3027:. 3020:| 2961:) 2922:) 2884:. 2625:) 2542:) 2507:) 2460:) 2413:) 2374:) 2344:) 2305:) 2297:. 2260:) 2220:) 2181:. 2016:-- 1979:CP 1914:) 1910:• 1900:— 1858:) 1854:• 1844:— 1828:is 1778:-- 1756:-- 1740:) 1654:: 1613:: 1568:: 1531:: 1490:) 1414:) 1391:A 1375:) 1367:-- 1328:) 1301:) 1216:) 1160:) 1145:. 1138:. 1073:) 933:) 925:-- 750:, 746:, 742:, 738:, 734:, 674:) 607:) 534:) 463:) 354:) 288:) 222:) 184:) 131:. 64:← 6819:t 6807:n 6805:X 6787:( 6740:( 6702:( 6558:( 6507:( 6459:– 6412:( 6365:( 6245:( 6202:( 6179:. 6139:( 6099:( 6057:( 6013:( 5896:( 5878:( 5821:( 5770:( 5732:( 5685:( 5654:( 5617:( 5577:( 5530:( 5511:( 5459:( 5425:( 5390:( 5381:· 5376:( 5273:( 5217:( 5105:( 5086:( 4951:2 4927:N 4883:2 4827:2 4782:N 4740:2 4653:2 4624:N 4596:2 4541:2 4524:N 4356:( 4347:· 4342:( 4297:( 4241:( 4201:☠ 4136:) 4132:( 4030:( 3811:( 3778:( 3754:( 3686:( 3631:( 3275:( 3096:( 3060:( 2957:( 2918:( 2621:( 2586:☠ 2538:( 2503:( 2456:( 2409:( 2370:( 2340:( 2301:( 2256:( 2214:( 2163:S 1906:( 1850:( 1736:( 1660:c 1658:/ 1656:t 1619:c 1617:/ 1615:t 1574:c 1572:/ 1570:t 1537:c 1535:/ 1533:t 1486:( 1410:( 1371:( 1324:( 1297:( 1212:( 1156:( 1069:( 929:( 670:( 603:( 530:( 459:( 350:( 284:( 218:( 180:( 50:.

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

Index