User talk:JBW/Archive 4

869:

principal, even if it might otherwise have been considered a good link. The first question ("is it spam?") is an issue of the motivation of the person placing the link, and is quite separate from whether the link is a good one. Considering the overall history of the edits of the editor who placed the reference I have no doubt whatsoever that it was spam, i.e. that the principal purpose of placing it was promotional: this user's recent edits consistalmost entirely of placing references to one publisher's publications. On the second question ("even if it was spam, was it perhaps a useful reference anyway?") like Andy Dingley I have not seen a copy of the book, but what I have read about it suggests that it may well be a good book, but that there is nothing special about it, and no obvious reason why Knowledge should refer to it. By Knowledge policy if the inclusion of information is challenged the onus is on those wishing to include it to justify the inclusion, and frankly "I haven't seen the book but the list of contents looks promising" is not a justification. Thirdly, on the question "should we by default remove links which are clearly intended as spam, and keep them only if there are overriding reasons to do so?" opinions differ, and there is no clear consensus. My own opinion is "consider each case on its own merits, but if in doubt do not let the spammers have their way". The practical effect of this is to

1185:

edits, so I shall not try to do so. As for your complaint that Todd Gallagher has "thrown the baby out with the bathwater", if you are right then clearly that is not helpful. On the other hand when I know from experience that when an editor has done a large amount of editing to an article (as you have) it can be very hard to separate the good from the bad, and it is tempting to take the easy way out, and revert the whole lot. Of course this does not make it alright to do so, but it makes it more understandable. There are a lot more issues here too: for example, there were references to archives, and those archives have been blocked, and you have removed the references to them. Todd Gallagher says that you had the archives blocked. I do not know how he claims to know this, nor whether it is true. If I had good reason to believe that Todd Gallagher is wrong about this, then I would certainly be taking steps to inform him, and if I had good reason to believe he was knowingly lying then I would be doing more than that. On the other hand if I had good reason to believe Todd Gallagher's claims then I would have no sympathy with you at all:

1189:, and any attempt to block access to material in this way would be completely unacceptable. I do not know the truth of all this, and so I do not wish to take either side in the quarrel. I do know, however, that both you and Todd Gallagher have particular points of view, and that both of you have been trying to make the article reflect your point of view. I aslo know that both of you have tended to stick uncompromisingly to your own version, reverting one another's edits. The best way forward is for both of you to discuss the matter with a view to reaching a version of the article which reflects both points of view. Whether that is possible depends on you and Todd Gallagher. I will post a message on his talk page asking him to try to reach an accommodation. If no progress is made within a few days we can ask another Wikipedian to try to mediate (I do not think I would be the best person to do this). 134:

underground electronica". This is a personal opinion, even if it is widely held, and Knowledge policy is that articles should be written from a neutral, objective, viewpoint. Thus it is not considered acceptable to include comments which give a subjective opinion like this unless you can justify it. If a notable and relevant person has expressed an opinion it may be acceptable to say "Jane Smith has said that Tine Kocjančič is the undisputed king ...", but even then it is necessary to be careful. This would only be acceptable if Jane Smith really is notable and relevant: if she is just your best friend then her opinion is no more useful than yours. Also in such a case you should be prepared to give references to documentary evidence that Jane Smith said what you claim she did.

744:"Official Finnish Moomin Website" to a "Official Website (Finnish)". Before your edit of the links, some of them were English entries and some were not (the official Finnish website and the theme park website for example) so in my latest edit I have edited all the links (except the Japanese) to English entries each, I hope it is okay now. Also, I thought the use of the word "Moomin" in there shouldn't be necessary as the whole article is about Moomin, so it's obvious that the links would be those of Moomin. As for the order of the links, it wasn't that important at all, but I just felt it could be better if the Museum would go first as it has more strong atmosphere dedicated to the books of Moomin rather than the theme park which is mostly inspired from the 1990-91 1725:

Preparatory School, the article was deleted because it appeared to be written mainly in order to promote the school. If an article about it is written from a more neutral point of view, with references to reliable third-party sources to support it, then it is likely that it will be acceptable. I am sure you will understand, however, that this depends on what such an article would contain, and I can make no promises about an article which has not been written. If you are thinking of writing such an article yourself, however, you should bear in mind Knowledge's

2025: 31: 1163:; I can find no source that SGAUS supports them (implying financial support). 2. I believe it is counter productive to undo a block of edits over one area of objection, this is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I welcome oversight of senior Knowledge members as this article develops. If users Todd Gallagher has an issue with the SGAUS "history" I would suggest these edits be placed on the history section of the article and not throughout the article. 156:. A page will come up starting with a note saying "Knowledge does not have a user page with this exact title", but if you type in the space provided and then click on "save" the page will be created. This way you should be able to edit and revise the page without the frustration of finding it has been deleted straight away. Then ask an experienced Wikipedian to check it over (I am willing to do this if you like). When it is ready it can be released as an article. 1985:

19:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC) Yeah i will, already started, He's from the family of Schauenburg. They have a family tree i've seen by myself.. but i don't really know how i should make more reliable sources have any idea ? i think it would be a shame to delete the page because it's interresting with this old bloodline still existing.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

713:"Official Website (Finnish)" was likely to be misinterpreted as meaning that the link was to a page in the Finnish language, and likewise "Official Website (Japanese)" that it was in Japanese. It seems to me that "Official Finnish Moomin Website" and "Official Japanese Moomin Website" might be less likely to deter English-speakers from looking. In your comment above you say "language here", but the point is that the pages linked are 1036: 573: 186: 152:

get access to, but it will have your name on it, and what you write should not be deleted from it (provided, of course, you don't write something totally unacceptable such as libel, but I am sure you won't). The Knowledge jargon for such a page is a "userspace page", and its title has your user name followed by / and then by the name of the page. If you would like to do that just click on this red link:

1666:

that are not accepted, and they find much of what they do is being reverted or deleted. As you can imagine, this can be frustrating and disheartening, and I am convinced it is better to start small and learn as you go along. You could start off looking at articles in subjects which interest you, and seeing if any of them can be improved by fairly simple changes, and work from there.

790:

fully accept your apology. It may be worth bearing in mind, though, that it is worth being really polite, even to editors who don't deserve politeness, as you are more likely to get co-operation from them. Fourthly, I could tell from your English that you were not a native English speaker, but it is certainly not bad enough to cause any problems. I wish you a good time on Knowledge.

1716:

think that means it must be alright. However, the fact of the matter is that a lot of the information on lists like this should not be there, and I am engaged on the job of weeding it out. Unfortunately this is a very long job, with many hundreds of individual entries to check, and so there will still be many bad entries for quite a while. If a school satisfies Knowledge's

1159:. I believe that I have been objective and made every effort to cite current and accurate information. I have two issues with edits made by user: Todd Gallagher; 1. state-level associations and chapters are two different entities are not part of the SGAUS organization. While SGAUS does and has in the past recognized independent groups seeking to establish 32 USC 109 718:

chronological order of foundation. Thirdly, as for your asking me why I "have problems with" giving English language links, I do not understand the question at all; perhaps you would like to clarify it. I did not change the destination of any of the links: they were to English language pages before my edit and they were still to the same English languages after my edit.

1729:

policy. I hope this has been of some help to you. Please feel welcome to contact me again if you wish to. Finally, I have added a welcome message to your talk page. It would have been better to have done this earlier: it is not very welcoming to find the first message you get is telling you that your

1702:

Hello, and welcome to Knowledge. I shall try to answer you query, and I hope I can be of some help to you. Knowledge's policy is that we do not include just everything, and there are certain standards which information is expected to follow before being included. Directly relevant in this case is the

1204:

Sir, thank you for the guidance. Not sure what I should do now? I have posted a paragraph to the discussion page. Is there some action I must take to have the banner removed? I believe the article is balanced now and accurately distinguished between the organization, the independent associations,

981:

As a regular user of wikipedia I have noticed that the stud has been referenced in many articles but no one had created an article for it. I had hoped that someone would create such but eventually I decided to do it myself. I think that the stud merits an article on wikipedia. I will send an email to

1665:

recommend. That is to start by looking for small improvements you can make to existing articles. Many people jump straight into either writing major new articles or making major changes to existing ones. The trouble is that, because they are inexperienced in Knowledge's ways, they do a lot of things

1560:

guideline. You can read it all if you like, but the essential point is that you should be very careful to avoid anything that might seem to be biased. I see no reason, from what you have written so far, to suppose you will be biased, but unfortunately many people who edit articles about subject they

253:

You are right and I am wrong. I looked at the history, and jumped to the very first edit, which should be the creation. Obviously, I was mistaken, but why? I'm not backing away from an apology, I will add something to the AfD, but before I do, do you know who created the article? And why there is no

137:

Then there are statements such as "If you're not a newby in the never ending game of beatmatching and scratching, you probably know Valentino doesn't really understand the meaning of words limit, border and purism". This kind of chatty style is common in magazine articles, blog posts, etc, and there

133:

In my edit summary I used the abbreviation "POV". Since you seem to be new to Knowledge editing this may not mean anything to you, but it is commonly used in Knowledge to stand for "point of view". This refers to such comments as, for example, "Tine Kocjančič, ... is the undisputed king of Slovenian

1724:

to support the fact, then it is very likely that there will be an article on the school, and that would be taken as sufficient justification for keeping the school on a list, unless there is a good reason to think that an article is not acceptable and should be deleted. In the case of St. Augustine

1564:

When you are posting comments to talk pages, such as this one, it helps to add your "signature". You can do this simply by typing 4 tildes (i.e. ~~~~) at the end of your comment. This will be automatically converted into a message giving your user name, a link to your user talk page, the date, etc.

1272:

I see that you recently moved AfterEllen.com to AfterEllen.com and AfterElton.com. But would you mind if I moved it to AfterEllen and AfterElton.com? Would that seem like a good move to you or not? The reason I feel that it would be a good move is that it flows better under that title, sort of like

696:

As for the order of the links, the Moomin museum would go first as it was opened first and second would be the Moominworld. And I provided the links in their English language because the article is in English (if there is a choice in an website for English entry, why is a problem to provide that in

151:

Now for a suggestion which may be helpful. You can write an edited version of the article in a "private" page of your own, and then it can be checked by someone with experience on Knowledge before launching it as an article for "public" use. By a "private" page I don't mean one that nobody else can

145:

you will see that these are not normally acceptable. I also note that one of the links was to a Twitter page of your own. This was not, on this occasion, a factor in my decision to revert your edit, but for future use you should be aware that links of this sort are likely to be regarded as spam and

1984:

Well, unless he's a descendant in the male line, there's not much of a ducal future in store for him. Providing some reliable sources would be a good idea, and you better hurry, because I don't think the article is going to have a very long life otherwise. Already been delete once. Favonian (talk)

1492:

I made the change that I did because of the sourcing in one case and the inadequate sourcing in the other, and also because experience elsewhere led me to doubt the reliability of the editor responsible. I have no other knowledge of Gress, and am not competent to make content judgments beyond this

1307:

Okay. I will suggest it on that article's talk page first. It is not an active talk page, but I can be patient about this and let it stay there for months. I can also suggest it at some related project, in order to get more thoughts about it sooner. If you do not mind, I am going to copy and paste

1132:

I don't keep changing it: I changed it once. Yes I have a source confirming Lichtenstein's address as 5 Grand Park Drive, Monsey, New York 10952. Do you have a source indicating that this is incorrect? Since you have queried this I have added this source to the article, together with a note on the

977:

Thanks for sending me a message about my article. It was the first time I have added an article and obviously I have not understood some of the rules. I will try to clarify my position and you can advise as to the best way to proceed. Ballymacoll Stud is a privately owned stud farm, that my father

789:

Website" is unnecessary, but I didn't think it important enough to bother about, so I just reverted to the old version, rather than typing in a new version. I certainly don't object to your removing the word "Moomin" here. Thirdly, yes you were a little aggressive, but I have seen far worse, and I

743:

Hello again JamesBWatson. First of all I want to apologize for my aggressive expression in the message above, I know it wasn't respectful. As for the external links in the article, I thought, as there is a template for languages, would be a better use as it makes a short length of text, instead of

1988:

You should click on that link about sources. Have some sort of reputable media (assuming they exist) written about this gentlemen and his claim to aristocratic fame and fortune? Descendants, legitimate or otherwise, from ducal or royal houses are a dime a dozen. Favonian (talk) 20:18, 30 November

1715:

which are independent of the subject (so that, for example, a school's own prospectus or web site would not be sufficient). You are quite right in saying that the information you posted was not different from information for other schools, and it is natural for someone new to editing Knowledge to

1686:

I added the name of this school to the listing on international schools in Nicaragua because the listing was incomplete. The information posted was not different from the information posted for other international schools in other countries. Please tell me what needs to be done so that people who

1288:

I completely agree that your suggested title flows better. However, I'm not sure that it wouldn't be less clear that it refers to two separate web addresses: it would be easy to read it as one URL rather than as and . I would be inclined to leave it where it is, but if you are still inclined to

873:

the principal that the onus is on those wishing to include the information to justify it, and therefore to reinforce the statement that "I haven't seen the book but the list of contents looks promising" is not a justification. However, this is not an essential point: even if you disagree with the

852:

I don't have a copy of it as it's fairly recent, 30 quid, and also I've found most green roof books that I have bought to be too focussed on architects & town planners, rather than builders. However from the contents list for this, it seems like it might be a useful and more hands-on guide. I

1833:

I appreciate the advice concerning the edit that I attempted to make, though, though your second message has me slightly confused as to whether I did something wrong/vandalism, making a negative error in my attempt to correct the spelling of the Article subject's name and adding more text to the

1224:

Hello You have placed a tag on the Holmewood House School page. The text has now been substantially amended to avoid any blatant advertising, copying from other sources or conflict of interest. I have also tried to bring it in line with that of other similar schools whose entries appear to be

1184:

I fully understand your complaints. You have clearly put a huge amount of effort into this article, and I can well imagine how frustrating it is to see someone simply discard large amounts of your work. Unfortunately I do not know enough about SGAUS to comment on the accuracy of Todd Gallagher's

127:

Hello Tina. I have had another look at the article, and I have restored your version of the discography: I am willing to believe you know what you are doing there. However, as for the rest of your edit, there are a number of issues. I will explain to you what they are, and then make a suggestion

1397:

Thank you. I would just like to suggest that the fact that it was covered worldwide speaks for the issue. We had a school that would not allow ANY touching. Girls could not hug girls, and boy could not shake hands. That's pretty harsh by any standard. If I posted this in the wrong place my

717:

in those languages; they are in English. Secondly, as for the change of order of the links, there was no evident reason for the change, which is what I meant by referring to it as unnecessary. You have now given a reason, though I am surprised that you feel so strongly that the links must be in

1336:

Okay. Done. But now I am starting to think that your title is better out of the two, due to what you stated about it possibly being perceived as one site under my title. I would suggest a comma be placed in mine, but we don't usually have commas in Knowledge article titles and that would seem

868:

There are several points involved here. Firstly, there is the question whether the addition of the link in question was spam, secondly there is the question whether, even if it was spam, it was a good link to include anyway, and thirdly there is the question whether spam should be deleted on

712:

Thank you for your comment. I shall try to answer each of your queries. Firstly, as far as "removing misleading comments" is concerned, I thought that what I was talking about was adequately explained in my edit summary, but if not, I will specify at greater length here. It seemed to me that

874:

line "by default don't let spammers have their way", this is, as I say, only a reinforcement of what is Knowledge policy anyway. To summarise my argument: this is clearly spam, and while it may be a good reference, nobody has shown that it is, and until someone does so it is not acceptable.

1453:

Thank you. He seems to have changed the substance of the argument though. I presented an argument ..Students do not, the Court tells us in Tinker vs. Des Moines, "shed their constitutional rights when they enter the schoolhouse door." " Anyway, thanks again and let's see how it goes.

1420:

No, you didn't post in the wrong place at all. However, I am going to be rather tied up over the next couple of days, so I may not be much help. However, if the issue has not been dealt with in by Monday I shall try to get onto it. Sorry about the delay, but I will do what I can.

1945:

Why did you delete my page about Mathias von Dam? i know the guy in real life and i've seen their family tree... he's the last desended of the schauenburg family. And therefor has the title of "Archduke of Schleswig-Holstein" i see no reason why you deleted it..

410:

in case you are interested. Last but not least I want to apologize for having used your time in this way, diverting it from real work on the encyclopedia. If I can offer my time and services for anything you need in return, feel free to ask at any time. Regards

485:". However, now that it has been deleted I can't look at it and see what about the page indicated that it was promotional, so I'm afraid I can't help you. I am sorry about that, but you could try contacting the administrator who deleted the page (Bearian) on 1660:

Well, Ethan, naturally not everybody is equally friendly, but it's nice to know that my effort has been appreciated. It's difficult to recommend any particular type of article to start on, because it depends so much on you. However, there is one thing I

107:

hey James, I have today updated Valentinos page as it is all wrong, the label Recycled loops is closed for some time, also the discography is not ok. All the updated data was 100% sure - that is why I am wondering why you changed it back to the old one?

1150:

I'm new to Knowledge (about six weeks now) and started the SGAUS article (I have also tweaked some other state defense force related sites). For lack of experience, I tried to model the article after other non-profit lobby type group articles (i.e.

1437:

I have now edited the article in an attempt to answer the objections which were raised. For the moment I have left the notice saying the content is disputed, while we see whether there are any further responses, but I hope it can be removed soon.

284:. I suppose that this means that Anthony Appleyard restored only the last revision (my speedy deletion nomination) rather than the whole edit history, but I have no idea why. You could ask him if you are interested enough to think it worthwhile. 1643:

Thank you for welcoming me here! I didn't realize that the community was so closely knit here at wikipedia. Is there any place that new wikipedians are encouraged to edit? And what would you recommend I do to start out? Awaiting a response,

1561:

are connected to do so, with the result that many Knowledge editors (myself included) tend to be suspicious of any editing by anyone who might have a conflict of interest (commonly abbreviated to COI). Really the point is just to be careful.

1516:

Thanks for your tips and I'll try to work that way if I need to change anything again. I'm actually India's mother and try to keep up to date with her information in case anyone puts up misleading information.

1493:"what are its sources?" level. Looking briefly at your editing history, talk page, and user page, I get the impression you seem to be a conscientious editor, and I am happy to leave you to put the article right. 982:

permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org from the domain admin account authorising usage of the material. I will also edit the article to remove any text that expresses an opinion so that it only displays facts.

902:. The user received two identical warnings from us at the same time, and your warning didn't have signature, so I removed duplicate as I thought that twinkle was going crazy and started to post duplicates. 1572:

talk page, because I find conversations which jump from one user's talk page to another can be very confusing, so I prefer to keep it all together. Many Knowledge editors agree with this, though not all.

1133:

article's talk page. It is also interesting that you object to my once changing this without a source, considering that you have at least twice changed the same information without giving a source.

254:

creation edit? I realize the article was created with the Article Wizard, but I just checked a couple others and the oldest edit is the creation. Again, sorry, and I'll modify my comments at Afd.--

615:

Hello there, was wondering if you might come back to your nom and consider withdrawing. I've added a number of legitimate cites covering it, and the AfD is drawing IP-editor disbelief. Cheers.--

925:

Yes. I realised I had forgotten to put my signature, so I tried to edit it, only to find an edit conflict because you were removing my warning at the time. These things happen: not a big deal.

153: 1575:

Finally, if you are feeling overwhelmed by all the information about how to work on Knowledge, don't worry! When I started I found it all very confusing, but you get used to it quite quickly.

1256:

requiring italicization of taxa. Botanical taxa (for genus rank and below) are italicized as well. Can you go back through your contributions and fix those edits? Much appreciated. Cheers,

200:. 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 978:

manages for the family. I designed and maintain the website for the stud. The stud does not operate in a commercial manner and does not actively advertise or promote itself in any way.

211:

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

1989:

2009 (UTC) Whoops! It looks like the administrators didn't buy the idea. Frankly, I think you should go back to doing your homework. Favonian (talk) 20:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC) "

138:

is nothing wrong with it there. However, it is not the kind of writing which you would expect in an article in an encyclopedia, and Knowledge requires a more formal, objective style.

197: 179: 402:

Hi there JamesBWatson. I want to inform you that you were unwittingly part of an experiment of newbie treatment in which I participated under a different name. The purpose of

212: 1896: 607: 378:

Good. It would be better expanded to more than a stub, but at least the copyvio has been dealt with. I see no COI problem, but thank you for declaring your position anyway.

1978:"Mathias von Dam Oh good to hear im danish too :b but Schleswig-Holstein was once Danish and he's the desendent of the Duke from there. I happend to know him personally :D 406:

is to determine how experienced users would be treated if they were new users and created sub-standard but viable articles. You can find a recollection of my experience at

1711:

describe what is required for inclusion, but essentially the criterion is that a subject should not be included unless it has received a substantial amount of coverage in

785:

edit of the links some of them were English entries and some were not: you made a definite improvement there, but I did not change that. Secondly, I agree that "Official

1377:

article; though talk pages such as those are not super active, they are active enough for either a reply within a few hours or a reply within several days or a month).

1273:

two relatives with the same last name. Instead of saying Richard Spears and Kristina Spears, you would (or are at least supposed to say), Richard and Kristina Spears.

587: 478: 1477:, an old article of mine. It probably needs plenty of work. It currently presents a typical BLP issue. I thought I should check first that we see this the same way. 1745: 174: 671: 853:

didn't add this book originally and as I haven't read it myself I wouldn't have added it, but describing it as outright spam though certainly seems excessive.

640: 1935: 2001: 1954: 1754:, and review the work I did on the Thal article? I think the rest can be deleted, but I believe I've salvaged the Thal article and established notability. -- 608: 721:

I hope that I have helped to clear up your doubts. Please feel welcome to contact me again if you have any further questions. Finally, you may like to read

1927:, and they are frequently used as designated sandboxes for protected templates. I've removed the speedy tag as I don't believe that the rationale applies. 1763: 1688: 1118: 1042: 1028: 822: 624: 112: 1373:

Yeah. I always expect that on articles that are not heavily edited, unless we are talking about articles not heavily edited due to being locked (like the

1797: 1531: 245: 1050: 988: 273: 1905: 1751: 1502: 645:

No problem, thanks for reviewing. At least the article looks better now, it was a bit sorry. I did chuckle at the IP-editor rationales as well.--

342: 1117:

Why do you keep changing his place of residence to Monsey NY? He resides in Ocean County, NJ do you have a source that says he resides in Monsey?

1107: 895: 457: 1778: 1739: 280:. The article's log lists it as having been deleted at 10:45, 1 November 2009, and then there is an entry at 22:50, 1 November 2009 which says: 168: 1447: 1430: 883: 1632: 1017: 1981:

And should i add more info on the page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luuxlatino2960 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

1257: 1070: 934: 358: 311: 293: 1696: 1367: 1023: 654: 554: 498: 267: 1386: 1346: 1331: 1317: 1298: 1198: 387: 1890: 298:

Thanks for being understanding. I'm researching the magazine a bit more, finding very thin material. I will check with Anthony. Thanks.--

1065: 440:

the tag is not yet removed and my article is still in the draft and i don't know why it was considered marketing in the first place ..

1864: 799: 768: 734: 1769:

Thanks for drawing my attention to this, and thanks also for the work you have put in to this. I have made a comment on the AfD page.

1282: 862: 1265: 1225:

acceptable. Would it now be possible for you to remove the tag? - sorry, I am a new user and am not sure of procedures. Thank you.

437:

You added a tag of speed deletion to my article.. and i replied by adding the "hangon" and explaining my situation in my "talk page"

373: 146:

removed for this reason. In fact users who make a habit of adding spam links are likely eventually to be blocked from editing at all.

1653: 1078:

Hello JamesBWatson, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of

120: 1843: 1825: 1809: 1678: 343: 1260: 1917:

for speedy deletion under T3. To the best of my knowledge such sandbox pages are exempt: there is explicit support for them in

1239: 602: 541:. This should be enough to indicate to you the general requirements, but if you want an even fuller picture you could look at 2013: 1234: 1126: 818: 2009: 1966: 1962: 1638: 1587: 1543: 809: 919: 272:

Apology is not needed, as it was not your fault: you were misled by the edit history. It seems the article was created by

1486: 996: 560: 1463: 1413: 759:

I hope I clarified my reason as possible and I'm apologize for any bad English in it. Thanks for your reply. **********

684:

And why is this unnecessary? Vice versa, no need for an official website to be known as "Official <language here: -->

1805: 1539: 1455: 1405: 706: 364:

P.S. I am a former New York State Office of Court Administration employee, FYI, but do not believe that I have a COI.

1784: 1266: 102: 1617: 1205:

and the actual state run websites. I am not seeking conflict nor do I wish turn a hobby in to work. Respectfully

1911: 1875: 175: 1322:

I don't mind at all. Also, although I still prefer the present title, I won't get upset if it does get changed.

1248:

on my watchlist and several others in your contributions removed italics for species and genera. Please review

1219: 842: 525: 465: 159:

I hope some of the above has been helpful to you. Please feel very welcome to contact me again for any reason.

141:

Then there are the links you gave to Facebook, Myspace, and Twitter. If you look at the Knowledge guideline on

529: 676: 469: 1245: 1358:

I have just looked at the article's talk page, and seen how completely inactive it is: I hadn't realised.

1214: 1178: 681:

Unnecessary change of order of links? removing misleading comments? What the hell are you talking about?

424: 337: 964: 1730:

article is unacceptable: apologies. However, you are no less welcome because nobody said so right away.

2032: 1482: 1156: 1112: 889: 542: 236:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- 193: 38: 1973: 1508: 1046: 583: 282:

Anthony Appleyard (talk | contribs) restored "Turbulence: Ideas for Movement" ‎ (1 revision restored)

2088: 2005: 1958: 1886: 1821: 1774: 1735: 1671: 1628: 1583: 1498: 1443: 1426: 1363: 1327: 1294: 1249: 1194: 1138: 1100: 1049:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 1013: 969: 930: 879: 795: 764: 730: 702: 636: 586:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 550: 494: 383: 289: 164: 94: 407: 2080: 2075: 2063: 2058: 2053: 1940: 1759: 1692: 1565:

This is very helpful, as it enables other editors to see who you are, and get back to you easily.

1122: 746: 667: 116: 86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 1921: 1839: 1801: 1704: 1535: 1459: 1409: 1392: 858: 1881:

Yes. I know well enough to do that, but I evidently forgot to check. Thanks for reminding me.

1932: 1848: 1612: 1478: 1186: 1004: 992: 277: 1084:

The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7.

825:, I wonder if I could ask why you both consider this book to be spam to be removed from the 222:

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

1997: 1950: 1793: 1717: 1708: 1649: 1527: 1401: 913: 513: 453: 305: 261: 241: 201: 8: 1834:

photo. I am appreciative of all guidance as I am still learning. Thank you, MatrixEditor.

1468: 1230: 1160: 1092: 1090:

before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know.

760: 698: 333: 1623:

Err... yes! I must be getting tired: what a stupid mistake. Thanks for letting me know.

1289:

move it perhaps it would be a good idea to suggest it on the article's talk page first.

1755: 1592: 1374: 899: 663: 650: 620: 521: 461: 1860: 1556:

If you are editing the article about your daughter you should be aware of wikipedia's

192:

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

1882: 1835: 1817: 1770: 1731: 1667: 1624: 1602: 1579: 1494: 1439: 1422: 1382: 1359: 1342: 1323: 1313: 1290: 1278: 1210: 1190: 1174: 1134: 1009: 926: 875: 854: 839: 791: 726: 688:

Website" - it is obvious that it's a Moomin website. That's why I prefer to go with "

632: 546: 538: 490: 486: 379: 369: 354: 285: 226:

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

160: 1993:

I was already explaining to Favonian and he was helping me out to edit the page...

1928: 1872: 1606: 1601:. Going to the Olympics is not only a claim of importance, it's a claim of meeting 1061: 504: 1856: 1645: 957: 905: 722: 598: 418: 395: 300: 256: 237: 2040:

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

949:

because it read like an advertisement but you did it all for me. hah thank you!

46:

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

1605:, so I declined the speedy. If you think she's not notable, try AfD. Cheers! -- 1226: 940: 429: 403: 396: 329: 142: 128:

which may help you if you would like to have another go at editing the article.

2041: 1863:). An easy way to check is to see if the page ends up in the hidden category 1726: 1557: 1145: 1087: 1024: 646: 616: 561: 517: 233: 223: 216: 205: 47: 17: 489:

if you like. He would be able to see the text which was deleted, unlike me.

1721: 1712: 1378: 1338: 1309: 1274: 1206: 1170: 365: 350: 1869: 1474: 1079: 1072: 1057: 323: 894:

Hey there. My apologies seems like we gave warning at the same time for

123:

Tina Bavdek General manager : Jesus Loved You & Valentino Kanzyani

1598: 1568:

Just in case you are wondering, I am posting this here, rather than on

950: 826: 810: 594: 413: 833: 579: 565: 1056:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

1035: 946: 593:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

572: 509:

hiya! hows u? i want to know that what sort of references u need?

185: 697:

an English article?), why you have problems with that? **********

537:

You can find information about what sort of sources are useful at

1816:

Sorry, that was a typo: it should have said "text", not "test".

1703:

policy on "What Knowledge is not", and particularly the section

1687:

search for schools get a complete listing. Thank you very much,

985:

Thanks again and please give me an further advise you may have.

328:

I am well versed with Knowledge policies. I am not new. Thanks,

213:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Turbulence: Ideas for Movement

349:

I stubified this page, moved it, and removed the speedy tag.

1308:

part of this discussion there on this article's talk page.

1253: 1252:. This is a convention beyond Knowledge, as well, with the 1152: 588:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Denialism (2nd nomination)

1859:, please be sure not to leave orphaned refs behind (e.g. 1551:

Just a couple more points arising out of the above reply.

481:. I see that it was deleted with the reason given as " 1897:

Nominating template sandbox pages for speedy deletion

609:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Red Pepper (magazine)

1166:

What is required to request the article be cleaned?

1041:An article that you have been involved in editing, 1003:I have given an extended answer to this message on 578:An article that you have been involved in editing, 1051:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Gananoque haunting 1752:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Bald Freak Music 1746:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Bald Freak Music 631:Thanks for the prompt. I have now withdrawn. 276:, and my speedy deletion warning is still on 781:Thank you for this message. Firstly, before 1865:Category:Pages with broken reference names 1855:s using blacklisted links, as you did in 344:Conference of State Court Administrators 836:Green Roof Construction and Maintenance 232:This is an automatic notification by a 14: 2038:Do not edit the contents of this page. 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 154:User:JesusLovedYou/Valentino Kanzyani 2019: 1473:I see you have taken an interest in 483:Unambiguous advertising or promotion 25: 1789:wt kinda test i culdn't get u???? 693:" - it's more logical thing to do. 23: 725:, if you haven't already done so. 184: 24: 2102: 1267:AfterEllen.com and AfterElton.com 2023: 1679:St. Augustine Preparatory School 1034: 571: 29: 1082:- a page you tagged - because: 1929:Chris Cunningham (not at work) 1240:Italics for species and genera 198:Turbulence: Ideas for Movement 180:Turbulence: Ideas for Movement 13: 1: 2014:20:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 1967:20:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 1936:13:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC) 1891:10:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 1876:02:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 1844:23:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1826:17:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1810:17:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1779:16:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1764:15:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1750:Hi, could you please revisit 1740:13:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1697:13:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1654:12:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1633:00:34, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1618:00:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 1588:22:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1544:22:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1503:14:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1487:13:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1464:21:19, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1448:11:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 1431:20:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 1414:18:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 1387:21:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1368:20:58, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1347:20:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1332:20:43, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1318:20:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1299:20:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1283:19:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1261:18:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1235:17:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1215:22:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 1199:20:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 1179:19:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 1127:20:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 1108:22:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC) 1066:22:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 1018:20:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 997:14:37, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 965:13:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 935:20:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 920:20:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 884:20:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 1705:Knowledge is not a directory 1639:Thanks for the warm welcome! 1088:criteria for speedy deletion 863:11:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC) 800:22:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 769:16:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 735:15:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 707:19:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 672:16:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 655:15:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 641:14:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 625:14:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 603:06:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 555:13:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 530:20:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 499:19:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC) 470:15:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC) 425:08:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC) 388:22:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 374:21:22, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 359:21:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 338:14:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 312:12:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 294:12:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 268:12:16, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 246:01:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 169:21:00, 1 November 2009 (UTC) 143:external links to be avoided 121:22:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC) 7: 1720:criteria, and if there are 196:. The nominated article is 10: 2107: 1854:When removing <ref: --> 1713:reliable published sources 1157:National_Rifle_Association 1071:Speedy deletion declined: 543:Knowledge:Reliable sources 408:WP:NEWT#SoWhy's experience 1785:Message from Ashu.sushant 1187:Knowledge is not censored 838:. New York: McGraw-Hill. 219:with four tildes (~~~~). 103:Valnetino KAnzyani update 1867:after your edit. Thanks! 1597:Just a friendly note on 1250:WP:ITALICS#Foreign terms 945:I was just about to tag 479:User:Syriajob/www.job.sy 443:please feed me back .. 1398:apologies in advance. 1005:Ballymacoll's talk page 834:Luckett, Kelly (2009). 1912:lead too short/sandbox 1220:Holmewood House School 1045:, has been listed for 692:<language here: --> 582:, has been listed for 189: 2036:of past discussions. 1709:notability guidelines 677:Moomin#External_links 224:articles for deletion 206:What Knowledge is not 188: 42:of past discussions. 1727:conflict of interest 1558:Conflict of interest 1244:Hi James. I noticed 1161:state defense forces 215:. Please be sure to 202:Knowledge:Notability 477:This must refer to 1375:Sexual intercourse 1113:David Lichtenstein 1086:Please review the 1043:Gananoque haunting 1029:Gananoque haunting 900:User talk:KINOGLAS 890:User talk:KINOGLAS 217:sign your comments 190: 2094: 2093: 2048: 2047: 2042:current talk page 2017: 2000:comment added by 1970: 1953:comment added by 1813: 1796:comment added by 1547: 1530:comment added by 1509:India de Beaufort 1404:comment added by 918: 813:claimed book spam 533: 516:comment added by 473: 456:comment added by 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2098: 2072: 2050: 2049: 2027: 2026: 2020: 2016: 1994: 1969: 1947: 1926: 1920: 1916: 1910: 1868: 1812: 1790: 1722:reliable sources 1615: 1609: 1546: 1524: 1479:Charles Matthews 1416: 1103: 1095: 1038: 970:Ballymacoll Stud 962: 955: 916: 912: 909: 903: 848: 690:Official Website 575: 532: 510: 472: 450: 421: 416: 310: 308: 303: 274:User:DavidUnruhe 266: 264: 259: 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2106: 2105: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2068: 2024: 1995: 1976: 1974:Mathias von Dam 1948: 1943: 1941:Mathias von Dam 1924: 1918: 1914: 1908: 1899: 1853: 1851: 1830:JamesBWatson, 1791: 1787: 1748: 1681: 1641: 1613: 1607: 1595: 1525: 1511: 1471: 1399: 1395: 1270: 1242: 1222: 1148: 1115: 1101: 1093: 1076: 1039: 1032: 972: 958: 951: 943: 914: 907: 904: 892: 845: 815: 679: 612: 576: 569: 511: 507: 451: 432: 419: 414: 400: 347: 326: 306: 301: 299: 262: 257: 255: 183: 105: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2104: 2092: 2091: 2086: 2083: 2078: 2073: 2066: 2061: 2056: 2046: 2045: 2028: 2002:Luuxlatino2960 1992: 1975: 1972: 1955:Luuxlatino2960 1942: 1939: 1898: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1850: 1847: 1786: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1747: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1707:. Knowledge's 1680: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1640: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1594: 1591: 1577: 1576: 1573: 1566: 1562: 1553: 1552: 1510: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1470: 1467: 1451: 1450: 1434: 1433: 1394: 1393:The fcps issue 1391: 1390: 1389: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1302: 1301: 1269: 1264: 1241: 1238: 1221: 1218: 1202: 1201: 1147: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1114: 1111: 1075: 1069: 1033: 1031: 1027:nomination of 1022: 1021: 1020: 971: 968: 942: 939: 938: 937: 891: 888: 887: 886: 850: 849: 843: 814: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 802: 774: 773: 772: 771: 754: 753: 752: 751: 738: 737: 719: 678: 675: 662:hey whatsup?-- 660: 659: 658: 657: 628: 627: 611: 606: 570: 568: 564:nomination of 559: 558: 557: 506: 503: 502: 501: 431: 428: 399: 394: 393: 392: 391: 390: 346: 341: 325: 322: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 315: 314: 182: 178:nomination of 173: 172: 171: 157: 148: 147: 139: 135: 130: 129: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2103: 2090: 2087: 2084: 2082: 2079: 2077: 2074: 2071: 2067: 2065: 2062: 2060: 2057: 2055: 2052: 2051: 2043: 2039: 2035: 2034: 2029: 2022: 2021: 2018: 2015: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1979: 1971: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1956: 1952: 1938: 1937: 1934: 1930: 1923: 1922:documentation 1913: 1907: 1902: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1874: 1871: 1866: 1862: 1858: 1849:Orphaned refs 1846: 1845: 1841: 1837: 1831: 1828: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1814: 1811: 1807: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1780: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1761: 1757: 1756:Spike Wilbury 1753: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1728: 1723: 1719: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1689:Mrivascaldera 1684: 1673: 1669: 1664: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1616: 1610: 1604: 1600: 1590: 1589: 1585: 1581: 1574: 1571: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1554: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1533: 1529: 1521: 1518: 1514: 1504: 1500: 1496: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1466: 1465: 1461: 1457: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1436: 1435: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1388: 1384: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1268: 1263: 1262: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1247: 1237: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1217: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1200: 1196: 1192: 1188: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1169:Respectfully, 1167: 1164: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1140: 1136: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1119:Thetrueword88 1110: 1109: 1106: 1104: 1097: 1096: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1074: 1068: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1054: 1053:. Thank you. 1052: 1048: 1044: 1037: 1030: 1026: 1019: 1015: 1011: 1008: 1006: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 994: 990: 986: 983: 979: 975: 967: 966: 963: 961: 956: 954: 948: 936: 932: 928: 924: 923: 922: 921: 917: 911: 910: 901: 897: 896:User:KINOGLAS 885: 881: 877: 872: 867: 866: 865: 864: 860: 856: 846: 841: 837: 832: 831: 830: 828: 824: 820: 812: 801: 797: 793: 788: 784: 780: 779: 778: 777: 776: 775: 770: 766: 762: 758: 757: 756: 755: 749: 748: 742: 741: 740: 739: 736: 732: 728: 724: 720: 716: 711: 710: 709: 708: 704: 700: 694: 691: 687: 682: 674: 673: 669: 665: 664:Bdwolverine87 656: 652: 648: 644: 643: 642: 638: 634: 630: 629: 626: 622: 618: 614: 613: 610: 605: 604: 600: 596: 591: 590:. Thank you. 589: 585: 581: 574: 567: 563: 556: 552: 548: 544: 540: 536: 535: 534: 531: 527: 523: 519: 515: 500: 496: 492: 488: 487:his talk page 484: 480: 476: 475: 474: 471: 467: 463: 459: 455: 447: 444: 441: 438: 435: 434:Hello dear, 427: 426: 423: 422: 417: 409: 405: 398: 389: 385: 381: 377: 376: 375: 371: 367: 363: 362: 361: 360: 356: 352: 345: 340: 339: 335: 331: 313: 309: 304: 297: 296: 295: 291: 287: 283: 279: 278:his talk page 275: 271: 270: 269: 265: 260: 252: 251: 250: 249: 248: 247: 243: 239: 235: 231: 227: 225: 220: 218: 214: 209: 207: 203: 199: 195: 187: 181: 177: 170: 166: 162: 158: 155: 150: 149: 144: 140: 136: 132: 131: 126: 125: 124: 122: 118: 114: 113:JesusLovedYou 109: 96: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 18:User talk:JBW 2069: 2037: 2031: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1980: 1977: 1944: 1903: 1900: 1883:JamesBWatson 1852: 1836:MatrixEditor 1832: 1829: 1818:JamesBWatson 1815: 1798:Ashu.sushant 1788: 1771:JamesBWatson 1749: 1732:JamesBWatson 1685: 1683:Dear James, 1682: 1668:JamesBWatson 1662: 1642: 1625:JamesBWatson 1596: 1580:JamesBWatson 1578: 1569: 1532:Hildalaverne 1522: 1519: 1515: 1512: 1495:JamesBWatson 1472: 1456:68.119.67.94 1452: 1440:JamesBWatson 1423:JamesBWatson 1406:68.119.67.94 1396: 1360:JamesBWatson 1357: 1324:JamesBWatson 1291:JamesBWatson 1271: 1243: 1223: 1203: 1191:JamesBWatson 1168: 1165: 1149: 1135:JamesBWatson 1116: 1098: 1091: 1083: 1077: 1055: 1040: 1010:JamesBWatson 1002: 987: 984: 980: 976: 973: 959: 952: 944: 927:JamesBWatson 906: 893: 876:JamesBWatson 870: 855:Andy Dingley 851: 835: 816: 792:JamesBWatson 786: 782: 745: 727:JamesBWatson 714: 695: 689: 685: 683: 680: 661: 633:JamesBWatson 592: 577: 547:JamesBWatson 508: 491:JamesBWatson 482: 448: 445: 442: 439: 436: 433: 412: 401: 380:JamesBWatson 348: 327: 286:JamesBWatson 281: 230:Please note: 229: 228: 221: 210: 191: 161:JamesBWatson 110: 106: 75: 43: 37: 2030:This is an 1996:—Preceding 1949:—Preceding 1792:—Preceding 1656:Blade bane 1608:Fabrictramp 1526:—Preceding 1475:David Gress 1469:David Gress 1400:—Preceding 1080:Rusty Baker 1073:Rusty Baker 989:Ballymacoll 908:Ilyushka88 829:article? 512:—Preceding 452:—Preceding 111:Best, Tina 36:This is an 2089:Archive 10 1904:I see you 1901:Hi James, 1718:notability 1646:Blade bane 1614:talk to me 1603:WP:ATHLETE 1599:Hanna Zajc 1593:Hanna Zajc 974:Hi James, 844:007160880X 827:Green roof 811:Green roof 750:TV series. 539:WP:SOURCES 449:syriajob 302:SPhilbrick 258:SPhilbrick 238:Erwin85Bot 95:Archive 10 2081:Archive 6 2076:Archive 5 2070:Archive 4 2064:Archive 3 2059:Archive 2 2054:Archive 1 1906:nominated 1857:this edit 1513:Hi James 1337:awkward. 1246:this edit 1227:Holmewood 871:reinforce 580:Denialism 566:Denialism 446:regards 330:Xavier449 87:Archive 6 82:Archive 5 76:Archive 4 70:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 2010:contribs 1998:unsigned 1963:contribs 1951:unsigned 1806:contribs 1794:unsigned 1540:contribs 1528:unsigned 1520:Regards 1402:unsigned 1047:deletion 947:Maclaren 823:Netalarm 723:WP:CIVIL 647:Milowent 617:Milowent 584:deletion 526:contribs 518:Bhaiwala 514:unsigned 505:Bhaiwala 466:contribs 458:Syriajob 454:unsigned 194:deletion 2033:archive 1523:Karen 1379:Flyer22 1339:Flyer22 1310:Flyer22 1275:Flyer22 1207:22015va 1171:22015va 404:WP:NEWT 397:WP:NEWT 366:Bearian 351:Bearian 39:archive 1870:Anomie 1258:Rkitko 1155:& 1058:DMacks 941:Thanks 821:, and 787:Moomin 747:Moomin 686:Moomin 430:hangon 1861:these 1146:SGAUS 915:talk 819:James 595:Unomi 204:and " 16:< 2006:talk 1959:talk 1933:talk 1887:talk 1840:talk 1822:talk 1802:talk 1775:talk 1760:talk 1736:talk 1693:talk 1672:talk 1650:talk 1629:talk 1584:talk 1570:your 1536:talk 1499:talk 1483:talk 1460:talk 1444:talk 1427:talk 1410:talk 1383:talk 1364:talk 1343:talk 1328:talk 1314:talk 1295:talk 1279:talk 1254:ICZN 1231:talk 1211:talk 1195:talk 1175:talk 1153:ACLU 1139:talk 1123:talk 1102:Talk 1062:talk 1014:talk 993:talk 931:talk 880:talk 859:talk 840:ISBN 796:talk 783:your 765:talk 761:שבור 731:talk 703:talk 699:שבור 668:talk 651:talk 637:talk 621:talk 599:talk 551:talk 522:talk 495:talk 462:talk 384:talk 370:talk 355:talk 334:talk 290:talk 242:talk 208:"). 165:talk 117:talk 1025:AfD 960:UDI 898:at 817:Hi 715:not 562:AfD 420:Why 324:COI 234:bot 176:AfD 2085:→ 2012:) 2008:• 1965:) 1961:• 1931:- 1925:}} 1919:{{ 1915:}} 1909:{{ 1889:) 1842:) 1824:) 1808:) 1804:• 1777:) 1762:) 1738:) 1695:) 1663:do 1652:) 1631:) 1611:| 1586:) 1542:) 1538:• 1501:) 1485:) 1462:) 1446:) 1429:) 1412:) 1385:) 1366:) 1345:) 1330:) 1316:) 1297:) 1281:) 1233:) 1213:) 1197:) 1177:) 1125:) 1094:NW 1064:) 1016:) 995:) 953:A8 933:) 882:) 861:) 798:) 767:) 733:) 705:) 670:) 653:) 639:) 623:) 601:) 553:) 545:. 528:) 524:• 497:) 468:) 464:• 415:So 386:) 372:) 357:) 336:) 292:) 244:) 167:) 119:) 91:→ 2044:. 2004:( 1957:( 1885:( 1873:⚔ 1838:( 1820:( 1800:( 1773:( 1758:( 1734:( 1691:( 1674:) 1670:( 1648:( 1627:( 1582:( 1534:( 1497:( 1481:( 1458:( 1442:( 1425:( 1408:( 1381:( 1362:( 1341:( 1326:( 1312:( 1293:( 1277:( 1229:( 1209:( 1193:( 1173:( 1141:) 1137:( 1121:( 1105:) 1099:( 1060:( 1012:( 1007:. 991:( 929:( 878:( 857:( 847:. 794:( 763:( 729:( 701:( 666:( 649:( 635:( 619:( 597:( 549:( 520:( 493:( 460:( 382:( 368:( 353:( 332:( 307:T 288:( 263:T 240:( 163:( 115:( 50:.

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

Index