User talk:JeremyA/Archive03

924:

is developed with THAT in mind. Certainly up to the point where links are needed to illustrate the writing they are therefore necessary. What you do is simply boldly delete ALL links YOU personally don't find interesting or appropriate relating to the article. In that case you can do the exact same for about 10000 other pages in wikipedia, and I sure hope you will soon find yourself asking what the hell your plan in life is; To be helpful or to annoy people? Now the only thing I see you do is obstruct the sharing of knowledge and blocking information from the reader by blindly deleting carefully selected (and over the years collected) External links. I had a life once, now I have a mission: I will keep on putting them all back for the innocent viewer looking for info.

103:

time Peter Lee from Denmark started editing the article of WGKF telling stories which are his opinion and not facts. You protected the article this early morning after he changed it according to his point of view. I wonder if it wouldn't be more fair to protect it after the people from WGKF edited the article according their side of the story. In most cases Mario changed the article and took a very neutral point of view in this article. He didn't insult somebody and he took the effort to write a NPOV. But anyway he is punished this moment. Maybe you can arrange that the article written by Mario can be the article protected, seems more fair and logic. I hope you consider this. Best regards, --TenChiJin 06:59, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

472:

third-party case on those grounds. Will they even hear a 3rd party case? So how about we file both article and conduct RfCs simultaneously (although the article one ought to be redundant, it will do no harm) and give them a few days to see if anything comes of it? I have some diffs and commentary I can give to both RfC and RfAr, although the bullk of the evidence will necessarily come from the articles' histories. I gather you have quite a bit of other material that you or may not be able to offer. RfCs often just give an alternative forum for the scuffle to be conducted in without attracting any outside attention but that, in this case, might be better than war-by-edit-summary. -

285:

everything to his own POV, which is totally way off and only functions to destroy our organization and to promote his teacher's book... I hope the evidences that TenChiJin sent you, will shed some light on the situation and you will start to realize that there IS no "middle course". Although the WGKF might have made some mistakes, their story comes close enough to the real story! Do you really think that WGKF (including myself, sensei Konno, and others from WGKF involved in this conflict) would have been invited to the

272:), however I don't believe you fully understand the importance of this part of text, but I blame myself for that (since it came not out the right way in that part of text). I have now tried to explain it on the talk page, and I have rewritten the text in a way that it now must be clear that this is important information for a full understanding of the reasoning behind the establishment of the WGKF. I sincerely hope that it's now clear. Please, let me know if you do/don't... 254:

the current offerings are. It appears you are about to receive confidential materials. I'm not sure how they can be usefully incorporated into a public article short of simply making a judgement call about "the truth" — which would seem unlikely to fix anything. Perhaps the two current articles should be merged and a section or two added describing the dispute(s) between the two schools of thought, with careful presentation of both sides of the dispute.

193:

doubt here whatsover that this site IS an official site to the Genseiryu Karatedo HONBU. Peter Lee keeps deleting this, because he doesn't acknowledge this honbu, but is thus vandalizing the article. Maybe a minor thing to you, but a big thing for the practisioners of the original Genseiryu. Also, the reverts Lee makes are accompanied by summaries with smearing texts with my name in it. Is this allowed on Knowledge??? Please act accordingly! Thanks! --

641:

insists on separate RfCs, I propose we give them a matter of days to succeed or fail and then proceed directly to Arbitration. We can point out to the Arbitrators the cackhandedness of RfC if that happens. I personally see no value in presenting this to Mediation since the parties must agree to it, have indicated that they will not (as shown by the diffs), and have not responded to informal mediation. But that is just my personal opinion. Bedtime. -

799: 276:

are you still defending him? He made perfectly clear to everybody he is not willing to contribute to Knowledge, he wants every article regarding Genseiryu removed (deleted and blocked) and he shows absolutely no sign of willingness to talk to me or anybody else connected to WGKF. Besides that, how much evidence do we still need to show you that this person is not who he really is and is nothing but a fraud, a teacher of a so called

135:

overzealous. Lustick certainly seems notable enough, and I think being a full professor at a major university is a claim to notability that precludes speedy deletion. The previous article was apparently speedied because of blanking by the author, but that may well have been a reaction by some newbie to the VfD nomination.

911:

I am a student at Georgia Tech and out teacher asked to post about something and I wanted to post about myself. The first time it was deleted because of "vanity" but I didn't intend it like that. The second time it was deleted by you because of "bio" and I was just wondering if bios aren't allowed or

650:

OK, so. It's been more than a week of RfC. Mario has responded, Peter Lee has refused, we have outside views from nl: and from here. I did ask Mario if he would suggest a way forwards, but he hasn't edited significanty since then. What shall we do? Unprotect and see if everything resumes? (Thanks for

544:

Thanks. RfCs are not good things. I knew that before, and I'm sure of it now. Anyway, now that it has jumped through the various hoops, I'll let the editors in question know that it is open for their responses. I'll use Lee's main talk page, and that of the article. I'm reluctant to stick the message

249:

My original interest was in stopping the fight-by-edit-summary with the hope that a talk-page discussion would be more fruitful. But as soon as MarioR realised that I wasn't going to advocate his cause over the other, he went completely quiet; I've only managed to extract one slightly abusive message

923:

You state that wikipedia is not a webdirectory. First, make a point by defining what a webdirectory is then, and what the function of wikipedia should be, since it is an ONLINE medium. The only PRO for Knowledge compared to normal printed media is that it can link to pages on the internet. Mediawiki

503:

Just to let you know that I am writing that RfC at the moment. It is very tedious; I can't fathom how some of the more...uh...something...editors can bare to file one of these so regularly. I'll post it once I'm done (in a while), but it will need input from you. In particular, I can't find the link

940:

Thanks for your comments on the Isle of May article, and for the pictures of the lighthouses — the one of Stevenson's lighthouse is particularly good. I have never been to the island myself, but having spent time researching it for the article I am very keen to get out there next time I am in that

832:

Just saw your picture of Lincoln Park in the winter. I recently moved from Chicago to a small city in Minnesota. There are many aspects of Chicago I was happy to leave behind: the traffic, the lack of parking, and so on. And yet I do miss it as well. Seeing your photograph definitely made me feel a

753:

Thanks for the strong support on my RfA. I was very pleasantly surprised to see so much support throughout the week. Please do keep an eye on me and my logs, especially while I'm learning the ropes with the new buttons. It does beging to appear that the Genseiryu Wars, if not over, are calming down

661:

Sorry, your earlier message disappeared inside another one and I didn't notice it when I pressed "last diff". Ok, yes, I suppose unprotecting and holding our breaths is next in line. Range blocks on those IPs look ok at the moment, and I guess someone will shout if they're hit by it. There's a page

606:

No, I didn't include it. I excluded a few of diffs of Peter Lee's on the basis that they were messages to and about users not party to the RfC. They appear to be directed at editors who dropped out of the fight early on, and I am unsure of their procedural applicability although I reckond they'd be

257:

I am not sure what kind of more draconian action might be available. File a user-behaviour RfC? Can a third party do that? Can a third party file a user-behvaiour RfAr, or would the arbitrators just reject it? I suppose we could forcibly list the issue at RfM, but given the progress so far, I'm not

253:

I had also considered offering to write the article myself: but I didn't manage to persuade anyone to make their case. I suppose with material from both sides, an NPOV article could be constructed, but I wonder whether it would be the 'right' NPOV or whether it would be repeatedly re-NPOV'd just as

240:

Dear Splash, I can deliver some proof about items that are claimed on the Genseiryu site. Only I want them to be treated confidential. They are at the moment translated by an official translator from Japanese to English. I will sent them, after the translation is ready, to JeremyA who already tried

102:

I just saw that you protected the sub-article of World Genseiryu Karatedo Federation. This article was done as an sub article to avoid an Edit war of the article about Genseiryu. Mario Roering made an NPOV article and made sub articles for both organizations. One for GKIF and one for WGKF. The last

580:

Mario tried to make an NPOV article. One part for all organizations and 2 sub articles to avoid an edit war and to let every organization tell their story on their sub article. Mario decided to stay off the part of GKIF. Probably he sticked to this decision. This also shows the right intention off

517:

working on it. Pity they don't make RfC into FAs, because this would qualify. As a heads-up, it particularly needs any evidence you have of failed dispute resolution from your talk archives, which I haven't the energy to go through in detail. I've extracted some from Mario's and Peter's pages, and

467:

Well, what you list is almost exactly what I attempted too, although you had more success than me. Just before you began doing it, I was considering reverting on-sight any edit which was a revert with an abusive edit summary. I've left you to do that, although I would have stepped in if I had been

275:

Secondly, I want to set something straight: Splash writes here that "neither side is presently allowed to continue the war". There IS no war on the nl.wiki, because this Peter Lee has been banned for one year, because of the exact same behaviour he has been showing on the en.wiki all along! So why

407:

In the last couple of weeks, the devs made a change such that a blocked user can still edit their own user and talk pages. In this case, since the person/s behind this IP only cares about editing the user talk page, the block was disappointingly ineffective. You have to protect the user talk page

214:

I'm no expert on the area around Barnsley, but from what I can make out, the name is now seldom - but occasionally - used (the alternative "Nether Hoyland" seems to have entirely fallen from use). It doesn't appear on any current maps I can find, but refers to what is now the central area of the

192:

Genseiryu Karatedo Honbu homepage as approved by the founder Shukumine Seiken ("創始者・祝嶺正献"). "玄制流空手道本部" means 'Genseiryu Karatedo HONBU'. "正式" means 'official'. The rest of the text on the main page talks about copyright of the name Genseiryu (with special exceptions to certain people). There's no

1011:

I've recently joined Wikipeda as a editor of mostly technical articles and have been a bit 'fuzzy' about the policies regarding external links: Through observation I've noticed that edits containing external links to certain websites will get reverted by an admin. Most of the time it's software

640:

of separate RfCs in this case: I hope, perhaps futilely, that a new forum for them to jointly talk in will be useful. Separate RfCs wouldn't achieve that. In any case, both could comment in each others, and most if not all outside views would have to be duplicated in large part. If the community

471:

Like I said on the various talk pages, I'm sceptical of the value of taking this particular dispute to RfM since what both of us have tried has been almost completely fruitless. I think, however, that we should probably go to RfC before RfAr or there's a good chance the Arbitrators will reject a

284:

I myself have tried to write an NPOV article, even now I try to rewrite sentences in a different way as much as possible, just to stop this pointless edit war, started by Peter Lee. But Peter Lee said himself that nobody is allowed to talk about Genseiryu besides himself, so he keeps changing

812:

Thanks for the reply regarding future British constituencies. It will take a while to put all the seats up there, I think I'm up to G or H, so a while to go. Thanks also for putting up some new seat articles; that'd stop me from worrying when I create the link and note the active links :)

635:

Hi. I have prepared but not filed separate RfCs if such is insisted upon widely. I was personally rather disappointed that anyone supposed they could adequately deal with 150+ diffs in a single dismissive sentence, but there we go. The price we pay for policy. I am deeply sceptical of the

134:

Since you speedied this article (which I never had the chance to see), I'd like to point out that I am recreating it. There are very clear cases of teenage vanity and advertisement which are allowed to run their course on VfD, so I think speedying this after about an hour on VfD was a bit

734:

Your excellent contributions to the Sheffield Central article prompted me to look over our related articles. Where did you find the information on the earlier elections? And do you whether Neepsend was really abolished in 1955? Although that date is given

437:. He will almost certainly log out and back on with another 63.19 IP. He's been one of the most persistent vandals around for the last couple of months; Curps, for one, likes to range-block him for an hour or two at a time. Cheers, 82:

Thank you for the image uploading help on the blue Buick. I am very used to ignoring case sensitivity in a Windows environment, so it did not dawn on me that an uploaded file would be case sensitive.

490:

for the purpose of an abusive edit summary before! We probably do have enough to go directly to arbitration, but I guess RfC is appropriate first. Meantime I'll go ask a hypothetical question on

292:). But nobody of GKIF was invited there!! There was no Kunihiko Tosa, there was no Peter Lee, actually, to our knowledge, there was absolutely NOBODY of GKIF present! Think about that fact! 785: 151:

I've seen you have some issues with Louis Epstein before, so I thought I'd invite you to comment on the RfC I've set up. He's crossed the line into edit warring over the em-dash thing. —

174:

Dear Jeremy, could you please do something against the vandalism and insulting language of Peter Lee, who keeps writing offensive and slandering texts about me in the summary of

770: 864:

I could use an admin hand to step in where Fvw left off earlier tonight. Are you game? A quick look at my recent contributions should give you an idea of what I'm up against.—

289:

of 55 years of Genseiryu/40 years of Taido, where the Shukumine family was present as well, if they would have been spreading lies?!? (See also here (scroll all way down):

528: 712:

Greetings: pawing through the SuperShadow edit history, I noticed you've edited the page in question before. I thought you'd want to know it is now the subject of a

826: 676:

edit at that kind of time, but I'm fairly sure that's more the exception than the rule. He's 'edited' late before, I suppose. Anyway, I'll revert if he carries on. -

321:

Thank you! Sometimes I do get a little bit carried away however. Not hard to believe regarding all the insults and name slandering I have to endure from this guy (

85:

I went back and looked at the instructions and could not find where it says anything about case sensitivity. Needs editing in my view, but I do not know where.

607:

ok in an RfAr. However, on reading that particular one more carefully (I looked at soooo many), I see it does deal with the other party, and so I will add it. -

504:

to the page at nl: where Peter Lee was banned for a year, and am not sure whether to include the VfD-tag stuff early on. I'll drop you a line once it's posted.-

794: 925: 992:

will be doing all of the real work. He would have responded to you directly, but he is currently out of town, and wanted to thank you asap. Thanks again. --

912:

what? If that's the reason then that is fine. Is it possible for my teacher to see the deleted post if he were to go to where the post used to be? Thanks.

853: 621: 420: 334: 297: 250:

from the anon (presumably Peter Lee). Evidently, we have acquired a fight from the Dutch wiki where neither side is presently allowed to continue the war.

194: 1025: 791: 144: 435: 361: 162: 582: 234: 629: 342: 305: 705: 581:

Mario although his last action was not a good choice. But this action is easy to understand if you are attacked and insulted continously. --

348: 219:, which originally consisted of several villages - the various Hoylands. I would suggest merging it in to our sparse article on Hoyland. 840: 585: 444: 892: 717: 1049: 1019: 666: 575: 566: 549: 539: 522: 508: 498: 145: 94: 975: 928: 494:. So, obviously I'll certify an RfC, and I don't mind writing it but do you have vastly more stuff to contribute to it than me? - 491: 820: 743: 618: 268:

Hi Jeremy (and Splash)! First of all, I understand what you did with removing the part about "the 'other' Genseiryu style" (on

724: 89: 527:

Well, I feel like putting myself in the washing machine after all that dirty laundry. Your signature and evidence are needed

1006: 223: 39: 1035:

article. I noticed you gave him/her a final warning on September 14th. I'm not sure what to do now. Thanks for your help--

427: 1039: 531:

in the usual 48 hours. Note that I have been through both users' talk page contributions, so what I don't have is any of

1001: 988:

RfA. He appreciates your support and comments and looks forward to better serving Knowledge the best he can. Of course

875: 434:

Hi Jeremy. Good work: you blocked the "Luxembourg", aka "Mississippi" or aka "Fake Places in North Carolina" vandal (

739:, it seems suspiciously soon after creation, and no other Sheffield constituencies were altered until 1983. thanks, 202: 178:! Peter Lee claims to be learing Japanese, but he doesn't understand shit about it (or he denies the text). The site 802: 139: 967:

sometimes called "cognitive behavior therapy", my dictionary suggests that "behavior therapy" is another name for "

825: 680: 655: 645: 611: 476: 237: 558:

which appears not to be part of the dispute. Do you know why this is, and how it fits in? Or just ignore this per

713: 315: 262: 945: 903:

I didnt know i could get banned. Sorry i thought it was just for my screen. we didnt find out until now. my bad

758: 807: 122: 846:

Oh man, I used to dread those orange signs. I think I would have rather the streets just remain dirty! —

290: 77: 66: 59: 52: 918: 850: 837: 729: 402: 1024: 286: 691: 950: 704: 672:

How tiresome. Do you think it's at all interesting that those edits were at 4am his time? I know

296:

Thanks again for all the time you are putting in this complicated and specialized subject... --

859: 394: 207: 182:

tells clearly (maybe you know a Japanese administrator who can prove this!) on its main page:

972: 968: 847: 834: 412: 31:

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 25 July 2005 and 7 October 2005.

8: 933: 462: 441: 358: 322: 158: 127: 721: 518:

the articles' talk pages, but I don't know what may have happened here in isolation. -

960: 888: 871: 736: 571:

Oh, that last email is cause for encouragement. There may be a way ahead after all. -

390: 244: 49: 35: 17: 179: 956: 763: 740: 695: 409: 228: 220: 1045:

Thank you. I actually forgot there that people usually have dynamic IP adresses.--

651:

the strong support by the way; I'll do proper thank-yous at the end of the week.)-

366: 748: 559: 1016: 817: 438: 208: 167: 153: 113: 86: 311:

Ok, fair enough. FWIW, I think your current course of action is appropriate. -

354: 455:

Hi Jeremy, thankyou very much for removing the vandalism from my user page.

883: 866: 330: 136: 46: 685: 535:

attempts to fix things, outside of those listed in the Evidence section. -

1046: 1036: 997: 989: 934: 755: 677: 663: 652: 642: 608: 572: 563: 546: 536: 519: 505: 495: 473: 424: 312: 259: 128: 784: 754:

which is a relief. Hopefully, we can avoid RfAr. Anyway, thanks again! -

545:

on a bunch of anons' pages in case they are used by others in future. -

906: 833:

bit homesick—in a good way. So I thought I'd pop by and say thanks. —

486:

it? I'm not sure I've come across the device of making a minor change

241:

to mediate in the conflict about the Genseiryu article. Best regards,

798: 617:

That link you are looking for is now in the archive of "Stemlokaal":

119: 1032: 993: 985: 981: 942: 456: 27:

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

233:

Dear JeremyA, This message I have sent to Splash. Best regards,--

216: 277: 175: 168: 1015:

What is the specific policy being followed here? (confused)

694:

on Splash's talk page, as it addresses both of your concerns.

38:, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See 769: 371:

Thank you for reverting the vandalism made on my user page. —

185:このホームページは、創始者・祝嶺正献の承認の元に活動している唯一の正式団体である「玄制流空手道本部」のホームページです。 662:

full of instruction about range-blocks somewhere around... -

971:". Is this a more appropriate target for the redirect? -- 773:

Thank you so much for reverting vandalism to my user page:

720:. If you want, you could stop in there and cast a vote. -- 555: 269: 107: 450: 325:)... But, I will try to work as much as possible in a 898: 421:

Knowledge:Blocked users can edit their own talk page

554:In digging out the evidence, I remembered about 881:Thanks much. Your help is greatly appreciated.— 1031:I just reverted this anon's vandalism of the 95:World Genseiryu Karatedo Federation Protected 780:for defense of Knowledge against vandalism. 718:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/SuperShadow 620:. Again, hope to be of a little help... -- 188:Meaning just as much that this is the ONLY 118:Thank you for reverting my user page. :) - 146:Knowledge:Requests for comment/12.144.5.2 108:http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:JeremyA 492:Knowledge talk:Requests for arbitration 353:Thanks for alerting me to your talk on 14: 984:'s RfA== Thank you for supporting my 776:I, V. Molotov, hereby give you this 349:Responded to your Critical Mass post 40:Knowledge:How to archive a talk page 23: 329:and listen to all the advice you, 24: 1061: 941:part of the country! Best wishes 797: 783: 768: 1002:20:38, 30 September 2005 (UTC) 976:15:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC) 955:I noticed that you redirected 946:20:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC) 929:17:09, 24 September 2005 (UTC) 893:02:49, 24 September 2005 (UTC) 876:02:23, 24 September 2005 (UTC) 854:07:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC) 841:04:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC) 821:11:47, 21 September 2005 (UTC) 803:21:50, 14 September 2005 (UTC) 13: 1: 759:23:39, 9 September 2005 (UTC) 744:16:12, 5 September 2005 (UTC) 725:22:09, 4 September 2005 (UTC) 698:07:39, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 681:13:25, 5 September 2005 (UTC) 667:00:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC) 656:18:43, 3 September 2005 (UTC) 459:15:19, August 24, 2005 (UTC) 415:03:58, August 24, 2005 (UTC) 399:02:30, August 23, 2005 (UTC) 1007:Newcomer with policy inquiry 7: 1050:00:10, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 1040:01:11, 7 October 2005 (UTC) 1020:03:29, 6 October 2005 (UTC) 963:. While cognitive therapy 646:05:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 630:23:26, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 612:03:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 586:20:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 576:03:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 567:03:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 550:03:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 540:02:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 523:01:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 509:22:43, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 499:20:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 477:20:33, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 468:awake and the 3RR looming. 445:04:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 428:04:03, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 362:20:19, 21 August 2005 (UTC) 343:15:34, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 316:01:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 306:12:59, 21 August 2005 (UTC) 263:20:06, 19 August 2005 (UTC) 258:hopeful of success there. - 238:17:09, 18 August 2005 (UTC) 224:13:16, 17 August 2005 (UTC) 203:08:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC) 67:User talk:JeremyA/Archive04 60:User talk:JeremyA/Archive02 53:01:14, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 10: 1066: 333:and JeremyA gave me... -- 163:01:59, 9 August 2005 (UTC) 140:13:39, 6 August 2005 (UTC) 123:05:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC) 90:04:46, 25 July 2005 (UTC) 827:Image:ChicagoWinter1.jpg 604:<carriage return: --> 58:Previous archive page: 778:Wiki Defender Barnstar 969:behavior modification 808:Future Constituencies 367:Thanks for reverting 34:Post replies to the 78:Thanks for the help 65:Next archive page: 919:Webdirectory/Links 730:Sheffield Neepsend 403:User 63.19.135.105 180:Genseiryu Karatedo 1026:User:203.144.9.73 961:cognitive therapy 714:Vote for Deletion 398: 387: 379: 18:User talk:JeremyA 1057: 973:Antaeus Feldspar 957:behavior therapy 951:Behavior therapy 848:Knowledge Seeker 835:Knowledge Seeker 801: 787: 772: 690:Please see this 686:Separate filings 627: 388: 383: 375: 357:. I responded. 340: 331:Peter van Londen 303: 200: 106:Retrieved from " 1065: 1064: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1029: 1009: 953: 938: 921: 909: 901: 862: 830: 810: 766: 751: 732: 710: 688: 623: 465: 453: 405: 369: 351: 336: 299: 247: 231: 212: 196: 186: 172: 149: 132: 116: 97: 80: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1063: 1053: 1052: 1028: 1023: 1008: 1005: 952: 949: 937: 932: 926:194.109.22.148 920: 917: 908: 907:Charlie Holder 905: 900: 897: 896: 895: 861: 860:Recent vandals 858: 857: 856: 829: 824: 809: 806: 765: 762: 750: 747: 731: 728: 709: 703: 701: 687: 684: 670: 669: 633: 632: 601: 600: 599: 598: 597: 596: 595: 594: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 588: 569: 464: 461: 452: 449: 448: 447: 431: 430: 404: 401: 368: 365: 359:Michaelbluejay 350: 347: 346: 345: 309: 308: 294: 293: 282: 281: 273: 246: 243: 230: 227: 211: 209:Hoyland Nether 206: 184: 171: 166: 148: 143: 131: 126: 115: 112: 99:Dear JeremyA, 96: 93: 79: 76: 75: 73: 71: 70: 63: 36:main talk page 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1062: 1051: 1048: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1038: 1034: 1027: 1022: 1021: 1018: 1013: 1004: 1003: 999: 995: 991: 987: 983: 978: 977: 974: 970: 966: 962: 958: 948: 947: 944: 936: 931: 930: 927: 916: 913: 904: 894: 890: 886: 885: 880: 879: 878: 877: 873: 869: 868: 855: 852: 849: 845: 844: 843: 842: 839: 836: 828: 823: 822: 819: 816:Cheers again 814: 805: 804: 800: 796: 793: 788: 786: 781: 779: 774: 771: 761: 760: 757: 746: 745: 742: 738: 727: 726: 723: 719: 715: 707: 702: 699: 697: 693: 683: 682: 679: 675: 668: 665: 660: 659: 658: 657: 654: 648: 647: 644: 639: 631: 628: 626: 619: 616: 615: 614: 613: 610: 605: 587: 584: 579: 578: 577: 574: 570: 568: 565: 561: 557: 553: 552: 551: 548: 543: 542: 541: 538: 534: 530: 526: 525: 524: 521: 516: 512: 511: 510: 507: 502: 501: 500: 497: 493: 489: 485: 482:Crikey. What 481: 480: 479: 478: 475: 469: 460: 458: 446: 443: 440: 436: 433: 432: 429: 426: 422: 418: 417: 416: 414: 411: 400: 396: 392: 386: 382: 378: 374: 364: 363: 360: 356: 355:Critical_Mass 344: 341: 339: 332: 328: 327:Knowledge way 324: 320: 319: 318: 317: 314: 307: 304: 302: 295: 291: 288: 283: 279: 274: 271: 267: 266: 265: 264: 261: 255: 251: 242: 239: 236: 226: 225: 222: 218: 210: 205: 204: 201: 199: 191: 183: 181: 177: 170: 165: 164: 161: 160: 156: 155: 147: 142: 141: 138: 130: 125: 124: 121: 111: 109: 104: 100: 92: 91: 88: 83: 74: 68: 64: 61: 57: 56: 55: 54: 51: 48: 43: 41: 37: 32: 29: 28: 19: 1030: 1014: 1010: 979: 964: 954: 939: 922: 914: 910: 902: 884:chris.lawson 882: 867:chris.lawson 865: 863: 831: 815: 811: 789: 782: 777: 775: 767: 752: 733: 711: 700: 689: 673: 671: 649: 637: 634: 624: 603: 602: 532: 514: 513:Update: I'm 488:specifically 487: 483: 470: 466: 454: 406: 384: 380: 376: 372: 370: 352: 337: 326: 310: 300: 256: 252: 248: 232: 213: 197: 189: 187: 173: 157: 152: 150: 133: 117: 105: 101: 98: 84: 81: 72: 44: 33: 30: 26: 25: 935:Isle of May 790:Take care, 741:Warofdreams 706:SuperShadow 696:Acetic Acid 463:What to do? 410:FreplySpang 287:celebration 221:Warofdreams 129:Ian Lustick 45:Thank you. 1012:websites. 692:discussion 439:Antandrus 1017:Frogtumor 583:TenChiJin 419:See also 323:Peter Lee 245:Genseiryu 235:TenChiJin 1033:abortion 915:Charlie 560:WP:BEANS 391:userpage 229:Evidence 215:town of 190:official 87:BuickGuy 986:masters 818:doktorb 792:Molotov 749:Thanks! 217:Hoyland 137:Uppland 47:JeremyA 1047:Shanel 1037:Shanel 795:(talk) 764:Thanks 756:Splash 678:Splash 664:Splash 653:Splash 643:Splash 609:Splash 573:Splash 564:Splash 547:Splash 537:Splash 520:Splash 506:Splash 496:Splash 474:Splash 451:Thanks 442:(talk) 425:cesarb 413:(talk) 313:Splash 278:McDojo 260:Splash 176:karate 169:Karate 114:Thanks 50:(talk) 899:Sorry 716:, at 638:value 622:Mario 515:still 408:too. 385:OCKER 377:ESSED 335:Mario 298:Mario 195:Mario 159:Welch 16:< 1000:?¿? 889:talk 872:talk 737:here 722:Maru 556:GKIF 533:your 529:here 423:. -- 395:talk 270:WGKF 154:Phil 120:Mark 998:mop 996:'s 994:Who 982:Who 959:to 943:Jll 708:VfD 562:. - 457:Rje 393:) ( 280:??? 42:.) 980:== 965:is 891:) 874:) 484:is 110:" 990:I 887:( 870:( 851:দ 838:দ 674:I 625:R 397:) 389:( 381:R 373:M 338:R 301:R 198:R 69:. 62:.

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

Index