User talk:Karanacs/Archive 13

3400:

are too quick to come to Karanac's defense. She is a human being, an editor and an admin. As all three, she should be able to bring herself to say something to those editors who come to the page spewing venom but she says nothing. Instead, her actions just encourage them because even though I do not engage in the venom spewing, she finds things to write up about me in an RFC and arbcom but somehow omits these other editors who really need help to learn how to be civil. Others have pointed out her bias, I am not alone on this. I thought I was being kind by not writing up an RFC or taking it to arbcom because - as human beings - people are capable of just telling someone when they have messed up. But it sounds like, according to you, on Knowledge there is only one way to tell people and its RFC's and arbcoms. It should not have to go that far. I think that Knowledge should have annual admin reviews on which everyone can have input because I think there are a lot of admins who use their position in inappropriate ways. That's been my experience on Catholic Church - I think that Knowledge should know that and I should not be threatened with arbcom

6882:

comments, but stopped because it caused some discussion. Most notably, I've been working on reducing the file size: it still takes almost 30 seconds, sometimes longer, for the edit window to close, which makes the editing excruciatingly slow. Most of my recent edits have been to move in-text citation templates to the sources section. I found about 15 to 20 that were duplicates and I reformated and consolidated. If you have questions about what I've done, ping me. Also, I have Norman and a quick spot-check was disappointing. Each bit of the article sourced to Norman was problematic: either not in his text; only a small portion in his text; in one case in the text but lifted directly into the article. I've added cite tags to the parts not in the text, and rewritten the others. I'm not impressed with Norman, but we can discuss the reasons later. I have a busy week beginning tomorrow, and then anticipate a number of small trips during the summer, but I'll be around to help as much as I can. Again, welcome back!

4026:(ec with Tom) Thank you, I do very much appreciate your feedback. I included "shorten" because there had been consensus on the talk page that something needed to be done about the length, we just hadn't agreed on what to remove. From past discussions, I was also pretty sure that this would be one of Nancy and Xandar's key objections to the change, and I was trying to include her perspective as well, and I assumed that shortening/removing text/etc is sometimes of greater interest to observers than simply restructuring. It didn't occur to me that this would be perceived as non-neutral, but I guess I wasn't looking at it from the perspective of those who don't follow the talk page. Next time I will place any proposed notice at the article talk page to get additional input to make sure that we all agree on the wording. Again, thank you for your explanation. 5026:

before it was battle scared. -- One could just as easily make a similar criticism about the first painting on that page, 'Battle of San Jacinto', which looks like something out of a child's story book. The cannon that is depicted in the 'Mural from the Gonzales Museum' looks like a wooden toy. -- As you can see, it is very easy to find 'fault' with just about any picture...if one is so inclined. I too would like to see other pictures of battle flags, etc, but the lack of these things on that page doesn't seem to be a basis for attacking this image. 'Dabomb87' has placed the Houston/Austin image further down on the page. I am hoping it will not be a cause for grief of any sort. In any event, I do appreciate the effort you and others have made to these pages, and was hoping that such images would be a welcomed addition.

4948:. I noticed that it wasn't promoted, and your talk header states that happens for one of three reasons: (1) actionable objections have not been resolved, (2) consensus for promotion has not been reached, or (3) insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met. I'd like to ask which of those it was for this review. We resolved all the objections & had one reviewer actively support and three other reviewers say "The article looks good except one thing" (and that one thing was resolved in every case), so was it #3? I'm just asking because I'm trying to figure out what else needs to happen with this article for it to pass. Thanks again for your time. 3281:. I told you first on my talk page, then Raul, and third after you opened the arbcom. I am hoping at some point you will see what you could maybe have done differently to be a better admin. If I had intended to heap criticism on you, I would have opened an RFC against you myself or an arbcom but I thought that would be mean. So I didn't. I just did what my religion tells me to do - "if you are angry with someone tell him his fault" - which I did. Your response was to open the RFC so I guess you did not take my kindness of telling you your fault to heart. I wish you had because that would have saved us a lot of time and energy and the page would have probably been further along by now. 768:

necessary (etc), or consensus of other reviewers is that the opposition should not be considered (etc). Prose is always a subjective thing, and Tony1 is considered on of the best FAC reviewers for prose. He generally only gives an example of what he sees as issues, so fixing each individual thing he points out is often not enough, because similar issues may be found through the rest of the article. It never hurts to have someone else look through the article just to make sure that there aren't other prose issues that you haven't caught (it's easy to miss those when you've been over the writing so many times).

5001:

reviewers mention problems. The issue was not the word count; Johnbod was concerned that the article was not fleshed out enough. Consensus did not support the nomination to be closed successfully, and it should not be brought back immediately. I recommend very strongly that when you do bring it back eventually that it should not be in the exact same format. Have a peer review, solicit Johnbod's help on searching for other sources to flesh out the coverage of the art and architecture, look throught more sources. Otherwise I suspect you'll have the same problem in the next nomination.

4980:

removed that source and found three others that said the same thing, but that editor never returned to the article to formally support. One editor (TonyTheTiger) voiced concerns with length, then another agreed with him, back when it was 1000 words. TonytheTiger supported the nomination when it was 1600 words. The other editor who said it was thin also did so when it was about 1000 words. There was a third who literally said "At 1089 words, including quotes, the article seems slight; more like a good dyk, than an FA." The article was expanded another 500 words after that.

4965:- and a concern about the level of sourcing used. In addition, the fact that there was only one support after several weeks and a large amount of text had been written, made me think that it was unlikely that a consensus would form at this time to overlook those issues. Usually, when the FAC gets long it's harder to attract reviewers to an article. I suspect that to get this article through FAC successfully you'll need to do another thorough search for more sources. It might be helpful to get others, who may have access to different sources, to help. Good luck! 4360:(although who knows, I might be ultra-naive). I would actually welcome any user RfC filed on me so that Nancy/Xandar/et al would be forced to actually provide some proof of all of their allegations, but that does not appear to be forthcoming. Much more fun, I suspect, to throw about allegations with no proof. I am very grateful, however, for the involvement of any so-far-uninvolved admins (including Tom harrison, despite questions over his neutrality), as their perspective will be useful if matters lead back to Arbcom. 5937:. As she is new to Knowledge, it is natural that she would not understand our rules - that this might derail a first FAC attempt is, perhaps, unfortunate, but the article could be stronger in the end, with her help. Besides, imagine how much Knowledge would benefit from someone with expert knowledge contributing in this area! We should be doing everything we can to recruit editors like this. We were all newbies once - I remember the first time someone had to tell me to add sources to an article I wrote - do you? :) 5953:

fact that it wouldn't meet that part of the criteria was problematic. I had previously welcomed Ms. Johnson on the talk page of the IP that she was using before she created an account, and since she had used that IP after I left the message I thought it would be silly to leave a very similar message on her new talk page. Thank you for taking the initiative to welcome her, and thank you also for your detailed comments on the article. There is obviously still room for improvement, but we are getting there.

111: 89: 7140: 31: 4985:

permission to renominate without waiting the obligatory "few weeks," because (with TONS of love and respect!) I don't think it was resolved right. Of course this is just my opinion, and yours is just as valid as mine. But if you feel I may have a point, could I renominate it, pretty please? Also, if you still want me to wait, I'll wait, and no hard feelings! I'm a fan of cheerful disagreement (if there has to be disagreement at all), so just let me know. Thanks Karen!

3543:

within the next week or so (as it had already been open more than 2 weeks). One oppose vote is not always enough to close a nomination, but this had received no supports (and without supports, an article cannot be promoted). In my experience, when a nomination has that much text, it is very difficult to convince other reviewers to come take a look at the article, and unless reviewers could be attracted - and would support - the article could not be promoted now.

2144:, and it's been in the queue for almost four weeks. Emboldened by what I've learned from Awadewit over the past few months I was going to offer to review it, but when I glanced through I saw that there appears to be nothing on the book's reception, which seems like quite a major omission. Is there some valid reason for that? I'd be happy to review it, but without something on its reception it's hard to see that it meets the "covers its major topics" GA criterion. -- 1640: 4784: 1985: 1231: 5624:

Church is not very flattering. I was happy to involve myself with this article as far as fundamental Knowledge policies were concerned. However, I don't think I should be involved with actually writing its content. Unlike Nancy, I recognize that my personal opinions might occasionally conflict with the aims of Knowledge. I'm also fairly busy with work and school, although I always overcome those limitations if I have the will.

3506:

scared away from commenting. I didn't think leaving the nom open would help the article's chances. I recommend that you keep working on it to address Slim Virgin's concerns, and renominate it in a few weeks when you feel like you've worked out all the kinks. With a clean nomination and these issues cleared up, you'll hopefully be able to attract more reviewers and get the article passed more smoothly. Good luck!

1553: 1401: 4006:

sure you'd have been open to addressing her concern and would have removed the mention of 'shorten', and there very well may not have been an issue. Instead, she unfortunately chose to place her "notification" after one was already made, and muddied the waters with the inclusion of diffs, and engaged in other problematic conduct after that, and was correctly blocked for it. Of course, this other editor's post was

1414: 3435:

possibly also PMA, but I haven't followed enough to know) have created a battleground on the article, are the only things standing in the way of article improvement, you continue calling for "votes", don't understand consensus, have exhibited classic ownership and failure to assume good faith, and the content issues at Catholic Church are all the result of these behavioral issues.

5651:

apparently it was controversial to call him King of Pop in the lead. But I got that and a lot more done at that article (now featured) despite opposition from long-standing editors and administrators, who were all totally confused about what it means to have an encyclopedic article on one of the greatest entertainers of all time. Those who try to

538:, and haven't responded since. I don't know if you have it watchlisted, but I assumed that you had a holiday break and maybe forgot about it. Anyways, I believe I have addressed most, if not all of, your concerns. I just wanted to make sure that all concerns were addressed, in case one of the other FA directors closed the nomation. Thanks. :) 2532:, claiming that it has no source. It is a map of the world's countries, tinted by percentage of Catholics; it claims a source - a list of percentage Catholics by country. Our good soul's complaint is that the original has no map; I have duly commented on the obvious (if it had a map, we could not use it without a waiver of copyright). 3313:; please try to read and understand that page as well. I'm growing tired of seeing your attacks on Karanacs' good faith, and may consider adding my input to the ArbCom if they don't cease. You appear to view yourself as a kind and gentle soul, but I see stubborn and willful intransigence, misrepresentation, misunderstanding, 3301:

position as FAC delegate or admin tools, they would be rushing to accept the case. Second, please cease the endless and pointless "us against them" mentality, which you also bring to every FAC and most talk page discussions. RFCs are not brought "against" anyone; they are brought as a routine part of Knowledge's

7048:

Florence is one of my favorite places :) The trip was good for me, not only because I really needed a break (and new shoes), but also because it has put some of what I'm reading about the early church in better perspective. I've now caught up on my watchlist and have read through the Catholic Church

6897:

Thank you so much for the update!! I need to tackle my watchlist, and will keep the Catholic Church article to last. I spent a great part of the last week marvelling at the wonders of various Catholic churches (there are no words to describe the feeling of walking on floors that are over 1600 years

5952:

I can see the confusion in my comments there - I use "FAC status" to mean "meets the FAC criteria" rather than "gets that gold star". I was quite concerned about the possibility of original research and, regardless of whether the article got promoted (I was a little suprised that it did already), the

4964:

Hi Noraft, thanks for your good attitude throughout the nomination and now! It's always a pleasure to deal with nominators who welcome feedback :) In the case of this article, there were several concerns about its comprehensiveness - that more details would be welcome to truly flesh out the article

4891:

We've had such a blizzard of comments that I'm uncertain what we have left to deal with, if anything. I've encouraged Kristin Johnson to be bold and edit the article herself if she feels there are inaccuracies or significant omissions; at least one of the books she mentions hasn't even been published

4623:

I did notice that, and I would like to comment but can't right now. SandyGeorgia and I are the FAC delegates, but she is unavailable for promotions this weekend, so I'll be doing all the promotions/archiving until next weekend. If I comment on the FAC, then I can't close it and it will be there for

4041:

It wasn't well thought out for me to invite active participants in the dispute to write a neutral notification. It was inevitable that anything either side wrote would be viewed with suspicion by the other. I should have taken the time to write something myself instead of pushing it off onto Karanac.

4005:

only found issue with that part also, and subsequently felt the need to state "rejects that proposal in favor of keeping more information in the article", which on its own would have again raised the same doubt for presumably 'the other side'. Ideally, if she'd simply raised her concern with you, I'm

3800:

I think you and I are on a very similar wavelength overall on this article, but you have the advantage of not having been involved in the last two years of "discussion". IAR is, I think, the only way to get anything done on this article in the present environment, but that can't be done successfully

3777:

You are more than welcome, although I must confess my surprise at being thanked and lauded by (two admins now) for invoking IAR. I plan to continue carrying out the changes I outlined in the talk page, and I'd appreciate any and all guidance as part of the effort to make the article smaller. I assume

3434:

that is linked to you? I do believe you may have the worst case IDidn'tHearThat I have ever encountered. I'll be participating in the ArbCom now. You Just Won't Learn: not everyone who challenges sources, neutrality or article naming is "anti-Catholic" and you and Xandar (and from what I read, now

3343:

of Wiki's policies, or do you only pick from them what suits you, as seems to happen with article sourcing arguments at Catholic Church? You also have a very fundamental misunderstanding about the role of admins on Wiki; they are no different than any other editor, until/unless they use admin tools.

2182:

archive to see if they've got anything to say in any event, and if I find anything I'll let you know. I'll sign up to do the review now, and hopefully get it done in the next day or so; you've had to wait too long already. Hopefully you'll be able to tolerate all my nit-picking suggestions, as I must

979:

Wishing you happy new year and hoping your Christmas was merry! I hope we can continue to work together on various projects on which we seem to intersect occasionally here on Knowledge. You are a very good reviewer and I appreciate your comments even though at times we have disagreed. We may disagree

224:

When I read a biography, or obit, about a person, I often wonder what the subject person would think and/or feel about what is said about them. While the BLP subjects can come back and change it in a wiki, or protest it in hard copy, the dead ones will have it, forever, as a part of what's remembered

6501:

If you want to get involved later that would be really, really helpful :) I'm only reading on the first 1000 years right now, and will have to get all those books and finish them up again later unless we get more help.... We're doing the opposite of you; Europe in two weeks and the hill country in

6429:

From what I can see on-line, McManners seems good. My local library doesn't have it, and our ILL is slow. Let me know if you get it, and I'll work at running down Norman. I'll be busy with work during the last two weeks of April into the beginning of May so my editing will slow down then. After that

5627:

This is my advice for you, if you want it. Do whatever you think is necessary to improve that article. Do not worry about anyone else. Go full speed and overhaul everything as you see fit. After you're convinced it's ready, you can even try FAC for what would undoubtedly be your crowning achievement

4984:

Also, all Elekhh's issues were answered, and the ones that weren't, he said weren't an issue for FA promotion. We had two officially support (counting me), nobody oppose, and two more say "its okay except for X or Y issue" and those issues were fixed. That tells me that consensus was clear. I'd like

4910:

Both Huston and Austin were central figures in the Texas Revolution, the likes of which gave birth to the Republic of Texas, which is -exactly- what the image commemorates. The iamge that, for some reason, you find 'inappropriate', has not been 'spammed everywhere'. The image appears on Huston's,

4130:

Well Tom didn't just declare the straw poll invalid. I believe he is also leaving the page and has now left us on our own again. That was my understanding of it. I think we're on very good grounds—per every Knowledge policy and support from a dozen established editors—to carry out these changes. See

3399:

is really surprising - I invite you to spell out for me what you think I have missed about those policies in my work on Catholic Church because it seems to me that neutral point of view for Karanacs is the one that excludes basic facts about the Church that just so happen to be positive. I think you

2917:

My feeling is that current Knowledge rules are inadequate for moderating heated talk page debates, and there is almost no way out except fatigue causing some participants to give up. I think I am going to stop watching this talk page for a while and just drop in very occasionally - reading this type

2911:

I should say that as an "outside observer" I find this discussion just unbelievable and surreal. This could not be happening.... I am not taking sides on the issue - I really do not care about this subtopic. But the types and tones of arguments presented by various sides is just amazing and makes me

2221:

written by Philippa Toomey on 19 October 1972. It's short, but it's quite complimentary. It ends: "Some of it is very funny, the characters are affectionately drawn, and there is, this time, that "bat's squeak of sexuality", an ingredient hitherto claimed to be missing from Miss Heyer; though it can

2059:

I've started reading the above. I just bought the Oxford Classics edition, thinking it would be reliable. Of course, when I received it from amazon, I discovered that it was abridged! Apparently, it is based on the "famous English" translation and abridgment, but still, I would have liked the entire

782:

Most of the concerns he listed are just linking issues, though, which would take only a few minutes to fix. I understand the prose stuff he was talking about, as I was also iffy on some of it. It's the lead though, which is a summary of the article, and it can be difficult to summarize stuff without

739:

Hey, I was wondering what the policy is if there is a single oppose to a nomination with many supports? A user opposed based solely on the lead (most concerns being merely overlinking), and when I tried to address his concerns, he started getting snappy and changed to "strongly oppose". Right now he

72:

message to him after he put up his article for featured status for the second time in a week or so. Your message of course was perfectly all right and was actually good advice. He does though feel a little peeved about it and has retired from wikipedia. I hope you don't mind me asking but, as he's a

6331:

I'm ready to begin rewriting the Middle Ages section. The first sentence in the section is chronologically misplaced, as the conversion to Arianism occured in the 3rd century before the fall of Rome, so it seems that an entire re-draft is necessary. What would be best: to begin my own version in my

5025:

Up until lately there were no portraits of either Houston or Austin on the Tex'Rev page, just Santa Anna, the man who was defeated by Houston, et al. As for the image of the Alamo being graphically correct for the time period, it was my understanding that it was the way the Alamo originally looked

4856:... because I reverted it as soon as I saw it. I'm not sure Moni3 is happy with the way the article has developed over the last day or so, particularly the pruning that's taken place. Personally I think it's quite a bit tighter now than it was, but I tend to be fairly brutal in cutting to the bone. 3375:

on discussion. When these types of comments are aimed at me (even when you don't go so far as to use my name), I'll continue to call them out, as I am an eternal optimist and hope that you will some day figure out either a) the difference between editing as an editor and editing as an admin and/or

2723:

Obviously, it is one of those, but I don't understand why? Neither one is really involved. Ruhrfisch made some minor edits prior to supporting, but in the grand scheme of the thousands of edits to get this to where it is neither has done much. Ruhrfisch has 9 of the 3445 edits and Hunter has 17,

266:

Technically, isn't heart failure the cause of every death? Many events and people's lives are not well-documented, so historians can only speculate on the cause of death or on other details that have become important in retrospect. This is why "probably" is useful, even in an encyclopedia, but only

239:

I'm sorry, but I don't really see how this information is gratuitous. Many, many biographies discuss the health matters of the subjects. It is not a secret that cigarette cause lung cancer, and we have a source which makes the connection in this case. The article makes no judgement on whether the

7091:

I'm not surprised at all at the potential plagiarism issues (I caught a few, from other sources, a while back - I do not believe that Nancy truly understood what that meant, at least in the beginning of her work on this article). From your analysis, and the selected quotes, I don't think I would

6674:

No, I didn't. You must have commented as I was reading through the FAC (and I usually don't refresh once I've started my run-through). Can you please work with Maria to get those issues resolved? She's pretty good at following up with issues, but if you don't feel satisfied, let me know and I'll

6487:

Just to let you both know that I have Bokenkotter, McManners, Duffy, and a bunch of others if you need backstopping later in the article creation process. Can't really get too involved as we leave for Texas (Scarborough ren faire and the hill country wildflowers) in a bit under two weeks, and then

6444:

Alrighty, I'll get McManners when I come back then. I'd like to have something to present on the Early Christianity section in May. I think that (my version of) this section is pretty close anyway, I just don't want it to rely so heavily on Bokenkotter, and, of course, it needs to be shortened.

5812:

Then I'll take Brent. Even if he's not quite as wonderful as Harmakheru thinks, he should lead to the recent literature. Tomorrow, however, I'll see if I can check Bodenkotter on the web; I am curious whether the business about Rome being the capital of the Western Roman Empire was his, or whether

5336:

No rush. Just a nudge. Slow and steady wins the race. (I watchlist everything too, so feel free to indulge in extended mumblings here, if you want to keep the RfC talkpage readably-short! I want to give more context&musings throughout (and keep writing-then-deleting paragraphs), but I'm trying

4359:

You've been following this more closely than I. Just keeping current on the article talk page has been a challenge lately! I don't see that the Mattisse and Catholic Church stuff should necessarily be intermingled - the only connection I really see is that a subset of the same people were involved

3344:

Perhaps you don't understand that Arbs are asking for admins to get involved so that, for example, the next time someone like you attacks Karanacs' good faith, they can be blocked. That is what admins do. Please read some Wiki policies, learn your way around here, and understand how Wiki works.

850:

Since I participated in the review, I won't be closing this one. SandyGeorgia generally does her pass through FAC on the weekend, so you should have the rest of the week to take any action. I don't think I have time right now to take a further look at this one (sorry!). On my last read I thought

173:

article. The statement, "Three months later, she was diagnosed with lung cancer, probably caused by the 60–80 cork-tipped cigarettes that she smoked each day (although she claimed not to inhale)" is not a clinical cause of death. If this is stated this way in the reference you cite (which I cannot

7032:

article, and I believe more can be cut to achieve a good summary, but expect some protests against the cuts. Am in the Reformation in my reading and believe that section needs a re-work, but will wait until the dust settles. Am trying to tie up loose ends before I disappear into work for the next

5248:

needs for FA. Basically from the standpoint of how educational the article is I am pretty happy with it so I don't have high motivation to spend a lot more time on it. But if the effort to get it to FA is straightforward I thought perhaps it might be worth the trouble. Not having gone through the

4458:. I had requested for comment from one of the users, however that person placed a support, prompting another user to say that I was CANVASSING, which was not my intention at all. Hence I striked out that support, is it fine? Please reply as I don't want the FAC to be not promoted because of that. 767:

An FAC can be archived if there is a single oppose and multiple supports, provided the oppose is actionable. An FAC can also be promoted even if there is unstruck opposition, provided the opposition is not actionable or the nominator has provided a convincing rebuttal of why those changes aren't

7049:

talk page and archives, although I haven't read through the article to see what's been changed. I'll be digging back into McCulloch later today, and will check on your sandbox later. You have been incredibly productive - I probably won't be able to match that output level! Good luck with work.

5797:

would probably be useful. I don't know if I'll be able to get Brent's most recent through ILL as my library won't/can't order any that are under a year old; I can order Norman, but likely won't have time to look through it before May. The structure/hiearchy/membership information needs severe

4979:

The sourcing issues were all taken care of, and all the reviewers that had sourcing concerns said so, except one person who said the article was in good shape except for one source ("Everything fixed except Baidu Baike, but I'm afraid I can't support that being used as a source at FA level."). I

4107:

I just read Tom's posts at ANI and the article talk page, and I think you are misinterpreting. He appears to be declaring the straw poll invalid because Nancy and Xandar are blocked, not declaring that any set of arguments has prevailed. I suspect your changes will be reverted immediately when

4010:

at its worst, and was also later correctly removed and blocked (though not necessarily blocked for that, or that alone). Anyway, before I digress with this little chit chat, I will emphasise for clarity's sake that this is my view, and you (or others) may reasonably disagree, even in part. But I

3505:

The nomination had been open more than two weeks and didn't have any supports. It also had one oppose, with the reviewer commenting that it would take significant work to deal with her concerns. Added to that, there was so much text on the nomination page that other reviewers were likely to be

7108:

Yes, I agree. Currently I'm reading about the Reformation, and when things slow down a bit for me next week, I'll begin making notes. I'm inclined to return Norman to the library. What's to be done about the close paraphrasing/plagiarism? Cite it to Norman while I have the book and then replace

6044:

You already pulled a Moni last time! I've got a thick skin, and my AGF-meter is pretty big. It's only recently that the AGF-meter has started getting full and my temper has started fraying. I'm Cajun - it's reaallllly important that I hold on to my temper or I could throw a hissy fit of such

5623:

Because you have far more experience with featured articles than I do, it would be a better idea if you did this by yourself. I know that's a very daunting task, but I can't imagine anyone more qualified. Additionally, I'm concerned about my biases. I'm an atheist and my opinion of the Catholic

5000:

Nominator support doesn't count - all nominators think their article meets the criteria or they wouldn't nominate! A lack of official opposes does not really matter - the key is a lack of supports, and this article did not have enough supports to show a consensus for promotion, yet had several

4926:

I've seen that image pop up all over my watchlist in the last few days, in articles that it really doesn't relate to closely enough. A more appropriate picture for Texas Revolution would be pictures of the battles, pictures of the battle flags, and individual pictures of Houston and Austin. A

4374:

The questions about the intermingling are because Wehwalt has raised a familiar theme in both cases, and re-raised and re-raised them, keeping the issues alive even after they were put to rest. Either he knows something no one else knows, or he's stirring the pot, or I don't know what, but the

3542:

I'm sorry, Susan, I don't understand your most recent comment. I have not read the article in question, and as I was not acting as a reviewer, my job is only to look at what had been written on the nomination thus far, and to judge whether I thought the article could meet the promotion criteria

3300:

Nancy, one wearies of reading your misrepresentations. First, Karanacs has not acted as an admin on the Catholic Church, nor has she acted as FAC delegate. She is another editor, just like you. The evidence for this is that, if ArbCom saw any indication that Karanacs had abused of either her

2937:

I think it would probably be best if you left this note as a statement on the Arb request page, as it is actually very relevant to the case. If the case is accepted, then your name would mostly likely be removed - the arbitrators and clerks often shuffle that once they've read the statements.

2075:

I hope you like the book anyway - even an abridged version should be pretty long and involved ;) I enjoy the French authors of this time period more than their British counterparts, and this is my favorite of those. It's been a year or two since I read it - I may have to go find it when I get

1081:

Andy explained that pretty well. Considering that it has been weeks since the first nomination was archived and a new nomination has already been opened, I fail to see why this is really relevant right now. It's time to move on, focus on your current nomination, and in the future, phrase your

6881:

is finished and I've started to work on some of the suggestions from the review. I've copyedited slightly, even with the knowledge that substantial changes may still be incorporated, using the logic that the article should be as clean as it can for now. I've also added a few images, per the GA

5650:

One other thing: you seemed concerned in my talk page that "bad things" would start happening to this article. I don't think you have anything to worry about. I've dealt with far worse on Knowledge. If you think the fights over this article were tough, try Michael Jackson back in 2007, when

2090:

I'm already confused! I'm trying to read without consulting the footnotes, as it was awfully troublesome to keep flipping to the back of the book (what is wrong with the bottom of the page!?). I may succumb to reading the "List of historical characters", though. It reminded me of some awful

2547:

I don't have the time or mental energy at the moment to go to the next step of dispute resolution (you may have noticed I haven't been dropping by that page as frequently). If you or someone else wants to start it I'll present evidence, but I'm not going to be the point person right now.

5798:

revamping in the article but I'm not sure if we've even identified the right books to read yet. Honestly, I think there is soooo much reading that needs to be done in general to turn this into a decent article that you can probably pick whatever interests you and we'll work from there.

3133:

Thank you for your work thus far on the above draft RFC. I think it's about time we move to the community discussion phase. The proponents for and against outlines can argue until they are blue in the face, but what we really need is disinterested community opinion on this. Thanks,

2446:

Just a note to say that due to computer breakdown my access will be very limited for a few days, and I may not be able to reply immediately to further issues raised by reviewers. There are no problems at the moment - 7 supports, no opposes - but I am waiting for an image review.

1522:

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I haven't forgotten that I promised to help. I got sucked into the latest BLP controversy and have spent the last few days rescuing older articles in danger of deletion. I'll get back to you next week. Karanacs (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2010

5597:

Hi. I sent you an email on Friday (this notice just in case your emailuser directs to an irregularly checked gmail or similar ;) I do see that you're working hard on an arbcom case; perhaps the outlines can be your distraction and mental-cleanser from that? ;) Talk soon. --

5827:

I just checked Bokenkotter, and on page 36 his book says that Rome was the capital of the Roman Empire. He was speaking of the early days of Christianity, before the East/West split. I think Milan became capital of the Western Roman Empire in the late 3rd century, right?

3523:

Yes, I will try again later. But I suspect that only one commenter (who was the oppose vote) is sometimes not enough. And now I have to wonder about what you think: "I didn't think leaving the nom open would help the article's chances." because you didn't comment. Probably

2581:

It had been up for about three weeks with no support, and that's usually the cutoff. Since you'd resolved the feedback you'd already gotten, it's fine if you want to nominate a different article quickly, but for this one you should wait a few weeks per the guidelines.

2162:

that states that her books were never reviewed in a serious newspaper. I will go add that to the article, now that I've thought about it. Or, if you think that the article can't be comprehensive without such a section, I can just withdraw the nomination. Thanks!

4668:

with an eye toward possible FA nomination. That one I believe will be more challenging to get passed (i.e. I probably don't have the skill set to get it through without a co-author). But, IMHO, it is one of the single most important aspects of the state's history.

1394: 4300:

The section is misnamed (that's on my list to fix). It's actually the full sources for the short references listed in the References section. All of the books in the list were at one time used as references in the article, just not removed if the text changed.

2157:

I appreciate you taking a preliminary look. I haven't been able to find anything about the reception. Even today, romances novels generally do not get reviewed, and 40 years ago it was even rarer. I actually found a source when I was writing the article on

2756:

Given Tony's concerns, and the fact that this is the 4th nomination for the article, I would like to see at least one more support from someone completely independent. Sandy, of course, may have different criteria when she goes through the list this weekend.

4863:

has lost 6kB of readable prose, down from 67 to 61kB, and is now 10,599 readable words. I think we could probably get it closer to 10,500 words, but under 10,000 might be a struggle. What's your view? Are we making the article better or worse do you think?

2367:

The article just got a rewrite yesterday. I just asked the opposing reviewers to re-read it to see if their issues had been addressed. I was expecting until the 15th to get them to look at it again. Can you unarchive it to allow them a chance to review the

1359:

Thank you for posting, Sandy...it made me realize that today is Tuesday. Which means I'm supposed to be promoting/archiving today. I have an insane number of appointments/meetings/errands today, but I'll get through as much as I can later this afternoon.

3111: 1475:

I'm waiting on a second image review. Zscout is new to images, and until he has a bit more experience, we are trying to have dual coverage for articles with a lot of images. You guys have done a great job so far - I fully expect this to be promoted soon.

3173:

I don't think that the Navigational pages draft is going to be specific enough to be helpful. I did a bit of copyediting and am happy with the Outline RfC draft and would support moving this to WP-space somewhere and opening the RfC. What do you think?

2383:

It's rare to have FACs unarchived, and we generally do not do that if there were outstanding opposes. You're welcome to bring this back in a few weeks when you are satisfied that the opposition has been addressed (and your other FAC has been promoted).

2978:

Please note that there is a 500 word limit on the request for arbitration page. That includes your initial statement and replies to others. Yours currently stands at close to 800. Please shorten it so it is below 500 words as soon as possible. Regards,

980:

again in the future but I hope that will not stain our Knowledge friendship. My most treasured friends are those who are not afraid to tell me exactly what they think and are not offended when I do the same. Honesty is an important element in a friend.

2819:

Every concern has been resolved. I wouldn't count Fuchs' lone oppose vote, which began with "Overall, a very good article its contributors should be proud of", as "serious opposition". Sorry to seem difficult, but could you elaborate on what you mean?

5732:

I was sorry to have to archive it, although the main reason was the lack of comments in general. I'll try my hand at a copyedit soon, but it may be wise to find someone else to help out too. Tony1 didn't approve of the prose on my last FAC either!

4911:

Austin's and one of the Alamo pages where it is well placed. Why is there no image of Huston or Austin on the Texas Revolution page, all the while there is one of Santa Anna?? Can you offer a legitmate reason why the image is not 'appropriate'?

5582:

I completely missed the last bump on this - sorry! My talk page gets a lot of traffic sometimes and I don't always notice new messages in the middle. I've noticed that there has been action on this recently, and it's on my list of things to do!

4624:

a while. If it isn't ready for promotion/archive by the end of this week, then I will put my reviewer hat on and leave comments, as Sandy could take care of the closing next week. I'm sorry that I haven't been able to be more help with this one!

3390:

Sandy, your entire thread is a personal attack followed by a threat. I know what dispute resolution is, I know that Karanacs completely skipped several steps before taking it to arbcom. Your assumption that I don't know Knowledge policies such as

2105:

I have a weakness for pre-1800 British and French royalty, so I was already fairly familiar with the history. I can see how it might be confusing if you don't have that background knowledge. Last time I read this novel I was inspired to pick up

225:

about them. Thank you for the revision you did make. However, I still feel that the biographer should be ashamed of themselves for making such a gratuitous statement about their subject and, that Knowledge should feel ashamed for repeating it. --

7027:

I was in England at Christmas didn't miss Knowledge while I was gone, so take your time. Savour the memories. Florence is one of the more gorgeous place I've visited, and I am envious of you. I've just cut out material that is duplicated in the

3017:

500 words is ample. As this case is likely to attract a lot of commentators, it's especially important to enforce the word count. Should you require more words, you can create a page in your userspace and link to it on the main arbitration page.

1063: 1059: 5751:

FYI: Ruhrfish helped big time in rewroking Free State. Ruhrfish recommended someone else do a final once over to check for any mistakes. If you still have an interest feel free to take a look. I guess I'll plan to put it up for FA again soon.

810:

Karanacs is recused from closing that FAC, because she entered a declaration; it is in my ballpark. Her comments about Tony's oppose above are correct; you should examine the rest of the article for similar issues, and ask Tony to revisit.

4551:

Let us know when you think you would like the article at FAC. Either it will languish at GAN for so long you'll be back from your break in time for FAC, or we can cut the PR short and take it to FAC with enough time for you to participate.

3486:. But I wondered why you closed it. The article received reviews for links, images and sources, but only one person commented on the content. I don't think this needs to be reopened, but I would like to understand your process. Thank you. - 5420:

The main objection to just addressing the "Outlines" alone, is that any decision will have ramifications for the other "navigational pages". The decision will be used as precedent, or the thin edge of a wedge. E.g. Dbachmann believes that

1123:

Go right ahead. I've found it especially useful for tracking the reviews that I have done, so I know whether to revisit or not. I haven't maintained it as well for the closures I've done - I need to update that so I can track patterns.

6902:

during my flight that quoted him a great deal, and was hopeful that it would be a good source. I'll work my way through the talk page soon, and if all goes well, I'll be back at my books tomorrow! Good luck resolving your busy period.

1679:

Karanacs, I just posted at Sandy's talk page; I won't repeat that post here but of course I'm curious to get your reaction to the sandbox too. You had said you were "intrigued" by the marker idea; what do you think of this approach?

5842:

I think the issue PMA mentions (Rome being capital) was a bit of an editing mash. I think that paragraph of the article originally meant the early Church, and then stuff about Constantine was added, making the time frame less clear.

3559:

Karanacs, I'm replying because your edit summary said that you're confused. I wondered why the nomination was closed. (That's what I came here to ask.) Now I understand what that step is (it's your call, your decision). Best wishes,

142:

of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank

3276:

I didn't name names. There was no personal attack there but since you are bringing it up, yes, I think that your efforts to have me banned through an RFA and an Arbcom brought encouragement to those who most needed instruction in

4605:). I know you've been busy but if you still have an interest in the topic I thought you might want to comment. There has not been a lot of discussion except for one reviewer who appears to feel that it is hopelessly flawed. :-( 3088: 5352:

It's on my list of things to do. I'm working my way down the talk page now. If I can't find time this weekend (I'm usually offline on the weekends), I'll look in Monday. Thank you very much for taking so much initiative.

2570:

I felt it was too early to archive, I was replying or fixing to each concern, and I had spoke to a couple of editors who said they were going to review the article by this thursday. Can I get a second chance please. Thanks

3196:

Hi Karanacs, could you not shut this down for a while as Anon Diss and Laser brain have agreed to take a look at it. I am a bit surprised as I prepared normally like the other FACs and am trying tow ork through the issue

2782: 2316:) I never got any replies on the FAC, and definitely not on the thread in question. Its been almost ten days and nothing has changed. His oppose just sits there. Is there any actual way to pry him to review his review? 999:

Thank you, Nancy. I had wanted to leave a similar message on your talk page but was unsure if that would be welcome. I hope that you and your family had a wonderful holiday, and I look forward to a productive 2010.

189:

This is actually what the source says. I don't agree that the existing text is presenting this as "a clinical cause of death", but I'll add some attribution there to ensure that there isn't unnecessary confusion.

5081:

No problem. I know there has been a backlog at the 3rr noticeboard off-and-on lately, it's just not a place I usually hang out. This was pretty straightforward, at least. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

783:

making it unreadable to non-fans. Do you mind looking at his concerns listed and seeing if you think another copy-edit is needed for it? If so, can the nomination be held open while a copy-edit is done? Thanks.

1782:(ec) How funny, that we had the same idea at the same time. Go ahead and leave yours - the mentors can decide how to handle it. It will be another good test case for making sure the alerts page runs smoothly. 6689:

This will be taken care of quickly. Because the oppose vote was not factored into the final FAC decision, may I move hamiltonstone's comments to the talk page? This would allow for further discussion, etc.

2335:

Hi there Karanacs. It's now the bottom FAC and I've expanded the politics section and explained by it shouldn't be expanded further, and so have some other folks, but haven't been able to elicit a reply from

1298:

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.

5046: 3815:

Is anyone working on shortening it yet, ala Marskell's old suggestions? Has anyone reposted that to talk for the benefit of newcomers (it's somewhere in archives, posted by me) ... I can't bear to look.

2783: 5894:

made Milan (and Rome) unsafe. Milan was the center of power in the West from Diocletian to Honorius; that's why Saint Ambrose was in a position to excommunicate an Emperor - he was bishop of the capital.

5655:

Knowledge for their myopic ends, and you know who I'm talking about, will always fail in the end. That's been one of my most important guiding principles through the years, no matter how intimidating the

4225:

You don't have real problems until someone puts one of this big ugly copvio tags on one of *your* articles, after you carefully summarized info in a way that you were quite proud of !! Keep smiling :)

2177:

No, don't withdraw it. I did wonder whether the reason might be that Heyer's books weren't generally reviewed by the critics, so just making that clear would resolve that issue. I'll have a look through

1189: 877:. Tony has also not responded to the FAC in a few days. Since I have responded to all of his concerns (either fixing them or arguing against them), what happens if he never responds before this weekend? 566:

Sorry for the delay, but I promise I didn't forget you! Sandy won't be doing promotions again until Saturday, so I wasn't in as much hurry as I should have been. I'll try to look at it today/tomorrow.

297:

I think today it's usually lack of brain activity that signals death, but hey, that would mean we live a world of zombies. More seriously, doctors have struggled for thousands of years to even determine

2607: 1304: 5332:

I'd also really like to get some more general-feedback from you - what is still unclear in the draft-notes (oversimplified vs still-too-complicated)? and what our next steps and next topics should be?

131: 6413:

from another branch of my library. Both will have to wait until May (going on vacation a week from Saturday, woohoo!). Any preference on which might be better (or that you don't have access to)?

3106: 2799: 6898:

old), which will hopefully be just the motivation I need to start working on this again in earnest. I am disappointed to hear that you have a poor opinion of Norman so far; I read an article in

1436: 6409:

arrived yesterday, so I'm going to try to get through his coverage of the first 1000 years before going back to Bokenkotter. After that, I can either order Norman through ILL or get McManners'

6387:

Yes, I agree. The only pressure is to get the books read and notes taken before library fines become too steep! Once the material is captured in a subpage it can be moved slowly to the article.

6843: 1293: 4602: 1451: 873:

Judging by Tony's attitude, I doubt he'd count Peregrine Fisher as a copy-edit since he's already looked through the article. I contacted Masem, but he has not replied, so I think I will ask

535: 204:

Thank you for your response. The term "caused by" is leading enough; and the word "probably" simply does not belong in an encyclopedia. At any rate, why is this statement even necessary? --

5549:

Happy new year! If you could give this thread a re-read, in the next couple of weeks perhaps, and let me know some of your thoughts/suspicions/inklings/leanings/etc, that'd be great. :) --

2362: 1937:, but this is an extremely controversial change, and I'm going to revert all of the pages you've updated recently. The next step in the process is discuss, and I will open up a section at 6656: 6516:

I'll spend my time reading and bringing myself up to speed now until I get too busy in May. The summer is starting to stack up too, so it's helpful having Ealdgyth as a backstop. Thanks!

4854: 3721:

If I'm just curious about the discussion that took place about a specific TFA, is there an archive for that? I don't seem to be finding one. Do I just have to look through the history of

1447: 138: 3903:

I'm sorry that Xandar is dragging you through the mud when you did nothing wrong. I regret getting myself involved with this article, but now that I am, I'll stick with it until the end.

5267:

I'll be happy to do a pre-FAC review for you (which, of course, means I'll recuse myself when/if it's eventually brought to FAC). It may take a few days...I'm in the middle of writing

2897: 534:

Hi, I know that FAC stuff is generally supposed to stay on the nomination pages, but the nomination is already 14 days old and could end soon. A week ago you posted comments on the FAC

3121: 5567:, incorporating some of the above ideas, and the previous working notes. Hopefully that can provide the basis for some further dialogue. Let us know what you're thinking. Thanks. -- 2563: 3159:(the other rfc) is as clear/complete as I can make it. Getting more input/assistance there, from yourself and any other interested/informed/polite editors would be great. Thanks. -- 6576: 6568: 6560: 6554: 5628:

on Knowledge. It's difficult to know who to trust with this article. To say nothing of the others, I don't even trust myself, so I know things will go well in your hands. Good luck.

5529: 5494:

I believe options 2, 4, and 5, have the least drawbacks, whilst still differentiating Navigation vs Article. Option 4 seems ideal to me, at the moment. (I won't elaborate for now).

5315: 3127: 2973: 2912:

wonder if "any" progress can be made in this type of atmosphere. I would strongly suggest to all sides to calm down and be more focused, but I doubt it will work in this atmosphere.

2328: 4166:

I'm unwatching the article (at least, that is, until another talk page attack on one of us pops up). I don't know how you do it, Karanacs, but my hat's off to you. Keep trying!

5474: 3483: 6855: 6851: 6844: 6365:

I think that is the best idea. My plan is to present these on the talk page section by section. If we try to do too much at once I think it may be difficult to get consensus.

2231: 3757:

Only about thirty percent of TFA's pass through TFA/R, the rest are chosen by Raul. Since he does this on his own, there is no discussion to refer you to. Hope this helps.--

3613: 2990: 2405: 1338: 2377: 155: 5872:

Apparently Ravenna was the center of power after Constantine (according to Bauer). The draft looks good. I'm reading Bauer, Bokenkotter and McBrien at the moment. Notes are

2303: 1326: 6579:

during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.

6921:

is gone, Moni is still mostly MIA, Eubulides is gone, Ealdgyth is out. Malleus is up and down ... and it's been hard to hold FAC under 40, with such a lack of reviewers!

4001:, I did wonder (even perhaps doubt) its neutrality. I don't think there would've been any doubt if the words "and shorten" had been omitted. I believe the editor who made 3946:

Apparently - I thought Tom was offline and filed an edit-warring report, and YellowMonkey picked it up before Tom mentioned the page protection. We'll see if it sticks.

6867: 4455: 3097: 3090: 3074:

For the heads up. Its been a couple of months since I edited the article, so I'll have to read up on talk drama between users since then before I can give an opinion. -

2357: 2643:

Since I promote next, I'd help out here, except for that big pink edit message ... "If you want me to look at an article or a FAC, please provide all relevant links."

6877:

Hi Karanacs. Hope you had a wonderful time away! I'm leaving you an update so you don't have to trawl through history to see what's been done during your absence. The

6214:

Last time we went to Europe, ya'll had a heat wave ... 35C in Vienna and higher. I expect by the time we get there in a month and a half we'll bring the heat with us.

4927:

stylized stamp - which has an incorrect silhouette (for the time frame) of the Alamo anyway - isn't as appropriate as many others would be. 23:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

2564: 6604: 6059:

ah, chocolate ... so that's what I'm missing !! I can pull a pretty mean hissy fit in Spanish :) Hang in there, Karanacs ... don't want you to lose your sainthood!

3968:. I chose the version with your last edit. Feel free to carry out any changes there if you want to. After it's done I'll present it to Tom and we'll see what happens. 6552: 5484: 3673: 3586: 2329: 2199:- I don't have good access to a lot of British sources. I'm also thrilled that you'll be taking on the review - your advice always helps make my articles better :) 2195:

I added a very short section on publication and reception with some general info about Heyer's books. I would very much appreciate a search through the archives of

4415:

If you'd ever heard me sing you wouldn't doubt that this was necessary!! It's an assault on all mankind ;) Thanks for bringing that to my attention - I'll fix it.

2575: 2323: 2874: 1799:

has removed the duplicate. If there is any information in the second alert that would be useful to retain, feel free to let us know. Thanks both for raising this.

5325:

I'm wondering whether it's time to ask/remind people for wider input? Whether we choose some of the other admins who've previously expressed concerns, or archive

1374:

You could leave a note for Gimmtrow, and defer 'til tomorrow. We've now got to sort the image reviews and re-add those needed (unstrike on the list at WT:FAC).

3367:, and I'm getting very tired of explaining it to you. For the last time, dispute resolution is for resolving disputes. Making snarky comments in an attempt to 3029: 2961: 2927: 1454:, I assume there are still issues that need to be addressed. I will be glad to fix whatever still needs to be fixed. Thanks in advance and sorry to bother you, 2246:

I just sent you an email so you'll have my address. I would appreciate a scan, if you don't mind. I'll be working on the other things you've identified soon.

1581: 1546: 1030: 5372: 4899: 6938:

I'm still a week behind on my watchlist. Funnily enough, I didn't miss WP even once while I was gone...but here I am again anyway. Thanks for the update.

1206:

Thanks for the invite, but as an FAC delegate I don't get to review very much anymore. If it gets to the bottom of the list I'll try to dive in. Good luck!

6000: 3012: 959:

Those aren't the most common guidelines, and a lot of people don't know they exist. Thanks for helping with the article, and gig 'em right back at you :)

240:

smoking is morally wrong or not, just states the conclusion of the biographer. (Note also that the biography in this case was authorized by Heyer's son.)

3309:

read that page, as there has been no indication that you ever have. It would be helpful if you would say "RFC on me" instead of "RFC against me". Third,

851:

the episode list was very well-done, and I remember thinking in my first read-through that the section on Writing needed some work. I'd recommend asking

682: 649: 625: 6810: 6016: 4871: 2859: 2844: 2830: 2814: 6360: 5096:

Yes, I thought it was a nice and straightforward case; I'm not so mischievous as to drop a complicated one in your lap out of the blue! Thanks again,

3059: 3043: 2957: 2923: 922: 1705: 6320: 6222: 6181: 5222: 5208: 5194: 4238: 4064: 3294: 2704: 2672: 2655: 2513: 2287: 2255: 2241: 2208: 2190: 2172: 596: 505: 491: 479: 435: 6824: 5946: 5694: 5167: 1834: 1823: 1777: 1717: 5933:, but I was a bit dismayed that I was the only person to leave her a personal message at her user talk page and that you seemed more interested in 5920: 5789:

That depends on whether you would like to concentrate on history or the other sections. If it's history, I think one of us needs to read Norman's

4178: 3710: 3465: 3452:

That's fine Sandy, I think it is good to "get it all out". I want the opportunity to respond to your accusations so why not have your say as well.

3447: 3356: 1732: 7118: 7101: 7086: 7072: 7058: 6912: 6725: 6711: 6684: 6525: 6454: 6439: 6422: 6396: 6374: 5885: 4920: 4424: 4324: 4310: 2432: 2393: 496:

I knew you were smart ;) Yes, "hawt" is a funky version of "hot". When a woman is "hawt" it makes it much easier for her husband to sell her ;)

408: 368: 330: 249: 234: 213: 199: 7009: 6995: 6978: 6964: 6947: 6933: 6271: 6085: 6071: 6054: 5672: 5076: 4501: 4387: 4369: 4217: 4200: 3887: 3873: 3856: 3828: 3268: 3000:

frequently allowed, and this case is much too complex to summarize in 500 words. (I've suggested that NancyHeise reduce her 1500 words to 800.)

2766: 2751: 2718: 2474: 1805: 1621: 1386: 1369: 1317:

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.

5170:? I know Kristin thinks the second clause is redundant, but (per the argument on the talk page and my edit summary when I initially put it back 4849: 4484: 4035: 2965: 2947: 1957:

LlywelynII, you are wrong. "Texas Revolution" is the conventional form and you were wrong to have moved the page without a proper discussion. --

1791: 5904: 5837: 5822: 5807: 5105: 5091: 4161: 4147: 4117: 3984: 3955: 3810: 3569: 3552: 3537: 3417: 3385: 2557: 1966: 1950: 1743: 1288: 1091: 1009: 823: 762: 734: 174:

easily verify /s a trip to a library) then you are quoting someone else's speculation. This type of thing has no place in an encyclopedia. ---

124: 102: 5867: 5849: 5156: 1505: 1485: 968: 6859: 6642: 6511: 6496: 6145: 6111: 6098: 5990: 5976: 5962: 5761: 5742: 5607: 5592: 5406: 5384: 5362: 5298: 5280: 5035: 4877: 4744: 4727: 4678: 4651: 4633: 4152:

I agree with you that policy - and consensus - favors a change, but I worry that the process is going to lead to increased strife next week.

3661: 3183: 2123: 2100: 2085: 1450:, i.e. what issues remain unresolved with the FAC? I was under the impression that all outstanding issues had been resolved, but having seen 1215: 6744:, since Gimmebot is not currently doing its job, I've stepped up to manually do its job. I've already gotten started on your latest pr/ar. - 5541: 5523: 5261: 5119: 6800: 6786: 6770: 6001: 5981:

No need to apologize! I obviously need to pay more attention to what I'm typing, and I'm glad to get that nudge from someone I respect :)

5067:

Thanks! Many apologies for disturbing you; you were a first familiar face I saw around who possessed the requisite buttons. Best wishes!

5010: 4995: 4974: 3722: 2591: 1810:

Nah, it's all good. Karanacs caught the spirit of what I was trying to say, and probably more elegantly. She just owes me a Coke is all. --

1153: 1133: 899: 868: 805: 777: 576: 4958: 4075:

Tom just said the straw poll is over. We had 65% support. Those are very good numbers for change (almost to override a presidential veto).

3766: 1687: 276: 6983:

I hope you had gelato at Biboli in Firenze! (I got horrific food poisoning from a corner store when I lived in Italy-- wanted to die.)

4892:

here in the UK yet. I'm not sure I'd have been so keen to start on this if I'd had an inkling of what a trouble it would be ... ah well.

4841: 3652:

Thank you for the invitation to run, but I don't have the time to be more involved - and I think you guys are already going a great job!

3168: 2460: 2042: 1711: 1173: 717: 4939: 3402:" I'm growing tired of seeing your attacks on Karanacs' good faith, and may consider adding my input to the ArbCom if they don't cease." 2313: 183: 7042: 6891: 5564: 4905: 4580: 4545: 4007: 3156: 3142: 6969:

Absolutely! We spit in the eye of the volcanic ash cloud and made it to our destination anyway, and I got to eat gelato every day :)

5644: 5171: 6755: 6026:

Somebody better whack me before I pull a Moni ... I swear, you are Saint Karanacs!! I don't know how you've done it for so long ...

5397:

I've written a draft of how I envision the RfC, although I think more work needs to be given to the arguments. Open for feedback :)

1562:

has been reviewed and the hook would need shortened slightly before promotion can take place. Any questions feel free to ask. Kindly

953: 560: 397:

Foxy lady. Articles without inline citations are really hard work though. I've been struggling on and off for over a year now to get

1558: 934: 5794: 5233: 4285:

I thought the point of Further reading was that it _wasn't_ directly used in the article, as opposed to References and Footnotes?--

2151: 4561: 4530: 4002: 3998: 2938:

Please note that I did not include you based on any accusation of poor behavior, but solely because you had been active recently.

2498: 5437: 5132: 4272: 4091: 3940: 3919: 3861:

I posted important excerpts once on the article talk page, that summarized his points ... they should be somewhere in archives.

3794: 3333:, that has poisoned the environment at Catholic Church and prevents anyone from engaging there to improve the article. Have you 3126: 6341: 4444: 4294: 1594:

Hey, Karen; I got busy on something and couldn't stop :) I'll pr/ar tomorrow: maybe you can defer 'til Wednesday or Thursday?

4807:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 4469: 3214: 2008:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 1880: 1254:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 6668: 5783: 5443:

Rather than a "Support/Oppose" division, and rather than just covering Outlines, I was hoping/envisioning that an RfC would:

2931: 2417: 1927: 1890:

There's a discussion page, but I'll just note this here so we can skip the edit war. You are quite right that many historians

1540: 1045: 82: 7063:

I don't have time to comment at the moment, but speaking of sources, have you found what I wrote about Norman in my sandbox?

5020: 4823:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

3249: 2907:

Hi, I lost interest in that article a day or two ago. I have already written to the other participants on one of the issues:

2234:, but I'm not certain you'll be able to access it from the US. If you can't, I can take a screen shot and email it to you. -- 2024:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

1655: 1432: 1353: 1270:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

6627: 3692: 993: 613:

and no one has yet taken the bait. (PS, unsure if I'll go through on Sat or Sunday this weekend, but it won't be sooner.)

6302: 6038: 5726: 4518: 4353: 2069: 3231: 2541: 1412:

has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath

6735: 6704: 5061: 4766: 3601: 2922:

Therefore, please remove me from the arbitration issues since I think that talk page is just a headache at best. Thanks.

2637: 1606: 740:

is demanding a fourth copyedit, though I would highly disagree that it's needed based on the concerns he listed. Thanks.

529: 421: 6430:

life gets crazy—children (?) home from college and out of high school, etc.—so am trying to do as much as possible now.

5576: 5558: 5507: 5346: 4046: 1759: 5858:. It relies way too much on Bokenkotter right now, because that is what I'm currently reading. Any help is welcome... 4713: 4696: 4020: 2734: 2687: 2620: 1991: 1237: 1221: 1117: 73:

young lad and a very good article writer I wonder if you could leave a little message of encouragement to him. Thanks.

3751: 3260: 1395:

DYK nomination of Needs inline citation for sentence (I think, I just started helping to try and clear out the backlog

68:. He is a young lad who has written a number of historical articles, very good ones in my opinion. You recently left 64:

Hello, karanacs and a Happy New Year to you. You don't know me but I've come to ask you for a small favour concerning

6838: 4945: 4790: 4617: 4512: 4409: 3495: 3083: 2438: 1746:

right after you did yours. Weird. Anyway, do you think I should remove mine since yours is substantively the same? --

1674: 1666: 1469: 1023: 5430: 4205:

Which reminds me ... I was actually trying to work on a Ven article yesterday when the latest nastiness popped up!

1075: 5618: 4716: 4642:

No worries. At least the feedback I've gotten is helping to improve the article which is what is most important. --

3646: 3515: 3034:

Dr PDAs script had told me I was at 500 words, but I guess that was wrong. Thanks for the heads up - I'll fix it.

2738: 2691: 2624: 1200: 939: 917: 69: 5934: 5181: 4375:

question exists as to why he is doing this. I'm keeping track of the side issues so you can edit the article !!

2404:

I missed the bit about having to wait two weeks after a FAC has been archived to bring up another and I nominated

5146: 4706: 4338: 2724:

but none in the last 6 monts. Also, aren't GA and or PR reviewers suppose to give an opinion if they have one?--

2529: 161: 6045:

humongous proportions that Moni would ask for lessons ;) So instead I go get chocolate. I'm gaining weight :(

4571:? I'd rather have you at the FAC than not, so any decision I weigh in on would have to have your input first. -- 3274: 7029: 6872: 6401:

I turned in my Bokenkotter copy today, even though I had only gotten through the first 1100 years. My copy of

1490:

Ah, thanks - I just was not sure what else was missing / needed to be done. Sorry to bug you and thanks again,

1103: 1026: 5368: 6332:

sandbox using the sources I have at hand which can then be integrated with your draft, or add to your draft?

6137:

No, Midwest, we're just REALLY warm today for the season. I do NOT want to turn the AC on just yet, but ....

2872: 2857: 2828: 2797: 4108:

Xandar's block expires; it would probably be best to wait until after they come back and continue the poll.

6567:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at 5855: 5774:

Which three or four books do you think most urgent? I should be able to look through one of them tomorrow.

5268: 4774: 2603: 2465:

Excellent. It looks like the article is well-prepared, and hopefully you won't need to babysit very much.

1975: 892: 798: 755: 710: 553: 398: 3997:

Hi Karanacs. Please consider this as non-binding feedback for the future. When I read the notice you sent

3207: 6582: 5422: 4837: 4757:

Suggest you go and look for something called the "SE page". There you will see discussion on the matter.

4070: 3924:

And has Xandar been banned or something? Wow things move fast. This is like a soap opera...except online.

3772: 2309: 2038: 1284: 1159: 472:

Have pity on a poor Brit. I've got no idea what "hawt" means. Or what this game is of which you speak. --

6502:

May. The flowers just started getting pretty last weekend, so they should be gorgeous when you arrive.

5052:

and block/protect as necessary? It's been reported for a while, but the problems are ongoing. Thanks!

5047:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Rkononenko_reported_by_User:Taivo_.28Result:_.29

1420:

Needs inline citation for sentence (I think, I just started helping to try and clear out the backlog)

589:

quickly as well Karanacs, before the feminists descend on it. I could yet take a battering there. :-) --

7147: 6178: 6007:

I thought you might be interested in the above project. Like all things academic, it will move slowly.

5205: 5191: 4896: 4884: 4868: 4824: 4810: 4475:

SandyGeorgia will be promoting/archiving this weekend, so I left her a note pointing to this message.

3623:

for this term? It's not a lot of work; mainly you would be needed to give opinions on random topics at

2495: 2284: 2238: 2187: 2148: 2025: 2011: 1849: 1516: 1271: 1257: 646: 593: 488: 476: 405: 327: 38: 7033:

week, but if I have time I'll write a review of my impression of Norman in my sandbox this afternoon.

6609: 5769: 5455:

Ask for other solutions, and for input on what unconsidered-ramifications each solution would have.

4521:? The only thing that should be fixed during or before the transition is the collapsible tables. -- 4449: 4430: 3314: 2866: 2851: 2822: 2791: 2183:

be one of the most irritating of reviewers. I want everything to be just so, even in a GA! :lol: --

1885: 1864: 1858: 418:

and recognized just how hawt I am." The disappointment is so crushing that I must now go lie down

5793:

for a good overview. For the Early Christianity section, one of the books Harmekheru recommended

1308:(intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to; 7114: 7068: 7038: 6887: 6698: 6664: 6521: 6435: 6392: 6356: 6337: 6326: 6090:

No baking here.. it's over 80 and I'm fighting a rear-guard action to avoid turning on the AC...

5881: 5711: 5705: 5690: 5326: 5245: 4598: 4405: 4320: 4290: 4280: 3965: 3191: 3050: 3020: 2981: 2902: 2413: 2373: 2308:

Question. Is there way you can pry Tony1 to actually look at the replies I made to his oppose on

2133: 2050: 1684: 1572: 230: 209: 179: 59: 6174:

Sounds like you'll need your thermal underwear on your trip to England. It's currently 48 here.

4222: 2337: 6991: 6960: 6929: 6316: 6298: 6267: 6067: 6034: 5142: 5031: 4916: 4833: 4762: 4497: 4440: 4383: 4349: 4234: 4213: 4174: 4060: 3869: 3824: 3706: 3667: 3624: 3597: 3501:

Hi Susan. Thank you for asking so politely - usually nominators are not quite so diplomatic ;)

3443: 3372: 3352: 3008: 2730: 2683: 2668: 2651: 2616: 2504:

I saw that last night - thank you very much! I hope to work on the article today or tomorrow.

2482: 2456: 2350: 2034: 1830: 1801: 1773: 1728: 1701: 1602: 1382: 1349: 1280: 1041: 1015: 974: 819: 730: 678: 621: 4783: 4568: 1984: 1312:

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

1230: 6648: 6175: 5202: 5188: 5153: 4893: 4881: 4865: 4795: 4467: 4016: 3079: 2956:

Ok, I will do that. Thanks. But I REALLY think the wikirules are inadequate therein. Cheers.

2492: 2399: 2281: 2235: 2184: 2145: 1996: 1938: 1818: 1754: 1332: 1242: 1097: 852: 643: 590: 485: 473: 414:

I saw your edit summary and thought "Finally! Someone has taken a hint from Sandy's posts at

402: 324: 78: 6348: 7097: 7082: 7054: 6974: 6943: 6908: 6796: 6766: 6721: 6680: 6638: 6507: 6450: 6418: 6370: 6081: 6050: 5986: 5958: 5900: 5863: 5833: 5818: 5803: 5779: 5738: 5666: 5638: 5588: 5537: 5402: 5358: 5329:

and place a pointer from there to the RfC draft, or other small-scale notification options?

5309: 5276: 5218: 5101: 5087: 5072: 5057: 5006: 4982:

I don't think there were concerns with comprehensiveness by time the nomination was closed.

4970: 4723: 4629: 4480: 4420: 4365: 4306: 4266: 4196: 4157: 4141: 4085: 4031: 3978: 3951: 3934: 3913: 3883: 3852: 3838: 3806: 3788: 3716: 3686: 3657: 3565: 3548: 3533: 3511: 3491: 3381: 3363:

I have also never called for you to be banned. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of

3179: 3039: 2943: 2893: 2840: 2810: 2805:

Since there was serious opposition at the previous FAC, I'd prefer it if you'd wait a bit.

2789:

Please advise on whether I should be allowed to renominate so soon. Thanks for your time. —

2762: 2587: 2553: 2537: 2519: 2509: 2470: 2440: 2428: 2389: 2251: 2204: 2168: 2119: 2081: 1946: 1923: 1787: 1617: 1531:

BTW, I played with the look of the Texas History Navbox. I hope it's to your liking. :-) --

1481: 1425: 1365: 1322: 1211: 1129: 1087: 1071: 1005: 964: 864: 773: 572: 501: 431: 245: 195: 4256:

There will be no more strife. Your troubles are over. Breathe a little easier...and smile.

8: 6402: 6021: 5844: 5040: 4332: 3392: 3330: 3310: 2111: 1876: 1495: 1459: 949: 855:

to take another look - (s)he usually does a good job with fiction articles - and perhaps

7156: 7110: 7064: 7034: 7005: 6883: 6820: 6741: 6692: 6660: 6623: 6517: 6493: 6431: 6388: 6352: 6333: 6219: 6142: 6108: 6095: 6012: 5972: 5942: 5877: 5757: 5722: 5686: 5603: 5572: 5554: 5503: 5380: 5342: 5294: 5257: 5179: 4820: 4741: 4736:

Thing is, I really don't CARE. Either is correct. Makes me glad I live in the states...

4703: 4674: 4647: 4613: 4401: 4316: 4286: 4113: 3634: 3257: 3222: 3164: 2714: 2409: 2369: 2096: 2065: 2021: 1962: 1681: 1663: 1612:

I can wait until Thursday. I've got lots of stuff scheduled for Wednesday right now.

1563: 1536: 1446:

Hi Karanacs, I was wondering if you could let me know what still needs to be done with

1267: 1249: 930: 610: 415: 401:

even up to GA. I don't doubt it's all true, but you know what reviewers can be like. --

226: 205: 175: 151: 117: 110: 95: 88: 47: 17: 5925:

I just wanted to thank you for your efforts to explain a bit of Knowledge's policy to

5166:

Did you mean to remove " eating those who had succumbed to starvation and sickness. "

695:

Hey, just wondering if you knew when the nomination would probably be closed? Thanks.

6984: 6953: 6922: 6309: 6294: 6260: 6060: 6027: 5930: 5519: 5174: 5027: 4912: 4758: 4752: 4589: 4490: 4436: 4376: 4342: 4227: 4206: 4167: 4053: 4043: 4011:

still hope you bear the first part of my message in mind for the future. ;) Regards,

3862: 3844: 3817: 3762: 3699: 3620: 3617: 3590: 3580: 3436: 3345: 3199: 3001: 2742: 2725: 2695: 2678: 2661: 2644: 2628: 2611: 2597: 2452: 2342: 1766: 1737: 1721: 1694: 1693:

Thanks for the work, Mike; it's so good to have you back ! I responded on my talk.

1630: 1595: 1589: 1409: 1375: 1342: 1034: 812: 723: 671: 614: 5873: 5050: 3112:

Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

1261: 6863: 6829: 6782: 6751: 6103:

Hmm? Snow melted already where you are? You live in the tropics or something? :p

5714:

please feel free. I guess I have reached the limits of my abilities at this point.

5150: 4459: 4012: 3992: 3747: 3075: 1811: 1796: 1747: 1441: 1169: 1149: 1113: 885: 791: 748: 703: 546: 299: 74: 5854:

That sounds likely. I'm working on a revamp of the Early Christianity section at

2408:

yesterday. So I ask for an exception since some comments have already been made.--

6834:

Thank-you for the barnstar! It was a pleasure to write; I'm glad you enjoyed it.

5896: 5814: 5775: 5658: 5630: 5439:

which isn't accurate (though individual editors have argued for this to occur).

5115: 5097: 5068: 5053: 4576: 4557: 4541: 4526: 4258: 4184: 4133: 4077: 3970: 3926: 3905: 3780: 3678: 3676:? I've decided to try for GA first per suggestions from the reviewers. Thank you. 3607: 3561: 3529: 3487: 3477: 3453: 3405: 3368: 3282: 3278: 2533: 2525: 2159: 2141: 2134: 2052: 1919: 1318: 1183: 1067: 981: 364: 272: 170: 7155:

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

6615: 3430:

admin power has Karanacs abused? Do you even know what admins do ? Do you read

46:

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

6835: 5652: 5470:

Move various pages to projectnamespace (Knowledge:...), as WikiProject subpages

5161: 4665: 3396: 3326: 3140: 3069: 2746: 2699: 2632: 2491:, just so that the conspuracy theorists don't get their knickers in a twist. -- 1872: 1491: 1455: 1053: 1016: 945: 5460:

Briefly (uncontextualized), the solutions I've seen suggested so far include:

4814: 2015: 1192:. If you're up to it, I would invite your further participation in this FAC. — 7093: 7078: 7050: 7001: 6970: 6939: 6904: 6816: 6792: 6762: 6717: 6676: 6649: 6634: 6619: 6572: 6564: 6503: 6489: 6446: 6414: 6366: 6215: 6138: 6104: 6091: 6077: 6046: 6008: 5982: 5968: 5954: 5938: 5926: 5859: 5829: 5799: 5753: 5734: 5718: 5599: 5584: 5568: 5550: 5533: 5499: 5398: 5376: 5354: 5338: 5322:

I'd appreciate your replies in the 1st and 3rd threads at the talkpage there.

5290: 5272: 5253: 5214: 5083: 5002: 4966: 4737: 4719: 4699: 4691: 4670: 4643: 4625: 4609: 4476: 4416: 4361: 4302: 4192: 4153: 4109: 4097:

I missed him saying that. I'll go take a look now. 22:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

4027: 3947: 3879: 3848: 3834: 3802: 3653: 3640: 3629: 3544: 3507: 3377: 3318: 3253: 3175: 3160: 3035: 2939: 2889: 2888:

Sorry, I didn't notice your previous question. The general rule is 2 weeks.

2836: 2806: 2784:

Knowledge:Featured_article_candidates/The_Elder_Scrolls_IV:_Oblivion/archive3

2758: 2710: 2583: 2549: 2505: 2466: 2424: 2385: 2247: 2200: 2164: 2115: 2107: 2092: 2077: 2061: 1958: 1942: 1934: 1854:

Hi. Here are some list of unreferenced BLPs that you might be interested in.

1783: 1659: 1613: 1532: 1477: 1361: 1207: 1195: 1139: 1125: 1083: 1001: 960: 926: 860: 769: 568: 497: 427: 241: 191: 147: 65: 2660:

Tony1 has concerns, and one of your supports is from an involved reviewer.

2423:

That's fine. The rule is pretty new and hasn't been widely publicized yet.

1190:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Marriott School of Management/archive2

5515: 5138: 4860: 4802: 4395: 3758: 3364: 3322: 3302: 2003: 1405: 874: 586: 7000:

Lucky! I used to have a gelato place near my house, but it closed down :(

6775:

I can't believe it, I just edit conflicted with Gimmebot on my last one! -

1138:

Thank you, I'll drop a link here when it is done just in case any of your

6777: 6746: 5137:

Do you have any thoughts on whether or not the current Main Page article

4987: 4950: 4718:. I've got the page watchlisted, but drop me a line if I miss something. 3727: 3525: 2572: 1164: 1144: 1108: 878: 784: 741: 696: 539: 6076:

Cake works pretty well too. Even better is to pair the two - brownies!

5473:

Tag "navigational pages" as __NOTCONTENT__ and leave them in mainspace (

5373:

Knowledge:Village_pump_(proposals)#Disambiguation_pages_are_not_articles

1639: 5111: 4572: 4553: 4537: 4522: 4188: 3482:

Greetings, Karanacs. Thank you for your administrative action to close

2140:

I was just looking through the list of GANs and I saw you've nominated

944:

Thanks for pointing out the style manual, I hadn't seen that. Gig em!

856: 360: 356: 268: 4603:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Free State of Galveston/archive1

6918: 5375:. (I'm out for the day. Car repairs and moss-removal and such...) -- 3135: 3118: 2528:. The latest sincere believer has taken to removing and disparaging 2451:

Later: Disregard this, I'm up and running with a borrowed computer.

2222:

be heard by those whose ears are adjusted to the correct frequency.

1448:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Jay Pritzker Pavilion/archive1

1337:

Elcobbola is now spotchecking some of the recent image reviews: see

6878: 6569:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft

5682: 5447:

Cover the various available-solutions for all "navigational pages"

5141:

ought to be semi-protected? Has consensus changed about this? See

2226:

is the same again. But did anyone ever complain about being given

2114:(a very well-written book), which confirmed a lot of the details. 1552: 1400: 132:

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)

6633:

That is really cool! Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

6259:

Bah, that's nothing ... it was 42C when I was in Seville once !

2709:

Probably Hunter Kahn, the GA reviewer (or Ruhrfisch, who PR'ed?)

359:

the other day, and quietly backed away. Afraid. Like a coward. --

323:

PS. Why is it that every article I look at needs so much work? --

3209:

vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll

1106:

for myself in tracking my closures of MILHIST A-Class reviews? -

6856:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination)

6852:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (3rd nomination)

6845:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Richard Tylman (4th nomination)

6445:

The Middle Ages section will likely be much more complicated!!

5891: 3424:

still don't understand that adminship has nothing to do with it

3371:

is absolutely not a way to resolve disputes - it instead has a

1898:

Revolution. Google and Google Book show both are used, and Texa

1528:

No problem. The FA is not a priority for me. Just a nice-to-do.

1294:

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

6575:

with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of

4878:

Well, I guess that last question of mine has been answered now

3102:

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

2406:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/HMS Lion (1910)/archive1

1906:

any consensus, grammar should trump local usage. It's not the

1871:

Copy, advertise, move or do whatever you want with the lists.

5045:

Hi - noticed you were online, could you take a quick look at

2363:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Petlyakov Pe-8/archive1

1339:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Halley's Comet/archive1

4664:

P.S. I am in the process of getting a second peer review on

3612:

I know you have a lot on your plate, but would you consider

3096:

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of

2312:'s FAC. I pinged him on his talk the day he made them. (see 484:(Is "hawt" some kind of Southern drawl version of "hot"?) -- 127:

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

105:

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

4456:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Give It 2 Me/archive1

3404:

for telling them I think that's an abuse of power as well.

3098:

Knowledge:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

3091:

Knowledge:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

5187:

I certainly want that back in, it's not at all redundant.

4435:

thank you! Enough was enough, and it was time to end it!

3587:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Liberalism/archive2‎

2565:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Ben Paschal/archive1

642:

Stop right there SandyG. I find powerful women so sexy. --

6761:

I saw that thread earlier today. MBK, you are awesome.

5813:

this is another case of not reporting sources accurates.

5173:) it really isn't if you want to give them a fair shake. 2974:

Your statement on the Catholic Church arbitration request

2330:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Sam Loxton/archive1

1718:

Knowledge talk:Featured article criteria#Unit conversions

3252:

during the month of February 2010, you're truly a star!

2835:

Serious meaning "actionable". Sorry for the confusion!

2524:

Please bring on the next stage of dispute resolution on

5213:

No, I didn't mean to do that...thanks for catching it!

4187:. They even have something in common - both celebrate 3048:

Much appreciated sir - thank you for your cooperation.

5467:

Move various pages to a new namespace (Navigation:...)

5271:

and I need to finish it so I can nominate it for DYK.

3484:

Featured article candidates/Jeannette Piccard/archive1

2304:

FAC of Tropical Storm Marco 1990 - one of the opposes

6815:

Thanks! All that is applicable to you too, you know.

420:(and take a nap so that I can stay awake through the 609:

What feminists? We've already put our price out on

5434:

rid of the "glossary" and "list of topics" articles

3964:Per Tom's suggestion, I have placed the article in 1902:is somewhat more common. However, given that there 5337:hard not to overwhelm anywhere.) Thanks again. -- 5241:If you don't mind my asking your advice again ... 3801:by those of us who have been present for so long. 3248:For your excellent and wonderful contributions at 1654:For your excellent and wonderful contributions at 923:Knowledge:WikiProject Magical Realism Reconsidered 6740:Just in case you have not read the discussion at 5791:The Roman Catholic Church: An Illustrated History 5514:Please let me know if this gets off the ground. 3833:I'll go dig that up - thanks for the reminder! 2610:) today. What is it lacking in your opinion?-- 6411:The Oxford illustrated history of Christianity 5710:Just FYI, if you decide you want to play with 5532:. When it's ready it will be well-advertised. 5528:Johnbod, you're welcome to help craft this at 1547:DYK nomination of Telegraph and Texas Register 6563:, a page you created, has been nominated for 5480:Tag "navigational pages" with a banner, like 5244:I was wondering how much more work you think 3878:I didn't see that...will have to look again. 3778:you share the same broad goals on that front. 722:I will look at it on my weekend runthrough. 6002:Knowledge:WikiProject NINES and 18th Connect 5563:I've made an attempt at creating a separate 5510:- tweaked at 22:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 4944:Hi Karen! Thanks for your consideration of 4712:(ec) What a lovely day you are having. See 3723:Knowledge:Today's featured article/requests 3376:b) how to resolve a dispute the wiki-way. 116:Hello, Karanacs. You have new messages at 94:Hello, Karanacs. You have new messages at 6850:Hi, Karanacs. Because you participated in 5565:User:Karanacs/Navigational pages RfC draft 4597:I don't know if you had noticed but I put 3157:User:Karanacs/Navigational pages RfC draft 5935:getting to FA than the input of an expert 4799:was updated with a fact from the article 3230: 3229: 2213:Well, you may be surprised to learn that 2000:was updated with a fact from the article 1716:When you have time, could you look in on 1637: 1246:was updated with a fact from the article 1058:Excause me, but can you explain yourself 169:This regards your undoing my edit on the 6811:Re: In case I haven't told you lately... 5921:Balancing FA with new editor recruitment 1418:and respond there as soon as possible. 4105:cross-posted at UberCryxic's talk page) 3269:your comment was inappropriately placed 267:if it is cited to a reliable source. -- 146:This has been an automated delivery by 14: 7153:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2849:Okay... How about tomorrow, March 1? — 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 6614:I thought you might be interested in 5490:, to differentiate them from articles 5110:Thank you for protecting the page. ( 4339:User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox#Crazy stuff 4052:Good idea, lesson learned by all :) 3325:correctly, and failure to understand 3273:I was telling Tom, thank you and why. 3250:Knowledge:Featured Article Candidates 2091:literature articles on Knowledge. :) 1656:Knowledge:Featured Article Candidates 7134: 6347:Actually I've created a rough draft 5967:Apologies for my misinterpretation! 4850:Not sure if you'd have seen this ... 4536:I did it. I couldn't help myself. -- 3672:Hello, can you please take down the 25: 7077:Not yet, I will go check that out. 5369:User talk:Dragons flight#NOTCONTENT 5249:process I'm not sure how to judge. 4400:"confesses his sings"??????? :-) -- 4315:oic. Thanks for the explanation. -- 2918:of material is just non-productive. 2602:I noticed that you did not promote 2280:OK, it'll be on its way shortly. -- 2230:pretty little present by Fabergé?" 1712:Conversions on ship articles at FAC 1658:during the month of December 2009. 1102:Would you mind if I used your idea 422:2010 BCS National Championship Game 23: 4906:Sam Houston ~ Stephen Austin image 1142:are interested or even yourself. - 109: 87: 24: 7171: 5876:and may, or may not, be helpful. 5464:Move various pages to portalspace 3149: 3117:Your opinion on this is welcome. 1082:questions a little less rudely. 7138: 7092:consider Norman a good source. 5234:Opinion: Free State of Galveston 4946:St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao 4940:St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao 4782: 3232: 1983: 1638: 1551: 1399: 1229: 29: 6952:Did you have a fabulous time? 6577:User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft 6561:User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft 6555:User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft 5530:User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft 5316:User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft 5133:Protection of Main Page article 3128:User:Karanacs/Outline RfC draft 2530:File:Catholicpopulationsnew.png 859:would take a look? Good luck! 302:, much less attrribute a cause. 7030:History of the Catholic Church 1765:Better to let G guy sort it. 1188:Thank you for your comment at 13: 1: 5608:21:27, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 5314:Hello. A gentle reminder for 5021:Reply to Houston/Austin image 4131:my comments in the talk page. 3184:18:05, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 3169:20:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 3152:above, in case you missed it. 3143:15:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 3122:02:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC) 3084:22:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC) 3060:15:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC) 3044:14:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC) 3030:13:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC) 3013:13:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC) 2991:13:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC) 2966:22:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 2948:21:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 2932:21:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 2860:12:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC) 2845:20:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 2831:20:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 2815:17:04, 22 February 2010 (UTC) 2800:01:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC) 2767:15:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2752:04:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2719:04:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2705:02:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2673:01:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2656:01:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2638:01:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2592:20:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 2576:19:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC) 2558:01:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC) 2542:19:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC) 2514:14:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC) 2499:22:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2475:19:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2461:19:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2433:15:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2418:03:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2394:16:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2378:04:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC) 2358:03:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC) 1410:Did You Know nominations page 5856:User:Karanacs/Catholic Early 5593:20:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC) 5577:23:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC) 5559:01:00, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 5542:14:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 5524:22:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 5508:21:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 5407:18:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 5385:20:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 5363:19:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC) 5347:19:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC) 5299:16:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 5281:15:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 5262:00:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 3261:15:52, 29 January 2010 (UTC) 2604:Inauguration of Barack Obama 2338:User_talk:Rebecca#Loxton_FAC 2324:22:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC) 2288:18:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC) 2256:18:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC) 2242:15:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC) 2209:15:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2191:15:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2173:15:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2152:15:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2124:18:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC) 2101:03:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC) 2086:14:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2070:04:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC) 2043:18:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC) 1967:18:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC) 1951:18:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC) 1928:14:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC) 1881:18:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC) 1835:20:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 1824:20:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 1806:19:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 1792:17:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 1778:17:54, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 1760:17:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC) 1733:19:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 1706:19:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 1688:17:06, 31 January 2010 (UTC) 1667:16:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC) 1622:14:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC) 1607:22:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC) 1582:08:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC) 1556:Hello Karanacs, Your latest 1541:05:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC) 1506:16:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 1486:14:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 1470:03:11, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 1437:00:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 1387:16:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1370:16:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1354:15:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1327:01:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 1289:18:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC) 1216:19:48, 14 January 2010 (UTC) 1201:19:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC) 1174:10:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC) 1154:01:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC) 1134:14:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC) 1118:20:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 1092:15:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 1076:03:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 1046:06:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC) 1010:14:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC) 994:07:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC) 900:16:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 869:18:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 824:18:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 806:18:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 778:16:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 763:16:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC) 735:12:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC) 718:05:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC) 7: 6854:, you may be interested in 6736:Botification of closed FACs 5423:Lists of mathematics topics 5201:It's back in the lead now. 3148:See also my latest ping at 2310:Tropical Storm Marco (1990) 1941:. This may require an RfC. 1160:User:MBK004/Article reviews 969:21:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 954:21:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 935:19:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 683:00:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC) 650:00:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC) 626:00:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC) 597:22:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 577:14:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC) 561:22:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC) 530:Supernatural (season 2) FAC 506:15:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC) 492:22:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 480:22:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 436:22:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 409:22:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC) 369:23:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC) 331:22:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC) 277:14:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC) 250:14:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC) 235:22:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 214:19:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 200:19:18, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 184:19:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 156:03:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC) 83:13:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC) 10: 7176: 7102:16:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 7087:16:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 7073:16:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC) 7059:15:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC) 7043:14:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC) 7010:21:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6996:21:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6979:21:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6965:21:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6948:20:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6934:20:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6913:20:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 6892:18:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC) 6868:02:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC) 6839:04:11, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6825:03:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6801:02:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6787:02:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6771:02:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6756:01:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6726:16:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC) 6712:12:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6685:01:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6669:01:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 6488:Europe at the end of May. 5762:18:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 5743:23:45, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 5727:23:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 5673:04:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC) 5645:03:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC) 5429:be moved out of mainspace. 5036:11:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 5011:14:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 4996:13:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 4975:13:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 4959:03:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 4921:18:40, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 4900:21:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC) 4872:18:42, 28 March 2010 (UTC) 4842:20:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 4767:19:39, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 4745:19:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 4728:19:42, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 4707:19:25, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 4679:17:36, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 4652:17:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 4634:16:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 4618:15:58, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 4581:00:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC) 4562:18:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 4546:19:31, 20 March 2010 (UTC) 4531:01:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC) 4502:14:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC) 4485:13:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC) 4470:03:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC) 4445:18:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC) 4425:15:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC) 4410:15:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC) 4388:14:12, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 4370:14:08, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 4354:13:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 4337:Have I missed any steps? 4325:21:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 4311:21:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 4295:20:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 4273:23:08, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4239:23:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4218:23:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4201:22:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4183:You have Venezuela, I get 4179:22:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4162:22:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4148:22:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4118:22:51, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4092:22:33, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4065:15:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4047:15:31, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4036:15:36, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 4021:15:21, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 3985:04:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 3956:03:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 3941:03:46, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 3920:03:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 3767:23:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 3107:Proposal to Close This RfC 1865:WikiProject Texas articles 1404:Hello! Your submission of 1222:DYK for Irish Thoroughbred 6791:Only on Knowledge.... ;0 6675:try to get involved too. 6643:15:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 6628:01:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 6605:23:36, 8 April 2010 (UTC) 6526:20:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6512:20:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6497:20:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6455:20:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6440:19:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6423:19:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6397:19:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6375:19:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6361:16:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6342:15:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6321:01:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6303:00:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6272:01:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC) 6223:22:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6182:22:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6146:22:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6112:22:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6099:21:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6086:20:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6072:20:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6055:20:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6039:20:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC) 6017:17:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5991:16:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5977:16:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5963:16:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5947:16:24, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5905:17:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5886:17:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5868:17:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5850:17:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5838:15:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 5823:21:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC) 5808:02:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC) 5784:22:52, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 5695:20:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 5223:21:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 5209:21:12, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 5195:18:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 5182:18:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC) 5157:20:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 5120:15:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 5106:14:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 5092:14:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 5077:14:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 5062:14:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 4567:Do you have any comments 4513:Before I do anything nuts 3888:18:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 3874:18:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 3857:17:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 3829:17:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 3811:17:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 3795:17:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC) 3752:07:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC) 3711:23:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 3693:22:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 3662:14:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC) 3647:06:42, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 3602:06:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC) 3570:18:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3553:18:00, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3538:17:49, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3516:17:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3496:16:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3466:02:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3448:02:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3418:01:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 3386:22:44, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 3357:23:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 3295:22:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 3238: 3233:File:Alpha Capricorni.jpg 3215:07:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC) 2898:17:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 2875:17:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 1675:Sandboxed section for FAC 1644: 5619:Catholic Church research 940:Thanks for the direction 918:Join a worthy project... 670:You should (they are). 7119:02:08, 1 May 2010 (UTC) 6407:History of Christianity 5712:Free State of Galveston 5327:Knowledge talk:Outlines 5246:Free State of Galveston 4930:Reply posted at bottom. 4825:Did you know? talk page 4599:Free State of Galveston 2026:Did you know? talk page 1894:refer to it as the Texa 1859::Texas A&M articles 1415:your nomination's entry 1272:Did you know? talk page 162:Georgette Heyer article 6873:Catholic Church update 6716:That is fine with me. 6571:and please be sure to 6308:You had to be there. 5371:regarding his idea at 2217:published a review of 114: 92: 7151:of past discussions. 5681:Posted some comments 5475:Dragons flight's idea 3089:Final discussion for 1939:Talk:Texas Revolution 853:user:Peregrine Fisher 113: 91: 42:of past discussions. 6659:in relation to OR?? 4775:DYK for Donner party 4454:I have a problem at 3311:wiki is not a "vote" 2441:Voyage of the Karluk 1976:DYK for Parysatis II 118:Jack1755's talk page 96:Jack1755's talk page 5432:He also thinks we " 4071:Catholic Church (3) 3773:Catholic Church (2) 3422:That does it. You 2868:Anonymous Dissident 2853:Anonymous Dissident 2824:Anonymous Dissident 2793:Anonymous Dissident 2112:Catherine de Medici 585:I wish you'd close 139:December 2009 issue 6573:sign your comments 6553:MfD nomination of 3365:dispute resolution 3323:dispute resolution 3303:dispute resolution 2871: 2856: 2827: 2796: 2677:Who is involved?-- 1850:Some lists for you 1517:Re: pre-FAC review 1250:Irish Thoroughbred 125:remove this notice 115: 103:remove this notice 93: 18:User talk:Karanacs 7163: 7162: 7157:current talk page 6710: 6293:What's a Moni? -- 5931:Talk:Donner Party 5903: 5821: 5782: 5670: 5642: 4994: 4957: 4834:Materialscientist 4831: 4830: 4818: 4270: 4145: 4106: 4089: 3982: 3938: 3917: 3845:User:Marskell/RCC 3792: 3690: 3319:assume good faith 3266: 3265: 2865: 2850: 2821: 2790: 2750: 2703: 2636: 2540: 2035:Materialscientist 2032: 2031: 2019: 1828::) Okay, thanks! 1672: 1671: 1502: 1466: 1305:finalisation poll 1281:Materialscientist 1278: 1277: 1265: 1062:for what you did 425: 158: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 7167: 7142: 7141: 7135: 6988: 6957: 6926: 6707: 6701: 6696: 6695: 6657:notice my oppose 6610:Book of interest 6600: 6597: 6594: 6591: 6588: 6585: 6313: 6264: 6064: 6031: 5899: 5817: 5778: 5770:Catholic sources 5671: 5665: 5663: 5643: 5637: 5635: 5489: 5483: 5177: 4993: 4990: 4956: 4953: 4808: 4786: 4779: 4778: 4494: 4465: 4450:A little problem 4431:Squabbles at FAC 4380: 4346: 4271: 4265: 4263: 4231: 4210: 4171: 4146: 4140: 4138: 4104: 4090: 4084: 4082: 4057: 3983: 3977: 3975: 3939: 3933: 3931: 3918: 3912: 3910: 3866: 3821: 3793: 3787: 3785: 3750: 3745: 3742: 3739: 3736: 3733: 3730: 3703: 3691: 3685: 3683: 3645: 3643: 3637: 3632: 3594: 3462: 3461: 3458: 3440: 3414: 3413: 3410: 3349: 3291: 3290: 3287: 3236: 3234: 3227: 3226: 3210: 3202: 3056: 3053: 3026: 3023: 3005: 2987: 2984: 2869: 2854: 2825: 2794: 2728: 2681: 2665: 2648: 2614: 2536: 2353: 2345: 2319: 2110:'s biography of 2009: 1992:February 3, 2010 1987: 1980: 1979: 1914:Revolution, the 1910:Revolution, the 1886:Texan Revolution 1821: 1816: 1770: 1757: 1752: 1725: 1698: 1642: 1635: 1634: 1599: 1579: 1570: 1555: 1500: 1464: 1403: 1379: 1346: 1255: 1238:January 15, 2010 1233: 1226: 1225: 1038: 990: 989: 986: 897: 890: 883: 816: 803: 796: 789: 760: 753: 746: 727: 715: 708: 701: 675: 618: 558: 551: 544: 419: 355:I stumbled over 145: 128: 106: 33: 32: 26: 7175: 7174: 7170: 7169: 7168: 7166: 7165: 7164: 7139: 6986: 6955: 6924: 6917:Welcome back! 6875: 6848: 6832: 6813: 6785: 6754: 6738: 6705: 6699: 6691: 6653: 6612: 6598: 6595: 6592: 6589: 6586: 6583: 6558: 6329: 6327:How to proceed? 6311: 6262: 6062: 6029: 6024: 6005: 5923: 5897:Septentrionalis 5815:Septentrionalis 5776:Septentrionalis 5772: 5708: 5706:FYI: Free State 5659: 5657: 5631: 5629: 5621: 5487: 5481: 5312: 5236: 5175: 5164: 5135: 5043: 5023: 4992: 4988: 4955: 4951: 4942: 4908: 4852: 4777: 4755: 4694: 4601:up for FA (see 4592: 4515: 4492: 4460: 4452: 4433: 4398: 4378: 4344: 4335: 4283: 4281:Further reading 4259: 4257: 4229: 4208: 4185:Catholic Church 4169: 4134: 4132: 4078: 4076: 4073: 4055: 3995: 3971: 3969: 3927: 3925: 3906: 3904: 3864: 3819: 3781: 3779: 3775: 3743: 3740: 3737: 3734: 3731: 3728: 3726: 3719: 3701: 3679: 3677: 3670: 3642:majestic titan) 3641: 3635: 3630: 3628: 3610: 3592: 3583: 3480: 3459: 3456: 3455: 3438: 3411: 3408: 3407: 3373:chilling effect 3369:poison the well 3347: 3288: 3285: 3284: 3271: 3225: 3208: 3200: 3194: 3192:Ian Meckiff FAC 3131: 3094: 3072: 3054: 3051: 3024: 3021: 3003: 2996:Exceptions are 2985: 2982: 2976: 2905: 2903:Catholic church 2867: 2852: 2823: 2792: 2787: 2663: 2646: 2600: 2568: 2534:Septentrionalis 2526:Catholic Church 2522: 2489:Lady of Quality 2485: 2444: 2402: 2365: 2351: 2343: 2333: 2317: 2306: 2224:Lady of Quality 2219:Lady of Quality 2142:Lady of Quality 2138: 2135:Lady of Quality 2057: 2053:La Reine Margot 1978: 1888: 1852: 1819: 1812: 1768: 1755: 1748: 1740: 1723: 1714: 1696: 1677: 1633: 1597: 1592: 1573: 1564: 1549: 1519: 1499: 1463: 1444: 1435: 1426:NativeForeigner 1397: 1377: 1344: 1335: 1296: 1224: 1186: 1172: 1152: 1116: 1100: 1056: 1036: 1020: 987: 984: 983: 977: 942: 920: 893: 886: 879: 814: 799: 792: 785: 756: 749: 742: 725: 711: 704: 697: 673: 616: 554: 547: 540: 532: 171:Georgette Heyer 164: 134: 129: 122: 107: 100: 62: 60:A small favour? 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 7173: 7161: 7160: 7143: 7132: 7130: 7129: 7128: 7127: 7126: 7125: 7124: 7123: 7122: 7121: 7089: 7025: 7024: 7023: 7022: 7021: 7020: 7019: 7018: 7017: 7016: 7015: 7014: 7013: 7012: 6874: 6871: 6847: 6842: 6831: 6828: 6812: 6809: 6808: 6807: 6806: 6805: 6804: 6803: 6781: 6750: 6737: 6734: 6733: 6732: 6731: 6730: 6729: 6728: 6652: 6647: 6646: 6645: 6611: 6608: 6557: 6551: 6549: 6547: 6546: 6545: 6544: 6543: 6542: 6541: 6540: 6539: 6538: 6537: 6536: 6535: 6534: 6533: 6532: 6531: 6530: 6529: 6528: 6470: 6469: 6468: 6467: 6466: 6465: 6464: 6463: 6462: 6461: 6460: 6459: 6458: 6457: 6380: 6379: 6378: 6377: 6328: 6325: 6324: 6323: 6291: 6290: 6289: 6288: 6287: 6286: 6285: 6284: 6283: 6282: 6281: 6280: 6279: 6278: 6277: 6276: 6275: 6274: 6240: 6239: 6238: 6237: 6236: 6235: 6234: 6233: 6232: 6231: 6230: 6229: 6228: 6227: 6226: 6225: 6197: 6196: 6195: 6194: 6193: 6192: 6191: 6190: 6189: 6188: 6187: 6186: 6185: 6184: 6159: 6158: 6157: 6156: 6155: 6154: 6153: 6152: 6151: 6150: 6149: 6148: 6124: 6123: 6122: 6121: 6120: 6119: 6118: 6117: 6116: 6115: 6023: 6020: 6004: 5999: 5998: 5997: 5996: 5995: 5994: 5993: 5922: 5919: 5918: 5917: 5916: 5915: 5914: 5913: 5912: 5911: 5910: 5909: 5908: 5907: 5888: 5771: 5768: 5767: 5766: 5765: 5764: 5746: 5745: 5707: 5704: 5702: 5700: 5699: 5698: 5697: 5676: 5675: 5620: 5617: 5615: 5613: 5612: 5611: 5610: 5547: 5546: 5545: 5544: 5497: 5492: 5491: 5485:Outline header 5478: 5471: 5468: 5465: 5459: 5457: 5456: 5449: 5448: 5442: 5416: 5414: 5413: 5412: 5411: 5410: 5409: 5390: 5389: 5388: 5387: 5334: 5333: 5330: 5323: 5311: 5308: 5306: 5304: 5303: 5302: 5301: 5284: 5283: 5235: 5232: 5230: 5228: 5227: 5226: 5225: 5198: 5197: 5163: 5160: 5134: 5131: 5130: 5129: 5128: 5127: 5126: 5125: 5124: 5123: 5042: 5039: 5022: 5019: 5018: 5017: 5016: 5015: 5014: 5013: 4986: 4949: 4941: 4938: 4936: 4934: 4933: 4932: 4931: 4907: 4904: 4903: 4902: 4888: 4887: 4851: 4848: 4846: 4829: 4828: 4819:and add it to 4791:March 25, 2010 4787: 4776: 4773: 4771: 4754: 4751: 4750: 4749: 4748: 4747: 4731: 4730: 4693: 4690: 4688: 4686: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4681: 4666:Texas Oil Boom 4657: 4656: 4655: 4654: 4637: 4636: 4591: 4588: 4586: 4584: 4583: 4549: 4548: 4514: 4511: 4509: 4507: 4506: 4505: 4504: 4451: 4448: 4432: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4397: 4394: 4393: 4392: 4391: 4390: 4334: 4331: 4330: 4329: 4328: 4327: 4282: 4279: 4277: 4254: 4253: 4252: 4251: 4250: 4249: 4248: 4247: 4246: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4241: 4164: 4123: 4122: 4121: 4120: 4099: 4098: 4072: 4069: 4068: 4067: 4039: 4038: 3994: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3988: 3987: 3959: 3958: 3901: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3774: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3718: 3715: 3714: 3713: 3674:Liberalism FAC 3669: 3668:Liberalism FAC 3666: 3665: 3664: 3609: 3606: 3605: 3604: 3582: 3579: 3577: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3503: 3502: 3479: 3476: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3470: 3469: 3468: 3360: 3359: 3315:IDidntHearThat 3270: 3267: 3264: 3263: 3245: 3244: 3239: 3237: 3224: 3221: 3219: 3193: 3190: 3189: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3153: 3130: 3125: 3115: 3114: 3109: 3093: 3087: 3071: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3015: 2975: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2951: 2950: 2920: 2919: 2914: 2913: 2904: 2901: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2786: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2599: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2567: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2521: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2484: 2483:You have email 2481: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2443: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2401: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2364: 2361: 2332: 2327: 2305: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2232:Here's the url 2137: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2056: 2049: 2047: 2030: 2029: 2020:and add it to 1988: 1977: 1974: 1972: 1970: 1969: 1954: 1953: 1933:You have been 1887: 1884: 1869: 1868: 1862: 1851: 1848: 1846: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1780: 1739: 1736: 1713: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1676: 1673: 1670: 1669: 1651: 1650: 1645: 1643: 1632: 1629: 1627: 1625: 1624: 1591: 1588: 1586: 1548: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1529: 1518: 1515: 1513: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1496: 1460: 1443: 1440: 1431: 1419: 1396: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1334: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1314: 1313: 1295: 1292: 1276: 1275: 1266:and add it to 1234: 1223: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1185: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1168: 1148: 1112: 1099: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1055: 1052: 1050: 1019: 1017:Hawaii Hotspot 1014: 1013: 1012: 976: 975:Happy New Year 973: 972: 971: 941: 938: 919: 916: 915: 914: 913: 912: 911: 910: 909: 908: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 837: 836: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 829: 828: 827: 826: 693: 692: 691: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 602: 601: 600: 599: 580: 579: 531: 528: 527: 526: 525: 524: 523: 522: 521: 520: 519: 518: 517: 516: 515: 514: 513: 512: 511: 510: 509: 508: 482: 453: 452: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 438: 382: 381: 380: 379: 378: 377: 376: 375: 374: 373: 372: 371: 342: 341: 340: 339: 338: 337: 336: 335: 334: 333: 312: 311: 310: 309: 308: 307: 306: 305: 304: 303: 286: 285: 284: 283: 282: 281: 280: 279: 257: 256: 255: 254: 253: 252: 219: 218: 217: 216: 163: 160: 144: 133: 130: 121: 108: 99: 86: 61: 58: 56: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 7172: 7158: 7154: 7150: 7149: 7144: 7137: 7136: 7133: 7120: 7116: 7112: 7111:Truthkeeper88 7107: 7106: 7105: 7104: 7103: 7099: 7095: 7090: 7088: 7084: 7080: 7076: 7075: 7074: 7070: 7066: 7065:Truthkeeper88 7062: 7061: 7060: 7056: 7052: 7047: 7046: 7045: 7044: 7040: 7036: 7035:Truthkeeper88 7031: 7011: 7007: 7003: 6999: 6998: 6997: 6993: 6989: 6982: 6981: 6980: 6976: 6972: 6968: 6967: 6966: 6962: 6958: 6951: 6950: 6949: 6945: 6941: 6937: 6936: 6935: 6931: 6927: 6920: 6916: 6915: 6914: 6910: 6906: 6901: 6896: 6895: 6894: 6893: 6889: 6885: 6884:Truthkeeper88 6880: 6870: 6869: 6865: 6861: 6857: 6853: 6846: 6841: 6840: 6837: 6827: 6826: 6822: 6818: 6802: 6798: 6794: 6790: 6789: 6788: 6784: 6780: 6779: 6774: 6773: 6772: 6768: 6764: 6760: 6759: 6758: 6757: 6753: 6749: 6748: 6743: 6727: 6723: 6719: 6715: 6714: 6713: 6708: 6702: 6694: 6688: 6687: 6686: 6682: 6678: 6673: 6672: 6671: 6670: 6666: 6662: 6661:hamiltonstone 6658: 6651: 6650:The Open Boat 6644: 6640: 6636: 6632: 6631: 6630: 6629: 6625: 6621: 6617: 6607: 6606: 6603: 6602: 6601: 6578: 6574: 6570: 6566: 6562: 6556: 6550: 6527: 6523: 6519: 6518:Truthkeeper88 6515: 6514: 6513: 6509: 6505: 6500: 6499: 6498: 6495: 6491: 6486: 6485: 6484: 6483: 6482: 6481: 6480: 6479: 6478: 6477: 6476: 6475: 6474: 6473: 6472: 6471: 6456: 6452: 6448: 6443: 6442: 6441: 6437: 6433: 6432:Truthkeeper88 6428: 6427: 6426: 6425: 6424: 6420: 6416: 6412: 6408: 6404: 6400: 6399: 6398: 6394: 6390: 6389:Truthkeeper88 6386: 6385: 6384: 6383: 6382: 6381: 6376: 6372: 6368: 6364: 6363: 6362: 6358: 6354: 6353:Truthkeeper88 6350: 6346: 6345: 6344: 6343: 6339: 6335: 6334:Truthkeeper88 6322: 6318: 6314: 6307: 6306: 6305: 6304: 6300: 6296: 6273: 6269: 6265: 6258: 6257: 6256: 6255: 6254: 6253: 6252: 6251: 6250: 6249: 6248: 6247: 6246: 6245: 6244: 6243: 6242: 6241: 6224: 6221: 6217: 6213: 6212: 6211: 6210: 6209: 6208: 6207: 6206: 6205: 6204: 6203: 6202: 6201: 6200: 6199: 6198: 6183: 6180: 6177: 6173: 6172: 6171: 6170: 6169: 6168: 6167: 6166: 6165: 6164: 6163: 6162: 6161: 6160: 6147: 6144: 6140: 6136: 6135: 6134: 6133: 6132: 6131: 6130: 6129: 6128: 6127: 6126: 6125: 6113: 6110: 6106: 6102: 6101: 6100: 6097: 6093: 6089: 6088: 6087: 6083: 6079: 6075: 6074: 6073: 6069: 6065: 6058: 6057: 6056: 6052: 6048: 6043: 6042: 6041: 6040: 6036: 6032: 6019: 6018: 6014: 6010: 6003: 5992: 5988: 5984: 5980: 5979: 5978: 5974: 5970: 5966: 5965: 5964: 5960: 5956: 5951: 5950: 5949: 5948: 5944: 5940: 5936: 5932: 5928: 5927:User:JohnsoKr 5906: 5902: 5898: 5893: 5889: 5887: 5883: 5879: 5878:Truthkeeper88 5875: 5871: 5870: 5869: 5865: 5861: 5857: 5853: 5852: 5851: 5848: 5847: 5841: 5840: 5839: 5835: 5831: 5826: 5825: 5824: 5820: 5816: 5811: 5810: 5809: 5805: 5801: 5796: 5792: 5788: 5787: 5786: 5785: 5781: 5777: 5763: 5759: 5755: 5750: 5749: 5748: 5747: 5744: 5740: 5736: 5731: 5730: 5729: 5728: 5724: 5720: 5715: 5713: 5703: 5696: 5692: 5688: 5687:Truthkeeper88 5684: 5680: 5679: 5678: 5677: 5674: 5669: 5668: 5664: 5662: 5654: 5649: 5648: 5647: 5646: 5641: 5640: 5636: 5634: 5625: 5616: 5609: 5605: 5601: 5596: 5595: 5594: 5590: 5586: 5581: 5580: 5579: 5578: 5574: 5570: 5566: 5561: 5560: 5556: 5552: 5543: 5539: 5535: 5531: 5527: 5526: 5525: 5521: 5517: 5513: 5512: 5511: 5509: 5505: 5501: 5498:Thoughts? -- 5495: 5486: 5479: 5476: 5472: 5469: 5466: 5463: 5462: 5461: 5454: 5453: 5452: 5446: 5445: 5444: 5440: 5438: 5435: 5431: 5428: 5424: 5418: 5408: 5404: 5400: 5396: 5395: 5394: 5393: 5392: 5391: 5386: 5382: 5378: 5374: 5370: 5366: 5365: 5364: 5360: 5356: 5351: 5350: 5349: 5348: 5344: 5340: 5331: 5328: 5324: 5321: 5320: 5319: 5317: 5307: 5300: 5296: 5292: 5288: 5287: 5286: 5285: 5282: 5278: 5274: 5270: 5269:a new article 5266: 5265: 5264: 5263: 5259: 5255: 5250: 5247: 5242: 5239: 5231: 5224: 5220: 5216: 5212: 5211: 5210: 5207: 5204: 5200: 5199: 5196: 5193: 5190: 5186: 5185: 5184: 5183: 5180: 5178: 5172: 5169: 5159: 5158: 5155: 5152: 5148: 5144: 5140: 5121: 5117: 5113: 5109: 5108: 5107: 5103: 5099: 5095: 5094: 5093: 5089: 5085: 5080: 5079: 5078: 5074: 5070: 5066: 5065: 5064: 5063: 5059: 5055: 5051: 5048: 5038: 5037: 5033: 5029: 5012: 5008: 5004: 4999: 4998: 4997: 4991: 4983: 4978: 4977: 4976: 4972: 4968: 4963: 4962: 4961: 4960: 4954: 4947: 4937: 4929: 4928: 4925: 4924: 4923: 4922: 4918: 4914: 4901: 4898: 4895: 4890: 4889: 4886: 4883: 4879: 4876: 4875: 4874: 4873: 4870: 4867: 4862: 4857: 4855: 4847: 4844: 4843: 4839: 4835: 4826: 4822: 4816: 4812: 4806: 4805: 4804: 4798: 4797: 4796:Did you know? 4792: 4788: 4785: 4781: 4780: 4772: 4769: 4768: 4764: 4760: 4746: 4743: 4739: 4735: 4734: 4733: 4732: 4729: 4725: 4721: 4717: 4714: 4711: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4705: 4701: 4697: 4689: 4680: 4676: 4672: 4667: 4663: 4662: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4658: 4653: 4649: 4645: 4641: 4640: 4639: 4638: 4635: 4631: 4627: 4622: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4615: 4611: 4606: 4604: 4600: 4595: 4587: 4582: 4578: 4574: 4570: 4566: 4565: 4564: 4563: 4559: 4555: 4547: 4543: 4539: 4535: 4534: 4533: 4532: 4528: 4524: 4520: 4510: 4503: 4499: 4495: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4482: 4478: 4474: 4473: 4472: 4471: 4468: 4466: 4464: 4457: 4447: 4446: 4442: 4438: 4426: 4422: 4418: 4414: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4407: 4403: 4402:SarekOfVulcan 4389: 4385: 4381: 4373: 4372: 4371: 4367: 4363: 4358: 4357: 4356: 4355: 4351: 4347: 4340: 4326: 4322: 4318: 4317:SarekOfVulcan 4314: 4313: 4312: 4308: 4304: 4299: 4298: 4297: 4296: 4292: 4288: 4287:SarekOfVulcan 4278: 4275: 4274: 4269: 4268: 4264: 4262: 4240: 4236: 4232: 4224: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4215: 4211: 4204: 4203: 4202: 4198: 4194: 4190: 4186: 4182: 4181: 4180: 4176: 4172: 4165: 4163: 4159: 4155: 4151: 4150: 4149: 4144: 4143: 4139: 4137: 4129: 4128: 4127: 4126: 4125: 4124: 4119: 4115: 4111: 4103: 4102: 4101: 4100: 4096: 4095: 4094: 4093: 4088: 4087: 4083: 4081: 4066: 4062: 4058: 4051: 4050: 4049: 4048: 4045: 4037: 4033: 4029: 4025: 4024: 4023: 4022: 4018: 4014: 4009: 4004: 4000: 3986: 3981: 3980: 3976: 3974: 3967: 3963: 3962: 3961: 3960: 3957: 3953: 3949: 3945: 3944: 3943: 3942: 3937: 3936: 3932: 3930: 3922: 3921: 3916: 3915: 3911: 3909: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3876: 3875: 3871: 3867: 3860: 3859: 3858: 3854: 3850: 3846: 3843: 3842: 3840: 3836: 3832: 3831: 3830: 3826: 3822: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3808: 3804: 3799: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3791: 3790: 3786: 3784: 3768: 3764: 3760: 3756: 3755: 3754: 3753: 3749: 3746: 3724: 3712: 3708: 3704: 3697: 3696: 3695: 3694: 3689: 3688: 3684: 3682: 3675: 3663: 3659: 3655: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3644: 3638: 3633: 3626: 3622: 3619: 3615: 3603: 3599: 3595: 3588: 3585: 3584: 3578: 3571: 3567: 3563: 3558: 3554: 3550: 3546: 3541: 3540: 3539: 3535: 3531: 3527: 3522: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3513: 3509: 3500: 3499: 3498: 3497: 3493: 3489: 3485: 3467: 3464: 3463: 3451: 3450: 3449: 3445: 3441: 3433: 3429: 3425: 3421: 3420: 3419: 3416: 3415: 3403: 3398: 3394: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3383: 3379: 3374: 3370: 3366: 3362: 3361: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3342: 3339: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3324: 3320: 3317:, failure to 3316: 3312: 3308: 3304: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3293: 3292: 3280: 3275: 3262: 3259: 3255: 3251: 3247: 3246: 3243: 3240: 3235: 3228: 3220: 3217: 3216: 3212: 3211: 3204: 3203: 3185: 3181: 3177: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3166: 3162: 3158: 3154: 3151: 3150:#Outline bump 3147: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3141: 3139: 3138: 3129: 3124: 3123: 3120: 3113: 3110: 3108: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3100: 3099: 3092: 3086: 3085: 3081: 3077: 3061: 3058: 3057: 3055:Postlethwaite 3047: 3046: 3045: 3041: 3037: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3028: 3027: 3025:Postlethwaite 3016: 3014: 3010: 3006: 2999: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2989: 2988: 2986:Postlethwaite 2967: 2963: 2959: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2949: 2945: 2941: 2936: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2929: 2925: 2916: 2915: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2900: 2899: 2895: 2891: 2876: 2873: 2870: 2864:...March 2? — 2863: 2862: 2861: 2858: 2855: 2848: 2847: 2846: 2842: 2838: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2829: 2826: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2798: 2795: 2785: 2768: 2764: 2760: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2736: 2732: 2727: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2716: 2712: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2701: 2697: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2680: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2659: 2658: 2657: 2653: 2649: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2634: 2630: 2626: 2622: 2618: 2613: 2609: 2605: 2593: 2589: 2585: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2574: 2566: 2559: 2555: 2551: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2497: 2494: 2490: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2458: 2454: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2442: 2434: 2430: 2426: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2410:Sturmvogel 66 2407: 2400:FAC exception 2395: 2391: 2387: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2370:Sturmvogel 66 2360: 2359: 2355: 2354: 2347: 2346: 2339: 2331: 2326: 2325: 2322: 2315: 2311: 2289: 2286: 2283: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2257: 2253: 2249: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2240: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2206: 2202: 2198: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2189: 2186: 2181: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2170: 2166: 2161: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2150: 2147: 2143: 2136: 2125: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2108:Leonie Frieda 2104: 2103: 2102: 2098: 2094: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2083: 2079: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2067: 2063: 2055: 2054: 2048: 2045: 2044: 2040: 2036: 2027: 2023: 2017: 2013: 2007: 2006: 2005: 1999: 1998: 1997:Did you know? 1993: 1989: 1986: 1982: 1981: 1973: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1956: 1955: 1952: 1948: 1944: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1925: 1921: 1918:Revolution. — 1917: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1901: 1897: 1893: 1883: 1882: 1878: 1874: 1866: 1863: 1861:- 15 articles 1860: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1847: 1836: 1833: 1832: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1822: 1817: 1815: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1804: 1803: 1798: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1779: 1775: 1771: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1758: 1753: 1751: 1745: 1735: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1719: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1686: 1683: 1682:Mike Christie 1668: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1652: 1649: 1646: 1641: 1636: 1628: 1623: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1587: 1584: 1583: 1580: 1578: 1577: 1571: 1569: 1568: 1561: 1560: 1554: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1514: 1507: 1504: 1503: 1493: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1468: 1467: 1457: 1453: 1449: 1439: 1438: 1434: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1421: 1417: 1416: 1411: 1407: 1402: 1388: 1384: 1380: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1367: 1363: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1351: 1347: 1340: 1333:Image reviews 1328: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1315: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1307: 1306: 1300: 1291: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1273: 1269: 1263: 1259: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1245: 1244: 1243:Did you know? 1239: 1235: 1232: 1228: 1227: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1191: 1175: 1171: 1167: 1166: 1161: 1158:As promised: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1146: 1141: 1137: 1136: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1110: 1105: 1098:Tracking page 1093: 1089: 1085: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1061: 1051: 1048: 1047: 1043: 1039: 1032: 1028: 1025: 1018: 1011: 1007: 1003: 998: 997: 996: 995: 992: 991: 970: 966: 962: 958: 957: 956: 955: 951: 947: 937: 936: 932: 928: 924: 901: 898: 896: 891: 889: 884: 882: 876: 872: 871: 870: 866: 862: 858: 854: 849: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 842: 841: 840: 839: 838: 825: 821: 817: 809: 808: 807: 804: 802: 797: 795: 790: 788: 781: 780: 779: 775: 771: 766: 765: 764: 761: 759: 754: 752: 747: 745: 738: 737: 736: 732: 728: 721: 720: 719: 716: 714: 709: 707: 702: 700: 694: 684: 680: 676: 669: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 663: 662: 661: 660: 651: 648: 645: 641: 640: 639: 638: 637: 636: 635: 634: 627: 623: 619: 612: 608: 607: 606: 605: 604: 603: 598: 595: 592: 588: 584: 583: 582: 581: 578: 574: 570: 565: 564: 563: 562: 559: 557: 552: 550: 545: 543: 537: 507: 503: 499: 495: 494: 493: 490: 487: 483: 481: 478: 475: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 465: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 454: 437: 433: 429: 423: 417: 413:<sigh: --> 412: 411: 410: 407: 404: 400: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 386: 385: 384: 383: 370: 366: 362: 358: 354: 353: 352: 351: 350: 349: 348: 347: 346: 345: 344: 343: 332: 329: 326: 322: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 315: 314: 313: 301: 296: 295: 294: 293: 292: 291: 290: 289: 288: 287: 278: 274: 270: 265: 264: 263: 262: 261: 260: 259: 258: 251: 247: 243: 238: 237: 236: 232: 228: 227:Michael David 223: 222: 221: 220: 215: 211: 207: 206:Michael David 203: 202: 201: 197: 193: 188: 187: 186: 185: 181: 177: 176:Michael David 172: 167: 159: 157: 153: 149: 141: 140: 126: 119: 112: 104: 97: 90: 85: 84: 80: 76: 71: 67: 66:User:Jack1755 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 7152: 7146: 7131: 7026: 6899: 6876: 6849: 6833: 6814: 6776: 6745: 6739: 6655:Hi. Did you 6654: 6613: 6581: 6580: 6559: 6548: 6410: 6406: 6330: 6292: 6025: 6006: 5924: 5845: 5790: 5773: 5716: 5709: 5701: 5667: 5660: 5639: 5632: 5626: 5622: 5614: 5562: 5548: 5496: 5493: 5458: 5450: 5441: 5433: 5426: 5419: 5415: 5335: 5313: 5310:Outline bump 5305: 5251: 5243: 5240: 5237: 5229: 5165: 5139:wife selling 5136: 5044: 5028:GWillHickers 5024: 4981: 4943: 4935: 4913:GWillHickers 4909: 4861:Donner Party 4858: 4853: 4845: 4832: 4803:Donner party 4801: 4800: 4794: 4770: 4759:Mister Flash 4756: 4695: 4687: 4607: 4596: 4593: 4585: 4550: 4516: 4508: 4462: 4453: 4437:Auntieruth55 4434: 4399: 4336: 4284: 4276: 4267: 4260: 4255: 4223:Lookie here! 4142: 4135: 4086: 4079: 4074: 4044:Tom Harrison 4040: 3996: 3979: 3972: 3935: 3928: 3923: 3914: 3907: 3902: 3789: 3782: 3776: 3720: 3717:TFA question 3687: 3680: 3671: 3627:. Regards, — 3611: 3576: 3504: 3481: 3454: 3431: 3427: 3423: 3406: 3401: 3393:WP:consensus 3340: 3337: 3334: 3306: 3283: 3272: 3241: 3218: 3206: 3201:YellowMonkey 3198: 3195: 3136: 3132: 3116: 3101: 3095: 3073: 3049: 3019: 2997: 2980: 2977: 2921: 2906: 2887: 2788: 2726:TonyTheTiger 2679:TonyTheTiger 2612:TonyTheTiger 2601: 2569: 2523: 2520:Latest twist 2488: 2486: 2453:Brianboulton 2445: 2403: 2366: 2352:bananabucket 2349: 2344:YellowMonkey 2341: 2334: 2320: 2307: 2227: 2223: 2218: 2214: 2196: 2179: 2139: 2058: 2051: 2046: 2033: 2004:Parysatis II 2002: 2001: 1995: 1971: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1891: 1889: 1870: 1853: 1845: 1831:Geometry guy 1829: 1813: 1802:Geometry guy 1800: 1749: 1742:I submitted 1741: 1715: 1678: 1647: 1626: 1593: 1585: 1575: 1574: 1566: 1565: 1557: 1550: 1521: 1520: 1512: 1494: 1458: 1445: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1413: 1406:Parysatis II 1398: 1336: 1303: 1301: 1297: 1279: 1248: 1247: 1241: 1194: 1193: 1187: 1163: 1143: 1107: 1101: 1057: 1049: 1021: 982: 978: 943: 921: 894: 887: 880: 800: 793: 786: 757: 750: 743: 712: 705: 698: 587:wife selling 555: 548: 541: 533: 168: 165: 137: 135: 63: 55: 43: 37: 7145:This is an 6022:Pull a Moni 5656:opposition. 5417:Thoughts: 5151:Paul August 5041:Khark(o/i)v 4815:quick check 4333:Crazy stuff 4013:Ncmvocalist 4003:this notice 3621:coordinator 3526:sour grapes 3076:Yorkshirian 2958:History2007 2924:History2007 2016:quick check 1797:RegentsPark 1262:quick check 75:Jack forbes 36:This is an 6403:MacCulloch 5901:PMAnderson 5819:PMAnderson 5780:PMAnderson 5289:Thanks. -- 5098:Knepflerle 5069:Knepflerle 5054:Knepflerle 4811:here's how 4261:UberCryxic 4189:Mardi Gras 4136:UberCryxic 4080:UberCryxic 4008:canvassing 3973:UberCryxic 3966:my sandbox 3929:UberCryxic 3908:UberCryxic 3783:UberCryxic 3681:UberCryxic 3625:WT:MHCOORD 3618:WP:MILHIST 3562:SusanLesch 3530:SusanLesch 3488:SusanLesch 3321:or engage 3223:Thank you! 2743:WP:CHICAGO 2696:WP:CHICAGO 2629:WP:CHICAGO 2538:PMAnderson 2368:changes?-- 2160:the author 2012:here's how 1920:LlywelynII 1814:Andy Walsh 1750:Andy Walsh 1559:submission 1319:Matt Lewis 1258:here's how 1068:GamerPro64 857:user:Masem 6919:User:Erik 6879:GA review 6295:Richard S 5846:Gimmetrow 5367:See also 5176:Yomangani 4753:York etc. 4590:Galveston 4519:with this 4489:got it. 3581:All yours 3331:consensus 3242:Thank You 2598:FAC delay 2340:. Thanks 2215:The Times 2197:The Times 2180:The Times 1873:Rettetast 1738:Ah.. um.. 1720:? Best, 1648:Thank You 1631:Thank you 1590:FAC pr/ar 1498:<: --> 1492:Ruhrfisch 1462:<: --> 1456:Ruhrfisch 946:LarryJeff 7094:Karanacs 7079:Karanacs 7051:Karanacs 7002:Dabomb87 6971:Karanacs 6940:Karanacs 6905:Karanacs 6900:Newsweek 6830:Barnstar 6817:Dabomb87 6793:Karanacs 6763:Karanacs 6718:Karanacs 6677:Karanacs 6635:Karanacs 6620:Awadewit 6565:deletion 6504:Karanacs 6490:Ealdgyth 6447:Karanacs 6415:Karanacs 6367:Karanacs 6216:Ealdgyth 6179:Fatuorum 6139:Ealdgyth 6105:Bishonen 6092:Ealdgyth 6078:Karanacs 6047:Karanacs 6009:Awadewit 5983:Karanacs 5969:Awadewit 5955:Karanacs 5939:Awadewit 5860:Karanacs 5830:Karanacs 5800:Karanacs 5754:Mcorazao 5735:Karanacs 5719:Mcorazao 5600:Quiddity 5585:Karanacs 5569:Quiddity 5551:Quiddity 5534:Karanacs 5500:Quiddity 5399:Karanacs 5377:Quiddity 5355:Karanacs 5339:Quiddity 5291:Mcorazao 5273:Karanacs 5254:Mcorazao 5215:Karanacs 5206:Fatuorum 5192:Fatuorum 5084:Karanacs 5003:Karanacs 4967:Karanacs 4897:Fatuorum 4885:Fatuorum 4869:Fatuorum 4821:DYKSTATS 4738:Ealdgyth 4720:Karanacs 4700:Ealdgyth 4671:Mcorazao 4644:Mcorazao 4626:Karanacs 4610:Mcorazao 4477:Karanacs 4417:Karanacs 4362:Karanacs 4303:Karanacs 4193:Karanacs 4154:Karanacs 4110:Karanacs 4028:Karanacs 3993:Feedback 3948:Karanacs 3880:Karanacs 3849:Karanacs 3835:Karanacs 3803:Karanacs 3654:Karanacs 3616:to be a 3614:standing 3545:Karanacs 3508:Karanacs 3432:anything 3378:Karanacs 3335:actually 3279:WP:civil 3254:Ealdgyth 3176:Karanacs 3161:Quiddity 3155:I think 3036:Karanacs 2940:Karanacs 2890:Karanacs 2837:Karanacs 2807:Karanacs 2759:Karanacs 2711:Dabomb87 2584:Karanacs 2550:Karanacs 2506:Karanacs 2496:Fatuorum 2467:Karanacs 2425:Karanacs 2386:Karanacs 2285:Fatuorum 2248:Karanacs 2239:Fatuorum 2201:Karanacs 2188:Fatuorum 2165:Karanacs 2149:Fatuorum 2116:Karanacs 2093:Awadewit 2078:Karanacs 2076:home :) 2062:Awadewit 2022:DYKSTATS 1959:Mcorazao 1943:Karanacs 1784:Karanacs 1660:Ealdgyth 1614:Karanacs 1533:Mcorazao 1478:Karanacs 1442:Question 1433:Contribs 1362:Karanacs 1268:DYKSTATS 1208:Karanacs 1196:Eustress 1126:Karanacs 1084:Karanacs 1031:my note. 1002:Karanacs 961:Karanacs 927:Awadewit 861:Karanacs 770:Karanacs 647:Fatuorum 594:Fatuorum 569:Karanacs 498:Karanacs 489:Fatuorum 477:Fatuorum 428:Karanacs 424:tonight) 406:Fatuorum 399:this one 328:Fatuorum 242:Karanacs 192:Karanacs 148:BrownBot 123:You can 101:You can 7148:archive 7109:later? 6987:Georgia 6956:Georgia 6925:Georgia 6312:Georgia 6263:Georgia 6176:Malleus 6063:Georgia 6030:Georgia 5516:Johnbod 5425:should 5203:Malleus 5189:Malleus 4894:Malleus 4882:Malleus 4866:Malleus 4569:on this 4517:You ok 4493:Georgia 4463:Legolas 4379:Georgia 4345:Georgia 4230:Georgia 4209:Georgia 4170:Georgia 4056:Georgia 3865:Georgia 3820:Georgia 3759:Wehwalt 3702:Georgia 3608:Milhist 3593:Georgia 3478:Piccard 3439:Georgia 3397:WP:NPOV 3348:Georgia 3004:Georgia 2747:WP:FOUR 2700:WP:FOUR 2664:Georgia 2647:Georgia 2633:WP:FOUR 2493:Malleus 2282:Malleus 2236:Malleus 2228:another 2185:Malleus 2146:Malleus 1908:America 1769:Georgia 1724:Georgia 1697:Georgia 1598:Georgia 1408:at the 1378:Georgia 1345:Georgia 1184:MSM FAC 1037:Georgia 875:Bignole 815:Georgia 726:Georgia 674:Georgia 644:Malleus 617:Georgia 591:Malleus 486:Malleus 474:Malleus 403:Malleus 325:Malleus 166:Hello, 39:archive 6860:Cunard 6742:WT:FAC 5892:Alaric 5890:After 5451:and 5162:Donner 4989:ɳorɑfʈ 4952:ɳorɑfʈ 4880::lol: 3698:done. 3307:please 3070:Thanks 2573:Secret 2060:text! 1916:France 1820:(talk) 1756:(talk) 1685:(talk) 1576:Waters 1567:Calmer 1140:TPSers 1054:*Ahem* 1033:Best, 611:WT:FAC 416:WT:FAC 6985:Sandy 6954:Sandy 6923:Sandy 6700:habla 6693:María 6310:Sandy 6261:Sandy 6061:Sandy 6028:Sandy 5145:and 5112:Taivo 4698:.... 4692:ARGH! 4573:Moni3 4554:Moni3 4538:Moni3 4523:Moni3 4491:Sandy 4377:Sandy 4343:Sandy 4228:Sandy 4207:Sandy 4168:Sandy 4054:Sandy 3863:Sandy 3818:Sandy 3700:Sandy 3636:(talk 3591:Sandy 3460:Heise 3457:Nancy 3437:Sandy 3412:Heise 3409:Nancy 3346:Sandy 3289:Heise 3286:Nancy 3119:Okip 3002:Sandy 2998:quite 2662:Sandy 2645:Sandy 2439:FAC: 2318:Mitch 1912:Glory 1904:isn't 1767:Sandy 1722:Sandy 1695:Sandy 1596:Sandy 1523:(UTC) 1497:: --> 1461:: --> 1376:Sandy 1343:Sandy 1035:Sandy 1027:here, 1024:here, 988:Heise 985:Nancy 813:Sandy 724:Sandy 672:Sandy 615:Sandy 361:Moni3 300:death 269:Moni3 16:< 7115:talk 7098:talk 7083:talk 7069:talk 7055:talk 7039:talk 7006:talk 6992:Talk 6975:talk 6961:Talk 6944:talk 6930:Talk 6909:talk 6888:talk 6864:talk 6821:talk 6797:talk 6767:talk 6722:talk 6706:migo 6681:talk 6665:talk 6639:talk 6624:talk 6616:this 6587:e Tr 6522:talk 6508:talk 6494:Talk 6451:talk 6436:talk 6419:talk 6393:talk 6371:talk 6357:talk 6349:here 6338:talk 6317:Talk 6299:talk 6268:Talk 6220:Talk 6143:Talk 6109:talk 6096:Talk 6082:talk 6068:Talk 6051:talk 6035:Talk 6013:talk 5987:talk 5973:talk 5959:talk 5943:talk 5882:talk 5874:here 5864:talk 5834:talk 5804:talk 5795:here 5758:talk 5739:talk 5723:talk 5691:talk 5683:here 5661:UBER 5653:game 5633:UBER 5604:talk 5589:talk 5573:talk 5555:talk 5538:talk 5520:talk 5504:talk 5427:also 5403:talk 5381:talk 5359:talk 5343:talk 5295:talk 5277:talk 5258:talk 5238:Hi, 5219:talk 5168:here 5147:here 5143:here 5116:talk 5102:talk 5088:talk 5073:talk 5058:talk 5049:and 5032:talk 5007:talk 4971:talk 4917:talk 4859:The 4838:talk 4763:talk 4742:Talk 4724:talk 4715:and 4704:Talk 4675:talk 4648:talk 4630:talk 4614:talk 4594:Hi, 4577:talk 4558:talk 4542:talk 4527:talk 4498:Talk 4481:talk 4441:talk 4421:talk 4406:talk 4396:ROFL 4384:Talk 4366:talk 4350:Talk 4321:talk 4307:talk 4291:talk 4235:Talk 4214:Talk 4197:talk 4175:Talk 4158:talk 4114:talk 4061:Talk 4032:talk 4017:talk 3999:here 3952:talk 3884:talk 3870:Talk 3853:talk 3839:talk 3825:Talk 3807:talk 3763:talk 3748:chat 3707:Talk 3658:talk 3598:Talk 3566:talk 3549:talk 3534:talk 3512:talk 3492:talk 3444:Talk 3428:WHAT 3395:and 3382:talk 3353:Talk 3338:read 3327:NPOV 3258:Talk 3180:talk 3165:talk 3137:xeno 3080:talk 3052:Ryan 3040:talk 3022:Ryan 3009:Talk 2983:Ryan 2962:talk 2944:talk 2928:talk 2894:talk 2841:talk 2811:talk 2763:talk 2715:talk 2669:Talk 2652:Talk 2588:talk 2554:talk 2510:talk 2471:talk 2457:talk 2429:talk 2414:talk 2390:talk 2374:talk 2314:here 2252:talk 2205:talk 2169:talk 2120:talk 2097:talk 2082:talk 2066:talk 2039:talk 1963:talk 1947:talk 1935:bold 1924:talk 1877:talk 1788:talk 1774:Talk 1744:this 1729:Talk 1702:Talk 1664:Talk 1618:talk 1603:Talk 1537:talk 1482:talk 1452:this 1383:Talk 1366:talk 1350:Talk 1323:talk 1285:talk 1212:talk 1130:talk 1104:here 1088:talk 1072:talk 1064:here 1060:here 1042:Talk 1029:and 1022:See 1006:talk 965:talk 950:talk 931:talk 865:talk 820:Talk 774:talk 731:Talk 679:Talk 622:Talk 573:talk 536:here 502:talk 432:talk 365:talk 357:this 273:talk 246:talk 231:talk 210:talk 196:talk 180:talk 152:talk 143:you. 136:The 79:talk 70:this 6836:Cam 6783:004 6778:MBK 6752:004 6747:MBK 6703:con 6599:ist 6596:man 6590:ans 6405:'s 5929:at 5318:. 5149:. 4789:On 4341:. 4191::) 3725:? 3589:. 3528:. - 3341:any 3329:or 3213:) 2739:BIO 2692:BIO 2625:BIO 2608:FAC 2487:Re 2356:) 1990:On 1341:. 1236:On 1170:004 1165:MBK 1150:004 1145:MBK 1114:004 1109:MBK 888:pho 794:pho 751:pho 706:pho 549:pho 7117:) 7100:) 7085:) 7071:) 7057:) 7041:) 7008:) 6994:) 6977:) 6963:) 6946:) 6932:) 6911:) 6890:) 6866:) 6858:. 6823:) 6799:) 6769:) 6724:) 6683:) 6667:) 6641:) 6626:) 6618:. 6593:hu 6584:Th 6524:) 6510:) 6492:- 6453:) 6438:) 6421:) 6395:) 6373:) 6359:) 6351:. 6340:) 6319:) 6301:) 6270:) 6218:- 6141:- 6107:| 6094:- 6084:) 6070:) 6053:) 6037:) 6015:) 5989:) 5975:) 5961:) 5945:) 5884:) 5866:) 5836:) 5806:) 5760:) 5752:-- 5741:) 5725:) 5717:-- 5693:) 5685:. 5606:) 5591:) 5575:) 5557:) 5540:) 5522:) 5506:) 5488:}} 5482:{{ 5405:) 5383:) 5361:) 5345:) 5297:) 5279:) 5260:) 5252:-- 5221:) 5118:) 5104:) 5090:) 5075:) 5060:) 5034:) 5009:) 4973:) 4919:) 4840:) 4827:. 4813:, 4793:, 4765:) 4740:- 4726:) 4702:- 4677:) 4669:-- 4650:) 4632:) 4616:) 4608:-- 4579:) 4560:) 4552:-- 4544:) 4529:) 4500:) 4483:) 4461:-- 4443:) 4423:) 4408:) 4386:) 4368:) 4352:) 4323:) 4309:) 4293:) 4237:) 4216:) 4199:) 4177:) 4160:) 4116:) 4063:) 4034:) 4019:) 3954:) 3886:) 3872:) 3855:) 3847:. 3841:) 3827:) 3809:) 3765:) 3709:) 3660:) 3639:• 3631:Ed 3600:) 3568:) 3551:) 3536:) 3514:) 3494:) 3446:) 3426:. 3384:) 3355:) 3305:: 3256:- 3182:) 3167:) 3082:) 3042:) 3011:) 2964:) 2946:) 2930:) 2896:) 2843:) 2813:) 2765:) 2749:) 2717:) 2702:) 2671:) 2654:) 2635:) 2590:) 2556:) 2512:) 2473:) 2459:) 2431:) 2416:) 2392:) 2376:) 2321:32 2254:) 2207:) 2171:) 2122:) 2099:) 2084:) 2068:) 2041:) 2028:. 2014:, 1994:, 1965:) 1949:) 1926:) 1892:do 1879:) 1790:) 1776:) 1731:) 1704:) 1662:- 1620:) 1605:) 1539:) 1484:) 1385:) 1368:) 1352:) 1325:) 1302:A 1287:) 1274:. 1260:, 1240:, 1214:) 1132:) 1090:) 1074:) 1066:? 1044:) 1008:) 967:) 952:) 933:) 925:! 895:is 867:) 822:) 801:is 776:) 758:is 733:) 713:is 681:) 624:) 575:) 556:is 504:) 434:) 426:. 367:) 275:) 248:) 233:) 212:) 198:) 182:) 154:) 81:) 7159:. 7113:( 7096:( 7081:( 7067:( 7053:( 7037:( 7004:( 6990:( 6973:( 6959:( 6942:( 6928:( 6907:( 6886:( 6862:( 6819:( 6795:( 6765:( 6720:( 6709:) 6697:( 6679:( 6663:( 6637:( 6622:( 6520:( 6506:( 6449:( 6434:( 6417:( 6391:( 6369:( 6355:( 6336:( 6315:( 6297:( 6266:( 6114:. 6080:( 6066:( 6049:( 6033:( 6011:( 5985:( 5971:( 5957:( 5941:( 5880:( 5862:( 5832:( 5802:( 5756:( 5737:( 5721:( 5689:( 5602:( 5587:( 5571:( 5553:( 5536:( 5518:( 5502:( 5477:) 5436:" 5401:( 5379:( 5357:( 5341:( 5293:( 5275:( 5256:( 5217:( 5154:☎ 5122:) 5114:( 5100:( 5086:( 5071:( 5056:( 5030:( 5005:( 4969:( 4915:( 4836:( 4817:) 4809:( 4761:( 4722:( 4673:( 4646:( 4628:( 4612:( 4575:( 4556:( 4540:( 4525:( 4496:( 4479:( 4439:( 4419:( 4404:( 4382:( 4364:( 4348:( 4319:( 4305:( 4289:( 4233:( 4212:( 4195:( 4173:( 4156:( 4112:( 4059:( 4030:( 4015:( 3950:( 3882:( 3868:( 3851:( 3837:( 3823:( 3805:( 3761:( 3744:3 3741:8 3738:F 3735:J 3732:T 3729:C 3705:( 3656:( 3596:( 3564:( 3560:- 3547:( 3532:( 3510:( 3490:( 3442:( 3380:( 3351:( 3205:( 3178:( 3163:( 3134:– 3078:( 3038:( 3007:( 2960:( 2942:( 2926:( 2892:( 2839:( 2820:— 2809:( 2761:( 2745:/ 2741:/ 2737:/ 2735:C 2733:/ 2731:T 2729:( 2713:( 2698:/ 2694:/ 2690:/ 2688:C 2686:/ 2684:T 2682:( 2667:( 2650:( 2631:/ 2627:/ 2623:/ 2621:C 2619:/ 2617:T 2615:( 2606:( 2586:( 2552:( 2508:( 2469:( 2455:( 2427:( 2412:( 2388:( 2372:( 2348:( 2250:( 2203:( 2167:( 2118:( 2095:( 2080:( 2064:( 2037:( 2018:) 2010:( 1961:( 1945:( 1922:( 1900:s 1896:s 1875:( 1867:- 1786:( 1772:( 1727:( 1700:( 1616:( 1601:( 1535:( 1501:° 1480:( 1465:° 1430:/ 1381:( 1364:( 1348:( 1321:( 1283:( 1264:) 1256:( 1210:( 1162:- 1128:( 1086:( 1070:( 1040:( 1004:( 963:( 948:( 929:( 881:Ω 863:( 818:( 787:Ω 772:( 744:Ω 729:( 699:Ω 677:( 620:( 571:( 542:Ω 500:( 430:( 363:( 271:( 244:( 229:( 208:( 194:( 178:( 150:( 120:. 98:. 77:( 50:.

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

Index