User talk:Kevin/Archive 6

6512:

Ottawa Citizen, 3 November 1977, pg5. 5. ^ "Mall 'prophet' jailed again", Ottawa Citizen, 5 November 1977, pg 5. 6. ^ "Prophet hauled out of Commons gallery", Ottawa Citizen, 18 October 1977, pg 3. 7. ^ "Gagged protester gets heave-ho", Ottawa Today, 18 October 1977. 8. ^ "Masked protester returns", The Ottawa Citizen, July 15, 1978 9. ^ Jane Taber "'Prophet' fined for shouting at Nov. 11 service", Ottawa Citizen, 3 January 1986 10. ^ "Anti-war speech costs man $ 250", Globe and Mail, 3 January 1986 11. ^ "Cormier condamné", Le Droit, 3 January 1986 12. ^ Steve St. Laurent. "Visiting 'prophet' no average preacher", Calgary Herald, 18 July 1981, A11. 13. ^ Cathy Lord "Visions compelled search for God", Edmonton Journal, 25 July 1981,G13. 14. ^ Leslie Cole "Self-proclaimed prophet: Showmanship not his style", Whitehorse Star, 26 August 1981, pg 3 15. ^ Nicholas Read "'Divine gifts' inspire ex-executive to tramp the land with a message", Vancouver Sun, 3 October 1981 16. ^ Maclean's Magazine, pg 40 31 August 1981, People Section. 17. ^ Richard Caron "Raymond Cormier sillonne le pays pour precher Dieu", Le Soliel, 28 July 1986 18. ^ Elizabeth Hanton "Prophet sees Canada as the new Israel", The Halifax Daily News, 11 August 1986 19. ^ Sylvia Reddom "Shares Faith With Canadians - Religion More Than Going To Church Says Travelling Born Again Christian", The Charlottetown Guardian, 20 August 1986 20. ^ Emily Dyckson "Wandering prophet shares his faith", The Weekend (St. John's), 30 August 1986 21. ^ History of Federal Ridings since 1867 22. ^ Kernaghan R. Webb Focus Magazine September1984 'RJC: Cormier makes people nervous. Especially authorities.' 23. ^ Elections Canada On-Line | General Information 24. ^ Kathleen Patterson "Prophet Chooses Park for Vigil" The Kansas City Times pg. 3A 13 September 1976 25. ^ Robert W. Butler "Prophet Plans Appeal of Conviction" The Kansas City Times 2 November 1976

7978:) Kevin said this was unreliable and I have not argued the point or reverted it once this ruling was made. I did not write it or invent it. As in point 1 please stop shooting the messenger. 3.) Unlike Little Grape, who says above "I clearly know where Sinden lives" I am unaware of where Sinden now lives, or for how long. I would be interested to know how he does and with what accuracy. Perhaps he should declare his interest or real identity. 4.) As Little Grape has done his constant damnedest to out me (a serious Wiki offence, but no one has done anything about it...) I can now tell him that Yes, he is right, as I stated, I was in the 'Hey Jude' film. I am the girl standing behind and to the left of Paul, in the white dress, black belt and brown hair. THAT is how I know that the two Sinden brothers were in the film (who are behind and next to Ringo) and that is what I told Mark Lewisohn. Satisfied now? Sorry to disappoint you and your obsessive conspiracy theory. 5.) I would also suggest that the articles that have been so furiously tampered with by Little Grape are returned to their state of 24-hours ago and that the two of us are then excluded from any Sinden-related articles, as suggested. I would not have a problem with that. 9943:). I would also like to make it clear that I am not Alex Jamieson, despite any similarity you might think you see between our writing styles. By all means, use checkuser to verify this. It is inaccurate to say that I wrote the bio, although I did promote it to GA status, and subsequently personally delisted it as a result of the GAR consensus. Incidentally, I'm surprised to see my writing described as a 'screed' - haven't I got the right to defend the article in the way I see fit. I am a literate person with a background in philosophy and I don't write anything that I think is not relevant. I put a great deal of effort into putting together a cogent case for retention of that article. I would also like to state here that I believe there is evidence of collusion between editors in the AfD process. I will return to the matter within the next 12 hours. 1956:. Not a single user has confronted or remotely approached the policies and sources I listed. I am not arguing users do not believe a unique section is warranted. I've been explaining why that is wrong. Whatever repetition you've assumed is likely the product of me simply repeating arguments that went unrecognized or unseen. Even so, I still responded to off-topic and red-herring accusations, which derailed discussions and forced us back. If you could please examine the sections I linked in "random section break" and come back with a dispute that goes beyond "user x, x, and x believes a unique section is not warranted" please do. I've requested you do this 4 times now. Take your time. :D If you have a specific dispute, please quote it in exact-form. If you deny the violations/accusations I mentioned above the have been asterisked, list them now. 5119:

based on his usual policy. BLP1E states that "f the event is significant, and if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate." If the "event" here is Bardwell's refusal to officiate an interracial marriage, obviously he played the most substantial role in that "event", because it occurred solely because of his own conduct and beliefs. He is not "likely to remain low profile" given that state and federal officials are calling for his resignation or sacking; there is a federal lawsuit proceeding against him; and he has also given at least one interview to a national news network, and probably will give more. It is far from clear on its face that WP:BLP1E applied here, and there certainly was not a consensus that it did within the AFD.

10356:

any seems to be in connection with the disputes concerning Sathya Sai Baba. For the details, see the AfD. Anyone who takes it to deletion review will be wasting his time. The other outside people involved in this are saying just the same, and so would any others. To the extent the subject is aware of this and wishes an article, the only advice I can give him is to publish in conventional publications and hope for conventional reviews in reliable sources. If that should ever be the case, I will write an appropriate article myself if the sources are sufficient to satisfy me that the article will be acceptable, but there is no point asking me until they are available.

8165:. Though I am not an expert in physical chemistry, I know a little about it and could restart the project, but only if logger and Marie agree to join too. I hope others will also jump in. We could then have general discussions about groups of articles, which (secondary?) sources to use for the general articles, how to distribute info over several articles, etc. This can only work if logger9 agrees not to insert new content without consensus at the project pages first. The two of them also need to get more constructive imho - that's why at first some supervision would be welcome. I'd like to propose this idea at the TP of liquid, but what's your opinion? Regards, 7887:

articles were in the Sunday Times, when they were in the Daily Mail. I have a copy in front of me! He claims that Debretts was not called 'Distinguished', yet if you look at the ISBN and the source that I used, it was then called that. It only changed its name recently. Please help to stop this apparent personal obsession that Little Grape has with deleting so much of the Sinden article. I cannot get away from the fact that it seems personal. But we have been here before and I thought (after your suggestion) that we had 'drawn a line' but apparently not... Captainclegg (talk) 22:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

7249:. There have been editors on both sides of this debate, showing that the policy does not have a bright line, but must be interpreted by contributors to a deletion debate. It is not the place of the closing admin to draw the line, but to determine where the debate participants have done so. As for the "weak keep" mention, when weighing up the arguments I placed less weight on those whose opinion was "weak keep", and noted that one keep argument did feel that there may be BLP1E concerns. In my opinion, this weakens that keep argument in that rather than refute the main point of debate, it acknowledges it. 6395:

independent reliable news sources in existence than was shown in the version just deleted. Being the subject, it was not COI on my part to want the article to be drawn on the references available, and unfortunately, in my zeal to exhort others to do it, I may have rubbed some people the wrong way. The problem has been all the references are pre-internet and not available online for free. Please have a look here, In particular, I ask you pay close attention to the big difference in header between #1 & #2, the independent, reliable news source in Canada´s Capital chose on their own to use.

7901:

than I am aware of) surely proving that he must know Sinden and have some personal beef with him to be so specific. As I stated previously when all this kicked-off originally, I would be happy to 'draw a line', but Little Grape seems hell-bent on re-writing the facts to suit his aim. He has now incorrectly removed the word "Distinguished" from the reference to an honorary position held by Sinden at the British Humanist Association. I have not however corrected it for fear of falling foul of your ruling! But again, I appeal for your intervention.

9452:

such as the recording of one of his songs by Nina Simone why?) and others, all seeming to be inspired by malice and cunning use of Wiki language - and became incensed. I have no axe to grind and no great interest in Sinden (I knew his brother) but I felt this Editor seems to reflect the worst aspects of this incredibly useful and valuable site. I suggest Editors like Captainclegg, SlimVirgin, Berettagun, Pharaoh of the Wizards, OhNoitsJamie, Seb az86556 and yourself get together and examine who Little Grape is and why he does what he does.

9251:, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are other anons who simply haven't taken the extra step of voicing their concerns on the talk page. As Splash also said, "popular articles will always get vandalised", but I'm wondering if we can see whether anons' contributions add up to a net positive for the article--at least for the time being, while there's evidence of anon interest in the page. I have this article on my watchlist, and, if you decide to unprotect it, I'll be glad to let you or RPP know if the vandals start to dominate. Thanks, 7863:

perfectly good edits designed to remove puffery/PR guff? All I can really do is again indicate to you my original edit, and leave it to you and others to judge whether the edits should have been reverted. As I said above, I'm not sure what the solution is to this sort of thing - and the 'East' article is a great example of how it can all go horribly wrong unless editors go through the lengthy process of a) complaining about it, b) digging up hundreds of edits, c) opening a case, and d) hoping that proportionality will prevail.

1405:

positive ones. If no middle ground can be found, I ask that the article be deleted completely. There are plenty of bona fide and citeable references to back the claim that the article for Owen is very one-sided. This man is no saint and has hurt many people with his business practices. I see no reason why pointing out his business dealings in anyway is a violation of BLP. I assure you, Knowledge has a responsibility to its readers to entitle them to all of the information available in a biography, good and bad :) . Cheers!

1872:

is a complete falsehood. Overall, I'd say I've been the one "talking sense." I always use policy and sources to back up my rationale. Everything I say is supported by available information. Not opinion, not agenda, just what is out there. I do agree, however that this is a major waste of time and am disappointed that the discussion has not followed a more-strict path of policy instead of relying on every user's POV regardless if it conflicts with reliable sources and standard (and indisputable) policies.

4138:) which is to ignore the larger question of suitability of newspapers as sources for solid science based articles (whatever one takes that to mean), and instead address the kernel that crystalized the dispute - to wit, replace the contentious NYT reference with the original source material. There seems to be support for this (and the absence of any disagreement), so ... could you unprotect the article again? If you're interested, I've got an updated version with the contentious reference replaced at 7698: 4692: 31: 4832: 10078:

retained that account, and my reasons were accepted by ArbCom, who registered the alternate accounts). Incidentally, between my two accounts, I don't think I can be accused of SPA. To be sure, my limited time means that I only make major edits on subjects that really interest me, but there is some variety there and I do make a point of tidying things or improving style where necessary in any article I'm reading (a habit from working professionally as an editor in the past!)

6570:

part; we can look for someone local to the papers to go read the microfiche but I'm not seeing notability here, more like sourced Local Character. Good for them. My home town had a local character too, and I have not (and will not) write a WP article on him. If you take a look, the "news" seems to be mostly Caused a fuss at the local courthouse and got arrested for Disorderly Conduct kind of thing. This is NOT notability. -- Atama頭 21:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

8158:

they duck and get personal (not always attacks, just personal in other ways). Marie wrote she doesn't want to answer me because even if we reach consensus at T:liquid, logger would continue his edits at other places. I should perhaps give up then, but imo this bunch of general articles (liquid, solid, glass, solution, etc) is simply to generally important. I think most can and should yet be improved. If anything, logger and Marie seem to agree about that.

8617:

family. I would like to work on bringing an article about Chris C. Kemp back as he is an important executive driving innovation inside the Agency (cloudcomputing) and I believe having a wikipedia article on Chris C. Kemp serves the important purpose of offering a trustworthy source about his background and career for US government officials. Could you provide me with guidelines on how to make it more appropriate for inclusion on wikipedia?

6586:

did - well, he ran for office and lost, caused a ruckus at a variety of events, and travelled across the country acting like a prophet. Most importantly, though, he got coverage from multiple reliable third party sources while doing so. Also, your characterization of the sources as "small newspapers" is off—the majority of them are major dailies in markets of well over one million. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

4640: 2060: 9146:, it is also less stringent in it's inclusion criteria, so generally I find that if an athlete fails the former then they also fail the latter. That said, GNG was not addressed in the debate, only ATHLETE. In my opinion, those arguments based on ATHLETE were easily strong enough to show a consensus for deletion. Are yuo sure we want to keep an article where the strongest keep argument is "barely notable"? 2913: 9858:, you closed this as redirect when only one person suggested as such. This is not reflectant of the consensus driven discussions held at xfds. The reason I did not want this article redirected there was that the title wasn't a good search term for redirection there. Next time, if you would like to speak your opinion, please leave one, but don't close an AfD against consensus. Thank you. 5960:

move , it is well to follow the letter of rules such as that. I will say that I myself have found it very helpful to offer as few opportunities for complaint as possible. BTW, though h=not yet literally required, it also helps to give explanations in the close, even when the closurees are obvious, as with the one below. Same reason. I find Twinkle makes it especially easy to do so.

6535:

case the debate centered around a somewhat subjective guideline of notability, and therefore the arguments explaining why a subject is or is not notable are much stronger than an argument that simply states that the subject is or is not notable. I didn't see any indication that those making arguments had ignored the media coverage, but that they had seen and assessed that coverage.

4944: 2349:", are you saying that WP's search facility can find things in the history (e.g. in non-current text)? If not, then your point is moot as it would only be people who know about TE's past who could find it. Would anyone, say, that gets annoyed by TE's future actions (and he's entitled to reappear at any time) be able to (easily) search for TE's track record and find it? 9467:

events with regard to Clegg/Baretta/Parnathus‎/IPedits/Daunt/Whatever perhaps you'd reconsider the Sinden article ban after reviewing my edits on that and other Sinden-related articles. Without exception, those edits sought to improve the article by removing puffery and unsupported false claims. Plus of course there's now a lot of clean-up work to do here:

10414:

do so. Heaven knows there's enough of that going on here already! On your advice I'm withdrawing my intention to request a review. If Kevin Shepherd is reading this, he may be grateful for your offer to write the article yourself one day. Perhaps he should send you a copy of one of his books, something a librarian would always appreciate ;-) All the best.

4314:- please elaborate on what the issue was with the most recent page deleted. I don't understand how "KEVIN" went through every reference in my most recent version and saw "nothing at all that would indicate that he notable." The articles clearly validate the stated experiences of Mr. Andrew Bentley and not sure what I am missing here. Please advise 4100:; I've been frustrated with the extremely dubious / libelous vandalism there for a while. It really got annoying when someone uploaded the pic and repeatedly uploaded it to the image. It took me a few days of ranting on Commons before I could get them to just speedy delete it as a copy-vio uploaded solely for (particularly egregious) BLP vandalism. 2563:. The newer sources, specifically from MSN.COM and from ABCNEWS meet what he claimed and what others also agreed with him on, meet the Reliably Reported Standard. As to Undue Weight, it says we have to judge based on the reliability of the information, not the number of editors, that is right in the UNDUE WEIGHT criteria, with a specific quote as 10007:(and most of the content wasn't even verifiable). Biographies can't be scraped together using passing references and the subject's own self-published works. After further thought I'd have closed the AfD exactly as Kevin did. As for a relation to Alex jamieson, was it pure coincidence that you appeared to do the GAR just after he wrote the article? 3687:

either article.", and nobody, including the editors advocating delete based on notability advanced that as a reason for deletion. I have no issue with an editor evaluating the sources and coming to that conclusion and advocating deletion. However, advancing it as a reason for closure when the issue was not even raised is not proper. --

9407:

which is absolutely untrue, as there is a link in the article anyway. Little grape is going against everything that you had previously instructed the two of us about and now making life hell for another editor. Please intercede. It is unfair and I am trying to stick to what you, rightly, had previously said. Enough, surely, is enough.

10449:. He added some references and has now restored the article to main space. The new refs seem to rule out a G4 deletion, but you may want to take a look and see if the case for notability has been made. If not, take whatever process steps that you think best. I personally think this is a Keep because of the major improvements. Thanks, 10052:

self-publication: I agree that self-published sources should not be used for factual information about a person's life, but the guidelines allow them to be used for authorial opinion, as I attempted to show in my 'screed' (!), and the article is largely about the subject's views. I'll wait to see what DGG says, assuming he replies.

7924:]. And, yes, as I clearly know where Sinden lives and Clegg says he doesn't know - perhaps he can stop adding the false claim that Sinden lives on Bishop's Avenue? Perhaps a sensible solution is indeed to ban both of us from any Sinden-related articles, and allow other editors to fill the breach. I'm happy with such a solution. 5210:. BLP1E does not say that events cannot be covered, only that articles should not be about people only known for one event. Your opinion on whether biographies can be reworked into successful articles about events is not relevant. Variants on "Keep but rename" were common. If you do not reopen I will open a deletion review. 7153:. I wonder if you're inclined to revisit the notion that this one falls under BLP1E: the fact that some editors are inclined to see it that way doesn't make it so. This one feels an awful lot like no consensus. No big deal, I suppose -- it can be recreated as evidence of notability continues to accumulate. regards, 8939:, you indicated that there was a clear consensus to delete. That one was a bit weird in that a number of people !voted twice. So after the relist by Tim there was only one new !vote to delete and one to redirect if I'm counting correctly. Could you look that over again and reopen the discussion? Thanks, 9451:

To answer your question (above), I've not been a Wiki editor before but I noticed the extraordinary editing on the Marc Sinden article by Little Grape, went across to his page, saw the equally extraordinary edits he has done elsewhere - on the Jonathan King article (constant removal of verified facts

9160:

Thanks for the explanation. No, I am not sure it should be kept (hence my "weak keep") and don't plan to contest the close. For future reference, you should be aware that amateur athletes are quite often notable, at least in the United States. The US puts a lot more emphasis on college sports than

8743:

Thanks for the help. Its a bit of catch22 cause the previous wiki article was used for that very purpose, i.e. providing an overview of the man's career and current position. it was used by many as a reference for a brief bio (e.g. where he sat on a panel etc). There is a profile coming out in a week

8157:

Hi there Kevin, greatly appreciate your intervention between Marie Poise and logger9. I read you've come to one of the same questions I asked Marie, she refused to answer me. I'm not sure why she should change her mind. Both appear willing to discuss content, yet whenever a straight question appears,

7886:

But I am trying to STOP the vandalism of this site. I am not trying to antagonise Little Grape at all, merely stop him/her from constantly deleting sourced material that doesn't suit his POV. I am undoing his wrong and inaccurate edits of sourced material. He tried to claim that the 'Relative Values'

6940:

The attack was a terrorist attack, carried out by a Muslim terrorist who listened to and followed a radical Imam, and did his best to kill as many people as possible. Had this be a Christian shouting "Jesus Saves" and opened up on Mulims, everyone would be screaming about Christian terrorists! mab91c

6877:

did not publish it. You might need a magnifying glass even after the expanded image to read the script, the three images down, three on the left. I was much younger then, interpreting the world through the prism of the Bible of things appearing darkly in the Future. These days I learn about it in the

6569:

I think its borderline, and if the subject weren't causing such issues, I'd probably let it slide. Knowledge is not paper. But self-declared prophet who did what, ran for office and lost? Uh, can we say Gastrich? Not notable, seriously. His sources are small newspapers from the seventies for the most

6370:

I made a deliberate choice to ignore any canvassing that had gone on, and base my close on the strength of the arguments alone. The arguments revolved around whether the several media mentions added up to notability. As the notability guidelines are just that, and have no bright line to delineate the

6178:

and the similar articles where you just said "Delete" without further explanation? In particular, why did you think my suggestion of redirect was inappropriate--there was a second comment to that effect also. It would have helped to give a rationale in the first place. Could you please respond on my

5959:

I have no idea what the ultimate reason behind it may be, that was the rationale given by those supporting an overturn. I commented there that a request that you not close early might have been more appropriate. In general, especially if you think there are people who are going to question your every

5835:

The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. YES! Every new publication of his is WIDELY

5343:

Provided the user was the person credited as the creator so the image was valid in the first place, deleting something released into the public domain that is potentially useful for educational purposes merely because the creator changed his/her mind is not in keeping with Knowledge's mission, right?

5244:

In your closing rationale you seemed to only consider the binary choice of keep or delete, whereas the third option of preserving content was not mentioned. It is absolutely correct that we should not have an article on Bardwell, but I read the debate - including comments by some of those arguing for

3219:

specifically, is much appreciated. That page has now been sunsetted (and I hope never to need to bring it back) but the work you did there (whether by bringing articles forward, reviewing them, or protecting them... or even by questioning or criticizing the process!) was of great help to the project.

3063:

1871:

Well, Kevin I've responded to your post a few edits up and would hope you respond in kind. NPguy, I've done the same for you. You've held on to the inaccuracy that the coverage has been limited to Israeli-based media and interests. I devoted 3 well-crafted paragraphs explaining to you simply why that

1488:

Yep me too. For this one I almost re-protected (even outside of our work at Lar's page vandalism is pretty well at the excessive level IMO). I left it because of the discussion you had had and the fact that others were also reverting - nevertheless I'd be happy to protect again if the same types of

1259:

Again, if I didn't have a long history editing the article and if WF didn't have no history editing the article then this wouldn't have been a perceived problem. I also tried to kindly take the issue up with WF first. Anyways, I will be sure to bring the issue here first if (and hopefully there won't

445:

I got your note, and I've been watching the page. The dispute seems blown out of proportion, particularly by one of the editors (Wikifan). I may make comments from time to time (for example, when bad ideas come up on how to organize the article) , but I don't expect to be deeply engaged. Also, I'm

10413:

a little further down), then that's fair enough, as long as the 'policy' is applied consistently. It is up to those in positions of authority to decide on what direction Knowledge should take, for better or worse. I agree that it is not the place to carry on a fight, and it was never my intention to

9472:

Good catch on checkuser - I'd considered such a request but thought there was *far* more flushing out to do. I thought Clegg was too smart to get caught twice, so would have used a better method to mask his IP. I was surprised that Daunt was the same as Parnathus‎; I thought Daunt was 'a source very

9406:

page, he is now being highly insulting and derogatory, saying that Sinden is "less notable than my goldfish", lying in saying that I had "claimed to be a 'good friend'" of Sinden's (which I would not claim to be) and that I had "expunged completely" Jeremy Sinden's name from the Marc Sinden article,

7973:

1.) Angela Brooks (a Daily Mail column writer) wrote the regular series Relative Values in 1994. The particular article quoted is a full-page, two-fold interview with Donald Sinden and his son Marc, discussing his schooling, among many other things, from their respective viewpoints. It is a separate

6534:

Thanks. that's a bit clearer. When an AfD is closed the job of the closing admin is not to assess the merits of the article, but to determine the outcome of the deletion debate. It is the job of those participating in the debate to weigh up whether those articles you mention show notability. In this

4771:

Kevin, take a look at Vogue (Magazine), they have a cover on their wiki page amongst others. You confirmed my page yesterday which I do appreciate, now you are using up my time trying to finish up this page. I am allowed to place covers on the Wiki page. Have the owner of Wiki contact me directly

4341:

in sufficient depth to show that he is notable. I did look at each and every reference, however in each case where the material was not self-published (i.e. a press release, Facebook etc), Bentley was not the subject, and was only mentioned in passing. If you feel that the deletion discussion linked

4057:

Haha, I seem to be fighting a loosing battle there, and not even a quality, going-down-in-a-blaze-of-glory style one, either. I'm just going down hard! I think I'm starting to look more and more deranged :P . . . . I'm really not understanding the grounds for the vociferous defense the article is

2740:

Sorry, hard to read another admin's mind, I know, but I was hoping to see how many of the CU-confirmed socks he was going to admit to. That's a pretty standard interrogation technique: ask a question for which you already know some info, and the subject doesn't know how much you know. That quickly

770:

Hi Kevin - I'm curious to know why you removed Dougweller's notification on the Markoff talk page about the block he made. Seems to me that it is relevant for other editors who have been dealing with him to know, given the edit history and I've seen similar notices many times on article talk pages.

747:

Okay, that seems a bit extreme, but it looks like it's being discussed already. You might like to use a clearer edit summary in future, and maybe actually link to the user essay you're invoking; one anon IP markup-clicking test that lasted six hours and one subtle vandal edit that went unnoticed for

330:

In my view, I am doing my best to stay on discussion and have tried to direct the conversation towards the first steps that you outlined first, but I am sure my responses have gotten off-topic as well. If you could clarify about my problematic editing, I would try to correct. I am interested in your

10321:

For the record, although I have had occasional email contact with Alex Jamieson, I have never had contact of any kind with Brian Steel or Robert Priddy. And of course there has been no 'factual' revelation of collusion on my part. Similarly, Moreno's claim elsewhere that I have a sockpuppet account

10051:

I won't pursue deletion review if success is unlikely. I have emailed DGG to ask his opinion - I had never heard of him before his submission to the AfD process, but I have since read his user page and I respect the wealth of experience he brings here. I think it is a moot point about biography and

9957:

I'm pretty sure I have made no claims whatsoever as to who you are or are not similar to, and have no intention of raising a checkuser request. Neither did I say that you had written the bio. As for my use of the word "screed", it is not intended in a derogatory fashion, but as a word to describe a

9567:

Hi there. :) I noticed that you were the closing administrator on the above listed AfD, and I'd like to ask you to take a second look at the discussion. Your primary reason for deleting was BLP concerns over sourcing and inclusion criteria. However, as far as I understood matters, Knowledge doesn't

7802:

The problem with 'East', the 1975 play by Steven Berkoff, is that the article was hijacked and written to a) feature Sinden's much later production instead of the original, b) insert Sinden's website instead of the writer's website, c) falsely insert Sinden as a writer in the 'category' section, d)

6865:

taking exception to his projections. I sent a copy to the Prime Minister, all Opposition Party leaders, The Pope´s Ambassador to Canada and all Princes of the Catholic Church in Canada, the Leaders of all other Christian Denominations, and to Jewish and Islamic Religious Leadership. The only one to

6450:

The editor who nominated this AfD edited it in the past to be as NN as possible when there were many more references than were in the article you deleted. It was absolutely beyond the pale of any understanding of what NPOV means. This is my last comment on this matter unless I am invited to respond

6394:

When another user explained the process for deletion, i.e. an uninvolved Administrator reviewing all pertinent information, I was confident while there was only one more !vote to delete than to keep, WP:N would prevail and the article would be kept to be cleaned up and improved. There are many more

6353:

To the extent that this was no consensus, I would be very concerned about closing as delete, in light of other recent discussions. But I do think it's worth remembering that only three of the keep votes came from people who weren't canvassed (and one of those was "weak keep"). I was surprised not

5992:

community and lay Catholic community. In addition, Moure's nonprofit leadership expands beyond his full time executive role at the Knights of Columbus to a post on the board of the National Fraternal Congress of America. Can provide secondary source documentation attesting to affiliation with other

5641:

Kevin, I'd like you to consider refraining from closing BLP AfDs until some of the discussion about them level out. You seem to be working to be beat of a drummer that's not entirely matched to current consensus and policy on these topics. "I disagree with relisting BLPs, which is why I have been

5131:

In conclusion, I believe the best result would have been to close as "no consensus", given the lack of agreement and the lack of clear applicability of policy. This of course would not preclude a later AFD if the story does not develop any further and once the interest has calmed down (see largely

5118:

First, I disagree that the applicability of BLP1E was established conclusively, or not refuted, however you want to phrase it; there certainly wasn't consensus that this was such a case. It's particularly difficult to push Bardwell into that category, where the relevant "event" is something he did

4843:

rule and you start labelling me as a bad editor? Or what did you try to say when you wrote "Well thanks for letting me know what kind of editor you are". I have 1,883 "Unique articles edited" and without me a lot of "Ukrainian" articles would be out of date, I do not deserve this kind of attitude.

4364:

Hi Kevin, discussion going on on my talk page as well. Just thought I should add, I am aware I may have erred, I didn't notice the fact you'd declined the speedy until after I'd seen it as recreation of deleted material. I have userfied the article currently so the editor may carry on working on it

3686:

No, I don't believe they considered the sources that were presented in the AFD. But that isn't material. The delete was closed because "The 2 main sources noted here as proof of notability seem to confer notability on Rosas Farms rather than Al Rosas specifically, as he is not the main subject of

3308:

Kevin, I obviously don't have any clue as to how to use wikipedia or else i wouldn't be posting here, but it looks like you deleted the tommy sowers article. I'm not really sure why that was. It met the primary notability criterion... how do you decide? At what point does a poltiical candidate go

2605:

Anyhow, the fact that both you and SANDOR have BOTH said that A) the original sources were not up to meet verification; and then BOTH agreed that it was UNDUE WEIGHT to use those to put in an entire paragraph. Both of you were VERY clear on that. So I have improved the sourcing and dropped it down

2587:

It is becoming clear to me that you do not intend to actually listen to what other editors are saying. Regardless of what you perceive as the merits of your argument, you have lost. There is a clear consensus against your position. Now you are resorting to casting aspersions on other editors rather

2537:

Also, I have not done anything to the page since this morning. But I am prepared to make a case against the people that are clearly trying to spike this story, they are just as guilty if not more so: the edits I am putting in have met Verification, NPOV, and whatever the other one was as far as an

1937:

The information is not characterized by POV or individual arguments. The reports are objective and generally factual, those who interpret criticism or negatives does not mean the sources themselves qualify as critical opinion. Though it might paint a bad/good (depending on who you are) image of ME,

545:

The delete arguments were essentially that this person was not notable of themselves, but only in connection with Bush. After FT2's rewrite, several editors argued that their opinion had not changed, because the underlying issue was still the same. That, and the new opinions that the article should

164:

Hiya Kevin. I wasn't aware that just because an article had previously been prodded, means it no longer can be tagged for speedy deletion. Surely if the criteria apply, they apply whether or not it was prodded? (I've also had a look through the guidelines and cannot find anything where it discusses

10355:

Simon Kidd asked me to comment here. As for the article: I will give you my opinion that there is no possible chance for an acceptable article here, until substantially more is published about the man and his work than there is at present. As I said at the AfD, the best likelihood of there being

10282:

Kevin R. D. Shepherd’s profile (due to his non-notability), there is little doubt that Kevin R. D. Shepherd will soon write a foaming-at-the-mouth diatribe against Knowledge that will invariably (and predictably) make accusations of "sectarian polemics". Kevin Shepherd upheld Knowledge's views and

10077:

Regarding Alex, no it wasn't coincidence - he did bring the article to my attention, after he saw my comments about Shepherd on Amazon. He was aware that I had an interest in the subject, and had defended him before, when I edited the Holotropic Breathwork article under my original account (I have

7900:

Thank you for that advise about the vandalism. I was unaware of that. I will take more care with that in future. May I refer you to the Talk:The Bishops Avenue page where Little Grape has made it very clear that he must know where Sinden lives personally and even describes the house (which is more

6585:

This is why I put considerable weight in the variety of references. He's garnered media coverage from every corner of Canada, which I think makes him somewhat more than a local character, and these references have come from several different years, making him not a flash in the pan. As for what he

6563:

Weak Delete - The number of references to reliable sources almost caused me to make a kneejerk "keep" argument. Normally I would say that they would clinch this as an establishment of notability. But I looked into the long discussion on the talk page, and the last two AfDs. Particularly compelling

6439:

Kevin, I am really surprised by your brief comment. I will try to be clearer and more exact in my words. I asked you to consider the difference between references #1 & #2 in the news story headers chosen by the major, independent reliable news source in Canada´s Capital one week apart, as they

6219:

The goal of creating this article to add to the quality and quantity of information about computing technology on Knowledge. Because HP bought several enterprise software companies during the past four years, this article attempts to help classify the portfolio to aid Knowledge readers. Also after

6206:

I added more Knowledge internal links, cited outside references and worked to improve the article based on your feedback. I also asked for comments and suggestions from the editors in the WikiProject computing. I received only one suggestion, to change the bulleted lists into prose, and so I made

2213:

You obviously weren't on the receiving end of TE's actions. So many of us poor unfortunates were—and never forget that there's a reason for his sanctions. So am I to understand from your point above that I can get my original request addressed if TE decides to reappear (at any time in the future)?

2029:

Uh, wait are you denying you've taken a side? You've endorsed the IP's POV without question. I have no problem with that, but are you disputing this? Look, you accused me of acting tedious and I explained why that wasn't the case. If you wish to no longer mediate I would hope you wait on resigning

1712:

The diff shows that Abtract and EGMichaels recently edited. The article's edit history (which the complainant did not include) shows the most recent edit by AH is three months old, and AH's edits then were reverted by other editors, not Abtract. (I'm also not sure that broadening the definition of

10006:

Brevity is the soul of wit, so criticising overly long contributions at AfD is fair game. You can take it to deletion review if you like, but as the only arguments for keep were weak you will almost certainly be wasting your time; liking Shepherd's work is not the same as demonstrating notability

7862:

I understand and appreciate that view from your viewpoint; perhaps you might take also into account the view that the editor in question has been previously blocked for socking in support of Sinden-related articles (months before I took any interest) and appears to simply traipse around reverting

7779:

is clearly extremely close to Sinden, which makes any collaboration extremely difficult. Even if collaboration is impossible, it should be fairly easy to trim false, misleading and unencyclopaedic content out of the article without screams of 'vandal' arising every single time? If it were just me

6511:

1. ^ "Preacher Arrested on Mall" Ottawa Citizen 3 September 1977 2. ^ Dave Rogers, "Second police warning for God's emissary", Ottawa Citizen, 10 September 1977, A2. 3. ^ "Emissary from God undaunted", Ottawa Citizen, 22 October 1977, pg 2. 4. ^ "The self-styled prophet hauled off Mall again",

6328:

Hello Kevin, From reading your close, it seemed that you agreed that this article met our guidelines (WP:N in this case) for article inclusion. Given that the !vote count was quite close and the delete !votes provided very little in the way of policy-based arguments for deletion, I don't see the

5839:

The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, or had works in many significant

3596:

article. Granted, most of the BLP cases in that article were not controversial (especially the Pre-20th century section, where it was apparently not that much of an outrage for a man to take on a 13-year-old girl as his bride or to get her pregnant). But, anyway, I am not saying that just because

2230:

Just caught your change on my watchlist. Your edit summary suggests the request was made by Tennis expert. May I ask when you were contacted and what reason was given? The user still has all of his editing rights intact, and I'm certain if he had removed it himself, it would have been reverted in

1886:

What is this "strict path of policy" you mention? Multiple editors have said that policies are open to some interpretation and require editorial judgement to implement. Those same editors have also said that their opinion is that the El Baradei-Israel connection does not warrant it's own section.

1792:

The reason you gave was that the diff provided shows Abtract editing or reverting an article that AH had recently edited. The diff doesn't show any editing by AH, and the article history shows that AH's most recent edits were from January (not recent) and reverted by other editors (no interaction

8226:

Unfortunately, I'm of little use when liquids are discussed in such detail. I've been educated in thermodynamics and dynamics/mechanics of crystalline solids, but know very little about liquids. I understand more or less what they are discussing and am familiar with the terminology, but I cannot

7057:

because there's no context whatsoever to the quote. Some editors want to push what they see as the "truth," but without knowing if she was joking (in an obvious comedy movie), and without any kind of reliable sources establishing notability, it doesn't belong. What's your take on that? Thanks in

6804:

I reverted your removal of the Fort Hood shooting/massacre as your reason was unfair. I never suggested that any killing by a Muslim was automatically Islamic terrorism. However, if a devout Muslim yelling "Allahu Akbar" before killing 13 people and wounding 31 others does not qualify as Islamic

1985:

I think you accusing me of acting tedious when I was simply responding to your questions which were tedious and repetitive in nature is inappropriate and wrong. If that is your only complaint, can I assume you agree with the simplified post above? In terms of mediation, I have no qualm with your

9466:

Hi - I can't find the 'unblock|your reason here' bit for an appeal, but the issue is somewhat moot as 48hrs have passed. I would accept in any case that my sense of humour overcame me with regard to the suggestion that BarretaGun turned his shotgun around 180 degrees. However, in view of recent

5699:

Ah, well I'd further include you seem to almost only close BLP discussion and always (as far as I could see) close them as delete. In addition there are a number of doubts about your closes on those BLPs expressed on this page. I think the situation is pretty clear and I'd like to urge you to

5127:

biography is unlikely to be warranted"). Many of the comments in the AFD were, in fact, urging that the article be refactored as an article on the "event," however characterized, and many of those expressly urging deletion nevertheless conceded that the "event" was notable. At a minimum, this

2609:

It's also funny because most of my 'critiques' were more generalized against the subject of the article- Sandor has accused me of being a conservitive, which is laughable and the fact that he has gone all out to stop this means either the VAN TOY argument which was the only thing I REALLY said

405:

I saw one IP add he word "penis" randomly, one IP try to add some spam links, and a whole lot of nothing else. Unless there have been multiple edits that have been completely erased from the history so there are no records that anything happened in the first place I see nothing like hat you are

8616:

Hi Kevin, You recently deleted an article I submitted on the NASA Ames Research Center CIO Chris C. Kemp. I personally also work at NASA Ames and I am surprised to find this article be nominated for deletion, since it aims to provide a genuine and objective bio of a valuable member of the NASA

7893:

Let me be very clear. You two are having an editorial disagreement over the article content. When you disagree with something it is not automatically vandalism, and you should not mark it as such. The only thing you should be marking as vandalism is "page blanking and adding cruel or offensive

7040:

5049:

Hi Kevin, I appreciate your support on the 21 Magazine page. However, other Admin people decided to delete vs. actually help the page. I spent hours researching and trying to build the page. I didn't start the page two years ago, but they decided to delete the entire page anyway. I am very

3127:

Gucci Mane's article is missing the whole bit about how he shot at some people and was charged with murder. i made an account to fix it but i'm not going to make filler edits just to confirm my account.. please either unprotect so i can fix it, or fix it yourself, or ask someone else to do it.

1404:

tab. The original article was fraught with misinformation, omitted information and self-bravado. The most recent 'corrected' article is nearly as bad. Please read the discussions in the Article regarding Owen. In fairness, the page should reflect all of the aspects of this person, not just the

1375:

Hi Kevin - Theo789 is back, ignoring consensus and editing as he pleases. He's quoted you in support of his position on neutrality on the talk page - I don't know if you agree with him or not, but I figure it's best if you speak for yourself and decide where you want your comments posted, so I

5183:

The closing admin's job os not to decide how a particular policy applies, but to determine consensus. Those who make arguments decide how they each apply whichever policy they are arguing. As to your second point, I find that biographies are usually a poor starting point for an article on an

9354:

Decided to edit the Marc Sinden article - immediate over rule by Little Grape virtually accusing me of being Sinden. I research Little Grape. Dozens of edit warring warnings and insane lunacy on Jonathan King article, Black and several more. Time someone flushed this crazy out of Knowledge.

4062:

and a few other associated policies. Seems like a bunch of Letterman fans wanting to think that a frequently-recurring guest star is actually somehow encyclopedically notable. I should probably just take a step back (and stop telling other people to take a step back, lest I be accused of

2624:

I found the following was posted by you on one of our discussions.....""If you can present a reliably sourced report (i.e. mainstream media reports) then it could stay, so long as it passes the hurdle of undue weight, otherwise it must be left out. Kevin (talk) 06:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

6488:

He was arrested on a number of occasions in the late 1970s for disturbing the peace in Downtown Ottawa. He was convicted, and later breached his probation and was sent to jail. On the first day of televised debate in the House of Commons, security guards removed Cormier from the gallery.

680:

I really don't want this to get in the way of mediation either, but it had the appearance that WF followed me to the article and then he started reverting my edits. I politely asked him to then just leave the article alone temporarily, which he has done in words and will hopefully do in

10325:

You may be interested to know that this issue originated in 2006, when Moreno (as user SSS108) took exception to the citation of one of Shepherd's books in the Sathya Sai Baba article. Shepherd was in complete ignorance of the objection at the time. The original argument can be seen on

2000:

Honestly, are you going to ignore what I wrote above? I essentially condensed the entire side and complaints (fairly, I hope) of the Israel/ME section dispute which he endorsed. If you want to be a mediator that is okay, I agreed to that. But if you take a side, stick to it or concede.

4902:

I did not say/think you are a dick, I tried to say I was/am not a dick; clearly I offended you and apologise for that, but it was not my intention! I only choose that picture cause it reflects the way I would like editors to work like, I died not try to give another message with it. —

10314:

attacks is going to change. It is Moreno’s personal opinion that Kevin R. D. Shepherd’s moralistic, puritanical, self-promoting, self-centered, self-serving, bigoted, narrow-minded, dogmatic and poorly researched views will keep him out of the Knowledge spotlight for years to come.'

5438:(and there are other sources). The ACLU alleges that Bardwell knowingly broke the law. Doesn't that sound as if he has been "charged" with a crime? The governor has made a similar statement and called for Bardwell to be fired. A civil (although not criminal) suit has has been filed. 8572:

While examining the editorial actions of a sockpuppet I ran across a number of bad faith nominations. This was one of the deletions I overturned after finding a significant number of sources pointing to its notability. Please let me know if you are not comfortable with this action.

6210:

Full disclosure: I work for HP, however, I am a journalist by academic background and wrote this article as a neutral, objective submission. The idea being to state the name of the product and what it does—with no hype or advertising. This is similar to Microsoft’s page that lists

7413:

I have not shied away, I just haven't answered in exactly the form you feel you require. It is clear that no matter what I say here you will disagree with the closing, as is your right, so to me there is little point in further discussion. I think your link above was meant to be

6820:

Unfair? I don't think so. There is much speculation in the media as to whether it is terrorism or not, and until the media move one way or the other we should not be labelling it as such. Your assertion that yelling "Allahu Akbar" makes a killing into a terrorist act seems like

5642:

systematically closing them where I see them." is one example. I realize that I'm coming at this from a viewpoint that your view on the issue is wrong and therefor I'm biased. But I think admins need to be careful about taking admin actions in areas they have strong opinions.

3909:. Unfortunately I do not think he does. You need to find something published where Meshbesher is the subject, and it is more than a trivial mention. I see hundreds og Google News hits, but they are mostly the type of passing mention you would expect to see of any trial lawyer. 1947:

The 3 core policies of BLP: NPOV, Verifiability, and NOR are policies. They are generally-accepted standards and are not meant to be a guide (and therefore prone to interpretation) by users. If I remember correctly, you referred to the policies as a guide and are allowed to be

294:. I've said this many times, but I truly am considering a BLP noticeboard and possibly filing an incident report if this is not resolved soon. I hate the courtish process of those kinds of forums but I cannot seem to identify another alternative. Let me know what you think! 1910:

By strict path policy, I mean justifying extreme disputes and accusations with policy and accurate information. For example, many statements directed at my posts were rather short-sighted and factually inaccurate. The following accusations were made by NPguy, IP, and you:

9308:

I am of the opinion that leaving debates on BLPs open for an excessive amount of time is generally to be avoided, in fairness to the subject. So in some cases I will close as soon as a clear consensus has formed, and in other cases, I basically treat it as an uncontested

1434:. It is only right, though, that I offer you the opportunity to unprotect; please let me know (here is fine) when you've a moment whether you will unprotect or whether you'd prefer that I take the issue to RFPP in order that a broader discussion might be had. Thanks, 709:

with a summary of "Persistent and significant violations of policy on biographical articles by multiple IPs"? The last IP edit was in mid-March, and checking the article history I can't find a single anonymous-IP BLP-violation edit to the article in the past two years.

3627:

as delete based on the sources being about Al Rosas' farm rather than about him. However, none of the AFD participants raised this as an issue. Based on the discussion in the article, these sources were accepted as supporting notability. Please review. Thanks. --

9473:

close to Jonathan King', and that Parnathus was a 'throwaway account' used by Clegg while he was at an internet cafe or something, as that entity came in strong right from the start with agressive tactics and personal abuse and was bound to get blocked at some point.

6371:

notable from the non-notable, I looked at why those on each side felt that the same guideline supported their opinion. Quite simply, the delete arguments were stronger, in that they explained why they felt that the several media mentions did not add up to notability.

5406:

thrice and citation needed tag for twice, without providing any reference, by himself, through edit. Despite warning him, he did it again. Please take some serious action. The user wasl also previous blocked for doing such with his another (thice) created article

574:

A poor choice of words, what I meant was that this person is not notable herself, and is only known at all (in reliable sources) for her connection to Bush. The mentions in articles primarily related to other subjects do not demonstrate notability for Fitzgerald.

5250: 1244:

Thanks. I'm not going to ask the IP for the same, because of their long history editing that article. I have asked the IP not to make any further reports regarding you without running them by me first. I've added a request at the mediation when you get a chance.

309:

I have offered to mediate there, however for it to be successful you will both need to agree to it, and you both still seem to be too busy sniping at each other. I also need time to read the length discussion that has taken place to date to mediate effectively.

7122: 2408:. I support that action. Please note that that's two editors who believe that the evidence in this case should remain visible. I'm happy to discuss it further, but I request that the page remains visible during the discussion and subsequent RfC (if necessary). 6983:

Well; you've made yourself clear, Kevin me'lad, but using vulgarities is frowned upon by most in civilized talk. Perhaps you could get out of your shorts, bathrobe, & slippers, get up out of the basement, and go see if your mommy needs a nice cup of tea.

5229:

Giving an argument less weight is not the same as ignoring it. I am happy to provide the deleted content to be merged elsewhere, or reworked in user space but I will not be re-opening the AfD, as I do not see how that would alter the consensus formed there.

4277:

notable, but the article is a mess. I am reluctant to invest time in it, though, if the article is going to be deleted. Could you take a look at the references and decide whether there is enough evidence of notability to make the article worth salvaging? --

10330:. Moreno was subsequently banned from Knowledge, and since then he has created multiple websites and blogs as an alternative forum for his views. It now seems that anyone who has sided with Shepherd is a target. Shepherd's own version of events is presented 10124:, another highly controversial figure whom Shepherd has stridently criticised. Surely in any real-world context (legal, political or commercial) this would be the subject of an investigation, and the interested parties would be suspended pending the outcome. 8543:

Kevin, DGG, NW, I am with you to mediate this case. Would it be possible to have your opinion on whether or not COI and related protectionism maybe a factor (I left a subsection at the bottom of ANI thread). This might help to develop a solution. Thank you.

9122:

or one of the more specific guidelines. I think it is a legitimate point of debate whether the GNG is met here and with a 2 to 2 !vote I don't see how you can say there is consensus that it is not met. As such, I would appreciate an explanation. Thanks,

3591:

I figured you would note the difference in scope, but I still felt that I would point out that article as an example. My point is that I have seen plenty of articles at this site list famous or other such documented BLP cases relating to them...such as the

5154:

RE-reading the AfD, I still see very little argument on the keep side that argues that BLP1E should not apply. On the other hand, almost every argument for deletion cites BLP1E as the reason. As I stated, the policy argument in this case is the stronger.

3657:

Who flagged the sources as inadequate? None of the editors advocating deletion addressed the sources that were raised in the discussion. The only editor contesting the sources actually changed from delete to keep after reviewing them more thoroughly.--

1697:

The arbitration remedy defined interaction as Abtract editing or reverting an article that AH had recently edited. This is what the diff shows. As this was after several previous blocks for breaching the same remedy, I took a broad view of "interaction".

8022:

Kevin, is it possible that with the almost exclusively targeted deletion of any and all articles concerning Marc Sinden (including sourced material) and the very intimate knowledge of his travel plans, not as far as I can see published in any paper etc.

7655:

I'm of the opinion that the draft version does not address the concerns that were raised at the AfD, being that his accomplishments do not show notability. I think you should run this by some of the contributors to the AfD and see what their opinion is.

7676:

Please review Heydon Prowse discussion page. Per your suggestion of finding common ground, both parties have agreed that page should be reverted to pre-edit "war" to the revision of approx May 2009. Would you revert to this version or unlock the page?

5122:

Second, even where BLP1E applies, the solution isn't necessarily to delete outright, but rather to perform "a merge of the information and a redirect of the person's name," which all presupposes that there is a separate article about the "event" ("a

4293:

I thought the recent AfD decided on the issue of notability for this person, in the negative. I looked at every reference in the new version, and see nothing at all that would indicate that he is notable. What you do from here is up to you though.

6091:

I guess I've seen too many cases where the close is sneakily reverted, so that I have come to prefer this method. If you like I can restore the earlier history, but then I need to leave it in place to maintain attribution for the merged material.

10220:

also bears his hallmarks, and links directly to one of those Moreno blogs I've just cited, which is why I've added the cautionary second comment. (By the way, note that this last blog is citing with qualified approval a non-self-published online

9880:

Then perhaps you should have made that argument at the debate. When an individual is notable for only one thing a redirect from the name is usually appropriate. If you have an issue with the naming of the redirect, then create an alternate one.

3597:

other articles do this means that it is right. And, I stated before, I do not feel strongly one way or the other that you deleted the Pedobaiting article. I simply felt the need to address you with what I was thinking when I saw it now deleted.

804:

No prob. I tend to use my rollback sparingly because it's like sudden death - I think I saw somewhere that there's a fix that can be added that will give you an option for an edit summary but I haven't had a chance to really look into it.

1139:

The page about Dupre was a mere biography page and your deletion is clearly abusive. You could have added some kind of POV tag but you chose to delete it without warning. For this, your capacities as administrator should come under question.

5337: 2572:

So, the question is, to both Kevin and to Sandor Clegane, you were saying one thing, both agreed, and now that the two issues you both specifically cited as making the entry are being met, you are now changing the argument to what now???

6507:

Cormier ran in the 1984 federal election. He received 71 votes out of 40,000 as an independent in Ottawa Centre. He ran again in Ottawa Centre as an independent in the 1997 federal election. He received 91 votes out of 50,000. References

6329:

consensus for deletion (I'd say no consensus leaning quite hard for keeping, though given I was one of the !vote keep folks, I may have a biased perspective). Any chance you'll take another look at it and reconsider that close? Thanks,

9595:

There is a significant difference in that in this case the majority was for deletion, and the opposite was true for the male list. As for other possible solutions, those who argued to delete did not think so, and my close reflects that.

2606:

to a single sentence and you guys are still against it. The only thing I seem to be running against is the Megan Fox (word that rhymes with VAN+word that rhymes with TOY) club here at Knowledge, which by itself is almost laughable.

6215:

as "a spreadsheet-application written and distributed by Microsoft for Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X. It features calculation, graphing tools, pivot tables and a macro programming language called VBA (Visual Basic for Applications)."

5603:. I do not feel any need to create wikidrama at a DRV over your good faith closing with minutes of NW's relisting, but do feel that in the incubator others may be able to strengthen it and address the weak delete comments. Thank you. 4525:, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Knowledge. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the 2769:

Apology accepted, but really unnecessary--again, not like you could read my mind, and it seems to have been an inconsequential issue. I still don't see any further evidence of good faith forthcoming, I'm not inclined to unblock him.

629:. I did a geolocate for both addresses, and the ISP is in the same state and city. You'll have to click on their users and scroll down to "geolocate" to see the link. The site doesn't allow unique pages, every hit is simply listed as 9579:

I'm just asking you to take another look at your decision on the AfD, and if you could, maybe explain why this case is different enough from the one I linked above for this to merit a delete and the other to merit a keep. Thank you!

10103:

Speaking of coincidence, I do genuinely suspect that the motivation for the AfD nomination, as well as several of the submissions, were sectarian, and probably connected with wider issues. For instance, was it pure coincidence that

6598:

I'm still thinking that he's more "color" than "substance" but clearly what we need here is more input from other editors. This is a borderline case at best, one I would not like to close. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:36, 14 February 2009

9573: 7831:

Without taking into account the rightness or otherwise of your edits, to me it looks like I warned you for edit warring with Captainclegg, and you immediately went and reverted at another article. Do you see the problem with that?

10207:

Thanks for the advice. By the way, Joe Moreno has wasted no time in crowing about the decision to delete the Shepherd article. He was obviously keeping a close eye on developments, and posted the news on at least two of his blogs

876:

was a legitimate edit that the same IP later sourced (probably after they realized that they needed to). Still, two edits, no more severe than the common "i don't like him" vandal, and nothing compared to others on that page like

10361:

As for more important matters: those who are closely concerned with him, for or against, should stop using Knowledge to fight with each other. The usual eventual result of this sort of combat will not be of benefit to anyone.

346:

I saw your initial responses, so I'll wait for Wikifan and see what his/her opinion is. Really, what is needed first for a successful mediation is a statement from both that mediation is desired, and then wait for the next step.

3558:

You mean you feel that people would have started adding cases to the article? And if so, there are articles here that list well-documented cases of scandals, controversies, or even a case about this specific topic...such as the

2194:

Seeing at TE is no longer here, there is no importance whatsoever in others being able to find out the history. With all this talk of "crimes", I might start thinking this is some kind of personal vendetta. Good thing we have

1807:

I feel that Abtract was gaming the system by making that edit, and that the block was appropriate. As I have already said. As I also said I have used my interpretation of the remedy, and if your is different you may unblock.

7780:

then fine, but myriad other editors have found this and other Sinden-related articles have Clegg (and his previously exposed socks) all over them as gatekeepers. I'm not sure what the solution is apart from opening a case?

2124: 7639:

and added some refs making the claims to notability (I think) pretty clear. I think this is probably ready for a Deletion Review but I'd really value your opinion on whether more work is needed on it first. Many thanks.

9509:

Someone in RL mentioned my account in a way that threatened my future employment, so I felt I had no choice. I'd sort of forgotten that SUL means that I would have needed a rename at 20 other wikis to have any effect.

8319:

Um, yeah, I asked about the AfD and you said there was consensus at AfD. I did ask you to either reopen or change the close and you refused. I guess we talked past each other, but I felt my request was pretty clear.

3468:

Could you explain how the sources discussed and linked to don't meet WP:N? Your basis for the close would seem to rely on your reading of the value of those sources so I think the close should touch on them. Thanks.

3309:

from being not worthy to worthy? I thougth it was when the became notable based on independent press? That seems to have happened to me... There are at least 10 online articles in the past month about the candidate...

10322:

is mistaken. As I have already pointed out, I have retained my original pseudonymous Knowledge account for a reason unrelated to the Shepherd case - this reason satisfied ArbCom, who registered the alternate account.

6224:. This will add to the body of knowledge of the types of ways that software can help companies better manage their data centers, similar to the IBM pages that describe Tivoli and WebSphere software for example. (See: 1759:

Well, I'd like to unblock him myself, but I thought I would check with you first. Is there a reason for blocking him, or is the arbitration enforcement to become "to never edit an article that AH has ever edited"? --

8830:

Next time you need to move the page back into article space, rather than cutting and pasting the content. I've merged the histories of both versions now, so you need to check that your preferred version is current.

9985: 9940: 6070:

recreated as a redirect, instead of having been redirected directly? I was thinking of maybe using some of the material in the history to merge in the Trevor Brennar article, and this way it is impossible. Thanks!

2477:

Well we have been experiencing a number of edits which seem to do nothing other than impersonate User:Tennis expert recently. I'm uncertain as to how you validated that the request came from the user in question.

8954:

I have amended the closing statement to explain how I assessed this, essentially I merged duplicate arguments into one for each editor. That done, the consensus is clear and deletion is the only possible outcome.

8442:

where consensus seems to be forming that "current squad members" who have not yet competed can be considered notable until such a time that they either fulfill the requirements or they are removed from the squad.

4019:

What is "absurd" is your statement that Stephanie Birkitt was not known to the public until the recent revelations about Letterman's behavior. If that were true, the article would not have such a long history.

10337:

In my opinion, Moreno's prompt blogging only reinforces the suspicion that Knowledge editors in sympathy with him were involved in the Shepherd AfD nomination. It seems to me that the horse is still whinnying!

7974:

article from the Sunday Times article and in no way connected, as far as I can tell. I photocopied it from my local library. 2.) I included a sourced blog which stated that Sinden lived in The Bishops Avenue. (

6629:

If it is true that with whatever judgment you judge, you will be judged, again, on second glance, your comment above is a very loud invitation to comment. By that standard and bar you set, the delete !votes of

9437:: "Rotate shotgun 180 degrees. Engage toe. "PULL!"". What is the point in warning him about his behaviour if he just continues and gets nastier and more personal? Please stop this, as you said that you would. 8744:

or so on spacenews, hopefully that will have the looked-for bio/background info. meanwhile, could I get access to the deleted article to draft the updated version so it'll be ready when the profile comes out?

7756:

You two are so clearly unable to work collaboratively that I see few options. I have made suggestions previously regarding working together that were ignored, and no changes in the attitude of either of you.

4739:

Kevin, the photo is legitimate on the "21 Magazine" webpage. If you have any questions, please talk to me first before putting up a deletion notice. I would appreciate it! Thank you! Have a wonderful day!

789:

A mistake - I clicked rollback by mistake, but never ended up at the confirmation screen so I thought it did not go through. I'd remove my rollback if it wasn't bundled with admin tools. Thanks for the note.

3705:(i.e. insufficient depth of coverage) overrode the other opinions. I knew that those particular articles would raise question, so I made particular note of them. Perhaps I should have expanded my reasoning. 665:

Oh, wait so the user confirmed both IPs were use? I know some routers alternate IPs randomly. It is odd though because at times it seemed the two IPs were unique, often caring different views. I don't know.

2277:

Yes that's right. They have nothing to do with us, except that I saw the request there, and felt it was appropriate to act on it. I would have done the same no matter how I came to be aware of the request.

5600: 2538:

edit against a Biography of living person goes, so I am well within my rights to report them for edit warring, because they are clearly trying to stop a legitimate edit that they personally don't like.

10400:

I'll second the thanks. Whatever the motives of other editors in the AfD process, I have found you to be even-handed and objective. If the current Knowledge tendency is towards exclusion (and btw I saw

939:

Wheel warring is bad. No need for it. If consensus ends up that a particular article doesn't need the protection we think it does, that's fine. It will be interesting to see if the vandalism resumes. ++

8253:

Hi Kevin, Would you either reopen this AfD or close it as no consensus? I can't see the article at this point, but I don't think there was consensus for that deletion (no !votes to delete...) Thanks,

7952:], which he has later erased from his talkpage. QED. Having exposed him, may I therefore request you consider blocking him indefinitely from editing his own article and any Sinden-related ones? Thanks 7894:

language" or similar material(from WP:3RR). At this point I am inclined to ban you both from any articles related to Sinden. I'll have to think on that a bit. Kevin (talk) 22:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

985: 705:

Your "Note - if I have protected a page with the summary..." comment tails off into nothing at the top of your talk page, so forgive me if I'm missing an obvious point, but why have you semi-protected

6551:

Kevin, please bear with me, but your comment is such a loud invitation for me to reply. I apologize for copy and paste, but I feel this partial comment from Hobit´s Talk should be part of this record.

4826: 4756:

what do you mean by "legitimate". It is clearly a magazine cover, and therefore not public domain. I placed the deletion notice to inform you of the problem, and give you an opportunity to remedy it.

1551:

article? I looked over the history, and it's not like there's like 7 IP's vandalising the article every day!! I've seen articles getting locked up until 2010 here...you might be interested in reading

8363: 8180:

That could work, but first both of them need to learn to work together, and we're still waiting for a sign that this is possible. I was thinking of trying to get them to collaborate on the lead of

5832:

The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. ABSOLUTELY. He wrote THE go-to compilations of animal guide meanings, dream interpretations, and much, much more.

3255:

It was discussed on the functionaries-en list and I think the protection standards at RFPP have moved a bit in the good direction, and it collected some good data so I think it was useful. Best. ++

3099:

It was discussed on the functionaries-en list and I think the protection standards at RFPP have moved a bit in the good direction, and it collected some good data so I think it was useful. Best. ++

1327:

We recently had an edit war on the Stallone page. I have take it to the discussion section of his page. PLease take a look and see what you think. There has to be some sort of middle ground here.

900:

I do not distinguish between different types of vandalism for BLPs, so mild or severe all receive the same treatment. On the second issue you will need to explain the relevance of that diff to me.

2809:

with the following edit summary '(decline prod, a google search reveals lots of hits in Czech, that I can't evaluate but suggest that it may be notable -- this needs discussion)'. Please consider

6033:(if I may intervene) The Kevin closure was totally right in my opinion. Perhaps -if admin here agrees- you can recreate the article in your userspace, address concerns on AfD adding sources, and 1376:

figured I'd mention it here. Meanwhile, any suggestions about how to get him to understand how things work around here? He doesn't seem to have learned from his block, not surprisingly. Thanks

10283:

policies when Moreno was banned on Knowledge for exposing Mel Etitis and his Peter J. King Sockpuppet Cover-Up. Any argument that Kevin R. D. Shepherd may make against Knowledge will ultimately

9212:

Would that we could all use lifeless, gray, colorless, and boring language in order to make your pathetic life have meaning. Do you protest people who don't speak to you in a monotones as well?

8098:

Yeah, I figured that out. I have no idea how a website's own claims of being sued are a reliable source, or how something unreported in the press so far as I know is even notable, but whatever.

4311: 4266: 7993:

Oh this just gets funnier and funnier, if it weren't for the fact that the encyclopaedia continues to be corrupted by ever-greater numbers of editors who see it as just one giant vanity page.

6604:

As I know how to read, four delete opinions were based on an erroneous statement in the 1st place. Where is the fairness in the process? Did the closing Administrator even look at that? Peace

5302:

trivia - which you reverted - of him living in The Bishops Avenue (which is true) also states that he is in a relationship with Heather Mills (which is untrue and/or he has repeatedly denied)

1308:

on the FH talk page? I was thinking the idea would be to end this dispute and not show up on articles or talk pages in which WF is involved as well, but maybe I am missing the point? Thanks,--

9849: 4134:

on cyclical variations / using the NYT as a source, seems to have abated (well, of course it's abated in the presence of a protect), but I think we have a solution (see down at the bottom of

4035:

I actually used the term "notable", which has a different and specific meaning here than "known to the public". Prior to recent events my opinion is that Birkitt was not notable as guided by

6805:

terrorism, then we are setting the bar way too high. Screaming "Allahu Akbar" prior to unproviked violence carries the meaning "I am Muslim and I am killing you because you are not Muslims."

6720:

still exists, because the article was moved after AfD was proposed. So the redirect was what was actually deleted, not the article itself. Could you go ahead and delete the article? Thanks.

9984:

Apologies, Kevin, if it seemed that I was attributing those things to you. I was using this thread as a convenient place to address both you and Fences, in the context of your conversation

7104: 4270: 9183:

Do not ever send me a message telling me I cannot express an opinion in a discussion thread. If you don't like my opinion then post a counter-argument, if you cannot do that then shut up.

5336: 531:

Not well done at all. Can you kindly explain how you came to your conclusion given that as FT2 pointed out there were good versions of the article that didn't even mention the BLP issue?

6235:

I welcome all comments and suggestions for improvement. Although I have edited approximately 9 articles on Knowledge, I am still new at this. Therefore, any insights are appreciated.

2887:

I read that. Like I said, regardless of your understanding of consensus, you cannot add unsourced information about living people. Period. Now go away and make that report you promised.

1087:

I have not made any comment on these sources as yet. My deletions are based on the content of the article as it was when I deleted it. It is not any bias, I am acting in accordance with

3134:

and yes IP edits can do plenty wrong, easy solution would be an approval system for IP edits, or delay so you could revert them before they go live.. current wikipedia is just broken

1182:

The IPer involved in the mediation as "reported" me at incidents. I personally find this disturbing, but I'd appreciate your opinion. Does this pose a threat to our mediation process?

4792:, which I explained yesterday, and also said that you could ask me for help on that issue. When you upload a magazine cover you need to select the appropriate license, and then add a 4170: 2813:

with Rigadoun before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to

5926:

This article has been brought to deletion review by another editor, not on the grounds of the merits of the subject, but on grounds of the early closure. You may want to comment.See

2702:

Sorry I made a mistake when I added the time of the eagle eye premiere, it was on September 16, 2008 - not 2009, thanks for correcting the mistake to the photos caption on the page.

8776:

Just a heads up to say I've updated the article on Chris C Kemp with several references, most importantly with the profile article that was featured in Space News earlier this week

7632: 2416: 2149: 651:. It would be useful for you both to disengage at other articles to avoid spillover, but that is up to you. Discussion of behavior elsewhere will not be helpful at the mediation. 8305:

What a pointless waste of time. Had you asked for it to be restored so you could fix it up I would have done, the same as I would for a PROD. Or was there another point to this?

8227:

judge the relative importance of the content they add or remove well enough to propose a clear outline myself. They will have to do it together or another expert has to turn up.

7596:. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 3792:. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 3177:. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 4139: 8198:

Okay, sounds like a plan. Marie just gave a list of secondary sources (hurray...) so I'll just sit back and watch for a while. Please notify me when you think I can be of use.

3201: 3045: 5836:

respected and reviewed in virtually every metaphysical and alternative spirituality circle. He is a household name in those fields! This is not an exaggeration, I promise you.

647:

Not a problem for me. The person behind the IP likely has no control over their IP address, and they did confirm at the mediation page that it is the same person (at least at

9349: 4184: 2030:

until we can find another, though I'd prefer we don't do that. I think I've done a pretty good job explaining the dispute so your decision to "ignore" is troubling at best.

8475: 4400: 3344:

have been merged into it. If you wish, please feel free to nominate this new article for deletion if you feel that the article does not merit a place on Knowledge. Regards,

9241:

has been on semi for over half a year, and I realize that continued protection for the remaining half-year may be warranted, especially for a BLP. But I'm wondering if (as

8212:

If you know something of the subject, then you can help right now. I think some examples of normal courteous editorial discussion could help both parties. Step in anytime.

7920:

Relative Values is and always has been a Sunday Times feature; it's been run every week in the Sunday Times Magazine for at least twenty five years that I can recall - see

7225:. You wrote ""weak keep", and one mentions BLP1E concerns ": if that editor, after concerning, concludes a keep, how come you turn that to the opposite (i.e. into weighing 4917: 4877: 2102:. I plan on submitting a request to MEDCAB (endorsed by the editors) soon but in the meantime would you endorse a protection extension until then? The lock expires 2 days. 1682:? The diff does not indicate that it is a violation of the arbitration (although it could be -- the complainant should have included a second diff showing that though). -- 4654: 8277:

Seems like a clear enough consensus to me. One editor nominated, citing lack of sources, another editor noted that sources could not be found, and no-one argued to keep.

2741:

either establishes them as untruthful (if they omit something or lie) or may tell you more than you knew already. At any rate, that was what I was hoping to accomplish.

9855: 6002: 5591: 4365:

to assert notability, though if you want as you declined the speedy I have no problems bringing it back to article space, and take it back through AFD process. Regards

3989:

was there for a long time before the news of the affair broke. She appeared frequently on Letterman's show for a number of years. Didn't you ever see her on the show?

2843:

Stop reverting without viewing the talk page. Conesus was reached there, as well as on my talk page with interested users, so STOP REVERTING WITHOUT DISUCSSING PLEASE.

1919:

The sources are not editorials, or "op-eds" as many users like to say. And even if they were, it wouldn't matter, at least not to the degree of completely ignoring them.

1842:

Kevin, there seems to be no talking sense to Wikifan on the ElBaradei article. We've all tried, but to no avail. It seems like a waste of time. I'm ready to give up.

476: 7053:, quick question about it. While it is unsourced (and I don't remember it in the movie), my take on this information is that not only isn't it notable, but it violates 5169:

Could you elaborate? It might save us the trouble of a deletion review, particularly if you could respond to my readings of BLP1E and the second point above. Thanks,

4004:

No I didn't. Obviously my opinion of what makes a person notable is different to the majority there, although I am uncertain as to how that makes my opinion "absurd".

10162:

OK, thanks for the explanation of the editing patterns. Those concerns about interests outside Knowledge affecting edits here were precisely why I raised the topic at

6299:

I would have asked an admin to delete it. You have saved the trouble of running around Knowledge to find an admin currently online. HCV= 04:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

5416: 1986:

involvement. I'd like to see more users become involved outside of the IP (who is the only consistent contributor) and another admin to review alleged-BLP violations.

10117: 8035:

that we are perhaps being manipulated into looking the wrong way at who Little Grape really is? Double-bluff, smoke & mirrors perhaps? I merely ask the question.

3890:

page is flagged. How can I get these flags removed? I have tried making the page more neutral in tone, adding credible sources, etc. Thanks in advance for your help.

5574:

You may wish to amend the close as "This boils down to deciding if 1 newspaper article can confer notability" implies pretty clearly that there is only one article.

5393: 5133: 1439: 2173:

in the history and is not easy for other people to find. Tennis Expert did the crime, so it is important for others to be able to find out the history of the issue

1430:, unjustified here, even under the most liberal interpretation of our protection policy, and I have no doubt that a consensus for unprotection will be borne out at 9874: 9562: 7636: 7138: 6175: 5359:

The image was watermarked with a copyright, and copyright was also asserted in the upload edit summary. The image should really have been deleted ages ago anyway.

5353: 8780:. This profile touches on most of the points mentioned in the wikipedia article. I plan to bring the article back online tomorrow so wanted to run it by you. Thx 8689:

and others. I'm happy to edit the article to base it on these secondary resources. Is there a way I can get the original page back to start editing? Thanks again

5615: 8816:

including several redirects and deleted my working version of it. I'll keep a watch on the page to see any community activity. Thanks for your help in all this.

8137:

Well, I thought that the edit summaries I used were detailed enough to explain my reasons for the removal. I've replied to your note that the article talk page.

7682: 7307:

If you are disinclined to take your answers from what I have written, then perhaps you are being affected by your preconception of what those answers should be.

5544:

On a different note, you did realize that there were three articles there, not one yes? Your closing statement seemed to indicate otherwise. Could you clarify?

3146: 2978: 7245:

At several recent AfDs there has been discussion of whether a series of criminal acts followed by a trial comprises a single event for the purposes of applying

5206:

is notable, and the article should either be reworked to be about the event rather than Bardwell, or the material should be merged into another article such as

3529:

I do not feel strongly one way or the other about this article, but the perceived BLP issue could have easily been removed without deleting the entire article.

2405: 9989: 9102: 6717: 5998: 5420: 5408: 5399: 5108: 4633: 4194:

Prior to your protecting and unprotecting of the global warming article, it was semi-protected. Did you mean to remove the semi-prot when you unprotected it? -

2985:? Similar unsourced and POV information from IP addresses as was added to the Steven Cohen article has been added to the World Soccer Daily article. Thanks. 6220:

publication of this article, we will be able to direct Knowledge users to this article from the pages that currently exist but are no longer accurate such as

4863:

kids are still mentioned in his article!), unrespectfull and just the opinion of 1 administrator (the opinion of 1 administrator is not consensus either!). —

9281: 9364: 506: 8898:

You have apparently refused to respond but as a matter of courtesy to you I am letting you know I have reported your behaviour at the admin incidents page.

6729: 5245:

deletion - as giving consensus that the event was notable, even if BLP1E means that Bardwell should not have a biography. Could you put the article in the

4503: 3898: 3314: 2982: 2569:""Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Knowledge editors."" 2015:

Yes, I am going to ignore your list above. I have little interest in mediating a dispute where one party feels I am acting tendentiously and taking sides.

988:. The scandal really occured and there are plenty of sources that are not attacks against anyone. See for example this National Catholic Reporter article 401:"Changed protection level for "Theodore Kaczynski": Persistent and significant violations of by multiple IPs, please consult with me before unprotecting" 10171: 9731: 9697: 9589: 8397: 6627:¨the arguments explaining why a subject is or is not notable are much stronger than an argument that simply states that the subject is or is not notable¨ 477: 1971:

If you really feel that I am acting tendentiously, then either you will need to leave the mediation, or arrange another mediator / method of mediation.

1049: 331:

form of dispute resolution or another, I would just hope for a resolution to one of these processes that doesn't lead to another process in two weeks.--

9301: 9132: 7704: 7678: 7110: 6128: 5621:

I disagree with relisting BLPs, which is why I have been systematically closing them where I see them. I'll look into incubating that article shortly.

4548: 3329: 3142: 2935: 2074: 1362: 832:

You say "significant and persistent" BLP violations. There has been two vandalism edits (today, May 5) in a year+. Where is this persistent vandalism?

394: 8969:

Thanks for the update. I'm still unclear how consenous on the issue was made clear by one additional !vote on both sides, but I'll drop it for now.

8798:

profile looks like it would satisft those who argued to delete at the AfD. Send me a note when you have moved it back and I'll restore the talk page.

8493: 7162: 4135: 10188: 10157: 10021: 7494:

I don't understand what you are asking here. I have opened a deletion review so that other editors can examine my actions. What more is it you want?

5985: 5431: 5148: 5050:

frustrated to say the least. How can a build this page right and avoid the onslaught of Admin people trying to tear it down? Thanks for your time

3380: 2099: 979: 10275:) banded together and attempted to deceive various Knowledge editors by resorting to circumlocution and rhetoric. Needless to say, it didn’t work.' 5799:

I am officially protesting your deletion of Ted Andrews' page. Ironically, it was taken down the day that he unexpectedly died. Your reasoning was

1608:

I totally disagree when we are talking about living people, but we'll see what happens now I have unprotected. Hopefully better than the one above.

10442: 9260: 8462: 7950:

And finally, some shock news that should surprise no-one. After some minor digging, one discovers Clegg admits that HE is Marc Sinden in this edit

6144: 5945:

That's not why he brought it there at all. I've just pissed a few people off, so they are doing some pushing back. It all seems a bit petty to me.

5075: 4680: 3643:

Not exactly, but they did flag that the sources were inadequate to show notability. I was articulating what I saw as the basis for those opinions.

3019: 2986: 1400:

Hey Kevin, I am asking for removal of protection (or additional editing) regarding the article on Owen citing information brought to light in the '

733:

that was the basis of the request I answered does not qualify in that it was by an autoconfirmed user, but shows that the article is underwatched.

153: 9930: 6006: 5865: 5462: 5224: 690: 415: 9704: 9416: 9229: 8413: 8401: 8059: 8002: 7961: 7933: 7814: 7597: 6721: 6063: 6014: 5489: 5306:

This is why I had not put it as the source, as it contains both stories. Can I include it without falling foul of an editor with a POV on Mills?

4408: 3577:

The difference is that that article has a definite scope of those portrayed on the show rather than just anybody. It is woefully sourced though.

3563:

article (as pedobaiting does not only refer to true pedophiles). Some of the information on those cases in that article needs sourcing, though.

3392: 3310: 2610:

against you people (and met as a compliment) But the fact that you guys are doing to me everything that I am NOT doing to you is also funny.

2119: 2010: 1348: 1238: 425:

is significant, and more than 10 similar cases in the past month shows persistance. Are you arguing against the protection, or the edit summary?

8408:(figure skater) should be most definitely be removed, as they have even less notability in the sport. Additionally, a stub should be added for 6851:

with the header, ¨Radicals in Check - Islamic Revival no Threat to the West¨ In retrospect, he and his sources in power were wrong at that time.

6051: 5281: 5267: 5239: 4996: 2826: 2088: 9730:

Considering the fact that you suggested Mccready to appeal to ArbCom, I thought you might be interested to know that he has a case request out

8553: 8122:. Also i think that when you are doing BLP and removing large parts from the article it would be polite to add notify in the talk-page also. -- 7459: 7143: 5791: 5593: 5109: 4086: 3463: 2458: 1552: 10267:

by multiple & independent Knowledge editors who neutrally investigated the matter thoroughly. Simon Kidd, Alex Jamieson, Brian Steel (aka

9482: 9446: 7181: 6363: 5927: 4720:'s concern in this section on my page? I think your AGF-o-meter is higher than mine on this, so I think you'd do a better job at it than me. 2487: 2472: 1512: 1131: 771:

I assume you have a reason, so I'm not undoing it, but I am interested to know why. Thanks - and thanks for coming in and helping out there.

10113: 9719: 9519: 9282: 9037: 9023: 8409: 7144: 6647: 6026: 5630: 5470: 4978: 4287: 4260: 3956: 2789: 2689: 2675: 2093: 719: 700: 9683: 9393: 9275: 8508: 7407: 7238: 5569: 5553: 4623: 4609: 4584: 4470:

Hi, you deleted the Samantha Henderson page without giving me a chance to move the information to my sandbox. How can I recover that info?

4230: 4165: 4151: 2680:

Simply had the time to dig a bit deeper. I'd love it if Slovenian editors help with sourcing, as Google Translate is not always 100%. Best,

2531: 1004: 526: 384: 370: 356: 9689: 9461: 9221: 9207: 7540: 7377: 5758: 4949: 4404: 4315: 4048: 4013: 3891: 3478: 3186: 3161: 2648: 2134: 2053: 1458: 1283: 1269: 189: 10423: 10001: 9967: 9952: 9531: 9340: 9326: 9008: 7872: 7841: 7789: 7766: 6977: 6479:

He has run for a seat in the Canadian House of Commons as an independent, and once ran for the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Contents

6253:

I'm not sure whether this is suitable, but I suggest moving it to mainspace and see how it goes. Let me know if you need help doing that.

5899: 5330: 4932: 4896: 4805: 4765: 4323: 3985:

I'm surprised that you think Stephanie Birkitt is notable only for the alleged affair with David Letterman. The Knowledge article titled

3672:

2 editors offered unqualified delete opinions based on notability. Do you feel that they did not consider the content of all the sources?

3301: 2240: 2039: 2024: 1995: 1980: 1900: 1881: 1665: 1579: 1495: 1483: 1469: 1254: 1224: 1210: 675: 660: 319: 139: 9779: 9668: 9605: 9379: 9170: 9155: 8907: 8893: 8840: 8825: 8807: 6766: 6262: 5979: 5872: 5477: 5015: 4497: 4122: 3849:

Yeah, Twinkle failure. I'll have to wait until I get home later to fix it, unless you want to be a Really Nice Person and do it... :-) -

3453: 3439: 3422: 2750: 2301: 2287: 2272: 2258: 1736: 1691: 540: 7605: 7096: 7082: 6905: 6685: 6663: 6544: 6430: 5921: 3875: 2130: 9104: 8789: 8771: 8753: 8720: 8698: 8656: 8236: 8221: 8207: 8193: 7711: 7368:

is different to yours, you will need to find another venue in which to take this up. There is a list of them (the editors) at the AfD.

6834: 6159: 6129: 5447: 5102: 4709: 4203: 4189: 3789: 3778: 3027: 3013: 1651: 1637: 1570:

Yes, the vandalism level was lower than that, but was still significant. Out of interest, what level do you think would be acceptable?

1526: 1016:

That source supports neither the article title nor most of the allegations within the article. I will not restore based on that alone.

992: 271: 243: 229: 211: 10373: 10209: 9640: 8921: 8107: 7620: 7034: 6878:

secular media as it´s happening. I hope this provides some backgrounder information to this discussion. The reality IS, God IS Great!

6793: 6754: 6120: 6101: 6017:. If you feel that I did not follow the consensus in that discussion, then follow the link to deletion review from the section above. 4303: 2966: 2875: 2779: 2764: 1817: 1802: 1787: 1769: 1754: 1722: 1707: 1474:

Pretty much as I expected. Also interesting is that the 3 articles I have noticed being unprotected by request are all sports people.

757: 742: 434: 10410: 10406: 9890: 9843: 8601: 8592: 7572: 7489: 7391:

I ask clear questions, and you shy away. I disagree with your closing of this AfD, and you evoke the discussion or responsability. A

7344: 5537: 5382: 5368: 5207: 5193: 5178: 5164: 3606: 3586: 3572: 3553: 3191: 584: 569: 555: 8074: 8044: 7987: 7910: 7750: 7665: 7558: 7517: 7503: 7471: 7453: 7427: 7330: 7316: 7302: 7288: 7274: 7258: 7195: 7019: 4384: 4366: 4254: 3232: 2444: 2431: 2392: 2371: 2357: 2330: 2225: 2208: 2189: 2164: 1195: 965: 934: 917: 895: 868: 10458: 10387: 9429:

that his "often used sarcastic or inflammatory edit summaries are totally unacceptable". He has just used this edit summery in the

8978: 8964: 8738: 8454: 8343: 8329: 8314: 8300: 8286: 8162: 8146: 7580: 6930: 6703: 6380: 5913: 5737: 5723: 5709: 5694: 5680: 5666: 5583: 4598: 4355: 4218: 4112: 3972: 3835: 3624: 3512: 3498: 3267: 3250: 2896: 1866: 1617: 1443: 470: 257: 7168:

It's hard to ignore all of those delete opinions at the debate, but if there is new info, that would be appropriate to present at

4457: 4441: 3886:

Hi Kevin, I'd really appreciate it if you could answer a quick question. I'm trying to stay within Knowledge's guidelines but the

3756: 3742: 3728: 3714: 3696: 3681: 3667: 3652: 3076: 1542: 951: 817: 799: 8538: 8524: 8385: 6296: 6171: 5971: 5954: 3111: 3094: 3035: 1167: 1149: 1100: 1025: 8092: 7172:. I don't quite agree with your view of BLP1E. As it is a subjective guideline, it really does come to the weight of arguments. 7005: 6613: 6528: 6415: 5879:

discussion, and it is perhaps sad that the subject recently died, the closure was correct. If you disagree, the proper venue is

5083: 5059: 3962: 3801: 3359: 3286: 2155:

As my edit summary said, it was by request of the subject. You can easily see the content in the history, as I'm sure you know.

1564: 194:

No, speedy deletion is for uncontroversial deletions only, and once a PROD tag has been removed deletion becomes controversial.

105: 8119: 6403: 6292: 6291:

Actually, I would like to thank you, instead of rant about why you have deleted it, because after reading in my user talk page

6085: 5039: 4984: 1427: 1066: 9739: 9066:

As I am new to Knowledge, does the lack of response mean acceptance of the revised article or will it get reverted if posted?

8707:. We need something that has more than his name and job title, such as a paragraph of background on Kemp. I'll have a look on 4569: 4029: 3998: 2245:

The request was made over at WR, earlier today. There was no particular reason given, but it was probably prompted by some of

1342: 641: 174: 9646: 9078: 8017: 6999: 6956: 6498:

In 1981, Cormier hitchhiked from Ottawa to Whitehorse, Yukon. Four newspapers and Maclean's wrote stories about his journey.

5761:

seems to have slipped by my watchlist too! Didn't see it until I'd started reviewing the contributions of the various socks.

4522: 4504: 4479: 9915: 3860: 3318: 2734: 1055: 855:

were the reason I protected. The vandalism is persistent in that it remained up for over an hour before being reverted. See

303: 124: 9690: 7150:

Re your close of this AfD -- Teitel has now been charged with an impressive array of offenses, stretching over many years:

7067: 6890: 6338: 5531: 5412: 4820: 4781: 4749: 3776: 3427:

And I thought they were different, because one wanted it kept and the other wanted it gone. Ah, the joys of IP edits. :) --

2994: 2660: 602: 487:, please drop me a note on my talk or via email as soon as possible in case I miss the note on your own talk page. Thanks. 362: 332: 145: 8948: 8366:, calling it "non-controversial" :) I mean, it is, but don't be surprised if certain people create controversy over it. -- 8262: 6814: 5074:? I promise to be a good boy & run it past you, DRV or whaterver if it turns out that it might be salvageable. Thanx 4772:

if he has a problem with it. Otherwise, please let me finish this page, so I can move onto my next project. Thank you!

4593:? There have been multiple recent edits and over the last few months calling him a murderer. Also I plan on un-disam'ing 3538: 3407: 1500:

Protection was clearly justified. Vandalism continues, and it's taking an excessive amount of time for it to be reverted.

1414: 290:

I was just curious if you were still interested in mediating, or at least offering an opinion regarding the dispute(s) at

10217: 8999:. However, you didn't remove the tag from the former. The last is still tagged for deletion. Can you solve it? Thank you! 8986: 5030:. It's difficult to avoid running into 3RR when there's a determined sock around with an agenda. And he's back again.... 4486: 3918: 1435: 1406: 1309: 1261: 991:

about the abuser who got 50 years in jail. It is a fairly notable scandal, and the page is mostly modeled on the article

682: 340: 92: 8884:

I have responded to your latest on my talk page. I think you may like to respond before I consider taking this further.

8577: 7686: 5315: 1388: 8670: 6991: 6948: 2602:

Hey I'm having problems with the 3RR reporting page, where Im trying to report Sandor's 3R violation against me with.

1600: 1334: 618: 606: 9764: 9557: 8629: 8433: 8291:

Hi Kevin, I sent this to DrV. I'm fairly sure this is not a valid close per WP:RELIST, but I've been wrong before....

8033:...in a little semi-detached two-up two-down off the Finchley Road and has lived there for at least the last ten years 6963:

And I would equally tell those people to go fuck themselves, if they sprouted their racist crap all over my talk page.

6784:

Yes, my fingers are too fat for my tiny phone. Wish I could turn off rollback on admin accounts. Thanks for the note.

5714:

I'm not going to do that. Considering how many I have closed recently, I think the number of complaints fairly small.

3544:

Problem is that is is a magnet for BLP violations. Had the rest been sourced at all I would have done as you suggest.

3170: 2637: 2619: 2582: 2547: 2516: 2169:

Wait a second—why should that request automatically get carried out? As I'm sure you're aware, that discussion is now

2141:". Those words seem pointless if the entire page is blanked. I, for one, would like the page to be reinstated please. 1317: 455: 10433: 9192: 9114:. That is certainly a relevant question, but it isn't the only question. For a subject to be included, it must meet 8878: 8682: 7737:

Thanks for the warning - if you get a chance, could you review edit history of Clegg, particularly with reference to

6247: 5773: 3820: 3150: 10349: 9503: 8131: 8088:

as "hardy adequate", which would not make sense. I meant to type "hardly inadequate". Just thought I'd explain. –

8085: 7803:

falsely claim that the DVD was a 'best seller', and finally e) link to his own website - again. I corrected this at

6879: 3941: 3154: 2711: 220:

applies, which seems to say that speedy delete can apply. Can you point to anything specific to show what you mean?

8079: 7732: 6201: 5767: 4411:, I believe that this expanded coverage meets the first of the 'valid reasons for recreating a deleted page' under 2951: 2852: 2588:

than adressing their arguments. You should consider going away from that article, edit something else for a while.

1965: 1305: 1177: 730: 726: 9249: 8008:

I'll be back to deal with you pair tomorrow. In the meantime, you might consider that you are not helping either.

7975: 7589: 6281: 5939: 5303: 8647:

from the subject. Fir this individual I would expect to see newspaper or magazine articles or something similar.

8174: 7727: 6057: 5468: 5321:

We cannot use blogs to source information about living people, particularly controversial or contested material.

5065: 4536: 1924:

The information is predominantly covered by only Israel-based media and has not been followed by "world media" -

840: 494: 10378:

Thanks DGG. Hopefully we can avoid a pointless DRV. I'm away for a while now, so I'll miss the fun in any case.

7649: 5988:

wikipedia page. Contrary to accusations, Moure commands notability not only in Knights of Colubmbus but also in

5453:

Has he been indicted for any offence related to this? Or convicted? If not, then the category is inappropriate.

4729: 4426: 9826: 9725: 7114: 6739: 6323: 6315: 5499: 5443: 4847:

What the hell, millions of other editors have ignored those rules before me. Yes people on wikipedia do ignore

4180: 1774:

I though I had made my reasons clear, but go ahead and unblock if you really want to. I suggest re-opening the

1419: 1184:

Wikifan12345 (talk · contribs) has been uncivil and making personal attacks in edits at Talk:Mohamed ElBaradei:

560:

Under what guideline or policy does someone being notable primarily due to a connection make them not notable?

6778: 5434:." Your explanation was that "no-one has been charged or convicted of any crime in relation to this." But see 4705: 3785: 1671: 1299: 626: 144:

I'm sorry that you had to lock the article, and would welcome your input if you have a chance to provide it.--

10241: 9939:

I will list it. In fact, I was surprised to see it deleted so soon after relisting (I note your conversation

8931: 8248: 7635:. I was v surprised that this article was not in Knowledge - I've quickly recreated it from the Google cache 7364:

I have said all I intend to say on this particular close. If you disagree with those whose interpretation of

6190: 4590: 4239: 2597: 1183: 159: 9245: 9161:

most any other country in the world. (Not saying this applied here, just offering it as a general note.) --

9097: 8666: 5671:

Could you explain what isn't specific? Are you looking for further examples of problems or something else?

5651: 3637: 1851: 1517:

It already meets my criteria for re-protection, but I'm waiting for the vandals to make me a stronger case.

1229:

Yeah I won't edit there while mediation is going on. Though I would hope the IP would do the same, for now.

901: 884: 881: 878: 873: 853: 850: 847: 10183: 10170:, but you could reopen that section to voice your concerns over COI in the deletion debate, but be wary of 10016: 9910: 9755:

Knowledge discourages using multiple accounts to make it appear that multiple persons support a contention.

8759: 8027:, all references to Ms Mills, even including his denials of any relationship with her and his home address 6921:

What the fuck are you talking about NPOV for? Racist crap is my (apt) description of what you wrote above.

5262: 5219: 5044: 4646: 3881: 3275: 2938:

to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the

2716: 1367: 1053: 783: 9530:

Hi Kevin, I'm not criticizing or anything, based on recent activity I'd just like to see your input here:

8370: 5847:

Please restore this wise and gentle man's entry. This is such an injustice, especially at a time when his

9822: 9625: 8703:

I'm not convinced that the coverage here are more than trivial mentions that do not meet the criteria at

8549: 8420:

I would argue that "is going to compete" is a world away from "has competed", which is the standard that

6225: 5425: 5090: 5021: 4887:", which you have stated that you are. How did you feel that calling me a dick would help the situation? 4676: 4432:

I don't think that would have turned the tide, but you're welcome to make the argument. It's open again.

4082: 3524: 2362:

If TE reappears then it's a different story. Right now, there is no value in keeping the page unblanked.

2263:

I'm sorry I don't get... WR meaning Knowledge Review? If that's the case, what's that got to do with us?

406:

claiming. What are you calling a BLP violation, let alone "persistant" and "significant" examples of it?

8269: 8050:

Copied section to Sinden talk page as this may run and run - it seems like a more appropriate venue....

5796:

Please forgive me if I am doing this incorrectly. I am new to this, but I am very concerned and upset..

97:

Ah, I never even noticed the section - sorry about that. Thanks for protecting and letting me know :) --

10327: 9059:

Your response has been the only reaction to the proposed revision of that article, as contained on the

7158: 6359: 6273:

Thanks. Thank G-D for someone with a brain. Unfortunately when I started that mess I wasn't using mine.

4465: 3841: 3323: 2972: 2916:

Welcome to Knowledge. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from

2483: 2454: 1358: 1322: 596: 217: 38: 9752:

I noticed that you have used more than one signature..."Kevin" and Rdm2376. Are you the same person?

9317:

is premature, there is no policy or guideline specifying any particular time to wait after a relist.

9110:

I am a bit confused by our close of these AfD. You say that the question is whether or not he meets

9033: 9004: 8565: 8400:

indeed fits the qualifications for inclusion, as he is competing at the "highest level of his sport"

8391: 7044: 6799: 5612: 5439: 4650: 4176: 3980: 3264: 3229: 3108: 3073: 2685: 2656: 2070: 948: 440: 84: 72: 67: 59: 1928:. Reliable mainstream sources from North America to Australia published unique stories on ME/Israel. 1420: 115:

Thank you! Now hopefully we can resolve issues without needless edit warring and BLP violations. :D

9074: 8486: 8404:. He also has competed internationally twice. If his article was removed, other athletes such as 6873:

You can read this 31 year old projection of what I saw coming relative to this discussion in 1978.

5875:

with a result of delete reflects the consensus of that discussion. While I agree there wasn't very

5525: 4653:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 4605: 4565: 4553: 3806: 3373: 3352: 2633: 2615: 2578: 2543: 2512: 2073:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 989: 923: 366: 336: 285: 149: 110: 9248:), we can "see how things are going". At least one anon seems interested in improving the article 8869:

Hoping, given the passage of two weeks as you stipulated, that you've had time for consideration.

7118: 5817:

esoteric paths, including shamanic practices, Earth spirituality, Nature lore, and mythology. He

926:. I don't fault you, I just think it's something that needs comments so no wheel-warring results. 10446: 10175: 10008: 9902: 9045: 8113: 6716:

I saw that you deleted the article that I had nominated for AfD, but there was a slight problem.

6559:

What I find most disturbing about the process is four delete opinions were based on this comment

5254: 5211: 4734: 4025: 3994: 3386: 1410: 1313: 1265: 686: 1887:

Your continued repeating of the same arguments in the face of this opposition seems to me to be

1741:

I still feel that the block was appropriate, but perhaps you should seek the opinion of another

1353:

Hi. I had some feedback on your comment. And a suggestion about modifying the article. Regards,

9901:

As I said, "Maybe I should grow a pair." I shall be interested to see what the fall-out is. :)

9664: 9525: 9495:

Hey Kevin, i'm one of your Talk Page Stalkers. I'm just curious, why did you decide to rename?

9478: 9442: 9412: 9389: 9256: 8545: 8070: 8055: 8040: 7998: 7983: 7957: 7929: 7906: 7868: 7810: 7785: 7746: 6995: 6952: 6212: 5861: 5825:

The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.

5311: 5055: 5035: 4967: 4912: 4872: 4859:. I (and others) will listen to them; I won't listen to you since your behaviour is selective ( 4816: 4777: 4745: 4073: 2115: 2107: 2035: 2006: 1991: 1961: 1877: 1596: 1560: 1338: 1234: 1220: 1191: 671: 648: 637: 299: 120: 8439: 7741:, and perhaps advise on dragging the article back to some semblance of encyclopaedic content? 6492:

In 1985, on Remembrance Day, Cormier was arrested and fined $ 250 for causing a disturbance.

6345: 610: 9744: 9217: 9188: 8864: 8609: 8396:

Hi Kevin, Additional information was added to the article before it was closed, showing that

7723: 7671: 7480:

of your conclusion. So somewhere (on internet) you might be right. Please provide the link. -

7154: 6355: 6243: 5994: 4992: 4544: 4475: 3719:

Perhaps, but I still feel it is out of process, and I'm sorry, but I'll take this to DRV. --

3434: 3402: 3216: 3060: 2822: 2707: 2479: 2450: 2436:

Of course I don't want that. Whether we get there though is up to the actions of others now.

2297: 2268: 2236: 1584:

In my opinion, protection is justified only if multiple IP's every day for at least 48 hours.

1393: 1354: 856: 10331: 4883:

Really, where did I label you as a bad editor? By "kind of editor" I meant "one who ignores

4698: 4691: 2181:" closely followed by blanking the page. Exactly what is the problem with leaving the page? 10454: 10419: 10345: 10153: 9997: 9948: 9810: 9336: 9297: 9198:

What, you aren't able to make an argument without the words "detestable gnat on humanity"?

9029: 9000: 8686: 7092: 7063: 6987: 6944: 6886: 6643: 6609: 6524: 6411: 6303: 6106:

I see your point. No problem, if needed I guess one can ask for a userfied page. Thanks. --

5763: 5605: 5293: 4856: 4394: 3935: 3887: 3855: 3138: 2681: 2652: 2642: 2216:(Still waiting to hear why it hurts to leave the page—especially if TE is no longer active) 1679: 1588: 1330: 521: 10120:

in the Shepherd AfD? It is relevant that JN466 has only recently declared his interest in

9398:

Kevin, I am really trying to bite my tongue here, but if you read the latest posting from

5777:

Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no

2928:. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the 2449:

Kevin, I may have missed it, but can you point us to a URL featuring the request please?

725:

The criteria I use (I've fixed the missing note at the top) includes plain vandalism, and

614: 234:

I'll have a look. It's been my assumption for several years, and it's possible I'm wrong.

8: 10383: 9963: 9926: 9886: 9839: 9775: 9715: 9679: 9636: 9601: 9585: 9515: 9457: 9375: 9360: 9322: 9271: 9203: 9166: 9151: 9128: 9070: 8836: 8821: 8803: 8785: 8749: 8694: 8625: 8479: 8232: 8203: 8170: 8118:

I disagree with removing the identity controversy and i wrote my reasons to the articles

7222:

of WP:BLP1E here. When I use that guideline, it is fully usable here (concluding not 1E).

6810: 6676:

Hi Kevin, I've listed this at DrV as I think the close should have been "no consensus".

6654:

I stand by my close of that AfD, and I do not intend to dissect each and every argument.

6268: 6140: 5753: 5521: 5079: 4601: 4561: 4161: 4147: 3560: 3366: 3345: 3333: 3023: 2990: 2925: 2906: 2838: 2651:... I was a little luckier than you in my search. The article will need Slovenian input. 2629: 2611: 2574: 2539: 2508: 1891:. I think you should consider accepting the opinion of the majority, and let us move on. 1633: 1508: 825: 500: 325: 267: 225: 185: 170: 7922:]. Debrett's stopped using 'Distinguished' in 1991. Here's evidence from the ISBN list: 6013:

It is not up to me as I only followed the direction from the deletion discussion here -

4415:. It may again be deleted but IMO it should be able to go through AfD again. Thank you 3503:

Thanks. In case you aren't following it, I've responded with a further question there.

2802: 2791: 10402: 10298:

he is not an academic) has been shown to be nothing more than a vanity self publisher.

9896: 9785: 9701: 9553: 9497: 9178: 9093: 8937: 8903: 8889: 8874: 8777: 8089: 8084:

Hi Kevin, I reverted your removal an entry on the page but just noticed I mistyped my

7626: 7601: 7015: 6774: 6311: 6195: 6165: 6118: 6083: 6049: 5506: 5493: 5246: 4283: 4021: 3990: 3337: 2947: 2848: 2810: 2775: 2746: 2730: 2319: 2066: 1798: 1765: 1732: 1718: 1687: 1622: 753: 715: 706: 625:. After reverting an edit by 68.251.184.4, he responded with this rationale in history 411: 8678: 6896:

I have no interest whatsoever in your racist crap. Go and find somewhere else for it.

5807:

self-published, but had dozens of books published by Llewellyn Worldwide and others.

5560:

Yes I did, but my close only refers to the NYT article which has the most discussion.

2930: 2884:

AND on the megan fox page. Now stop reverting what we've all agreed upon accept you.

546:

be deleted after the AfD was re-opened convinced me that the consensus was to delete.

375:

Thanks. I think Wikifan also wants to head for mediation, but in a more formal sense.

9660: 9474: 9438: 9426: 9408: 9399: 9385: 9252: 9139: 9019: 8960: 8917: 8767: 8734: 8716: 8652: 8644: 8598: 8588: 8574: 8566: 8534: 8504: 8429: 8421: 8381: 8339: 8310: 8282: 8217: 8189: 8142: 8103: 8066: 8051: 8036: 8013: 7994: 7979: 7953: 7925: 7902: 7864: 7837: 7806: 7781: 7776: 7762: 7742: 7661: 7616: 7536: 7499: 7467: 7423: 7373: 7312: 7284: 7254: 7177: 7078: 7050: 7030: 6973: 6926: 6901: 6830: 6789: 6750: 6699: 6659: 6540: 6426: 6376: 6275: 6258: 6155: 6097: 6022: 5950: 5909: 5857: 5808: 5781: 5719: 5690: 5662: 5626: 5565: 5458: 5378: 5364: 5349: 5326: 5307: 5277: 5235: 5189: 5174: 5160: 5144: 5098: 5051: 5031: 5011: 4960: 4928: 4905: 4892: 4865: 4812: 4801: 4773: 4761: 4741: 4717: 4619: 4580: 4493: 4437: 4380: 4351: 4299: 4250: 4214: 4108: 4044: 4009: 3986: 3968: 3952: 3914: 3871: 3831: 3738: 3710: 3677: 3648: 3602: 3593: 3582: 3568: 3549: 3534: 3494: 3449: 3418: 3297: 3281: 3246: 3182: 3122: 3090: 3009: 2962: 2939: 2921: 2892: 2871: 2760: 2697: 2671: 2593: 2527: 2468: 2427: 2367: 2315: 2283: 2254: 2246: 2204: 2160: 2111: 2103: 2081: 2031: 2020: 2002: 1987: 1976: 1957: 1896: 1873: 1862: 1813: 1783: 1750: 1703: 1647: 1613: 1592: 1575: 1556: 1522: 1490: 1479: 1464: 1454: 1279: 1250: 1230: 1216: 1206: 1187: 1163: 961: 913: 864: 795: 738: 667: 656: 633: 580: 565: 551: 536: 466: 430: 380: 352: 315: 295: 253: 239: 207: 135: 116: 8674: 6576:

The very next comment below that is this, which no one bothered to read, evidently.

622: 10435: 10306:

reliably sourced, third-party media references to Kevin R. D. Shepherd. This is an

9710:

I see my sig has been removed altogether now. Must have been diluting the message.

9621: 9430: 9403: 9314: 9213: 9184: 8583:

I don't have a problem, but you might want to let those who argued to delete know.

8463: 8152: 7719: 7697: 7645: 7568: 7554: 7513: 7485: 7449: 7403: 7340: 7326: 7298: 7270: 7234: 7191: 7134: 6239: 5657:

Thanks for your opinion. If you have something specific, feel free to let me know.

4988: 4725: 4685: 4554: 4540: 4471: 4338: 4269:, which has the same name as an article which was deleted earlier as the result of 4234: 3618: 3428: 3396: 3174: 3163: 2818: 2798: 2703: 2501: 2293: 2264: 2232: 1047: 195: 5435: 4575:

No problem. Let me know if you see any other candidates for long term protection.

291: 10450: 10415: 10341: 10263:'Moreno's past argument about Kevin R. D. Shepherd's non-notability has now been 10167: 10149: 9993: 9944: 9867: 9818: 9795: 9490: 9434: 9332: 9293: 8996: 8974: 8944: 8452: 8438:

Kevin, hope you don't mind me jumping in here, but there is a current discussion

8357: 8325: 8296: 8258: 8127: 7365: 7246: 7088: 7059: 7054: 6882: 6711: 6681: 6639: 6605: 6520: 6407: 6334: 5892: 5733: 5705: 5676: 5647: 5636: 5579: 5549: 5003: 4672: 4319: 4224: 4209:

No I didn't, thanks for the note. I've restored the pre-existng semi-protection.

4199: 4097: 3850: 3816: 3508: 3474: 2560: 1847: 1837: 1155: 1127: 1096: 1021: 765: 513: 451: 47: 17: 9572:

problems when there are other possible solutions, and in fact, has precident to

9288:

This AfD was relisted for discussion on 10 December 2009 but you closed it with

7010:

I'd appreciate your response to the discussion you began on my talkpage. Thanks

4136:

Talk:Global_warming#Note_cyclical_variations_which_lead_to_recent_cooling_trends

199: 46:

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

10213: 9756: 9581: 9453: 9384:

Kevin, for your info, I am staying WAY outta this one! Ringside and lovin' it!

9356: 9310: 9162: 9124: 8817: 8781: 8745: 8690: 8621: 8228: 8199: 8166: 7691: 7151: 6806: 6760: 6631: 6136: 5989: 5513: 5485: 5298:

Hello, perhaps you can help on the right and wrong of this: The source for the

4789: 4614:

I've done the article, but not the disambig yet. I'll keep an eye on that one.

4452: 4421: 4412: 4157: 4143: 4131: 4123: 3842: 3797: 3752: 3724: 3692: 3663: 3633: 3001: 2858:

Bullshit. There is no real consensus, and even if there were you must supply a

2559:(i.e. by some source other than a blog), and whether a whole paragraph carries 1953: 1888: 1626: 1501: 1431: 1384: 1368: 1045: 813: 779: 488: 263: 221: 181: 166: 7976:

http://realestalker.blogspot.com/2009/09/heather-mills-is-flipping-out-on.html

6625:

Kevin, things are not alway apparent at first sight. On reviewing your words,

5304:

http://realestalker.blogspot.com/2009/09/heather-mills-is-flipping-out-on.html

1713:

interaction is needed here either, but that's beside my primary question.) --

10369: 10222: 10163: 10109: 10105: 9735: 9537: 9143: 9119: 9111: 9089: 8899: 8885: 8870: 8813: 8704: 8636: 8610: 8520: 8405: 8367: 7433: 7415: 7392: 7169: 7011: 6770: 6307: 6200:

You recently deleted an article I submitted. So I created this article at:

6186: 6107: 6072: 6038: 5967: 5935: 5880: 4884: 4860: 4848: 4840: 4793: 4529: 4515: 4372: 4343: 4331: 4279: 4036: 3924: 3906: 3902: 3702: 3292:

Thanks Steve. I got talked into it, hopefully I'll fnd a path that suits me.

3260: 3225: 3104: 3069: 2957:

As it clearly was my intention, I think this message has missed it's target.

2943: 2863: 2844: 2831: 2814: 2806: 2771: 2742: 2726: 2196: 1794: 1761: 1728: 1714: 1683: 1145: 1088: 1062: 1000: 944: 749: 711: 484: 422: 407: 9921:

The fallout will be at DRV, for sure. I just wonder which one will list it.

6286: 4952:

I realise I threaded and judged you wrong; please except these bowl of wiki-

3365:

And I'm glad to see you back around working hard with cleaning up our BLPs.

2628:

Seems like I accomplished both and you are still the one edit warring,......

180:

Just seen your comment on my page. Must have been posting at the same time!

10379: 9959: 9922: 9882: 9835: 9799: 9771: 9711: 9675: 9632: 9597: 9511: 9371: 9318: 9267: 9238: 9231: 9199: 9147: 9083: 8832: 8799: 8665:

Ok, fair enough. Shouldn't be a problem, i've already gathered a few, like

8640: 8467: 7593: 7582: 6844: 6822: 5374: 5345: 5253:? I'll rework it to scrap the bio content and I'll consider merge targets. 5170: 5140: 5071: 4831: 4335: 3598: 3564: 3530: 3178: 2859: 2556: 1775: 1742: 1675: 1119: 1115: 561: 532: 216:

Well, you may be right regarding software, but on the general point surely

7265:

I asked three straight questios and you (an admin!) answer is only this? -

1057:

It goes on and on. Not accepting these sources shows a bias on your part.

9700:

your strike as things have been restored to what you had signed. Cheers,

9617: 9611: 9242: 8476:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Repeated Reverts at Solid

7738: 7641: 7564: 7550: 7509: 7481: 7445: 7399: 7336: 7322: 7294: 7279:

Yes. I think I've answered your questions, and have nothing else to add.

7266: 7230: 7187: 7130: 6635: 6564:

was something that KillerChihuahua said in the first deletion discussion:

6066:

closure. I am only puzzled by a detail. Why the article has been deleted

5993:

organizations, namely the National Fraternal Congress of America and the

5299: 5184:

incident, as they tend to become just a renamed version of the original.

5027: 4852: 4721: 4059: 3701:

No, I closed it because I believed the arguments that the subject failed

3341: 2437: 2409: 2385: 2350: 2323: 2218: 2182: 2142: 1201:

It certainly will not make mediation easier. I'll comment there shortly.

928: 905: 889: 834: 826: 8729:

brought up one article with a similar trivial mention of his name only.

5251:

Knowledge:Article Incubator/Refusal of interracial marriage in Louisiana

3811:

Hi Kevin, if you have a chance there is a question for you at the DrV...

1915:

The sources are editorials and are therefore not reliable or relevant -

1051: 627:

i thought you were agreeing to at least temporarily leave my edits alone

9861: 9814: 9791: 9015: 8970: 8956: 8940: 8913: 8763: 8730: 8712: 8648: 8584: 8530: 8500: 8444: 8425: 8377: 8335: 8321: 8306: 8292: 8278: 8254: 8213: 8185: 8138: 8123: 8099: 8009: 7833: 7758: 7657: 7612: 7547:

Only after question 1?! A free re-chance: what is the single ONE EVENT?

7532: 7495: 7463: 7419: 7369: 7308: 7280: 7250: 7173: 7074: 7026: 6969: 6922: 6897: 6826: 6785: 6746: 6695: 6677: 6655: 6536: 6422: 6372: 6330: 6254: 6151: 6093: 6018: 5946: 5905: 5886: 5729: 5715: 5701: 5686: 5672: 5658: 5643: 5622: 5575: 5561: 5545: 5454: 5360: 5322: 5273: 5231: 5185: 5156: 5094: 5007: 4924: 4888: 4797: 4757: 4661: 4615: 4576: 4489: 4433: 4403:

and when I went to save I saw that you already speedied it. Since the

4376: 4347: 4295: 4246: 4210: 4195: 4142:

which is what I would replace the current (contentious?) version with.

4104: 4040: 4005: 3964: 3948: 3910: 3867: 3866:

I would have, but don'replyt know what your rationale would have been.

3827: 3812: 3734: 3706: 3673: 3644: 3578: 3545: 3504: 3490: 3470: 3445: 3414: 3293: 3242: 3086: 3005: 2958: 2924:

and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's

2888: 2867: 2756: 2667: 2589: 2523: 2464: 2423: 2376:

As you have failed to address my question, I have to repeat that there

2363: 2279: 2250: 2200: 2156: 2016: 1972: 1892: 1858: 1843: 1809: 1779: 1746: 1699: 1643: 1609: 1571: 1548: 1518: 1475: 1450: 1275: 1246: 1202: 1159: 1123: 1092: 1017: 957: 909: 860: 791: 734: 652: 630: 576: 547: 462: 447: 426: 376: 348: 311: 249: 235: 203: 131: 98: 4660:

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

3747:

Taking an article to DRV isn't something I take lightly. Regards. --

361:

So I'll just say I desire mediation and wait for the next step then.--

202:

would not have applied in any case, as it does not apply to software.

9674:

Yes, someone else picked that up and corrected my error a while ago.

8726: 8376:

I'm sure they will. We can use it to define irony in months to come.

7121:

for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the

6867: 6229: 5128:

should have been done by moving the article to an appropriate title.

4594: 4448: 4417: 4271:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur)

3793: 3748: 3720: 3688: 3659: 3629: 3395:

as delete, but the IPs were different. Same ISP, but different IPs.--

2917: 1378: 807: 773: 617:. Today I was asked to "recuse" from editing by 76.21.104.121 at FH. 248:

I think your interpretation is correct. I learn something every day.

3000:

Hi Mikerichi, I'm no longer an admin. You'll need to report this at

10364: 8708: 8515: 7387:

and conclusions here. These people overthere, at AfD: I did argue.

6181: 5962: 5930: 5403: 4639: 3332:. The AfD was closed early because the article had been renamed to 3328:

Hello there. I am leaving this message to you because you voted in

3256: 3221: 3100: 3065: 2721:

Yep, I'm well aware of that, hence me asking him to disclose them.

2422:

You want an RfC on the blanking of an RfC? This is just hilarious.

2125:

Why the blanking of "Knowledge:Requests for comment/Tennis expert"?

2080:

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

2059: 1141: 1058: 996: 940: 10445:

as Delete last November. I userfied the article at the request of

5844:

The evaluation given on the page couldn't have been MORE wrong.

4064: 3733:

No need to apologise, seems opinion is on your side there anyway.

3018:

Sorry, didn't notice that at the top of your talk page. Cheers.

2881: 9648: 8992: 6221: 6135:

You closed the AfD as delete, but you didn't delete the article.

5070:

Well not really. Just wondering if i could get a userfication of

4953: 4600:, so it'll be great if you can protect that as well. Thanks. -- 4330:

Notability is determined for biographies using the guidelines at

748:

six weeks doesn't seem "persistent and significant" from here. --

10216:) on the day of the deletion. In addition, the first comment on 8025:

Marc Sinden is currently in Australia, having just arrived there

7073:

Yes, I've made a comment to that effect at the BLP noticeboard.

5430:

You removed the category "Crime in Louisiana" from the article "

4938: 4827:

I always try to edit neutral, I always try to don't be a... etc.

4535:

template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at

3444:

Equally plausible I guess. That's why I kept A7 for a fallback.

3241:

Thanks Lar. It's a pity it didn't gain more widespread support.

3085:

Thanks Lar. It's a pity it didn't gain more widespread support.

1933:

The sources are criticism of ME and therefore violate policy x.

1463:

Interesting - 4 vandalism attacks since unprotection occurred.--

9834:

I must be missing something here. How is this redirect useful?

8181: 7087:(EC) Whoops! We must have just crossed paths. I appreciate it! 6968:

Now in case I haven't made myself clear, fuck off. All of you.

6476:

Raymond Joseph Cormier is a self-proclaimed Prophet in Canada.

5685:

That was just a general note in case you had anything further.

3901:, showing how he passes either of these notability guidelines: 3220:

See you in the trenches (in the happy event of your return)! ++

3200: 3064:

See you in the trenches (in the happy event of your return)! ++

3044: 8639:, and are essentially that the person has been the subject of 7335:

For starters, to help you: What is the ONEEVENT it is about? -

6482:* 1 Arrests * 2 Pilgrimages * 3 Politics * 4 References 6454:

Revision as of 16:28, 18 February 2009 Raymond Joseph Cormier

4811:

Hi Kevin, ok thanks for the tip, I will follow that procedure

4371:

I don't recall declining a speedy on this one, think that was

2912: 1857:

I hear your frustration. I'm not ready to give up yet though.

130:

No problem. I'll look at the whole thing when I get a chance.

9292:

one day later. Can you explain why you acted so prematurely?

7436:. I am not used to delete-reviews. Then: it's not about your 7105:

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

4401:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Kari Ferrell (2nd nomination)

4175:

I understand and agree with you. No problem to delete. Sorry.

2382:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate

2292:

I won't even bother to look, and will take your word for it.

2179:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate

2139:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate

9803: 7714:

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

5338:

File:Dragoslav Sekularac - photo property of BelgradeArt.png

4712:

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

4655:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Allied Artists International

3131:"arrest" section is also all wrong, check out the citations 2507:

on talk pages, they seem to be working on the ones I used.

2322:. Could you please provide the diff of the request? Thanks. 1952:

It is you who has engaged in, or acted indifferent towards,

10121: 8725:

NewsBank only has the SF Chronicle article you linked, and

7025:

I didn't begin it. But I will comment further if you like.

4943: 3929:

Hey - I sent you a couple of e-mails - did you get them? --

2880:

Reported, and you need to learn to read talk pages, dude.

9060: 7508:(ec)and the ONEEVENT is: ... (applause after filling in) - 7125:. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome. 6847:, having access to the people in power, wrote a column in 6460:

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

4171:

Proposed deletion of List of programs broadcast by RedeTV!

2555:

According to Kevin in his first chiming in, this is about

1154:

Is it possible to just have this discussion in one place?

859:

for my criteria and the request relating to this article.

8912:

Or alternately, I was busy and had not yet had a chance.

7186:

1E subjective here? Straight countable to me. See next. -

5134:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Colorado balloon incident

3413:

Seemed clear to be the same user to me, on a dynamic IP.

10407:

Brickbat: Deletionism and the end of the Knowledge dream

9616:

Can you please confirm you voted in ACE as user:kevin?--

9313:. This was a bit of both. As to whether closing after a 8635:

The criteria for inclusion of biographies are listed at

8513:

I have commented there also. Your opinion is needed.

6501:

In 1986 he hitchhiked East to Quebec and the Maritimes.

6176:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Pitar (fictional planet)

5700:

consider stepping away from the BLP closes for a while.

2981:, would you mind protecting the page of his former show 984:

I would like to ask you to re-create the article on the

9988:. I believe screed is generally used pejoratively (see 6404:

User_talk:Steve_Smith#Deleting_material_from_talk_pages

4245:

I haven't got around to changing that yet. One day....

1943:

BLP policies are subject to interpretation by editors.

8499:

At this point I'm inclined to block the pair of them.

5821:, in fact, meet just about every one of the criteria: 1274:

Thanks to both of you. It will make mediation easier.

1122:

are supplied to back up the material, I will restore.

262:

Cheers. It's a situation I hadn't come across before!

9054: 6238:

I look forward to your feedback on this new article.

5813:

He is a widely known, highly respected wise elder in

4233:. Why do you call yourself a "former administrator"? 2920:. When removing text, please specify a reason in the 2314:". I'm sorry, but I'm not following the link between 10287:

his former arguments against Moreno and Knowledge!'

9856:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Andria "Dreamz" Herd

9850:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Andria "Dreamz" Herd

7203:

A very surprising closure to me. Could you clarify:

6440:

bare witness to my activity then in a ¨news¨ report.

3899:

Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/Ronald_I._Meshbesher

9532:

Knowledge talk:Articles for deletion#Early closures

9350:

For God's sake do something about this crazy person

5202:I concur. This close ignored the argument that the 4645:An article that you have been involved in editing, 4407:took place the case has received major coverage by 2137:? At the bottom of that page used to be the words " 2065:An article that you have been involved in editing, 478:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Fitzgerald

10228:It's worth noting some of Moreno's blog comments: 9088:Many thanks for your help with my request on ANI. 6150:Thanks. Not sure why the script didn't delete it. 5809:http://www.llewellyn.com/author.php?author_id=2605 5139:Thanks for your time, and I await your response. 4796:to explain why a copyrighted image is being used. 4342:above was closed in error, then you need to go to 3330:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Olga Rutterschmidt 2075:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Desiree Washington 922:With a comment at RFPP, I brought the issue up at 10252:were Simon Kidd, Alex Jamieson, Brian Steel (aka 10240:on the AFD for the Kevin R. D. Shepherd article ( 8065:Kevin, PLEASE don't let this matter slip away... 6870:, Leader of the Official Opposition at the time. 5432:2009 refusal of interracial marriage in Louisiana 5394:Removal of AfD and Citation Needed Tags by a user 4597:(where there was also the same recent vandalism) 2177:digging. I repeat that I don't see the point of " 1938:it still has nothing to do with criticism policy. 9563:Re: List of actresses in the MILF porn genre AfD 9050:Kevin - Your guidance is requested on the BLP 6596:My error on the sources; thank you for your AGF. 6354:to see this as part of the rationale. regards, 4788:Having a single cover is covered by Knowledge's 2882:http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Kww#Your_Edits 2347:You can easily see the content in the history... 609:are the same person. Both have been involved at 8414:2010 United States Figure Skating Championships 8402:2010 United States Figure Skating Championships 6064:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Patrick Bamford 6015:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Emilio B. Moure 5436:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8310509.stm 3393:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/John Arvin Nery 2797:Hello Kevin, this is an automated message from 2098:I posted a request to extent protection status 632:. Could this pose a problem for the mediation? 10310:that no amount of deflections, distortions or 9992:), so I think my reaction was understandable. 8936:Hello Kevin, At the AfD for the Christy Twins 7460:Knowledge:Deletion_review/Log/2009_November_13 7321:Once again: your answers to 1.2. and 3 are? - 5594:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Greg Augustine 5110:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Keith Bardwell 4634:AfD nomination of Allied Artists International 3961:Maybe wiki email is a bit slow - send them to 2723:Message blanked to avoid giving him any ideas. 2312:The request was made over at WR, earlier today 10236:that Simon Kidd accused Knowledge editors of 9283:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Alexander Lee 7211:event would that be? I found not one editior 6912:Is this reply typical of your application of 5787:or other comment on my talk page is required. 3897:What you need to do is offer your opinion at 2801:to inform you the PROD template you added to 956:You know you could have just asked directly. 9794:? If you delete that you should also delete 8529:Thanks for that opinion, it is very useful. 7563:Unnecessary and unhelpful. Sorry. Stroked. - 3486:I'm taking the article to a Deletion Review 2649:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Jurij Moskon 2135:Knowledge:Requests for comment/Tennis expert 9370:Hmm, and who were you before this account? 8991:Hi, Kevin! You closed the discussion about 8334:Either way it's out of both our hands now. 6421:I have no idea what you are talking about. 5502:) - has recreated it … I've tagged it with 5478:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Eric Zaccar 4560:Thank you for semi-protecting this page. -- 9798:however neither should really be deleted. 9105:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Brian Fury 8184:, or perhaps the outline Marie mentioned. 7458:Note - I have opened a deletion revire at 6465:The following discussion has been closed. 6130:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Party Dark 5601:Knowledge:Article Incubator/Greg Augustine 5115:Please reconsider your close of this AFD. 4851:, if you have a problem with that contact 3215:Your hard work on BLPs in general, and at 3059:Your hard work on BLPs in general, and at 2862:when adding the material. Go and read the 993:Sexual abuse scandal in Boston archdiocese 483:Well done. If this is sent to DRV against 395:Could you explain this edit comment please 6170:Would you care to explain your closes at 5853:admirers are grieving his sudden death. 5402:has removed the AfD tag from his article 5208:Interracial marriage in the United States 2404:I notice that the original edit has been 1449:I've unprotected, we'll see how it goes. 986:Sexual abuse scandal in Worcester diocese 980:Sexual abuse scandal in Worcester diocese 9061:http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Arthur_Kemp 8478:, it would be much appreciated. Cheers, 8364:Knowledge:Requests for comment/Kmweber 3 7703:Hello, Kevin. You have new messages at 5476:Hello, Kevin … Less that 24 hours after 5411:. You culd see and visit his talk-page. 4942: 4830: 4697:Hello, Kevin. You have new messages at 4273:. My first reaction is that the subject 3625:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Al Rosas 2506:I did not know that, about the <: --> 10409:for the first time today; see also his 6172:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Hivehom 4310:I am the user who created the page for 2755:Yeah well, sorry I fucked up the plan. 1349:Responded to your comment on Tim Burton 14: 8161:My idea is this: there is an inactive 7145:WP:Articles for deletion/Yaakov Teitel 5792:Disputing your deletion of Ted Andrews 4835:What ever happens to these wiki-rules? 4375:. I deleted after a consensus at AfD. 4334:. Bentley has not been the subject of 3489:I've answered at the deletion review. 3464:Articles for deletion/Kristen McNamara 3198: 3042: 2864:policy on biographies of living people 2832:Learn how to opt out of these messages 1727:? (Four months, not three months.) -- 421:I believe that "penis" vandalism on a 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 5856:Thank you for kindly reconsidering. 5002:Sure. I have moved the discussion to 4979:Need your opinion on some photographs 4523:List of programs broadcast by RedeTV! 4505:List of programs broadcast by RedeTV! 4312:Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur) 4267:Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur) 4261:Andrew Bentley (British Entrepreneur) 2817:for community discussion. Thank you, 2094:Page protection at Mohamed ElBaradei? 701:Semi-protection of John Cooper Clarke 10244:). Needless to say, the only people 10116:, just 90 mins after the latter had 9691:Knowledge:Flagged revisions petition 9425:Please take notice, Kevin: You told 8711:and see if there is anything there. 2805:has been removed. It was removed by 2054:AfD nomination of Desiree Washington 218:Knowledge:DELETE#Process_interaction 25: 10290:'In conclusion, the self-described 9055:http://en.wikipedia.org/Arthur_Kemp 8758:The pre-deletion version is now at 7444:answering. What is the one event? - 5980:Deletion Review for Emilio B. Moure 4983:Hi. Can you provide you opinion on 4487:User:Vermiculite/Samantha_Henderson 4103:Yes, that battle looks to be lost. 23: 7696: 7109:As you participated in the recent 4690: 4346:rather than recreate the article. 4190:Protection level of global warming 3280:- welcome back to mopping tasks.-- 2129:I would like to know why you made 461:Thanks, any input is appreciated. 24: 10469: 9655:Did you mean edit=autoconfirmed, 8362:I love your deletion summary for 8029:I clearly know where Sinden lives 7805:] but Clegg repeatedly reverted. 5006:though, probably a better venue. 4096:PS Thanks for that protection on 2666:Nice work. I've changed my vote. 1666:Abtract's arbitration enforcement 8597:I dropped them a note, thanks ˉˉ 7631:Hi Kevin. You closed the AfD on 7123:SecurePoll feedback and workshop 6202:User:JLRedperson/HP_BTO_Software 4716:Hey Kevin- do you mind handling 4638: 4156:I see it's unprotected. Thanks. 3391:Obviously I'm fine with closing 3336:during the discussion, and both 3199: 3043: 2911: 2058: 1118:for the same reasons. Again, If 29: 10026:Regarding brevity, point taken. 7633:George Lee (British politician) 7293:Uh? so answers 1. 2. 3. are? - 7128:For the Arbitration Committee, 5132:on point comments of closer at 4537:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 3192:Thanks for your help with BLPs! 3036:Thanks for your help with BLPs! 9806:thus the redirect is proper. 9770:Are you really this clueless? 9534:if and when you have a chance. 8163:physical chemistry wikiproject 7207:. If it were a ONEEVENT, then 4948:Having seen your last edit on 3836:23:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3821:23:31, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3802:13:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3757:01:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC) 3743:21:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3729:12:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3715:12:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3697:12:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3682:11:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3668:11:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3653:11:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3638:11:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC) 3607:22:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 3587:21:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 3573:21:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 3554:21:11, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 3539:21:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 3513:04:43, 28 September 2009 (UTC) 3499:00:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC) 3479:18:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 3454:22:36, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 3440:22:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 3423:22:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 3408:14:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 3381:15:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC) 3360:15:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC) 3302:00:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 3287:10:28, 25 September 2009 (UTC) 3187:20:12, 26 September 2009 (UTC) 512:I agree with Root. Well done. 13: 1: 10424:16:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 10411:Bouquet: Blocking malcontents 10388:05:11, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 10374:03:46, 24 December 2009 (UTC) 10350:15:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC) 10189:01:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC) 10172:shooting yourself in the foot 10158:20:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 10022:18:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 10002:03:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 9968:03:47, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 9953:03:40, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 9931:02:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 9916:02:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC) 9891:22:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 9875:22:43, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 9844:04:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 9827:03:25, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 9780:23:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC) 9765:22:25, 19 December 2009 (UTC) 9740:01:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC) 9720:06:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC) 9705:22:15, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 9684:08:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC) 9669:07:54, 15 December 2009 (UTC) 9641:05:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC) 9626:05:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC) 9606:21:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC) 9590:13:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC) 9558:22:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 9520:22:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC) 9504:18:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC) 9483:11:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC) 9462:17:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 9447:20:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC) 9417:18:40, 12 December 2009 (UTC) 9394:14:42, 12 December 2009 (UTC) 9380:21:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 9365:16:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 9341:02:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC) 9327:02:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 9302:01:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 9276:21:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 9222:06:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 8979:16:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8965:05:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8949:05:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8894:23:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8879:01:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 8841:21:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 8826:18:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 8808:02:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 8790:01:37, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 8754:22:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8739:21:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8721:21:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8699:21:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8657:23:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC) 8630:22:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC) 8602:02:30, 28 November 2009 (UTC) 8593:01:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC) 8578:01:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC) 8554:23:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 8539:23:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 8525:22:46, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 8509:21:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 8494:22:02, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 8455:14:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC) 8434:06:19, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 8386:01:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC) 8371:01:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC) 8344:00:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8330:00:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 8315:06:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC) 8301:03:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC) 8287:01:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC) 8263:23:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC) 8237:08:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 8222:08:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 8208:08:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 8194:05:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 8175:05:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC) 8147:22:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 8132:18:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 8108:07:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 8093:07:30, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 8075:23:32, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 8060:14:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 8045:12:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 8018:07:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 8003:06:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 7988:01:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 7962:23:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7934:23:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7911:23:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7873:23:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7842:22:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7815:22:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7790:22:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7767:21:58, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7751:21:46, 17 November 2009 (UTC) 7728:22:52, 16 November 2009 (UTC) 7687:16:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC) 7666:22:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 7650:13:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC) 7621:20:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7606:12:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7573:17:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7559:01:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7541:01:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7518:01:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7504:01:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7490:01:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7472:00:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7454:00:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7428:00:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7408:00:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7378:00:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7345:00:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC) 7331:22:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7317:22:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7303:22:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7289:22:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7275:22:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7259:20:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7239:16:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7196:16:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7182:11:14, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7163:11:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7139:08:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 7097:22:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 7083:22:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 7068:22:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 7035:03:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 7020:03:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 7000:13:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 6978:04:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 6957:04:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 6931:02:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 6906:00:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 6891:17:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 4591:Ray Lewis (American football) 4399:Hi. I was just commenting on 4140:User:Lissajous/Global_warming 4130:The temporary furore over at 3268:16:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC) 3251:10:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC) 3233:01:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC) 3155:05:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC) 3112:16:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC) 3095:10:01, 7 September 2009 (UTC) 3077:01:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC) 2249:'s user pages being deleted. 1547:Could you also unprotect the 446:going away for several days. 9261:15:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC) 9208:01:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 9193:01:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 9171:20:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 9156:04:23, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 9133:02:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 9098:23:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 9079:11:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 9038:00:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 9024:02:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 9009:02:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 8922:11:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 8908:09:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 8772:00:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 8760:User:Navarenko/Chris C. Kemp 7006:I'd appreciate your response 6843:In 1978, the U.S. Columnist 6835:06:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC) 6815:06:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC) 6794:03:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 6779:02:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 6755:00:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6745:Thanks for picking that up. 6740:00:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6704:03:04, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6686:02:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6664:02:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6648:01:54, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6614:22:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6545:22:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6529:21:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6431:21:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6416:13:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6381:21:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6364:09:59, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6339:06:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 6282:16:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 6263:02:05, 7 November 2009 (UTC) 6248:23:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC) 6191:15:47, 1 November 2009 (UTC) 6160:02:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC) 6145:02:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC) 6121:01:42, 1 November 2009 (UTC) 6102:20:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC) 6086:13:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC) 6052:13:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC) 6027:20:13, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 6007:15:30, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5972:23:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5955:22:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5940:21:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5914:21:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5900:14:59, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5866:14:36, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5774:09:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5738:06:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5724:05:37, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5710:05:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5695:05:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5681:05:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5667:04:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5652:04:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5631:01:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5616:01:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5584:04:45, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5570:04:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5554:03:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5538:00:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 5463:03:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC) 5448:03:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC) 5421:04:25, 25 October 2009 (UTC) 5383:00:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC) 5369:22:04, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5354:21:58, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5331:21:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5316:14:24, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5282:22:10, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5268:20:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5240:02:34, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5225:01:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC) 5194:22:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 5179:22:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 5165:22:11, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 5149:13:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 5103:22:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 5084:13:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC) 5060:20:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 5040:18:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 5016:01:42, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 4997:01:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 4933:00:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 4918:23:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4897:23:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4878:23:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4821:23:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4806:22:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4782:22:19, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4766:21:55, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4750:21:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4730:20:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4706:20:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4681:01:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC) 4647:Allied Artists International 4624:23:57, 1 November 2009 (UTC) 4610:23:19, 1 November 2009 (UTC) 4585:09:18, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 4570:08:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 4549:01:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC) 4498:02:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4480:02:23, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4458:02:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4442:02:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4427:02:13, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4385:11:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4367:08:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC) 4356:20:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC) 4324:16:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC) 4304:04:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC) 4288:23:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC) 4255:19:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC) 4240:16:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC) 3319:15:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC) 924:WP:ANI#User:Lar/Liberal Semi 7: 10459:17:59, 2 January 2010 (UTC) 9331:Thank you for your answer. 9266:OK, we'll see how it goes. 9230:Requesting unprotection of 9069:Many thanks for your time. 8987:Megarex and Megarex (album) 8643:published coverage that is 7113:election, or in one of two 6226:IBM_Tivoli_Identity_Manager 5091:User:Misarxist/Wadih Saadeh 4265:Another editor has created 4219:07:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC) 4204:06:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC) 4185:23:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 4166:20:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 4152:17:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 4113:02:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 4087:02:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 4049:21:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC) 4030:21:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC) 4014:20:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC) 3999:20:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC) 3973:23:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC) 3957:23:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC) 3942:23:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC) 3919:20:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC) 3876:01:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC) 3861:01:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC) 3028:20:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC) 3014:21:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 2995:19:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 2967:00:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 2952:23:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC) 2897:00:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 2876:06:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC) 2853:05:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC) 2827:01:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC) 2780:02:43, 17 August 2009 (UTC) 2765:00:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 2751:23:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 2735:23:21, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 2712:05:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC) 2690:07:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC) 2676:01:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC) 2661:23:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC) 2638:04:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 2620:01:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 2598:04:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC) 2583:04:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC) 2548:03:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC) 2532:06:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC) 2517:06:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC) 2110:) 07:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC) 1426:Protection was, as Wknight 883:. On the same note, how is 93:Re: Liberal semi-protection 10: 10474: 10294:Kevin R. D. Shepherd (who 9854:Regarding your closure of 9433:page for an editor called 8812:Just restored the page at 8412:, who is competing at the 7588:An editor has asked for a 7117:that relate to the use of 6638:must be discounted. Peace 5728:Thanks for the response. 5026:Thanks for chipping in on 3784:An editor has asked for a 3169:An editor has asked for a 527:19:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 507:15:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 435:21:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 416:21:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 385:23:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 371:23:27, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 357:23:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 341:23:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 320:01:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 304:01:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 272:11:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 258:11:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 244:11:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 230:11:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 212:11:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 190:11:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 175:11:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 154:02:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 140:02:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 125:02:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 106:02:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC) 10271:) and Robert Priddy (aka 10256:) and Robert Priddy (aka 9804:http://www.fakesteve.net/ 7440:of answering: it is your 7432:OK, Your link is better: 6062:I agree with your recent 4339:secondary source material 3205: 3049: 2522:I've fixed some of them. 2488:09:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2473:08:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2459:08:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2445:05:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2432:05:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2417:05:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC) 2393:22:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2384:" is no longer relevant. 2372:22:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2358:22:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2331:22:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2302:07:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2288:06:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2273:06:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2259:06:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2241:06:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2226:06:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2209:06:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2190:06:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2165:05:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 2150:04:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 1793:from Abtract). Right? -- 904:is the reason protecting 601:I have reason to believe 8474:If you could comment at 8080:Scientology in Australia 7733:Marc Sinden edit warring 7383:No sir. I disagree with 7215:a specific single event. 6468:Please do not modify it. 5599:Please move the article 4923:Thanks. See you around. 2977:I noticed you protected 2811:discussing your concerns 2120:07:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC) 2089:08:07, 31 May 2009 (UTC) 2040:04:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 2025:03:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 2011:02:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 1996:02:49, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 1981:02:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 1966:01:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 1901:00:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 1882:00:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC) 1867:21:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC) 1852:21:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC) 1818:11:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1803:10:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1788:00:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1778:request also if you do. 1770:00:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1755:00:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1737:00:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1723:12:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC) 1708:12:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC) 1692:11:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC) 1652:04:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC) 1638:21:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 1618:23:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1580:06:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1565:05:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1527:00:55, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 1513:00:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 1496:23:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC) 1484:22:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC) 1470:21:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC) 1459:23:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 1444:20:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 1415:23:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 1389:06:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 1363:01:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC) 1178:Disruption of mediation? 10447:User:Pohta ce-am pohtit 9063:Talk:Arthur Kemp page. 6058:Patrick Bamford closure 5984:Contesting deletion of 5512:, but would you please 5066:Another deletion whinge 3340:and its sister article 1945:Wrong, with exceptions. 1674:an interaction between 1343:12:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC) 1318:23:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC) 1284:03:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 1270:02:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 1255:23:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC) 1239:23:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC) 1225:22:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC) 1211:22:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC) 1196:21:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC) 1168:03:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1150:03:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1132:03:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1101:03:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1067:03:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1026:03:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1005:03:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 966:22:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 952:17:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 935:16:49, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 918:04:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 896:03:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC) 869:21:24, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 841:15:34, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 818:07:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 800:07:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 784:07:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 758:11:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 743:11:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 720:10:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 691:15:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 676:03:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 661:02:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 642:02:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 585:04:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 570:03:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 556:01:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 541:01:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 471:06:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 456:06:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 10166:. It might be seen as 9726:You may be interested: 9696:Hi. You might want to 9142:is more specific than 7701: 6765:Is there a reason for 6324:Ray Joseph Cormier AfD 6213:Microsoft_Office_Excel 5829:A very resounding YES! 4972: 4836: 4695: 4649:, has been listed for 4058:mounting there, given 2866:before you come back. 2069:, has been listed for 1421:José Reyes (shortstop) 649:Talk:Mohamed_ElBaradei 10164:the admin noticeboard 10114:Request for Adminship 9237:Hi Kevin, I see that 8932:AfD for Christy Twins 8778:Chris C. Kemp profile 8249:Willy Schäfer (actor) 7700: 7218:. Please clarify the 7049:I saw your revert on 5995:Wheelchair Foundation 5803:misinformed. He was 4946: 4834: 4694: 3217:User:Lar/Liberal Semi 3061:User:Lar/Liberal Semi 2979:Steven Cohen (soccer) 2934:. Take a look at the 2790:Removal of PROD from 1553:my subpage about this 857:User:Lar/Liberal_Semi 160:prodding and speedies 42:of past discussions. 10278:'Now that Knowledge 10168:beating a dead horse 10108:gave his support to 7581:Deletion review for 7115:requests for comment 6861:I wrote a letter to 6718:Cyber Security virus 6037:ask for a review. -- 5997:. Please undelete. ( 5409:Sarfaraz Khan Marwat 5400:User:AurangzebMarwat 5398:I have witness that 5045:The page was deleted 4857:Wikimedia Foundation 4177:Regi-Iris Stefanelli 4126:unprotection request 3888:Ronald I. Meshbesher 3882:Ronald I. Meshbesher 3777:Deletion review for 3276:Glad to see you back 3162:Deletion review for 2717:Your sock message... 1680:User:Alastair_Haines 1543:On a related note... 1114:I have also deleted 9958:lengthy discourse. 9790:Why did you delete 8268:Sorry, link to AfD 7775:You may agree that 6866:reply was the Hon. 5873:deletion discussion 5426:Crime in Louisiana? 5022:Marc Sinden puffery 4839:Look I ignored one 4511:I have removed the 4083:"I'm listening...." 3561:To Catch a Predator 3525:Pedobaiting article 3334:Black Widow murders 1954:tendentious editing 1889:tendentious editing 1304:Shold I respond to 1044:There is also this 887:blatant vandalism? 10302:: There have been 8677:and more recently 7712:remove this notice 7705:Liquid's talk page 7702: 7476:We take this as a 7111:Audit Subcommittee 6849:The Ottawa Citizen 4973: 4837: 4794:fair use rationale 4710:remove this notice 4699:Tedder's talk page 4696: 4589:Thanks. How about 4466:Samantha Henderson 3947:No, was it today? 3338:Olga Rutterschmidt 3324:Olga Rutterschmidt 3284: 2983:World Soccer Daily 2973:World Soccer Daily 2320:User:Tennis expert 2067:Desiree Washington 1642:Now re-protected. 1493: 1467: 1381: 1323:Slyvester Stallone 1260:be) a next time.-- 810: 776: 707:John Cooper Clarke 597:Is this a problem? 9873: 9830: 9813:comment added by 9802:is the writer of 8567:Gracie and Zarkov 8546:Materialscientist 8398:Michael Solonoski 8392:Michael Solonoski 7777:user:Captainclegg 7051:Brittny Gastineau 7045:Brittny Gastineau 6990:comment added by 6947:comment added by 6800:Islamic Terrorism 6738: 6517: 6516: 6320: 6306:comment added by 6287:Deletion of ZaRP! 6207:those changes. 5898: 5871:The close of the 5788: 5772: 5765: 5519:Happy Editing! — 5247:Article Incubator 4718:User:Mariah-Yulia 4679: 4074:Peace and Passion 3987:Stephanie Birkitt 3981:Stephanie Birkitt 3859: 3594:Teenage pregnancy 3282: 3238: 3237: 3158: 3141:comment added by 3082: 3081: 2835: 2557:reliably reported 2463:To what purpose? 2316:User:Kelly Martin 2247:User:Kelly Martin 2217: 1605: 1591:comment added by 1491: 1489:edits continue.-- 1465: 1387: 1377: 1333:comment added by 816: 806: 782: 772: 729:met my criteria. 441:Mohamed ElBaradei 90: 89: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 10465: 10436:SUPER (software) 10308:irrefutable fact 10186: 10182: 10178: 10019: 10015: 10011: 9913: 9909: 9905: 9872: 9870: 9859: 9829: 9807: 9762: 9759: 9568:delete based on 9550: 9502: 9431:Talk:Marc Sinden 9404:Talk:Marc Sinden 9046:BLP Arthur Kemp 8687:FederalNewsRadio 8489: 8464:User:Marie Poise 8450: 7715: 7155:Nomoskedasticity 7002: 6959: 6736: 6728: 6726: 6470: 6457: 6456: 6356:Nomoskedasticity 6319: 6300: 6278: 6116: 6110: 6081: 6075: 6047: 6041: 5897: 5895: 5889: 5884: 5786: 5780: 5776: 5766: 5762: 5608: 5511: 5505: 5265: 5261: 5257: 5222: 5218: 5214: 4970: 4963: 4915: 4908: 4875: 4868: 4713: 4671: 4668: 4642: 4555:JaMarcus Russell 4534: 4528: 4520: 4514: 4456: 4425: 4079: 3938: 3933: 3853: 3807:Kristen McNamara 3437: 3431: 3405: 3399: 3376: 3355: 3209:The BLP Barnstar 3203: 3196: 3195: 3175:Kristen McNamara 3164:Kristen McNamara 3157: 3135: 3053:The BLP Barnstar 3047: 3040: 3039: 2933: 2915: 2829: 2803:Czechtalent Zlín 2792:Czechtalent Zlín 2480:The Rambling Man 2451:The Rambling Man 2441: 2413: 2389: 2354: 2327: 2222: 2215: 2186: 2146: 2086: 2062: 1630: 1604: 1585: 1505: 1383: 1355:Piano non troppo 1345: 1120:reliable sources 931: 892: 837: 812: 778: 524: 519: 503: 497: 491: 286:Mediation at ME? 111:Protection at ME 103: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 10473: 10472: 10468: 10467: 10466: 10464: 10463: 10462: 10439: 10184: 10180: 10176: 10017: 10013: 10009: 9911: 9907: 9903: 9899: 9868: 9860: 9852: 9808: 9796:Fake Steve Jobs 9788: 9760: 9757: 9753: 9747: 9728: 9694: 9653: 9614: 9565: 9538: 9528: 9496: 9493: 9352: 9286: 9235: 9181: 9108: 9086: 9048: 9030:Victor Silveira 9001:Victor Silveira 8997:Megarex (album) 8989: 8934: 8867: 8614: 8570: 8487: 8472: 8448: 8394: 8360: 8251: 8155: 8116: 8114:AbbyWinters.com 8082: 7735: 7716: 7709: 7694: 7674: 7637:in my Userspace 7629: 7590:deletion review 7586: 7148: 7107: 7047: 7008: 6985: 6942: 6802: 6763: 6730: 6722: 6714: 6513: 6483: 6466: 6326: 6301: 6293:Speedy deletion 6289: 6280: 6276: 6271: 6198: 6168: 6133: 6114: 6113: 6108: 6079: 6078: 6073: 6060: 6045: 6044: 6039: 5986:Emilio B. Moure 5982: 5924: 5922:Deletion review 5893: 5887: 5885: 5881:deletion review 5840:libraries. YES! 5794: 5784: 5778: 5770: 5756: 5639: 5606: 5597: 5540: 5509: 5503: 5474: 5428: 5396: 5341: 5296: 5263: 5259: 5255: 5220: 5216: 5212: 5113: 5068: 5047: 5024: 4981: 4968: 4961: 4957: 4941: 4913: 4906: 4873: 4866: 4829: 4790:fair use policy 4737: 4735:Image Copyright 4714: 4703: 4688: 4662: 4643: 4636: 4558: 4532: 4526: 4518: 4512: 4509: 4468: 4447: 4416: 4397: 4263: 4227: 4192: 4173: 4128: 4098:Austin St. John 4077: 3983: 3936: 3930: 3927: 3884: 3847: 3809: 3786:deletion review 3782: 3621: 3527: 3466: 3435: 3429: 3403: 3397: 3389: 3387:John Arvin Nery 3374: 3353: 3326: 3278: 3194: 3171:deletion review 3167: 3136: 3125: 3038: 2975: 2929: 2909: 2860:reliable source 2841: 2795: 2719: 2700: 2682:MichaelQSchmidt 2653:MichaelQSchmidt 2645: 2504: 2439: 2411: 2387: 2352: 2325: 2220: 2184: 2144: 2127: 2096: 2082: 2063: 2056: 1840: 1668: 1628: 1586: 1545: 1503: 1424: 1398: 1373: 1351: 1328: 1325: 1302: 1180: 982: 929: 890: 835: 830: 768: 703: 623:full discussion 599: 522: 514: 501: 495: 489: 481: 443: 397: 328: 288: 162: 113: 99: 95: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 18:User talk:Kevin 12: 11: 5: 10471: 10438: 10432: 10431: 10430: 10429: 10428: 10427: 10426: 10393: 10392: 10391: 10390: 10358: 10357: 10320: 10231: 10225:by Shepherd.) 10206: 10204: 10203: 10202: 10201: 10200: 10199: 10198: 10197: 10196: 10195: 10194: 10193: 10192: 10191: 10136: 10135: 10134: 10133: 10132: 10131: 10130: 10129: 10128: 10127: 10126: 10125: 10090: 10089: 10088: 10087: 10086: 10085: 10084: 10083: 10082: 10081: 10080: 10079: 10064: 10063: 10062: 10061: 10060: 10059: 10058: 10057: 10056: 10055: 10054: 10053: 10038: 10037: 10036: 10035: 10034: 10033: 10032: 10031: 10030: 10029: 10028: 10027: 9975: 9974: 9973: 9972: 9971: 9970: 9934: 9933: 9898: 9895: 9894: 9893: 9851: 9848: 9847: 9846: 9787: 9784: 9783: 9782: 9751: 9746: 9743: 9727: 9724: 9723: 9722: 9693: 9688: 9687: 9686: 9652: 9647:Protection of 9645: 9644: 9643: 9613: 9610: 9609: 9608: 9564: 9561: 9535: 9527: 9526:Early closures 9524: 9523: 9522: 9492: 9489: 9488: 9487: 9486: 9485: 9470: 9449: 9423: 9422: 9421: 9420: 9419: 9351: 9348: 9347: 9346: 9345: 9344: 9285: 9280: 9279: 9278: 9234: 9228: 9227: 9226: 9225: 9224: 9180: 9177: 9176: 9175: 9174: 9173: 9107: 9101: 9085: 9082: 9071:TheFallenCrowd 9047: 9044: 9043: 9042: 9041: 9040: 9028:Ok! Thank you! 8988: 8985: 8984: 8983: 8982: 8981: 8933: 8930: 8929: 8928: 8927: 8926: 8925: 8924: 8900:Kevin McCready 8886:Kevin McCready 8871:Kevin McCready 8866: 8863: 8862: 8861: 8860: 8859: 8858: 8857: 8856: 8855: 8854: 8853: 8852: 8851: 8850: 8849: 8848: 8847: 8846: 8845: 8844: 8843: 8671:WashingtonPost 8660: 8659: 8613: 8608: 8607: 8606: 8605: 8604: 8569: 8564: 8563: 8562: 8561: 8560: 8559: 8558: 8557: 8556: 8471: 8461: 8460: 8459: 8458: 8457: 8393: 8390: 8389: 8388: 8359: 8356: 8355: 8354: 8353: 8352: 8351: 8350: 8349: 8348: 8347: 8346: 8274: 8273: 8250: 8247: 8246: 8245: 8244: 8243: 8242: 8241: 8240: 8239: 8154: 8151: 8150: 8149: 8115: 8112: 8111: 8110: 8081: 8078: 8063: 8062: 8006: 8005: 7971: 7970: 7969: 7968: 7967: 7966: 7965: 7964: 7941: 7940: 7939: 7938: 7937: 7936: 7898: 7897: 7896: 7895: 7884: 7883: 7882: 7881: 7880: 7879: 7878: 7877: 7876: 7875: 7851: 7850: 7849: 7848: 7847: 7846: 7845: 7844: 7822: 7821: 7820: 7819: 7818: 7817: 7795: 7794: 7793: 7792: 7770: 7769: 7734: 7731: 7708: 7695: 7693: 7690: 7673: 7670: 7669: 7668: 7628: 7625: 7624: 7623: 7585: 7579: 7578: 7577: 7576: 7575: 7529: 7528: 7527: 7526: 7525: 7524: 7523: 7522: 7521: 7520: 7474: 7397: 7396: 7385:your behaviour 7362: 7361: 7360: 7359: 7358: 7357: 7356: 7355: 7354: 7353: 7352: 7351: 7350: 7349: 7348: 7347: 7242: 7241: 7223: 7216: 7201: 7200: 7199: 7198: 7147: 7142: 7129: 7127: 7126: 7106: 7103: 7102: 7101: 7100: 7099: 7046: 7043: 7038: 7037: 7012:Kevin McCready 7007: 7004: 6981: 6980: 6965: 6964: 6938: 6937: 6936: 6935: 6934: 6933: 6918: 6917: 6859: 6858: 6857: 6856: 6855: 6854: 6853: 6852: 6801: 6798: 6797: 6796: 6762: 6759: 6758: 6757: 6713: 6710: 6709: 6708: 6707: 6706: 6689: 6688: 6673: 6672: 6671: 6670: 6669: 6668: 6667: 6666: 6651: 6650: 6632:User:Ironholds 6593: 6592: 6591: 6590: 6589: 6588: 6566: 6565: 6557: 6556: 6555: 6554: 6553: 6552: 6515: 6514: 6510: 6481: 6472: 6471: 6462: 6461: 6448: 6447: 6446: 6445: 6444: 6443: 6442: 6441: 6401: 6400: 6399: 6398: 6397: 6396: 6386: 6384: 6383: 6367: 6366: 6350: 6349: 6325: 6322: 6295:nomination of 6288: 6285: 6274: 6270: 6267: 6266: 6265: 6197: 6194: 6167: 6164: 6163: 6162: 6132: 6127: 6126: 6125: 6124: 6123: 6111: 6076: 6059: 6056: 6055: 6054: 6042: 6030: 6029: 5990:Cuban American 5981: 5978: 5977: 5976: 5975: 5974: 5923: 5920: 5919: 5918: 5917: 5916: 5904:Thanks Frank. 5842: 5841: 5837: 5833: 5830: 5793: 5790: 5768: 5755: 5752: 5751: 5750: 5749: 5748: 5747: 5746: 5745: 5744: 5743: 5742: 5741: 5740: 5638: 5635: 5634: 5633: 5596: 5590: 5589: 5588: 5587: 5586: 5557: 5556: 5536: 5522:138.88.125.101 5480:was closed as 5473: 5467: 5466: 5465: 5427: 5424: 5413:119.153.57.156 5395: 5392: 5390: 5388: 5387: 5386: 5385: 5340: 5335: 5334: 5333: 5295: 5292: 5291: 5290: 5289: 5288: 5287: 5286: 5285: 5284: 5200: 5199: 5198: 5197: 5196: 5112: 5107: 5106: 5105: 5067: 5064: 5046: 5043: 5023: 5020: 5019: 5018: 4980: 4977: 4975: 4956:as an apology! 4947: 4940: 4937: 4936: 4935: 4900: 4899: 4828: 4825: 4809: 4808: 4769: 4768: 4736: 4733: 4704:Message added 4702: 4689: 4687: 4684: 4637: 4635: 4632: 4631: 4630: 4629: 4628: 4627: 4626: 4602:Omarcheeseboro 4562:Omarcheeseboro 4557: 4552: 4508: 4502: 4501: 4500: 4467: 4464: 4463: 4462: 4461: 4460: 4396: 4393: 4392: 4391: 4390: 4389: 4388: 4387: 4359: 4358: 4309: 4307: 4306: 4262: 4259: 4258: 4257: 4226: 4223: 4222: 4221: 4191: 4188: 4172: 4169: 4132:Global warming 4127: 4124:Global warming 4121: 4120: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4094: 4093: 4092: 4091: 4090: 4052: 4051: 4017: 4016: 3982: 3979: 3978: 3977: 3976: 3975: 3926: 3923: 3922: 3921: 3883: 3880: 3879: 3878: 3846: 3843:Focus Lighting 3840: 3839: 3838: 3808: 3805: 3781: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3772: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3762: 3761: 3760: 3759: 3620: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3614: 3613: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3609: 3526: 3523: 3522: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3515: 3465: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3388: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3325: 3322: 3307: 3305: 3304: 3277: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3270: 3236: 3235: 3212: 3211: 3206: 3204: 3193: 3190: 3166: 3160: 3124: 3121: 3119: 3117: 3116: 3115: 3114: 3080: 3079: 3056: 3055: 3050: 3048: 3037: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 2974: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2942:. Thank you. 2908: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2840: 2837: 2794: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2718: 2715: 2699: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2644: 2641: 2630:Whippletheduck 2612:Whippletheduck 2575:Whippletheduck 2567: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2540:Whippletheduck 2535: 2534: 2509:Whippletheduck 2503: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2345:When you say " 2343: 2342: 2341: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2308: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2231:seconds flat. 2199:and all that. 2126: 2123: 2095: 2092: 2057: 2055: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 1950: 1949: 1948:"interpreted." 1940: 1939: 1930: 1929: 1921: 1920: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1839: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1667: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1544: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1423: 1418: 1397: 1392: 1372: 1369:Philip Markoff 1366: 1350: 1347: 1324: 1321: 1301: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1179: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 981: 978: 977: 976: 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 954: 829: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 767: 764: 763: 762: 761: 760: 702: 699: 698: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 603:76.214.104.121 598: 595: 594: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 588: 587: 529: 480: 475: 474: 473: 442: 439: 438: 437: 396: 393: 392: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 363:76.214.104.121 333:76.214.104.121 327: 324: 323: 322: 287: 284: 283: 282: 281: 280: 279: 278: 277: 276: 275: 274: 192: 161: 158: 157: 156: 146:76.214.104.121 142: 112: 109: 94: 91: 88: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 10470: 10461: 10460: 10456: 10452: 10448: 10444: 10437: 10425: 10421: 10417: 10412: 10408: 10404: 10403:M Alan Kazlev 10399: 10398: 10397: 10396: 10395: 10394: 10389: 10385: 10381: 10377: 10376: 10375: 10371: 10367: 10366: 10360: 10359: 10354: 10353: 10352: 10351: 10347: 10343: 10339: 10335: 10333: 10329: 10323: 10318: 10316: 10313: 10309: 10305: 10301: 10297: 10293: 10292:"philosopher" 10288: 10286: 10281: 10276: 10274: 10270: 10266: 10261: 10259: 10255: 10251: 10247: 10243: 10239: 10235: 10229: 10226: 10224: 10219: 10215: 10211: 10190: 10187: 10179: 10173: 10169: 10165: 10161: 10160: 10159: 10155: 10151: 10148: 10147: 10146: 10145: 10144: 10143: 10142: 10141: 10140: 10139: 10138: 10137: 10123: 10119: 10115: 10111: 10107: 10102: 10101: 10100: 10099: 10098: 10097: 10096: 10095: 10094: 10093: 10092: 10091: 10076: 10075: 10074: 10073: 10072: 10071: 10070: 10069: 10068: 10067: 10066: 10065: 10050: 10049: 10048: 10047: 10046: 10045: 10044: 10043: 10042: 10041: 10040: 10039: 10025: 10024: 10023: 10020: 10012: 10005: 10004: 10003: 9999: 9995: 9991: 9987: 9983: 9982: 9981: 9980: 9979: 9978: 9977: 9976: 9969: 9965: 9961: 9956: 9955: 9954: 9950: 9946: 9942: 9938: 9937: 9936: 9935: 9932: 9928: 9924: 9920: 9919: 9918: 9917: 9914: 9906: 9892: 9888: 9884: 9879: 9878: 9877: 9876: 9871: 9865: 9864: 9857: 9845: 9841: 9837: 9833: 9832: 9831: 9828: 9824: 9820: 9816: 9812: 9805: 9801: 9797: 9793: 9781: 9777: 9773: 9769: 9768: 9767: 9766: 9763: 9750: 9745:Sockpuppetry? 9742: 9741: 9737: 9733: 9721: 9717: 9713: 9709: 9708: 9707: 9706: 9703: 9702:Jack Merridew 9699: 9692: 9685: 9681: 9677: 9673: 9672: 9671: 9670: 9666: 9662: 9658: 9650: 9642: 9638: 9634: 9630: 9629: 9628: 9627: 9623: 9619: 9607: 9603: 9599: 9594: 9593: 9592: 9591: 9587: 9583: 9577: 9575: 9571: 9560: 9559: 9555: 9551: 9549: 9545: 9541: 9533: 9521: 9517: 9513: 9508: 9507: 9506: 9505: 9501: 9500: 9499:The Wordsmith 9484: 9480: 9476: 9471: 9468: 9465: 9464: 9463: 9459: 9455: 9450: 9448: 9444: 9440: 9436: 9432: 9428: 9424: 9418: 9414: 9410: 9405: 9401: 9397: 9396: 9395: 9391: 9387: 9383: 9382: 9381: 9377: 9373: 9369: 9368: 9367: 9366: 9362: 9358: 9342: 9338: 9334: 9330: 9329: 9328: 9324: 9320: 9316: 9312: 9307: 9306: 9305: 9303: 9299: 9295: 9291: 9284: 9277: 9273: 9269: 9265: 9264: 9263: 9262: 9258: 9254: 9250: 9247: 9244: 9240: 9233: 9223: 9219: 9215: 9211: 9210: 9209: 9205: 9201: 9197: 9196: 9195: 9194: 9190: 9186: 9172: 9168: 9164: 9159: 9158: 9157: 9153: 9149: 9145: 9141: 9137: 9136: 9135: 9134: 9130: 9126: 9121: 9117: 9113: 9106: 9100: 9099: 9095: 9091: 9081: 9080: 9076: 9072: 9067: 9064: 9062: 9057: 9056: 9053: 9039: 9035: 9031: 9027: 9026: 9025: 9021: 9017: 9013: 9012: 9011: 9010: 9006: 9002: 8998: 8994: 8980: 8976: 8972: 8968: 8967: 8966: 8962: 8958: 8953: 8952: 8951: 8950: 8946: 8942: 8938: 8923: 8919: 8915: 8911: 8910: 8909: 8905: 8901: 8897: 8896: 8895: 8891: 8887: 8883: 8882: 8881: 8880: 8876: 8872: 8865:Consideration 8842: 8838: 8834: 8829: 8828: 8827: 8823: 8819: 8815: 8814:Chris C. Kemp 8811: 8810: 8809: 8805: 8801: 8797: 8793: 8792: 8791: 8787: 8783: 8779: 8775: 8774: 8773: 8769: 8765: 8761: 8757: 8756: 8755: 8751: 8747: 8742: 8741: 8740: 8736: 8732: 8728: 8724: 8723: 8722: 8718: 8714: 8710: 8706: 8702: 8701: 8700: 8696: 8692: 8688: 8684: 8680: 8676: 8672: 8668: 8664: 8663: 8662: 8661: 8658: 8654: 8650: 8646: 8642: 8638: 8634: 8633: 8632: 8631: 8627: 8623: 8618: 8612: 8611:Chris C. Kemp 8603: 8600: 8596: 8595: 8594: 8590: 8586: 8582: 8581: 8580: 8579: 8576: 8568: 8555: 8551: 8547: 8542: 8541: 8540: 8536: 8532: 8528: 8527: 8526: 8522: 8518: 8517: 8512: 8511: 8510: 8506: 8502: 8498: 8497: 8496: 8495: 8492: 8490: 8483: 8482: 8477: 8469: 8465: 8456: 8453: 8451: 8447: 8441: 8437: 8436: 8435: 8431: 8427: 8423: 8419: 8418: 8417: 8415: 8411: 8407: 8406:Jordan Miller 8403: 8399: 8387: 8383: 8379: 8375: 8374: 8373: 8372: 8369: 8365: 8345: 8341: 8337: 8333: 8332: 8331: 8327: 8323: 8318: 8317: 8316: 8312: 8308: 8304: 8303: 8302: 8298: 8294: 8290: 8289: 8288: 8284: 8280: 8276: 8275: 8271: 8267: 8266: 8265: 8264: 8260: 8256: 8238: 8234: 8230: 8225: 8224: 8223: 8219: 8215: 8211: 8210: 8209: 8205: 8201: 8197: 8196: 8195: 8191: 8187: 8183: 8179: 8178: 8177: 8176: 8172: 8168: 8164: 8159: 8148: 8144: 8140: 8136: 8135: 8134: 8133: 8129: 8125: 8121: 8109: 8105: 8101: 8097: 8096: 8095: 8094: 8091: 8087: 8077: 8076: 8072: 8068: 8061: 8057: 8053: 8049: 8048: 8047: 8046: 8042: 8038: 8034: 8030: 8026: 8020: 8019: 8015: 8011: 8004: 8000: 7996: 7992: 7991: 7990: 7989: 7985: 7981: 7977: 7963: 7959: 7955: 7951: 7949: 7948: 7947: 7946: 7945: 7944: 7943: 7942: 7935: 7931: 7927: 7923: 7921: 7919: 7918: 7917: 7916: 7915: 7914: 7913: 7912: 7908: 7904: 7892: 7891: 7890: 7889: 7888: 7874: 7870: 7866: 7861: 7860: 7859: 7858: 7857: 7856: 7855: 7854: 7853: 7852: 7843: 7839: 7835: 7830: 7829: 7828: 7827: 7826: 7825: 7824: 7823: 7816: 7812: 7808: 7804: 7801: 7800: 7799: 7798: 7797: 7796: 7791: 7787: 7783: 7778: 7774: 7773: 7772: 7771: 7768: 7764: 7760: 7755: 7754: 7753: 7752: 7748: 7744: 7740: 7730: 7729: 7725: 7721: 7713: 7706: 7699: 7689: 7688: 7684: 7680: 7672:Heydon Prowse 7667: 7663: 7659: 7654: 7653: 7652: 7651: 7647: 7643: 7638: 7634: 7622: 7618: 7614: 7610: 7609: 7608: 7607: 7603: 7599: 7595: 7591: 7584: 7574: 7570: 7566: 7562: 7561: 7560: 7556: 7552: 7548: 7545: 7544: 7543: 7542: 7538: 7534: 7519: 7515: 7511: 7507: 7506: 7505: 7501: 7497: 7493: 7492: 7491: 7487: 7483: 7479: 7475: 7473: 7469: 7465: 7461: 7457: 7456: 7455: 7451: 7447: 7443: 7439: 7435: 7431: 7430: 7429: 7425: 7421: 7417: 7412: 7411: 7410: 7409: 7405: 7401: 7394: 7390: 7386: 7382: 7381: 7380: 7379: 7375: 7371: 7367: 7346: 7342: 7338: 7334: 7333: 7332: 7328: 7324: 7320: 7319: 7318: 7314: 7310: 7306: 7305: 7304: 7300: 7296: 7292: 7291: 7290: 7286: 7282: 7278: 7277: 7276: 7272: 7268: 7264: 7263: 7262: 7261: 7260: 7256: 7252: 7248: 7244: 7243: 7240: 7236: 7232: 7228: 7224: 7221: 7217: 7214: 7210: 7206: 7205: 7204: 7197: 7193: 7189: 7185: 7184: 7183: 7179: 7175: 7171: 7167: 7166: 7165: 7164: 7160: 7156: 7152: 7146: 7141: 7140: 7136: 7132: 7124: 7120: 7116: 7112: 7098: 7094: 7090: 7086: 7085: 7084: 7080: 7076: 7072: 7071: 7070: 7069: 7065: 7061: 7056: 7052: 7042: 7036: 7032: 7028: 7024: 7023: 7022: 7021: 7017: 7013: 7003: 7001: 6997: 6993: 6989: 6979: 6975: 6971: 6967: 6966: 6962: 6961: 6960: 6958: 6954: 6950: 6946: 6932: 6928: 6924: 6920: 6919: 6915: 6911: 6910: 6909: 6908: 6907: 6903: 6899: 6895: 6894: 6893: 6892: 6888: 6884: 6880: 6876: 6871: 6869: 6864: 6850: 6846: 6842: 6841: 6840: 6839: 6838: 6837: 6836: 6832: 6828: 6824: 6819: 6818: 6817: 6816: 6812: 6808: 6795: 6791: 6787: 6783: 6782: 6781: 6780: 6776: 6772: 6768: 6756: 6752: 6748: 6744: 6743: 6742: 6741: 6737: 6735: 6734: 6727: 6725: 6719: 6705: 6701: 6697: 6693: 6692: 6691: 6690: 6687: 6683: 6679: 6675: 6674: 6665: 6661: 6657: 6653: 6652: 6649: 6645: 6641: 6637: 6633: 6628: 6624: 6623: 6622: 6621: 6620: 6619: 6618: 6617: 6616: 6615: 6611: 6607: 6602: 6601: 6597: 6587: 6583: 6582: 6581: 6580: 6579: 6578: 6577: 6574: 6573: 6571: 6562: 6561: 6560: 6550: 6549: 6548: 6547: 6546: 6542: 6538: 6533: 6532: 6531: 6530: 6526: 6522: 6509: 6505: 6502: 6499: 6496: 6493: 6490: 6486: 6480: 6477: 6474: 6473: 6469: 6464: 6463: 6459: 6458: 6455: 6452: 6451:to anything. 6438: 6437: 6436: 6435: 6434: 6433: 6432: 6428: 6424: 6420: 6419: 6418: 6417: 6413: 6409: 6405: 6393: 6392: 6391: 6390: 6389: 6388: 6387: 6382: 6378: 6374: 6369: 6368: 6365: 6361: 6357: 6352: 6351: 6347: 6343: 6342: 6341: 6340: 6336: 6332: 6321: 6317: 6313: 6309: 6305: 6298: 6294: 6284: 6283: 6279: 6264: 6260: 6256: 6252: 6251: 6250: 6249: 6245: 6241: 6236: 6233: 6231: 6227: 6223: 6217: 6214: 6208: 6204: 6203: 6193: 6192: 6188: 6184: 6183: 6177: 6173: 6161: 6157: 6153: 6149: 6148: 6147: 6146: 6142: 6138: 6131: 6122: 6119: 6117: 6105: 6104: 6103: 6099: 6095: 6090: 6089: 6088: 6087: 6084: 6082: 6069: 6065: 6053: 6050: 6048: 6036: 6032: 6031: 6028: 6024: 6020: 6016: 6012: 6011: 6010: 6008: 6004: 6000: 5996: 5991: 5987: 5973: 5969: 5965: 5964: 5958: 5957: 5956: 5952: 5948: 5944: 5943: 5942: 5941: 5937: 5933: 5932: 5928: 5915: 5911: 5907: 5903: 5902: 5901: 5896: 5890: 5882: 5878: 5874: 5870: 5869: 5868: 5867: 5863: 5859: 5854: 5852: 5851: 5845: 5838: 5834: 5831: 5828: 5824: 5823: 5822: 5820: 5816: 5811: 5810: 5806: 5802: 5797: 5789: 5783: 5775: 5771: 5764: 5760: 5739: 5735: 5731: 5727: 5726: 5725: 5721: 5717: 5713: 5712: 5711: 5707: 5703: 5698: 5697: 5696: 5692: 5688: 5684: 5683: 5682: 5678: 5674: 5670: 5669: 5668: 5664: 5660: 5656: 5655: 5654: 5653: 5649: 5645: 5632: 5628: 5624: 5620: 5619: 5618: 5617: 5614: 5613: 5610: 5609: 5602: 5595: 5585: 5581: 5577: 5573: 5572: 5571: 5567: 5563: 5559: 5558: 5555: 5551: 5547: 5543: 5542: 5541: 5539: 5535: 5533: 5530: 5527: 5523: 5517: 5515: 5508: 5501: 5498: 5495: 5491: 5487: 5484:, one of the 5483: 5479: 5472: 5464: 5460: 5456: 5452: 5451: 5450: 5449: 5445: 5441: 5437: 5433: 5423: 5422: 5418: 5414: 5410: 5405: 5401: 5391: 5384: 5380: 5376: 5372: 5371: 5370: 5366: 5362: 5358: 5357: 5356: 5355: 5351: 5347: 5339: 5332: 5328: 5324: 5320: 5319: 5318: 5317: 5313: 5309: 5305: 5301: 5283: 5279: 5275: 5271: 5270: 5269: 5266: 5258: 5252: 5248: 5243: 5242: 5241: 5237: 5233: 5228: 5227: 5226: 5223: 5215: 5209: 5205: 5201: 5195: 5191: 5187: 5182: 5181: 5180: 5176: 5172: 5168: 5167: 5166: 5162: 5158: 5153: 5152: 5151: 5150: 5146: 5142: 5137: 5135: 5129: 5126: 5120: 5116: 5111: 5104: 5100: 5096: 5092: 5088: 5087: 5086: 5085: 5081: 5077: 5073: 5072:Wadih Saadeh‎ 5063: 5062:Modelmanager 5061: 5057: 5053: 5042: 5041: 5037: 5033: 5029: 5017: 5013: 5009: 5005: 5001: 5000: 4999: 4998: 4994: 4990: 4986: 4976: 4971: 4965: 4964: 4955: 4951: 4950:Wiki-talk BLP 4945: 4934: 4930: 4926: 4922: 4921: 4920: 4919: 4916: 4910: 4909: 4898: 4894: 4890: 4886: 4882: 4881: 4880: 4879: 4876: 4870: 4869: 4862: 4861:Roland Burris 4858: 4854: 4850: 4845: 4842: 4833: 4824: 4823:Modelmanager 4822: 4818: 4814: 4807: 4803: 4799: 4795: 4791: 4787: 4786: 4785: 4784:Modelmanager 4783: 4779: 4775: 4767: 4763: 4759: 4755: 4754: 4753: 4752:Modelmanager 4751: 4747: 4743: 4732: 4731: 4727: 4723: 4719: 4711: 4707: 4700: 4693: 4683: 4682: 4678: 4674: 4670: 4667: 4666: 4658: 4657:. Thank you. 4656: 4652: 4648: 4641: 4625: 4621: 4617: 4613: 4612: 4611: 4607: 4603: 4599: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4587: 4586: 4582: 4578: 4574: 4573: 4572: 4571: 4567: 4563: 4556: 4551: 4550: 4546: 4542: 4538: 4531: 4524: 4517: 4506: 4499: 4495: 4491: 4488: 4484: 4483: 4482: 4481: 4477: 4473: 4459: 4454: 4450: 4445: 4444: 4443: 4439: 4435: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4423: 4419: 4414: 4410: 4406: 4402: 4386: 4382: 4378: 4374: 4370: 4369: 4368: 4363: 4362: 4361: 4360: 4357: 4353: 4349: 4345: 4340: 4337: 4333: 4329: 4328: 4327: 4325: 4321: 4317: 4313: 4305: 4301: 4297: 4292: 4291: 4290: 4289: 4285: 4281: 4276: 4272: 4268: 4256: 4252: 4248: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4241: 4238: 4237: 4232: 4220: 4216: 4212: 4208: 4207: 4206: 4205: 4201: 4197: 4187: 4186: 4182: 4178: 4168: 4167: 4163: 4159: 4154: 4153: 4149: 4145: 4141: 4137: 4133: 4125: 4114: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4101: 4099: 4095: 4089: 4088: 4084: 4076: 4075: 4071: 4070: 4069: 4068: 4066: 4061: 4056: 4055: 4054: 4053: 4050: 4046: 4042: 4038: 4034: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4027: 4023: 4022:Michael Hardy 4015: 4011: 4007: 4003: 4002: 4001: 4000: 3996: 3992: 3991:Michael Hardy 3988: 3974: 3970: 3966: 3963: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3954: 3950: 3946: 3945: 3944: 3943: 3940: 3939: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3900: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3889: 3877: 3873: 3869: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3862: 3857: 3852: 3844: 3837: 3833: 3829: 3825: 3824: 3823: 3822: 3818: 3814: 3804: 3803: 3799: 3795: 3791: 3787: 3780: 3758: 3754: 3750: 3746: 3745: 3744: 3740: 3736: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3726: 3722: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3712: 3708: 3704: 3700: 3699: 3698: 3694: 3690: 3685: 3684: 3683: 3679: 3675: 3671: 3670: 3669: 3665: 3661: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3650: 3646: 3642: 3641: 3640: 3639: 3635: 3631: 3626: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3595: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3576: 3575: 3574: 3570: 3566: 3562: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3551: 3547: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3536: 3532: 3514: 3510: 3506: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3496: 3492: 3488: 3487: 3485: 3484: 3483: 3482: 3481: 3480: 3476: 3472: 3455: 3451: 3447: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3438: 3432: 3426: 3425: 3424: 3420: 3416: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3409: 3406: 3400: 3394: 3382: 3379: 3377: 3370: 3369: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3358: 3356: 3349: 3348: 3343: 3339: 3335: 3331: 3321: 3320: 3316: 3312: 3303: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3285: 3269: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3254: 3253: 3252: 3248: 3244: 3240: 3239: 3234: 3231: 3227: 3223: 3218: 3214: 3213: 3210: 3207: 3202: 3197: 3189: 3188: 3184: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3165: 3159: 3156: 3152: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3132: 3129: 3120: 3113: 3110: 3106: 3102: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3092: 3088: 3084: 3083: 3078: 3075: 3071: 3067: 3062: 3058: 3057: 3054: 3051: 3046: 3041: 3029: 3025: 3021: 3017: 3016: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3003: 2999: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2992: 2988: 2984: 2980: 2968: 2964: 2960: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2949: 2945: 2941: 2937: 2932: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2914: 2898: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2885: 2883: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2861: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2836: 2833: 2828: 2824: 2820: 2816: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2800: 2793: 2781: 2777: 2773: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2762: 2758: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2732: 2728: 2724: 2714: 2713: 2709: 2705: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2673: 2669: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2650: 2640: 2639: 2635: 2631: 2626: 2622: 2621: 2617: 2613: 2607: 2603: 2600: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2585: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2570: 2562: 2558: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2521: 2520: 2519: 2518: 2514: 2510: 2489: 2485: 2481: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2470: 2466: 2462: 2461: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2443: 2442: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2429: 2425: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2418: 2415: 2414: 2407: 2394: 2391: 2390: 2383: 2379: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2369: 2365: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2356: 2355: 2348: 2344: 2332: 2329: 2328: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2309: 2303: 2299: 2295: 2291: 2290: 2289: 2285: 2281: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2224: 2223: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2206: 2202: 2198: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2188: 2187: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2162: 2158: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2148: 2147: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2122: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2105: 2101: 2091: 2090: 2087: 2085: 2078: 2077:. Thank you. 2076: 2072: 2068: 2061: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2022: 2018: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2008: 2004: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1993: 1989: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1946: 1942: 1941: 1936: 1932: 1931: 1927: 1926:Wrong as well 1923: 1922: 1918: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1902: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1879: 1875: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1864: 1860: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1849: 1845: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1767: 1763: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1752: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1705: 1701: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1689: 1685: 1681: 1677: 1673: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1636: 1635: 1632: 1631: 1624: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1607: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1550: 1528: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1511: 1510: 1507: 1506: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1494: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1468: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1456: 1452: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1436:68.76.147.212 1433: 1429: 1422: 1417: 1416: 1412: 1408: 1407:76.113.56.175 1403: 1396: 1395:James A. Owen 1391: 1390: 1386: 1380: 1370: 1365: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1346: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1332: 1320: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1310:99.162.60.191 1307: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1262:99.162.60.191 1258: 1257: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1243: 1242: 1240: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1169: 1165: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1138: 1137: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1121: 1117: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1056: 1054: 1052: 1050: 1048: 1046: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1002: 998: 994: 990: 987: 967: 963: 959: 955: 953: 950: 946: 942: 938: 937: 936: 933: 932: 925: 921: 920: 919: 915: 911: 907: 903: 899: 898: 897: 894: 893: 886: 882: 879: 875: 872: 871: 870: 866: 862: 858: 854: 851: 848: 845: 844: 843: 842: 839: 838: 828: 819: 815: 809: 803: 802: 801: 797: 793: 788: 787: 786: 785: 781: 775: 759: 755: 751: 746: 745: 744: 740: 736: 732: 728: 724: 723: 722: 721: 717: 713: 708: 692: 688: 684: 683:99.162.60.191 679: 678: 677: 673: 669: 664: 663: 662: 658: 654: 650: 646: 645: 644: 643: 639: 635: 631: 628: 624: 620: 616: 615:freedom house 612: 608: 604: 586: 582: 578: 573: 572: 571: 567: 563: 559: 558: 557: 553: 549: 544: 543: 542: 538: 534: 530: 528: 525: 520: 517: 511: 510: 509: 508: 504: 498: 492: 486: 479: 472: 468: 464: 460: 459: 458: 457: 453: 449: 436: 432: 428: 424: 420: 419: 418: 417: 413: 409: 403: 402: 386: 382: 378: 374: 373: 372: 368: 364: 360: 359: 358: 354: 350: 345: 344: 343: 342: 338: 334: 321: 317: 313: 308: 307: 306: 305: 301: 297: 293: 273: 269: 265: 261: 260: 259: 255: 251: 247: 246: 245: 241: 237: 233: 232: 231: 227: 223: 219: 215: 214: 213: 209: 205: 201: 197: 193: 191: 187: 183: 179: 178: 177: 176: 172: 168: 155: 151: 147: 143: 141: 137: 133: 129: 128: 127: 126: 122: 118: 108: 107: 104: 102: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 10440: 10363: 10340: 10336: 10324: 10319: 10317: 10311: 10307: 10303: 10299: 10295: 10291: 10289: 10284: 10279: 10277: 10272: 10268: 10264: 10262: 10257: 10253: 10249: 10245: 10237: 10234:very amusing 10233: 10232:'It is also 10230: 10227: 10205: 10118:voted delete 9900: 9862: 9853: 9800:Daniel Lyons 9789: 9754: 9748: 9729: 9695: 9661:Andrewlp1991 9656: 9654: 9615: 9578: 9569: 9566: 9547: 9543: 9539: 9529: 9498: 9494: 9475:Little grape 9439:Captainclegg 9427:Little grape 9409:Captainclegg 9400:Little grape 9386:Captainclegg 9353: 9289: 9287: 9253:Cosmic Latte 9239:Fidel Castro 9236: 9232:Fidel Castro 9182: 9115: 9109: 9087: 9068: 9065: 9058: 9051: 9049: 8990: 8935: 8868: 8795: 8619: 8615: 8571: 8514: 8484: 8480: 8473: 8468:User:Logger9 8445: 8395: 8361: 8252: 8160: 8156: 8117: 8086:edit summary 8083: 8067:Captainclegg 8064: 8052:Little grape 8037:Captainclegg 8032: 8028: 8024: 8021: 8007: 7995:Little grape 7980:Captainclegg 7972: 7954:Little grape 7926:Little grape 7903:Captainclegg 7899: 7885: 7865:Little grape 7807:Little grape 7782:Little grape 7743:Little grape 7736: 7717: 7675: 7630: 7594:Sniff Petrol 7587: 7583:Sniff Petrol 7546: 7530: 7477: 7441: 7437: 7398: 7388: 7384: 7363: 7226: 7219: 7212: 7208: 7202: 7149: 7108: 7048: 7039: 7009: 6992:66.69.124.22 6982: 6949:66.69.124.22 6939: 6913: 6874: 6872: 6862: 6860: 6848: 6845:Joseph Kraft 6803: 6764: 6732: 6731: 6723: 6715: 6626: 6603: 6600: 6595: 6594: 6584: 6575: 6572: 6568: 6567: 6558: 6518: 6506: 6503: 6500: 6497: 6495:Pilgrimages 6494: 6491: 6487: 6484: 6478: 6475: 6467: 6453: 6449: 6402: 6385: 6327: 6290: 6272: 6237: 6234: 6218: 6209: 6205: 6199: 6180: 6169: 6134: 6067: 6061: 6034: 5983: 5961: 5929: 5925: 5876: 5858:Owlsdaughter 5855: 5849: 5848: 5846: 5843: 5826: 5818: 5814: 5812: 5804: 5800: 5798: 5795: 5757: 5640: 5611: 5604: 5598: 5528: 5520: 5518: 5496: 5481: 5475: 5469:Please salt 5429: 5397: 5389: 5342: 5308:Captainclegg 5297: 5294:Captainclegg 5203: 5138: 5130: 5124: 5121: 5117: 5114: 5069: 5052:Modelmanager 5048: 5032:Little grape 5025: 4982: 4974: 4962:Mariah-Yulia 4959: 4907:Mariah-Yulia 4904: 4901: 4867:Mariah-Yulia 4864: 4846: 4838: 4813:Modelmanager 4810: 4774:Modelmanager 4770: 4742:Modelmanager 4738: 4715: 4664: 4663: 4659: 4644: 4559: 4510: 4469: 4405:original afd 4398: 4395:Kari Ferrell 4308: 4274: 4264: 4235: 4229:I like your 4228: 4193: 4174: 4155: 4129: 4080: 4072: 4018: 3984: 3934: 3928: 3885: 3848: 3810: 3783: 3622: 3528: 3467: 3390: 3371: 3367: 3350: 3346: 3327: 3306: 3283:VirtualSteve 3279: 3208: 3168: 3133: 3130: 3126: 3118: 3052: 2976: 2936:welcome page 2931:page history 2922:edit summary 2910: 2842: 2796: 2722: 2720: 2701: 2646: 2643:Jurij Moskon 2627: 2623: 2608: 2604: 2601: 2586: 2571: 2568: 2561:undue weight 2536: 2505: 2438: 2410: 2403: 2386: 2381: 2377: 2351: 2346: 2324: 2311: 2219: 2183: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2143: 2138: 2128: 2112:Wikifan12345 2104:Wikifan12345 2097: 2084:PirateSmackK 2083: 2079: 2064: 2032:Wikifan12345 2003:Wikifan12345 1988:Wikifan12345 1958:Wikifan12345 1951: 1944: 1935:Wrong again. 1934: 1925: 1916: 1909: 1874:Wikifan12345 1841: 1676:User:Abtract 1669: 1634: 1627: 1593:Andrewlp1991 1557:Andrewlp1991 1546: 1509: 1502: 1425: 1401: 1399: 1394: 1374: 1352: 1335:69.183.84.73 1326: 1303: 1231:Wikifan12345 1217:Wikifan12345 1188:Wikifan12345 1181: 1116:Thomas Dupre 1113: 983: 927: 888: 846:These edits 833: 831: 769: 704: 668:Wikifan12345 634:Wikifan12345 607:68.251.184.4 600: 515: 482: 444: 404: 400: 398: 329: 296:Wikifan12345 289: 163: 117:Wikifan12345 114: 100: 96: 78: 43: 37: 10441:You closed 10250:"colluding" 10238:"collusion" 9809:—Preceding 9749:Greetings, 9631:Yes I did. 9243:User:Splash 9214:scooteristi 9185:scooteristi 9052:Arthur Kemp 8667:SFChronicle 8645:independent 8424:calls for. 8410:Daniel Raad 7739:Marc Sinden 7720:Marie Poise 7679:LondonFoggy 7531:I give up. 7220:unclearness 6986:—Preceding 6943:—Preceding 6875:The Citizen 6863:The Citizen 6767:this revert 6636:User:Frmatt 6344:Here's the 6302:—Preceding 6269:HAP article 6240:JLRedperson 5754:Missed one! 5486:sockpuppets 5471:Eric Zaccar 5300:Marc Sinden 5028:Marc Sinden 4989:Nightscream 4985:this matter 4969:Talk to me! 4939:An apology. 4914:Talk to me! 4874:Talk to me! 4853:Jimbo Wales 4541:Smallman12q 4472:Vermiculite 3623:You closed 3430:Fabrictramp 3398:Fabrictramp 3342:Helen Golay 3143:Flyingpants 3137:—Preceding 2907:August 2009 2819:SDPatrolBot 2799:SDPatrolBot 2704:Ashley92995 2294:Ohconfucius 2265:Ohconfucius 2233:Ohconfucius 1623:Not so good 1587:—Preceding 1402:discussion' 1329:—Preceding 906:Joe_Elliott 827:Ted Leonsis 399:You wrote: 326:Drop a note 36:This is an 10451:EdJohnston 10416:Simon Kidd 10342:Simon Kidd 10312:ad hominem 10285:compromise 10269:Ombudswiki 10265:vindicated 10254:Ombudswiki 10150:Simon Kidd 9994:Simon Kidd 9945:Simon Kidd 9897:Good close 9792:Fake steve 9786:Fake steve 9576:do that. 9435:Berettagun 9333:Xxanthippe 9294:Xxanthippe 9179:Go to Hell 9140:WP:ATHLETE 8796:Space News 8422:WP:ATHLETE 8229:Woodwalker 8200:Woodwalker 8167:Woodwalker 7627:George Lee 7119:SecurePoll 7089:Dayewalker 7060:Dayewalker 6883:DoDaCanaDa 6640:DoDaCanaDa 6606:DoDaCanaDa 6521:DoDaCanaDa 6408:DoDaCanaDa 6179:talk p. 6166:AfD closes 5801:absolutely 5759:N.B Meitei 5516:it? Thnx! 4987:? Thanks. 4708:. You can 4539:. Thanks! 3856:Talk to me 3851:Realkyhick 3826:Answered. 3436:talk to me 3404:talk to me 2380:value as " 1549:Larry Bird 198:has more. 10434:Userfied 10328:this page 10248:shown of 10246:factually 10218:this blog 9582:Lithorien 9570:potential 9554:talk to Ω 9454:Parnathus 9357:Parnathus 9163:ThaddeusB 9125:ThaddeusB 8818:Navarenko 8782:Navarenko 8746:Navarenko 8727:EBSCOhost 8691:Navarenko 8683:Spacenews 8622:Navarenko 8446:Jezebel's 8416:as well. 8120:talk page 7229:keep)? - 7058:advance. 6868:Joe_Clark 6807:Jwbaumann 6504:Politics 6230:WebSphere 6137:Joe Chill 5507:uw-repost 5076:Misarxist 4595:Ray Lewis 4521:tag from 4453:talk page 4422:talk page 4158:Lissajous 4144:Lissajous 3937:Shankbone 3123:hi there. 3020:Mikerichi 3004:. Cheers 2987:Mikerichi 2926:talk page 2918:Megan Fox 2839:Megan Fox 2698:Megan Fox 1745:regular? 1300:Talk page 1158:is fine. 727:this edit 681:action.-- 490:rootology 264:Quantpole 222:Quantpole 200:WP:CSD#A7 196:WP:DELETE 182:Quantpole 167:Quantpole 85:Archive 7 79:Archive 6 73:Archive 5 68:Archive 4 60:Archive 1 10296:admitted 10273:ProEdits 10258:ProEdits 10110:Polargeo 9823:contribs 9811:unsigned 9736:Penwhale 9659:=sysop? 9090:AndrewRT 8709:NewsBank 8641:reliably 8090:Moondyne 7710:You can 7611:Thanks. 7598:Davepoth 7366:WP:BLP1E 7247:WP:BLP1E 7055:WP:UNDUE 6988:unsigned 6945:unsigned 6771:Tim Song 6724:Netalarm 6485:Arrests 6316:contribs 6308:HellcatV 6304:unsigned 6196:No title 6068:and then 5782:talkback 5607:Schmidt, 5532:contribs 5500:contribs 5490:Robroams 5404:Mullazai 5125:separate 5004:WP:BLP/N 4686:Talkback 4651:deletion 4409:abc news 4373:Eastmain 4336:reliable 4280:Eastmain 3790:Al Rosas 3779:Al Rosas 3619:Al Rosas 3311:Matth915 3151:contribs 3139:unsigned 2944:Pyrofork 2845:Pyrofork 2807:Rigadoun 2772:Jclemens 2743:Jclemens 2727:Jclemens 2502:No title 2133:edit at 2071:deletion 1795:JHunterJ 1762:JHunterJ 1729:JHunterJ 1715:JHunterJ 1684:JHunterJ 1601:contribs 1589:unsigned 1428:observed 1331:unsigned 1215:Thanks. 1156:WP:BLP/N 902:This one 750:McGeddon 731:The edit 712:McGeddon 408:DreamGuy 10443:the AfD 10300:To Date 10280:deleted 10223:article 10185:Windows 10018:Windows 9912:Windows 9651:article 9649:Twitter 9491:Rename? 9402:on the 9311:WP:PROD 9014:Fixed. 8993:Megarex 8679:NextGov 8620:Thanks 8358:Heh heh 7227:against 6914:WP:NPOV 6825:to me. 6712:Deleted 6277:СДжП,ДС 6222:Opsware 5637:Request 5514:WP:SALT 5375:Hekerui 5373:I see. 5346:Hekerui 5264:Windows 5221:Windows 5171:Postdlf 5141:Postdlf 5089:Sure - 4954:Borscht 4855:or the 4677:contrib 4669:(tcncv) 4446:Thanks 4413:WP:RPDA 4225:Nice =) 3599:Flyer22 3565:Flyer22 3531:Flyer22 3179:Facha93 3002:WP:RFPP 2940:sandbox 2440:HWV258 2412:HWV258 2388:HWV258 2353:HWV258 2326:HWV258 2221:HWV258 2185:HWV258 2175:without 2145:HWV258 1838:Wikifan 1670:How is 766:markoff 562:JoshuaZ 533:JoshuaZ 292:ME talk 165:this). 39:archive 10177:Fences 10010:Fences 9904:Fences 9758:Ryoung 9618:Tznkai 9315:relist 9290:delete 9246:put it 9144:WP:GNG 9138:While 9116:either 9112:WP:ATH 8705:WP:BIO 8637:WP:BIO 8470:at ANI 8182:Liquid 8153:Liquid 7692:Liquid 7642:NBeale 7565:DePiep 7551:DePiep 7510:DePiep 7482:DePiep 7478:REVIEW 7446:DePiep 7434:WP:DRV 7416:WP:DRV 7400:DePiep 7393:WP:VFD 7337:DePiep 7323:DePiep 7295:DePiep 7267:DePiep 7231:DePiep 7213:naming 7188:DePiep 7170:WP:DRV 7131:Risker 6881:Peace 6761:Revert 6519:Peace 6406:Peace 5888:Frank 5482:Delete 5440:Rammer 5256:Fences 5213:Fences 4885:WP:BLP 4849:WP:BLP 4841:WP:BLP 4722:tedder 4507:Deprod 4344:WP:DRV 4332:WP:BIO 4326:Harry 4037:WP:BIO 3907:WP:GNG 3903:WP:BIO 3703:WP:BIO 2406:undone 2197:WP:AGF 2171:hidden 1917:Wrong. 1629:Enigma 1504:Enigma 1089:policy 485:WP:BLP 423:WP:BLP 10380:Kevin 10370:talk 10181:& 10106:JN466 10014:& 9960:Kevin 9923:Kevin 9908:& 9883:Kevin 9869:Talk 9863:Tavix 9836:Kevin 9815:Ben b 9772:Kevin 9712:Kevin 9676:Kevin 9633:Kevin 9598:Kevin 9512:Kevin 9372:Kevin 9319:Kevin 9268:Kevin 9200:Kevin 9148:Kevin 9016:Kevin 8971:Hobit 8957:Kevin 8941:Hobit 8914:Kevin 8833:Kevin 8800:Kevin 8764:Kevin 8731:Kevin 8713:Kevin 8649:Kevin 8585:Kevin 8531:Kevin 8521:talk 8501:Kevin 8449:Ponyo 8426:Kevin 8378:Kevin 8336:Kevin 8322:Hobit 8307:Kevin 8293:Hobit 8279:Kevin 8255:Hobit 8214:Kevin 8186:Kevin 8139:Kevin 8124:Zache 8100:Kevin 8010:Kevin 7834:Kevin 7759:Kevin 7658:Kevin 7613:Kevin 7533:Kevin 7496:Kevin 7464:Kevin 7420:Kevin 7395:then. 7370:Kevin 7309:Kevin 7281:Kevin 7251:Kevin 7209:which 7174:Kevin 7075:Kevin 7027:Kevin 6970:Kevin 6923:Kevin 6898:Kevin 6827:Kevin 6823:WP:OR 6786:Kevin 6747:Kevin 6696:Kevin 6678:Hobit 6656:Kevin 6599:(UTC) 6537:Kevin 6423:Kevin 6373:Kevin 6331:Hobit 6297:ZaRP! 6255:Kevin 6187:talk 6152:Kevin 6094:Kevin 6019:Kevin 5999:pvphl 5968:talk 5947:Kevin 5936:talk 5906:Kevin 5894:talk 5769:matic 5730:Hobit 5716:Kevin 5702:Hobit 5687:Kevin 5673:Hobit 5659:Kevin 5644:Hobit 5623:Kevin 5592:inre 5576:Hobit 5562:Kevin 5546:Hobit 5455:Kevin 5361:Kevin 5323:Kevin 5274:Kevin 5260:& 5232:Kevin 5217:& 5204:event 5186:Kevin 5157:Kevin 5095:Kevin 5008:Kevin 4925:Kevin 4889:Kevin 4798:Kevin 4758:Kevin 4665:Tom N 4616:Kevin 4577:Kevin 4490:Kevin 4434:Kevin 4377:Kevin 4348:Kevin 4316:Hyim1 4296:Kevin 4247:Kevin 4236:ƒ(Δ)² 4231:style 4211:Kevin 4196:Atmoz 4105:Kevin 4041:Kevin 4006:Kevin 3965:Kevin 3949:Kevin 3932:David 3931:: --> 3925:Howdy 3911:Kevin 3892:Lhc67 3868:Kevin 3828:Kevin 3813:Hobit 3735:Kevin 3707:Kevin 3674:Kevin 3645:Kevin 3579:Kevin 3546:Kevin 3505:Hobit 3491:Kevin 3471:Hobit 3446:Kevin 3415:Kevin 3294:Kevin 3243:Kevin 3087:Kevin 3006:Kevin 2959:Kevin 2889:Kevin 2868:Kevin 2757:Kevin 2668:Kevin 2647:Inre 2590:Kevin 2524:Kevin 2465:Kevin 2424:Kevin 2364:Kevin 2280:Kevin 2251:Kevin 2201:Kevin 2157:Kevin 2017:Kevin 1973:Kevin 1893:Kevin 1859:Kevin 1844:NPguy 1810:Kevin 1780:Kevin 1776:WP:AE 1747:Kevin 1743:WP:AE 1700:Kevin 1644:Kevin 1610:Kevin 1572:Kevin 1519:Kevin 1476:Kevin 1451:Kevin 1371:again 1306:edits 1276:Kevin 1247:Kevin 1203:Kevin 1160:Kevin 1124:Kevin 1093:Kevin 1018:Kevin 958:Kevin 910:Kevin 861:Kevin 792:Kevin 735:Kevin 653:Kevin 577:Kevin 548:Kevin 523:vecia 463:Kevin 448:NPguy 427:Kevin 377:Kevin 349:Kevin 312:Kevin 250:Kevin 236:Kevin 204:Kevin 132:Kevin 101:aktsu 16:< 10455:talk 10420:talk 10384:talk 10346:talk 10332:here 10260:).' 10214:here 10212:and 10210:here 10154:talk 10122:Osho 9998:talk 9990:here 9986:here 9964:talk 9949:talk 9941:here 9927:talk 9887:talk 9840:talk 9819:talk 9776:talk 9734:. - 9732:here 9716:talk 9698:undo 9680:talk 9665:talk 9657:move 9637:talk 9622:talk 9602:talk 9586:talk 9516:talk 9479:talk 9458:talk 9443:talk 9413:talk 9390:talk 9376:talk 9361:talk 9337:talk 9323:talk 9298:talk 9272:talk 9257:talk 9218:talk 9204:talk 9189:talk 9167:talk 9152:talk 9129:talk 9118:the 9103:re: 9094:Talk 9084:Help 9075:talk 9034:talk 9020:talk 9005:talk 8995:and 8975:talk 8961:talk 8945:talk 8918:talk 8904:talk 8890:talk 8875:talk 8837:talk 8822:talk 8804:talk 8794:The 8786:talk 8768:talk 8750:talk 8735:talk 8717:talk 8695:talk 8653:talk 8626:talk 8589:talk 8550:talk 8535:talk 8505:talk 8488:Talk 8466:and 8440:here 8430:talk 8382:talk 8340:talk 8326:talk 8311:talk 8297:talk 8283:talk 8270:here 8259:talk 8233:talk 8218:talk 8204:talk 8190:talk 8171:talk 8143:talk 8128:talk 8104:talk 8071:talk 8056:talk 8041:talk 8014:talk 7999:talk 7984:talk 7958:talk 7930:talk 7907:talk 7869:talk 7838:talk 7811:talk 7786:talk 7763:talk 7747:talk 7724:talk 7683:talk 7662:talk 7646:talk 7617:talk 7602:talk 7569:talk 7555:talk 7537:talk 7514:talk 7500:talk 7486:talk 7468:talk 7450:talk 7438:form 7424:talk 7404:talk 7389:Here 7374:talk 7341:talk 7327:talk 7313:talk 7299:talk 7285:talk 7271:talk 7255:talk 7235:talk 7192:talk 7178:talk 7159:talk 7135:talk 7093:talk 7079:talk 7064:talk 7031:talk 7016:talk 6996:talk 6974:talk 6953:talk 6927:talk 6902:talk 6887:talk 6831:talk 6811:talk 6790:talk 6775:talk 6751:talk 6733:talk 6700:talk 6694:OK. 6682:talk 6660:talk 6644:talk 6634:and 6610:talk 6541:talk 6525:talk 6427:talk 6412:talk 6377:talk 6360:talk 6346:link 6335:talk 6312:talk 6259:talk 6244:talk 6228:and 6156:talk 6141:talk 6109:Cycl 6098:talk 6074:Cycl 6040:Cycl 6035:then 6023:talk 6003:talk 5951:talk 5910:talk 5877:much 5862:talk 5850:many 5827:YES! 5819:does 5815:many 5734:talk 5720:talk 5706:talk 5691:talk 5677:talk 5663:talk 5648:talk 5627:talk 5580:talk 5566:talk 5550:talk 5526:talk 5494:talk 5459:talk 5444:talk 5417:talk 5379:talk 5365:talk 5350:talk 5327:talk 5312:talk 5278:talk 5272:OK. 5236:talk 5190:talk 5175:talk 5161:talk 5145:talk 5099:talk 5080:talk 5056:talk 5036:talk 5012:talk 4993:talk 4929:talk 4893:talk 4817:talk 4802:talk 4778:talk 4762:talk 4746:talk 4726:talk 4673:talk 4620:talk 4606:talk 4581:talk 4566:talk 4545:talk 4530:prod 4516:prod 4494:talk 4485:See 4476:talk 4449:J04n 4438:talk 4418:J04n 4381:talk 4352:talk 4320:talk 4300:talk 4284:talk 4251:talk 4215:talk 4200:talk 4181:talk 4162:talk 4148:talk 4109:talk 4065:MPOV 4060:WP:N 4045:talk 4026:talk 4010:talk 3995:talk 3969:talk 3953:talk 3915:talk 3872:talk 3832:talk 3817:talk 3798:talk 3794:Whpq 3753:talk 3749:Whpq 3739:talk 3725:talk 3721:Whpq 3711:talk 3693:talk 3689:Whpq 3678:talk 3664:talk 3660:Whpq 3649:talk 3634:talk 3630:Whpq 3603:talk 3583:talk 3569:talk 3550:talk 3535:talk 3509:talk 3495:talk 3475:talk 3450:talk 3419:talk 3375:Talk 3354:Talk 3315:talk 3298:talk 3247:talk 3183:talk 3147:talk 3091:talk 3024:talk 3010:talk 2991:talk 2963:talk 2948:talk 2893:talk 2872:talk 2849:talk 2823:talk 2776:talk 2761:talk 2747:talk 2731:talk 2725::-) 2708:talk 2686:talk 2672:talk 2657:talk 2634:talk 2616:talk 2594:talk 2579:talk 2544:talk 2528:talk 2513:talk 2484:talk 2469:talk 2455:talk 2428:talk 2368:talk 2318:and 2298:talk 2284:talk 2269:talk 2255:talk 2237:talk 2205:talk 2161:talk 2131:this 2116:talk 2108:talk 2100:here 2036:talk 2021:talk 2007:talk 1992:talk 1977:talk 1962:talk 1897:talk 1878:talk 1863:talk 1848:talk 1814:talk 1799:talk 1784:talk 1766:talk 1751:talk 1733:talk 1719:talk 1704:talk 1688:talk 1678:and 1672:this 1648:talk 1614:talk 1597:talk 1576:talk 1561:talk 1555:. -- 1523:talk 1480:talk 1455:talk 1440:talk 1432:RFPP 1411:talk 1385:talk 1379:Tvoz 1359:talk 1339:talk 1314:talk 1280:talk 1266:talk 1251:talk 1235:talk 1221:talk 1207:talk 1192:talk 1164:talk 1146:talk 1128:talk 1097:talk 1063:talk 1022:talk 1001:talk 962:talk 930:Grsz 914:talk 891:Grsz 885:this 874:This 865:talk 852:and 836:Grsz 814:talk 808:Tvoz 796:talk 780:talk 774:Tvoz 754:talk 739:talk 716:talk 687:talk 672:talk 657:talk 638:talk 619:Diff 613:and 605:and 581:talk 566:talk 552:talk 537:talk 518:enna 467:talk 452:talk 431:talk 412:talk 381:talk 367:talk 353:talk 337:talk 316:talk 300:talk 268:talk 254:talk 240:talk 226:talk 208:talk 186:talk 171:talk 150:talk 136:talk 121:talk 10405:'s 10365:DGG 10242:Ref 10112:'s 9761:122 9738:| 9612:ACE 9574:not 9120:GNG 8675:BBC 8516:DGG 8368:NE2 7718:-- 7592:of 7442:not 6232:) 6182:DGG 6115:pia 6080:pia 6046:pia 5963:DGG 5931:DGG 5805:not 5249:at 5136:). 4067:). 3905:or 3845:AfD 3788:of 3257:Lar 3222:Lar 3173:of 3101:Lar 3066:Lar 2815:AfD 1241::D 1142:ADM 1059:ADM 997:ADM 941:Lar 880:or 10457:) 10422:) 10386:) 10372:) 10348:) 10334:. 10304:no 10174:. 10156:) 10000:) 9966:) 9951:) 9929:) 9889:) 9866:| 9842:) 9825:) 9821:• 9778:) 9718:) 9682:) 9667:) 9639:) 9624:) 9604:) 9588:) 9556:) 9546:* 9542:= 9536:— 9518:) 9481:) 9460:) 9445:) 9415:) 9392:) 9378:) 9363:) 9339:) 9325:) 9304:. 9300:) 9274:) 9259:) 9220:) 9206:) 9191:) 9169:) 9154:) 9131:) 9096:) 9077:) 9036:) 9022:) 9007:) 8977:) 8963:) 8947:) 8920:) 8906:) 8892:) 8877:) 8839:) 8824:) 8806:) 8788:) 8770:) 8762:. 8752:) 8737:) 8719:) 8697:) 8685:, 8681:, 8673:, 8669:, 8655:) 8628:) 8599:╦╩ 8591:) 8575:╦╩ 8573:ˉˉ 8552:) 8537:) 8523:) 8507:) 8481:NW 8443:-- 8432:) 8384:) 8342:) 8328:) 8313:) 8299:) 8285:) 8261:) 8235:) 8220:) 8206:) 8192:) 8173:) 8145:) 8130:) 8106:) 8073:) 8058:) 8043:) 8031:- 8016:) 8001:) 7986:) 7960:) 7932:) 7909:) 7871:) 7840:) 7813:) 7788:) 7765:) 7749:) 7726:) 7685:) 7664:) 7648:) 7619:) 7604:) 7571:) 7557:) 7539:) 7516:) 7502:) 7488:) 7470:) 7462:. 7452:) 7426:) 7418:. 7406:) 7376:) 7343:) 7329:) 7315:) 7301:) 7287:) 7273:) 7257:) 7237:) 7194:) 7180:) 7161:) 7137:) 7095:) 7081:) 7066:) 7033:) 7018:) 6998:) 6976:) 6955:) 6929:) 6904:) 6889:) 6833:) 6813:) 6792:) 6777:) 6769:? 6753:) 6702:) 6684:) 6662:) 6646:) 6612:) 6543:) 6527:) 6429:) 6414:) 6379:) 6362:) 6337:) 6318:) 6314:• 6261:) 6246:) 6189:) 6174:, 6158:) 6143:) 6100:) 6071:-- 6025:) 6009:) 6005:) 5970:) 5953:) 5938:) 5912:) 5891:| 5883:. 5864:) 5785:}} 5779:{{ 5736:) 5722:) 5708:) 5693:) 5679:) 5665:) 5650:) 5629:) 5582:) 5568:) 5552:) 5510:}} 5504:{{ 5488:- 5461:) 5446:) 5419:) 5381:) 5367:) 5352:) 5329:) 5314:) 5280:) 5238:) 5192:) 5177:) 5163:) 5147:) 5101:) 5093:. 5082:) 5058:) 5038:) 5014:) 4995:) 4966:• 4958:— 4931:) 4911:• 4895:) 4871:• 4819:) 4804:) 4780:) 4764:) 4748:) 4728:) 4622:) 4608:) 4583:) 4568:) 4547:) 4533:}} 4527:{{ 4519:}} 4513:{{ 4496:) 4478:) 4440:) 4383:) 4354:) 4322:) 4302:) 4286:) 4275:is 4253:) 4217:) 4202:) 4183:) 4164:) 4150:) 4111:) 4085:) 4047:) 4039:. 4028:) 4012:) 3997:) 3971:) 3955:) 3917:) 3874:) 3834:) 3819:) 3800:) 3755:) 3741:) 3727:) 3713:) 3695:) 3680:) 3666:) 3651:) 3636:) 3605:) 3585:) 3571:) 3552:) 3537:) 3511:) 3497:) 3477:) 3452:) 3433:| 3421:) 3401:| 3368:NW 3347:NW 3317:) 3300:) 3259:: 3249:) 3224:: 3185:) 3153:) 3149:• 3103:: 3093:) 3068:: 3026:) 3012:) 2993:) 2965:) 2950:) 2895:) 2874:) 2851:) 2825:) 2778:) 2763:) 2749:) 2733:) 2710:) 2688:) 2674:) 2659:) 2636:) 2618:) 2596:) 2581:) 2546:) 2530:) 2515:) 2486:) 2471:) 2457:) 2430:) 2378:is 2370:) 2300:) 2286:) 2271:) 2257:) 2239:) 2207:) 2163:) 2118:) 2038:) 2023:) 2009:) 1994:) 1979:) 1964:) 1899:) 1880:) 1865:) 1850:) 1816:) 1801:) 1786:) 1768:) 1753:) 1735:) 1721:) 1706:) 1690:) 1650:) 1625:. 1616:) 1603:) 1599:• 1578:) 1563:) 1525:) 1492:VS 1482:) 1466:VS 1457:) 1442:) 1413:) 1361:) 1341:) 1316:) 1282:) 1268:) 1253:) 1237:) 1223:) 1209:) 1194:) 1186:. 1166:) 1148:) 1130:) 1099:) 1091:. 1065:) 1024:) 1003:) 995:. 964:) 943:: 916:) 908:. 867:) 849:, 798:) 756:) 741:) 718:) 710:-- 689:) 674:) 659:) 640:) 621:. 611:ME 583:) 568:) 554:) 539:) 505:) 499:)( 469:) 454:) 433:) 414:) 383:) 369:) 355:) 339:) 318:) 302:) 270:) 256:) 242:) 228:) 210:) 188:) 173:) 152:) 138:) 123:) 64:← 10453:( 10418:( 10382:( 10368:( 10344:( 10208:( 10152:( 9996:( 9962:( 9947:( 9925:( 9885:( 9838:( 9817:( 9774:( 9714:( 9678:( 9663:( 9635:( 9620:( 9600:( 9584:( 9552:( 9548:R 9544:I 9540:V 9514:( 9477:( 9469:] 9456:( 9441:( 9411:( 9388:( 9374:( 9359:( 9343:. 9335:( 9321:( 9296:( 9270:( 9255:( 9216:( 9202:( 9187:( 9165:( 9150:( 9127:( 9092:( 9073:( 9032:( 9018:( 9003:( 8973:( 8959:( 8943:( 8916:( 8902:( 8888:( 8873:( 8835:( 8820:( 8802:( 8784:( 8766:( 8748:( 8733:( 8715:( 8693:( 8651:( 8624:( 8587:( 8548:( 8533:( 8519:( 8503:( 8491:) 8485:( 8428:( 8380:( 8338:( 8324:( 8309:( 8295:( 8281:( 8272:. 8257:( 8231:( 8216:( 8202:( 8188:( 8169:( 8141:( 8126:( 8102:( 8069:( 8054:( 8039:( 8012:( 7997:( 7982:( 7956:( 7928:( 7905:( 7867:( 7836:( 7809:( 7784:( 7761:( 7745:( 7722:( 7707:. 7681:( 7660:( 7644:( 7615:( 7600:( 7567:( 7553:( 7549:- 7535:( 7512:( 7498:( 7484:( 7466:( 7448:( 7422:( 7402:( 7372:( 7339:( 7325:( 7311:( 7297:( 7283:( 7269:( 7253:( 7233:( 7190:( 7176:( 7157:( 7133:( 7091:( 7077:( 7062:( 7029:( 7014:( 6994:( 6972:( 6951:( 6925:( 6916:? 6900:( 6885:( 6829:( 6809:( 6788:( 6773:( 6749:( 6698:( 6680:( 6658:( 6642:( 6608:( 6539:( 6523:( 6425:( 6410:( 6375:( 6358:( 6348:. 6333:( 6310:( 6257:( 6242:( 6185:( 6154:( 6139:( 6112:o 6096:( 6077:o 6043:o 6021:( 6001:( 5966:( 5949:( 5934:( 5908:( 5860:( 5732:( 5718:( 5704:( 5689:( 5675:( 5661:( 5646:( 5625:( 5578:( 5564:( 5548:( 5534:) 5529:· 5524:( 5497:· 5492:( 5457:( 5442:( 5415:( 5377:( 5363:( 5348:( 5325:( 5310:( 5276:( 5234:( 5188:( 5173:( 5159:( 5143:( 5097:( 5078:( 5054:( 5034:( 5010:( 4991:( 4927:( 4891:( 4815:( 4800:( 4776:( 4760:( 4744:( 4724:( 4701:. 4675:/ 4618:( 4604:( 4579:( 4564:( 4543:( 4492:( 4474:( 4455:) 4451:( 4436:( 4424:) 4420:( 4379:( 4350:( 4318:( 4298:( 4282:( 4249:( 4213:( 4198:( 4179:( 4160:( 4146:( 4107:( 4081:( 4078:☮ 4043:( 4024:( 4008:( 3993:( 3967:( 3951:( 3913:( 3870:( 3858:) 3854:( 3830:( 3815:( 3796:( 3751:( 3737:( 3723:( 3709:( 3691:( 3676:( 3662:( 3647:( 3632:( 3601:( 3581:( 3567:( 3548:( 3533:( 3507:( 3493:( 3473:( 3448:( 3417:( 3378:) 3372:( 3357:) 3351:( 3313:( 3296:( 3265:c 3263:/ 3261:t 3245:( 3230:c 3228:/ 3226:t 3181:( 3145:( 3109:c 3107:/ 3105:t 3089:( 3074:c 3072:/ 3070:t 3022:( 3008:( 2989:( 2961:( 2946:( 2891:( 2870:( 2847:( 2834:) 2830:( 2821:( 2774:( 2759:( 2745:( 2729:( 2706:( 2684:( 2670:( 2655:( 2632:( 2614:( 2592:( 2577:( 2542:( 2526:( 2511:( 2482:( 2467:( 2453:( 2426:( 2366:( 2310:" 2296:( 2282:( 2267:( 2253:( 2235:( 2203:( 2159:( 2114:( 2106:( 2034:( 2019:( 2005:( 1990:( 1975:( 1960:( 1895:( 1876:( 1861:( 1846:( 1812:( 1797:( 1782:( 1764:( 1749:( 1731:( 1717:( 1702:( 1686:( 1646:( 1612:( 1595:( 1574:( 1559:( 1521:( 1478:( 1453:( 1438:( 1409:( 1382:/ 1357:( 1337:( 1312:( 1278:( 1264:( 1249:( 1233:( 1219:( 1205:( 1190:( 1162:( 1144:( 1126:( 1095:( 1061:( 1020:( 999:( 960:( 949:c 947:/ 945:t 912:( 863:( 811:/ 794:( 777:/ 752:( 737:( 714:( 685:( 670:( 655:( 636:( 579:( 564:( 550:( 535:( 516:ل 502:T 496:C 493:( 465:( 450:( 429:( 410:( 379:( 365:( 351:( 335:( 314:( 298:( 266:( 252:( 238:( 224:( 206:( 184:( 169:( 148:( 134:( 119:( 50:.

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

Index