User talk:Mkativerata/Archive14

984:

any more substantial contributions. And there may very well not be any more contributions to this debate in the next seven days: it is TLDR and no-one likes to jump into TLDR. So what is an admin to do in seven days time? That's why re-lists shouldn't be done as readily as they are. At the least, debates like this should be allowed to slip well off the last day of the log, to give as many patrolling admins as possible the opportunity to close them. It seems to me this was re-listed after the standard 168 hours, which is good, but it would have been better to give it more time on the last day of the log for an admin to close if the admin saw a consensus. Re-listing should actually be kind of a last resort.

3004:, I was not sure how strongly you object to allowing the two editors to participate in mediation. There is a lot of support for letting the closing admin (yourself) decide what should happen, but in your AE comment you seem to express mixed feelings. Can you elaborate at all on what bad things you believe could happen if you let them join in the mediation? I don't see anyone wanting to overturn or question the topic ban that you imposed. Personally, I could go either way on allowing them to participate in mediation. I would just like to know your rationale. Thanks, 2892:

comments on how few libraries have her book, but I don't recall that ever a measurement of notability. As for Metropolitan90 he didn't respond to anything regarding notability at all, only talking about "sexism", and ignoring Google hits. But no one was referring to Google hits, only Google news results where reliable sources were shown to cite this person as an expert in their field. If the final few votes had said keep, and no one bothered to respond to them, would that make them more valid than every statement already made?

1650: 1722: 2192: 3146:

which we're fine to oversee if that works, additionally they lose the right to dispute results in the MedCab at a later stage. The last part is especially important. My goal here is to give the dispute resolution the best chance at being resolved. If they behave thry get to participate. If not, they get kicked out. Part of me thinks if they disrupt the process then maybe they should be permanently topic banned, but that seems unwieldy. What do you think?

1221:

100% sure is not the case). Perhaps I'm more conservative than most, but it is a norm I've applied to myself for some time. Perhaps AQ will see the views that S Marshall and I have expressed here, and my own view that S Marshall's examples are even more egregiously off-base re-lists, and reconsider his call not to revert this re-list himself. Of course the other possibility is that a TPS, if I have any, might be inclined to consider acting. --

3484: 769:

but respect" and try to figure out who the "people who are useless and just cause nothing but trouble" are next time. I'd give you some clues but there's some restrictions in place. Yes, yes, yes, I know it's hard and we all Eastern European sound alike and we bicker and oh my goodness it's such a pain to sort it out, but since you get paid the big bucks for being and admin... I mean ... it's your job, right?

3561: 1552: 43:

delete !voter made a statement after this discovery. This one !voter reported nothing was found on Google news, yet there are numerous sources on Google news, and I reported five of them at the AfD. When challenged on this point, there was no explanation given. So all delete !votes stand refuted for not having considered the evidence. Please revert your closing to "keep". Thank you,

2711:

favor of clothed image and 20 in favor of nude image. My question is, why does a "no consensus" result in the same as a "keep" where the minority point of view is retained? I understand that a no consensus is no consensus for action, but I don't see why that can be pointed to as consensus to keep or retain the nude photo either. Does my question make sense?--v/r -

2976:. I'd highlight two important things: (1) basing the article on reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article; and (2) adopting a neutral tone. So instead of telling the world about everything a university offers (which is an advertisement), tell us the key facts about the university as they're reported in things like news sources. 2752:"No consensus" does not equate to a "consensus to keep". Anyone who is saying that is misguided. I would support a close of the new RfC not because there was a consensus in the last RfC, but because the new RfC is so soon after the old one and in a highly contentious discussion, that is not conducive of a productive outcome. -- 190:

would have found a way out of this conversation that doesn't disrespect the work I did during the AfD in improving the encyclopedia and analyzing relevant guidelines and policies. As per your statements, this will be my last post in this section without some feedback. Perhaps you have some suggestions.

3582:

is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us

2667:

Hmm... is this poll meant to be a binding request for comment? The poll says it is "to test consensus" not to determine consensus and it doesn't seem to follow RfC format (discussions later on the page do). I wonder if it shouldn't just be closed, by anyone, with no result or closing statement. Sorry

1456:

because as stated in the debate, OTRS had received complaints from the subject of the article. I felt that it needed wider input. The other three that you linked had blanket !votes protesting the mass nomination. I closed some of these as debates as keep, but these particular discussions only had the

1320:

It's unfortunate that none of us can revert this inappropriate relist. If Alpha Quadrant continues to make poor decisions (like the four times you've overruled Alpha Quadrant, which I endorse) and does not heed editors' suggestions, perhaps an RfC/U will be necessary. Also note the ongoing discussion

983:

I can see where AQ may have been coming from. But the problem with re-listing in these circumstances it that it jams up an admin who now might want to close it. If one neutral party has said the consensus isn't clear, it's very tough for another to come over the top and close it if there haven't been

3019:

I don't have mixed feelings about my decisino -- looking at the behaviour that led to the sanctions I maintain the position that involving the editors in mediation would not be a good move. But the extent to which I care about having that aspect of the sanction upheld: not strong. I say that only to

2381:

No worries. They've been open for weeks, so another 10 hours won't hurt. If you could close any of the other discussions I listed at AN (I have not participated in any of the RfCs currently listed there), I'd be grateful. If you don't have the time or inclination after closing the merge discussions,

764:

Sigh. Once again, "you're banning the wrong people". Igny, however much I disagree with him and however irritating I found his comment about the EEML (I AM the EEML, a mailing list of one!) is actually one of the good guys. In the sense that he actually tries to discuss things, brings sources to the

633:

to avoid accusations of picking your admin but this is more vandalism than edit-warring so I'm happy to do it myself. I'll watchlist the page in case he/she comes back with a different account. My fear is that the account actually is Nazor or someone close to him and he's removing incorrect content

518:

You know, all this and I still don't know what the proposal entails. (I deliberately didn't read which side was up and which side was down), but I wanted to say I was extremely impressed with your writing in your close. It reveals a tempered, restrained, and sensible mindset and clearly communicated

42:

How can reasonable minds be said to differ when we don't know what they think about the evidence? None of the first three delete !voters reported any research, and these !votes were refuted during the AfD on this point. Subsequent to these !votes, more than 40 references were discovered. Only one

2710:

First off, I'm not involved in the dispute and I couldn't care less which direction it goes. My question is more of a question about consensus. You stated that because there was "no consensus" in the previous RFC that the status quo should remain. When reading the RFC (and counting), I see 27 in

1818:

Okay thanks, I guess I probably should have just linked to the source template in my original edit summary. Yeah it seems I've gotten myself a bit of a supervisor. He's ended up on the wrong side of a DR process I instigated, so he's decided to take a sudden interest in my contribution history—this

1265:

Cunard, normally I would be delighted to do exactly as you ask. However, I'm concerned that I've unilaterally overruled Alpha Quadrant four times today already, and if I did it any more, I might appear to be victimising him. I feel that I need to back off now. (I don't normally stalk Mkativerata's

1130:

Sorry, it's (hopefully) not that I don't have the balls that Sandstein or Spartaz have, it's that as a general rule I only act upon procurements for admin assistance from involved editors on my talk page in uncontroversial circumstances. Even if I did, I'd probably say in this case that whatever my

798:

Well, thank you for your unsolicited opinion. It flies in the face of the clear impression I have of Igny's editing behaviour based on the objective evidence discussed at the AE. Behaviours change. Maybe your opinion would have been well-founded a few months ago (for even a few weeks ago, check out

772:

The above is worded in a slightly obnoxious way. BUT. I wouldn't even bother posting it if I didn't think there was at least a chance that you would think about it. I actually have a ... more-than-average regard for your past admin actions at AE which is why I have bothered typing all them letters.

3498:

Thanks for your decision regarding the above. You made a hard decision originally and I apologise for being a bit of a dick about it and going to ArbCom in the first place instead of approaching you directly, which in hindsight I should have done from the get-go. Thanks for being understanding and

3351:. If that administrator is satisfied that misconduct occurred by TLAM or Igny: (1) the modification to the topic ban for that editor will cease; (2) the topic ban for that editor will be reset and doubled in length and (3) the editors will lose the right to dispute the outcome of the MedCab case." 3145:

I think that approach would work, but just so I am sure we're on the same page, their topic bans would be modified to allow MedCab participation, and if they disrupt MedCab (though would hope that this be left to our discretion as to what is disruptive) then their topic bans are reset and doubled,

2724:

I think it is well established that first, consensus is not determined by a head count, and secondly, subject to some exceptions (such as where there is not a stable status quo),a "no consensus" result causes the retention of the status quo. The words "majority" and "minority" have no place in the

1474:

I think that almost all the debates that ever make it to AfD need wider input. The outcome is, all too often, a lottery based on who shows up and !votes. The system's creaking and tottering under the sheer number of AfD nominations we get every single day, and it's fair to say that most AfDs are

1220:

Sure, I can see your point. But the difficulty I have is that I have made comments before in other venues about the merits of re-listing. If I act on your request here it may be thought that my assistance was procured here because my views on such re-listings were known to you (which of course I'm

768:

Ok, look, this is a messy topic area where you will ALWAYS have disagreements. I would rather have disagreements with intelligent knowledgeable people, like Igny or Paul Siebert, than clueless vicious psychopaths, which is sort of the norm in this area. So please bring back people "I disagree with

297:

That was before there was an OTRS ticket, all arguments were based on that. Once the OTRS ticket was in place, there were no further objections. Until now. Otherwise, I would have requested extra OTRS permission weeks ago. I'm writing them now. I merely asked for a little time to verify if the

3102:

Nope, ArbCom basically said AE is the correct venue and AE seems to have come to a consensus that it's your call. Which brings me to appeal to you directly. I know what I ask is quite a lot, but I give my word that if poor behavior occurs within the MedCab case I'll be the first to report it, but

3060:

As all other avenues have been exhausted I supposed I am reduced to trying to convince you to change your mind. Before I do so, is there any way I can persuade you to do so, if I was to give an extraordinary reason or decent rationale, or is this something you won't consider at all? I say this as

2943:

Please let me know, where i need to improve while creating the 'ISBR bangalore' Page. As previous one was deleted, and my account is showing error message 'G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion.' I read the available information twice but still confuse about the error. Please specify some key

2795:

I still support a new discussion. I couldn't care one way or another on the images, I actually think a partially clothed would be preferable, but I feel like the folks supporting the nude image are trying to game the system and I feel like you're buying into it. Regardless, we're now arguing in

987:

I also agree with you that the statement "Discussions that have unclear consensus can be relisted" is not correct. Having said that, re-listing is very discretionary. There may very well have been admins who would have re-listed this, but had it been left to slip off the log I think it would have

282:

No, it was an issue raised by a number of editors in support of the proposal that was not adequately dealt with and in combination with other issues caused there to be a consensus. See in particular Steven Walling and Viritidas' contributions and the others that relied on them. I'm not going to

189:

I understand that you don't mean to be impolite, and we have a good conversation behind us to confirm it. I think the drag on this conversation is your insistence or implication that some of the choices that you make don't have consequences. If your choice was truly inconsequential, I think you

37:

The result was no consensus. Reasonable minds often differ on whether sources are sufficient to establish a subject's notability. It's especially the case when there are many sources that mention or quote the subject but not so many that are actually about him. Here, reasonable minds differ quite

2891:

Some saw the coverage is proof she was notable, some did not. There was no consensus one way or the other. You stated that "DGG, ItsZippy and Metropolitan90" convinced you. ItsZippy admitted that one of the news sources demonstrates notability, but felt the rest are just minor mentions. DGG

3130:

Hmm... well as I read it, T. Canens and NW seem to be in favour of your approach and they've got good heads on their shoulders. Those on "my side", including the arbs, are more deferring to my discretion than explicitly agreeing with my decision. Shall we call the AE "no consensus, default to

250:

The summary of the OTRS ticket is that it gives permission for use, not that the subject of the photo has directly consented to its use. Having said that, I don't have the OTRS ticket. I have just added an important proviso to the close about the eventuality of proper consent being obtained.

265:

Then you can't close it as conensus for change based on a technical issue into which you have no view and has not become an issue until right now, at closure. Please reverse the closure until we can confirm what, if anything, is necessary to show the consent of the subject.

570:

Obviously the image is not of a naked person so concerns about consent are far less signifcant. It also appears that the photo has also been published on a US government website. I doubt very much that we have stronger privacy protections than government websites.

1799:

speaks of "pages" generally, so it would seem to cover all pages. So the other user might strictly have a point. But I think it is over the top to have a crack at someone for copying a brief template instruction of all things. I mean, really. We have

765:

table etc. (yes, yes, he can be stubborn and tentedious and even rude at times when frustrated, but this is sort of par for the course in this topic area...I was gonna close this parentheses but then realized that that was actually the main point...

2920:

Given that the factual assertions in your own contribution were demonstrated to be wrong, yes I would assume you would have re-visited your position. And good on editors for ignoring Google news results and actually discussing the coverage therein.

2633: 851:

Good morning, Mkativerata. I was reading the above discussion again today and it struck me as an excellent candidate for a triumvirate close: contentious, fraught, numerically split, and very long indeed. So I thought I'd ping you and see if you

1061: 875:

Yes I reckon it fulfils all those conditions. My only doubt is whether there's any dispute as to which way it could be closed. I can really see only one way myself, but I've participated in the discussion so perhaps my judgement is clouded.

1040:

clear consensus." – I think he meant to write "Two delete !votes", but he again repeated his earlier false statement that there were two—not three—delete votes. His comment also indicated that he is counting the votes and not assessing the

1157:

I'm a bit reluctant to do any more in case it starts to look personal, but I don't see any reason why either of you shouldn't simply close any debate in which you're uninvolved, irrespective of the relisting, if you think the consensus is

780:

about it, I'm just going to email him for his opinions. Which would be like "canvassing" except I'd be "canvassing" someone whom I know disagrees with me, but in this wacky world of Knowledge, that too can be used against me. So heads up.

475:

I would also suggest boxing the entire discusison to include discussion not labelled "support/oppose," but the whole thing as it should have been weighed in your final decision... and preserved in that condition. Right now it is already

648:

Thanks. I was unsure whether it should have been reported for edit-warring or vandalism so I just brought it to your attention. The source seems pretty harmless (it was a pat-on-the-back softball interview) which is what baffles me so

2739:

Yes, so back to the original question. Where does "no consensus" equal "consensus to keep"? I don't see why folks are calling for the close of a new RFC based on your close and from my perspective you appear to support it.--v/r -

335:

suggests the use of a "model release". But I can understand you wanting to get the terms of any such consent and supporting evidence "right" first. I'd suggest you contact OTRS yourself or one of the OTRS administrators listed at

603:

which is why I sense a connection between the two accounts and the subject. It has been exasperating to keep on reverting his unexplained removals of a source. Warnings on his talk page have gone unheeded. Please deal with him,

2476:

you said "Indeed, you'll see that the reference to Inked (magazine) is dated 2006, a year in which its wikipedia article appears to concede the magazine was not published" but magazine debut in 2004 per inked's wikipedia page

2396:

I've done the Indian one, but when I read through the Iranian one I felt in a better position to !vote than to close the discussion. I'll have a look at AN for the other ones but I might not have much time left today. Cheers

3325:. If that administrator is satisfied that misconduct occurred by TLAM or Igny: (1) the modification to the topic ban for that editor will cease; and (2) the topic ban for that editor will be reset and doubled in length." -- 1513:, I would have closed it as keep. The other three that you closed I relisted because both the arguments for keeping or deleting the articles was weak. I felt that they needed wider input before closing one way or another. 1198:

Mkativerata, letting the relist remain perpetuates the error and the perception that the relist was valid. I think a poor relist does as much damage as a poor NAC because the latter can be reviewed at DRV while the former

727:

Well that was fast. Anyway, are Igny and TLAM still allowed to participate in the Holodomor mediation? Since that may - let me stress the *may* - have potential long run benefits perhaps it should be exempt from the topic

174:

Yes, I am trying to end it. I don't mean to be impolite, but I have limited time to engage in a totally inconsequential debate whether an AfD should have been closed as "keep" versus "no consensus". I'm just not doing it.

149: 1131:

view of the merits of the re-listing, now that it has been done, it may be better to let it lie than unilaterally reversing it. I'd revert a dodgy NAC any day of the week, but re-lists like this do much less damage. --

1114:

Since the discussion ran for at least 168 hours (prior to the relist), it can be closed at any time. Would you either assess the consensus in the debate or restore it to the 2 October log for another admin to close?

2505:

Yes, but the article also says "debuted in late 2004 and was published quarterly for one year" and "The magazine relaunched in October 2007", which appears to suggest a break in publication between 2005 and 2007.

232:

to use the photo of his wife, with her knowledge and consent. If this is insufficient, which no one involved in the RFC has advanced, then please explain why. The RFC should have been closed as 'no consensus'.

422:(EC)I think it was a well thought out and measured response... but I would ask that you modify your last sentence... I think you should explicitly state what the proposal was for, to reiterate the conclusion.--- 330:

That is not an accurate reflection at all. The OTRS diff is from 7 September. A number of the contributions raising concerns about consent post-dated that diff significantly. In any case, as to your question,

390:

At any rate, I agree that we'll investigate and I'm doing that now. Better late than never, I guess... :) Although I still think you should reverse your close and wait, the image has been there since 2006.

1360:

I think we're a way short of an RFC/U on this user. He appears to be trying to edit in good faith, even though we differ from him in a matter of judgment, so I think the first port of call should be DRN.—

1079: 2683: 3518:

Thanks Steven, that's very kind. Don't apologise: had you approached me directly to start with, I surely would have said no! :) Thanks for having such commitment to the mediation to follow this through.

3438:

I think it would probably be better to stick to what was proposed at Arbcom and AE. Also, the more self-executing penalties we impose, the less likely it is that TLAM and Igny will actually participate.

3080:

I thought AE was approaching a consensus to give an exception? I'm not inclined to act unilaterally while both AE and Arbcom are considering and a number of admins and arbs have supported my decision. --

1879: 2887:

That makes absolutely no sense at all. Should those of us saying keep just repeat what we already said? Some stated the coverage in the book wasn't notable, while I stated already that I felt it was.

314:

And can you point me to the instructions on how to obtain and verify this 'personality rights' consent? I'm not seeing instructions on how to accomplish this and I want to make sure it's done right.

283:

speak for OTRS here, but I would ordinarily seek not just the consent of the subject of the photograph but reasonable evidence that the subject of the photograph is indeed the person giving consent. --

2645: 2634: 2641: 681:

Might ask how broadly construed (I believe that is how it is termed) Is it just articles I am banned from are talk pages still allowed? I ask as I am currently in a mediation regarding Holodomor?

2112: 2108: 1947: 1896: 3321:. The mediators of that case have the exclusive prerogative of reporting any editorial misconduct by Igny or TLAM during the mediation to an administrator familiar with the topic bans or to 2051:

Ah... I'll see if I can have a look at that when I have some time tomorrow. It may need an AWB run. The Gold Coast team had multiple sets of colours in its brief and inglorious history... --

1475:

seriously underattended. But we can't just relist everything, because then what happens is we flood the next day with debates that nobody's interested in, which reduces the participation in

3347:. The mediators of that case have the exclusive prerogative of reporting any editorial misconduct by Igny or TLAM during the mediation to an administrator familiar with the topic bans or to 1964: 456:

Thanks, I find that reiterating the conclusion helps to aleviate ambiguity later on... it also ensures that when somebody says "I support the proposal" that they understood the proposal.---

2661: 3278:

Yes, I would envisage that any of the three mediators could come to AE or indeed any AE admin involved in the case (such as you, me, T. Canens) and ask for the topic ban to be doubled. --

831:. I have requested that the topic bans of TLAM and Igny be modified, but realise that these requests need to be made to ArbCom directly. Feel free to comment at RFAR of course. Thanks, 1888: 1322: 1930: 1913: 1908: 228:

of the Pregnancy lead image proposal. It is faulty on several grounds, the primary consideration being Issue #2, where the photographer, the husband of the subject, has submitted

2079: 2074: 1479:

day's debates. Where it's reasonably possible to close an AfD, that AfD should be closed. Relisting is for when a reasoned close is not possible based on the debate before you.—

1956: 3242:

part of the suspended topic ban might have to be confirmed by an admin, as Steve isn't one, but just to confirm: we're allowing Steve to reimpose the topic ban as he sees fit?

1976: 2883:

Your closing rational is odd. "That those delete !votes have stood for between 7 and 13 days without any challenge leads me to conclude that there is a consensus to delete."

2649: 1502: 916:, there is an overwhelming consensus to overturn. Triumvirate closes should generally be reserved for when an outcome is unclear and the discussion can be closed either way. 1505:

as keep, as there were two editors with good keep arguments. (Contrary to Cunard's above claim, I do not simply count !votes). However, the nom asked me to reopen it, and I

2682:

I don't know. Sswonk requested a closure at the bottom of the poll, but you are right that the discussion doesn't seem to be binding. It also might have been superseded by

2268:

Yes, I'd definitely support that. As I was researching the article it struck me that the vast majority of sources say "Faifai Loa", especially in his native New Zealand. --

1454: 1292:

After thinking about this some more, I've spotted that Timotheus Canens seems to be online and I've drawn his attention to this discussion. He may feel able to act here.—

1146: 912:

As an uninvolved editor, while the discussion is contentious, I'm not sure that a triumvirate close is needed here. Based on the numbers and the strengths of arguments at

148:

Sounds to me like you are trying to end this conversation before it has started, which would start with your response to my first question. We had a good conversation at

3171:

Yes, that sounds fine to me and consistent with the ideas floated by some arbs and at the AE appeal. Maybe leave it for 24 hours though in case anyone has any issues. --

2796:

three different places so we mine as well consolidate to the AN thread or on the talk page. I'm sure you're ready for the "New Message" link to stop popping up.--v/r -

1942: 1201:

S Marshall, had I been uninvolved in this AfD, I would have reverted Alpha Quadrant. I hope that as uninvolved editors, either you or Mkativerata will undo the relist.

58:

I disagree. The difference between "keep" and "no consensus" is so inconsequential that, with respect, I'm not inclined to give any further explanation for my close. --

3453:

Yeah, let's just stick with your suggestion plus (3). Let me know when you're ready to implement it (though I've got AE watch listed so will find out that way too.)

3344: 3318: 72:

Given your position that the difference between "keep" and "no consensus" "is so inconsequential", then would you be ok with changing the result to "keep"? Thanks,

1922: 1109: 1046:

My attempt at having Alpha Quadrant review his relist has been unsuccessful. He at first ignored my replies and then was unable to justify the relist. When admin

52: 1752:

Hey mate. Got a question for you about attribution—I know you frequently deal with copyright issues so I'm hoping the knowledge is basically the same. I've been

3509: 3311: 3054: 1318:

I think you might have misread the timestamps. Timotheus Canens' most recent edit was on 23:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC), over a day ago, so he might not be online.

2995: 1656: 1649: 3013: 776:

Anyway, blah blah blah, I would like it if Igny particpated in the Holodmor mediation, since I want to know what he has to say, and if you're going to be all

935: 26: 2867: 1358:

Oops. Tim's got a little green light at the top right of his talk page that says "online"; I looked at that, saw it was green and believed it. My mistake.

719: 705: 2952: 2247: 153: 977: 812: 793: 755: 199: 184: 169: 123: 109: 95: 81: 67: 3287: 3257: 2553:

may very well be misleading or just plain wrong and you may very well be right: that's why I say in the deletion discussion that the "wikipedia article

1469: 3071: 2989: 2977: 2878: 1525: 1496: 1243:. I understand your position that there may be accusations of impropriety if you were to undo the relist. S Marshall, would you undo it? Or one of the 913: 3543: 3528: 3463: 3448: 3417: 3386: 3364: 3334: 3221: 3199: 3180: 3156: 3140: 3113: 3089: 1152: 3212:

I'm just going offline now though and won't be back for some hours - I'm happy for you a drop a note below the line (in the admin area) of the AE. --

2930: 2915: 1565: 499:

Hmm... I'm a bit hesitant shutting down more discussion than needs to be shut down, and it would be difficult to work out where to draw the lines. --

3029: 2964: 2627: 2231: 2141: 2060: 2026: 1873: 1193: 1175: 907: 885: 841: 508: 494: 470: 451: 2566: 2515: 2042: 1663: 1637: 1543: 1309: 580: 402: 382: 368: 349: 325: 309: 292: 277: 260: 2572:

No I have the 2006 spring issue. It could have been purchased in the summer of that year or even winter. Is there a way to upload a scanned copy?

2319: 2305: 2291: 2277: 2176: 1832: 1813: 668: 643: 943: 2841: 2817: 2803: 2787: 2773: 2761: 2747: 2734: 2695: 2677: 2465: 2420: 2406: 2391: 2376: 1256: 1230: 1155: 1140: 1124: 997: 543: 1426: 1400: 1377: 1348: 1283: 1210: 925: 869: 565: 2687: 2653: 2412: 2383: 2353: 1535: 1531: 1392: 1340: 1248: 1202: 1116: 969: 961: 936: 917: 27: 2090:

Given what happened with the Manly rename, I figured I'd ask someone to clarify which teams these refer to as they aren't the same colors.

1509:

that consensus could have been clearer, and I relisted it. Due to the nature of the Zachary Stone AfD, I relisted. If there hadn't been the

890:

Well, I think that you and I agree on what the only proper close is—but there are certainly vocal and passionate editors on the other side.—

2873: 2009:

That one looks ok, actually. The Wynnum-Manly colours are showing correctly. Another complicating factor is that two Queensland clubs, the

1101: 2521:"The magazine was purchased by Downtown Media Group in 2006" but that didn't specify when in 2006 it was purchased. I have that magazine 2213: 1150: 1148: 3403:

I partly think that if their topic bans are re-imposed, it might be better to place them under an indefinite ban on articles relating to

1990: 1097: 3628: 2577: 1548:

I closed it. @S Marshall: That little green light depended on a page that I was too lazy to update - it hasn't been updated since 2010

822: 3001: 3020:

indicate that I won't take any issue with being overturned on that point, not that my personal feelings should be relevant anyway! --

2938: 436: 2126: 2099: 1005:

He stated: "Currently there is two users (you and the nom) arguing deletion". – there are three users arguing for deletion. Myself,

244: 2778:

A couple of weeks is nothing. And it's actually only been a couple of days since the "no consensus" part of the close kicked in. --

2450: 1727:

Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake...

1388: 157: 2889: 2612: 1453:

Ok, I was a away for about an hour, and I see that a lengthy discussion has started. I am reading it now. @S Marchall, I relisted

690: 2852: 2251: 1707: 846: 528: 2549:

If it was first published in 2004, and published for one year, it must have stopped in 2005, right? In any case, the article on

1768: 229: 1387:

Okay. I agree that an RfC/U would be premature. If he continues to make mistakes, a DRN report might be needed. But looking at

740: 2341: 2246:

lately I thought I'd run it by you first for a second opinion. Both the NZ media and the Cowboys official page use Faifai Loa

1858: 1506: 1739: 3407:, with the topic ban on Eastern Europe to be reset and to run concurrently with the Holodomor topic ban. What do you think? 2345: 1684: 2589: 2161: 2003: 1057: 957: 357:, so I don't know that it's an inaccurate reflection at all. I don't see arguments that the OTRS ticket is insufficient. 3189:

If you could make a note at AE and at Amendment it might be more visible than say here. I think another 24hrs won't hurt.

2361: 2960: 2541: 2497: 2262: 1244: 2349: 828: 634:(not that the article is incorrect, but perhaps the source is). Still, he/she needs to tell us that and not edit-war! -- 2182: 1949: 1915: 1881: 1618: 803:, which would have been sanctionable in and of itself). But not, in my view, now. I won't re-litigate this further. -- 623: 3533:

Heh. Well, I'm not one that gives up easily when I believe in something :) Glad we could work this out. All the best,

2336:

Hi Mkativerata. As a frequent closer of contentious AfDs and DRVs, would you be able to help clear the RfC backlog at

1785: 3608: 2718: 1501:

Agreed, as you said above, relisting should only be done when it isn't reasonable possible to close an AfD. I closed

114:

You are confusing meaning and consequence. There was no consensus in the debate and I'm not changing it to "keep". --

519:

what was being decided, why, and was respectful to all sides. I think you might have managed to thread the needle.--

1492: 1422: 1373: 1305: 1279: 1171: 903: 865: 600: 1754: 3035:

Regarding this, there's a request by Tznaki at AE for you to comment, are you able to take a look at AE? Thanks,

2537: 2493: 2432: 1093: 2249: 3551: 2083: 1698:

of what is intended as some advice on how to make one's case at AE. Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

663: 618: 225: 2973: 2367:

Hi Cunard, I'd be happy to. I won't have the time for another 10 hours though, but I'll see how I go then. --

1846: 1075: 1030: 219: 3587:

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.

3301:

If possible, could you write up the proposed modification and how it would work (just so we are all clear).

2017:, use Manly's colours and should link to the Manly file name. But I think that's all looking correct now. -- 2848: 2068: 715: 686: 3607:

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see

2840:

I have asked for the topic ban you applied to be modified so we may take part in the Holodomor mediation.

388: 355: 2684:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration#Requested move: Republic of Ireland → Ireland (republic)

1016: 3061:

someone who realises the necessity for discretionary sanctions at times, but also say it as a mediator.

332: 3103:

tying the hands of us three mediators makes our jobs harder than it already is. I hope you understand.

2595: 1759: 1703: 1561: 589: 2668:

I don't mean to be pedantic, I'm just cautious about making a decision where one is not called for. --

2646:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration#Poll to see if people want to retain the status quo.

2635:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration#Poll to see if people want to retain the status quo.

1336: 195: 165: 105: 77: 48: 3590:

If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

827:

Hello, I have mentioned you in a Requests for Amendment at arbitration, you can find the discussion

3250: 1695: 1678: 1523: 1467: 1105: 1051: 951: 2642:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration#Poll on extending ArbCom resolution for two years

2618:

It'd surely be on some public document somewhere (a candidate registration form, for instance). --

2296:

Excellent, thanks. I'll do an AWB run if you like (to change references in all other articles). --

1409:

Maybe WQA would be the right venue, I don't know. Something low-level, if it's necessary at all.—

3624: 3524: 3444: 3382: 3330: 3283: 3217: 3176: 3136: 3085: 3050: 3025: 2985: 2956: 2926: 2863: 2844: 2813: 2783: 2757: 2730: 2673: 2623: 2585: 2562: 2511: 2461: 2402: 2372: 2301: 2273: 2227: 2172: 2137: 2056: 2022: 1869: 1809: 1766:. Would you please confirm whether I have in fact made a copyright infringement and whether this 1633: 1226: 1189: 1136: 993: 881: 808: 751: 711: 701: 682: 639: 576: 539: 504: 447: 378: 345: 288: 256: 180: 119: 91: 63: 2167:

No worries. I'm surprised I managed to avoid the temptation of vandalising Manly's colours :) --

2033:

It was the redlink for one of the teams I was concerned about, Goldcoast Chargers or something?

1266:

talk page, but I just happened to have talked to him directly above. So there are 109 others!)—

696:

I am just about to post it on your talk page... The short answer is that it is the whole lot. --

3540: 3506: 3460: 3414: 3361: 3308: 3196: 3153: 3110: 3068: 3042: 2331: 2204:

Just thought I'd leave some thanks for the work you did on sorting out the Manly colors issue.

1840: 1712: 838: 3583:

in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

3343:

Perhaps this instead: "The topic bans are modified to allow participation by Igny and TLAM in

2147: 1699: 1557: 17: 1064:). Because this was a non-admin relist, I think you as an uninvolved admin can override it. 3499:

for all the hard work you do here, I know AE is not a fun place to work and appreciate it.

3009: 2948: 2608: 2525: 2481: 2209: 2122: 2095: 2038: 1999: 1972: 1938: 1904: 1854: 1488: 1418: 1369: 1301: 1275: 1167: 899: 861: 784: 731: 489: 465: 431: 191: 161: 101: 73: 44: 2222:

Thanks very much - I have vegemite on toast for breakfast every day, so you chose well! --

8: 3243: 2533: 2489: 2237: 1984: 1735: 1689: 1670: 1616: 1514: 1458: 1087: 1047: 947: 559: 396: 362: 319: 303: 271: 238: 2132:

Hmm. I'll have to do some research on this one. I'll put it on my to-do list. Thanks. --

373:

Viritidas' contribution, to take one example, was well after the OTRS ticket came in. --

2471: 2315: 2287: 2258: 2243: 2157: 2152:

Just want to say a big thank you for your effort in cleaning up the Manly mess! Cheers

1822: 1775: 777: 676: 659: 614: 1145:

Personally, I've just been closing the various debates that Alpha Quadrant relisted.

298:

current OTRS is ok or if we need more, and to obtain that extra permission if needed.

3535: 3501: 3455: 3409: 3356: 3303: 3191: 3148: 3105: 3063: 3037: 2835: 2703: 2014: 1069: 1024: 833: 588: 3131:

Mkativerata caving?". We'd then put Igny and TLAM under a double-or-nothing rule. --

1002:

Judging by Alpha Quadrant's comments, it seems that he did not read the discussion.

3620: 3520: 3440: 3378: 3326: 3317:

How about: "The topic bans are modified to allow participation by Igny and TLAM in

3279: 3213: 3172: 3132: 3081: 3046: 3021: 2981: 2922: 2893: 2859: 2809: 2800: 2779: 2770: 2753: 2744: 2726: 2715: 2691: 2669: 2657: 2619: 2581: 2558: 2550: 2507: 2457: 2446: 2416: 2398: 2387: 2368: 2357: 2297: 2269: 2223: 2168: 2133: 2052: 2018: 1865: 1805: 1747: 1643: 1629: 1581: 1539: 1396: 1344: 1252: 1222: 1206: 1185: 1132: 1120: 989: 973: 965: 921: 877: 804: 747: 697: 635: 572: 535: 524: 500: 443: 374: 341: 284: 252: 176: 115: 87: 59: 3005: 2604: 2242:

Hey, I was going to be bold and move this but seeing as you've done some work on

2205: 2118: 2091: 2034: 1995: 1968: 1934: 1900: 1850: 1763: 1480: 1410: 1361: 1293: 1267: 1159: 1010: 891: 853: 482: 458: 424: 2596: 2529: 2485: 2010: 1792: 1728: 1611: 1083: 555: 477: 392: 358: 315: 299: 267: 234: 2580:

and make a note there where everyone in the deletion discussion can see it. --

3579: 2311: 2283: 2254: 2153: 1796: 1721: 1625: 1510: 1457:

blanked comments. I'll look and see what the other issues and reply shortly.

1330: 1080:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/List of important publications in mathematics

1060:) made two questionable relists, he was willing to review his decisions (see 651: 630: 606: 337: 150:

WP:Articles for deletion/Australian Intervarsity Choral Societies Association

2650:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration#Closure of page titles poll

3348: 3322: 2337: 1607: 1599: 1595: 1391:, I find all of the listings to be articles, not problematic user conduct. 1240: 1065: 1020: 3596: 2797: 2767: 2741: 2712: 2442: 2438: 1603: 1591: 596: 520: 2191: 1036:

He later wrote: "Two keep !votes, one userfy vote, and one keep vote is

746:

No, I see no reason for there to be any exceptions to the topic bans. --

1006: 944:

User talk:Alpha Quadrant#Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Caiyad Phahad

3404: 2704: 1587: 800: 773:

If it was one of the other AE admins, I would not have even bothered.

595:

This user has been slow edit-warring over a reference in the article

1326: 354:

Certainly the one you pointed out was well before the OTRS ticket,

3602:

Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

2648:? I've unarchived it to allow for closure, which was requested at 1598:

state that the 4S is not the iPhone 5. Calling it the iPhone 5 is

968:

has not been met and that consensus at the AfD has been achieved.

3483: 1610:

are wikipedia core content policies and should not be violated.--

551: 2576:

I don't think there's any need to: what you should do is go to

1239:

I contacted you because you were the most recent admin to edit

534:

Thanks very much, I guess we'll see if this outcome "works". --

3560: 3045:

23:33, 24 October 2011 (UTC) Done -- I have it watchlisted. --

2348:

are two merge discussions that have been on AN for a while. I

2346:

Talk:Yadava#Proposal to merge articles Yadav , Ahir and Yadava

629:

I've blocked him for one month. Normally I'd suggest going to

1955:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

1921:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

1887:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

3354:

A variant that has words to that effect would work as well.

1666:

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

2253:

spelling of his name. Any objection if I move it to that?

1624:

This is an argument to be had elsewhere: the talk page or

3345:

Knowledge:Mediation Cabal/Cases/02 October 2011/Holodomor

3319:

Knowledge:Mediation Cabal/Cases/02 October 2011/Holodomor

1530:

Because multiple editors have stated that your relist of

1112:), and he doesn't seem to have acknowledged the message. 914:

Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2011 October 3#Amanda Knox

480:, let any future discussion start with a clean slate.--- 2310:

Great, Thanks, I don't have AWB as I refuse to use IE.

2342:

Talk:2005 Ahvaz unrest#Merge with Khūzestān Province.

1662:

Message added 18:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC). You can

154:

Australian Intervarsity Choral Societies Association

3377:

That looks fine - I defer your expertise on (3). --

2603:I've left a message on the DOB-master's talk page. 1154:. So far, users seem to be quite happy with that. 387:Apparently, even she is unclear on what is needed. 2879:Knowledge:Articles_for_deletion/Jessie_Stricchiola 550:I don't see a direct release from the subject for 1534:is inappropriate, please revert it. Thank you, 964:? I believe that the criteria for relisting at 2996:How strong is the opinion you expressed at AE? 2944:point which helps me in better contribution. 1989:This article might need looking over as well, 1655:Hello, Mkativerata. You have new messages at 1184:Certainly agree with what you did in those! -- 710:Short and painless is always good, thank you. 2437:Thanks for reviewing the merge discussion at 1795:speak of the article space but others don't. 1532:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Caiyad Phahad 962:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Caiyad Phahad 937:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Caiyad Phahad 156:as a redirect by writing a new subsection of 28:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/R Viswanathan 1880:File:Manly Colors (1950-2007).svg listed at 1849:needs some attention re club colors, sorry. 1819:is just one fault he's found. Thanks again. 1586:You do realize that linking iPhone 5 to the 1102:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Mariko Honda 38:evenly and there is no consensus either way. 3238:That sounds about what I was thinking. The 2557:concede the magazine was not published". -- 1991:List_of_Queensland_rugby_league_team_squads 1963:redirect, you might want to participate in 1929:redirect, you might want to participate in 1895:redirect, you might want to participate in 1959:. Since you had some involvement with the 1925:. Since you had some involvement with the 1891:. Since you had some involvement with the 3481: 2644:. Would you close the related discussion 942:As an uninvolved admin, would you review 554:either. Please explain the difference. 1948:File:Manly Colors (2009-).svg listed at 1657:Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment 1389:Knowledge:Dispute resolution noticeboard 158:InterVarsity Choral Festival (Australia) 100:Then it is not inconsequential, right? 1804:plagiarism problems on this project. -- 1791:I don't think it's clear: parts of our 14: 2640:Hi Mkativerata. Thank you for closing 2352:in either of these discussions. Best, 2113:File:Toowoomba_Clydesdales_colours.png 2109:File:Toowoomba_Clydesdales_colours.PNG 1100:Alpha Quadrant's non-admin closure of 988:been closed and closed as "delete". -- 152:. I was the one that later recreated 599:. He has been continuing the work of 2874:Jessie Stricchiola deletion rational 1967:(if you have not already done so). 1933:(if you have not already done so). 1899:(if you have not already done so). 1549: 2578:WP:Articles for deletion/Eddie Tana 23: 3559: 1648: 823:Arbitration requests for amendment 24: 3640: 3578:Hello Mkativerata/Archive14! The 2939:Key Points For Article Acceptance 2766:It's been a couple weeks.--v/r - 1914:File:Manly colours.svg listed at 1893:File:Manly Colors (1950-2007).svg 1889:File:Manly Colors (1950-2007).svg 3555: 3482: 2190: 1720: 1550: 1078:) overrode a non-admin close at 847:Deletion review for Amanda Knox 2084:File:Norths Devils colours.svg 2080:File:Norths Devils colours.png 2075:File:Norths Devils colours.PNG 13: 1: 3002:your October 22 comment at AE 2974:Knowledge:Starting an article 2972:The best guidance we have is 1961:File:Manly Colors (2009-).svg 1957:File:Manly Colors (2009-).svg 1847:Brisbane A-Grade Rugby League 3629:09:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC) 3619:A new userright? Oh dear. -- 3544:08:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC) 3529:08:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC) 3510:02:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC) 3464:08:01, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3449:07:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3418:02:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3387:02:22, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3365:02:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3335:02:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3312:02:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3288:01:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 3258:22:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3222:10:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3200:09:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3181:09:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3157:09:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3141:09:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3114:09:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3090:08:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3072:08:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3055:07:55, 25 October 2011 (UTC) 3030:19:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC) 3014:17:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC) 2990:10:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC) 2965:09:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC) 2931:10:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC) 2916:10:24, 23 October 2011 (UTC) 2868:22:32, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2853:22:20, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2818:22:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2804:22:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2788:22:08, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2774:22:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2762:21:59, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2748:21:58, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2735:19:40, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2719:15:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 2696:23:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2678:22:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2662:22:46, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2628:22:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2613:22:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2590:20:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2567:20:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2542:20:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2516:01:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC) 2498:21:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC) 2466:07:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC) 2451:05:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC) 2421:22:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2407:19:50, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2392:10:03, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2377:10:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2362:09:29, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2320:21:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2306:21:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2292:20:59, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2278:08:23, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2263:04:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC) 2232:07:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC) 2214:21:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 2177:20:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 2162:20:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 2142:20:10, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 2127:16:02, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 2100:15:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 2061:20:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 2043:20:31, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 2027:20:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 2004:20:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1977:20:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1943:20:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1909:20:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1874:19:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1859:19:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1833:10:41, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1814:10:06, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1786:09:03, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 1740:15:23, 14 October 2011 (UTC) 1708:10:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC) 1685:18:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC) 1638:19:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1619:17:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1566:10:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC) 1544:01:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1526:01:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1497:00:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1470:00:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1427:00:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 1401:00:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC) 7: 2382:then don't worry about it. 2198:Vegeimite on toast for you. 1772:is warranted? Many thanks, 1378:23:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1349:23:42, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1310:23:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1284:23:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1257:23:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1231:23:19, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1211:23:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1194:23:12, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1176:23:09, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1141:23:05, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 1125:23:00, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 998:22:43, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 978:22:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 926:23:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 908:15:31, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 886:15:05, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 870:10:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 842:05:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC) 813:09:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC) 794:08:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC) 756:22:42, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 741:22:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 720:21:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 706:21:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 691:21:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 669:15:51, 7 October 2011 (UTC) 644:20:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC) 624:14:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC) 581:20:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC) 566:08:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC) 544:22:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 529:18:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 509:22:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 495:19:40, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 471:17:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 452:17:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 437:17:22, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 403:17:31, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 383:17:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 369:17:24, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 350:17:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 333:WP:Image_use#Privacy_rights 326:17:11, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 310:17:09, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 293:17:02, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 278:17:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 261:16:58, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 245:16:52, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 200:13:08, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 185:01:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 170:00:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 124:19:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 110:15:53, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 96:14:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 82:11:08, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 68:08:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 53:02:42, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 33:The closing statement was: 10: 3645: 2183:Toast and Vegemite for you 224:I ask that you reconsider 3488: 2411:Thank you for the close! 2189: 1104:. Sandstein commented at 1950:Redirects for discussion 1916:Redirects for discussion 1882:Redirects for discussion 1511:concern from the subject 1106:User talk:Alpha Quadrant 1062:User talk:The Bushranger 960:)'s non-admin relist of 2433:Yadava merge discussion 1965:the redirect discussion 1931:the redirect discussion 1897:the redirect discussion 3564: 3552:New Page Patrol survey 2350:have not been involved 1927:File:Manly colours.svg 1923:File:Manly colours.svg 1653: 40: 3563: 1652: 220:Pregnancy RFC closure 35: 18:User talk:Mkativerata 3492:The Admin's Barnstar 2069:Clarification needed 799:the edit-warring on 442:Thanks, and done. -- 3569:New page patrol – 3565: 3000:When reading your 2845:The Last Angry Man 2456:You're welcome. -- 2244:Kalifa Fai-Fai Loa 1664:remove this notice 1654: 1590:is a violation of 712:The Last Angry Man 683:The Last Angry Man 3616: 3615: 3611: 3571:Survey Invitation 3515: 3514: 2968: 2951:comment added by 2545: 2528:comment added by 2501: 2484:comment added by 2219: 2218: 2015:Mackay Sea Eagles 1745: 1744: 1600:Original research 1495: 1425: 1376: 1308: 1282: 1174: 906: 868: 792: 739: 667: 622: 564: 401: 367: 324: 308: 276: 243: 3636: 3606: 3556: 3542: 3538: 3508: 3504: 3486: 3479: 3478: 3462: 3458: 3416: 3412: 3363: 3359: 3310: 3306: 3253: 3198: 3194: 3155: 3151: 3112: 3108: 3070: 3066: 3044: 3040: 2980:looks useful. -- 2967: 2945: 2912: 2909: 2906: 2903: 2900: 2897: 2551:Inked (magazine) 2544: 2522: 2500: 2478: 2194: 2187: 2186: 1864:Done, thanks. -- 1830: 1828: 1825: 1783: 1781: 1778: 1771: 1758:of plagiarising 1757: 1731: 1724: 1717: 1716: 1696:very rough draft 1681: 1675: 1667: 1614: 1596:reliable sources 1555: 1554: 1553: 1521: 1487: 1485: 1465: 1417: 1415: 1368: 1366: 1300: 1298: 1274: 1272: 1166: 1164: 898: 896: 860: 858: 840: 836: 791: 789: 787:Volunteer Marek 782: 738: 736: 734:Volunteer Marek 729: 657: 654: 612: 609: 562: 558: 485: 461: 427: 399: 395: 365: 361: 322: 318: 306: 302: 274: 270: 241: 237: 3644: 3643: 3639: 3638: 3637: 3635: 3634: 3633: 3574: 3554: 3536: 3534: 3502: 3500: 3456: 3454: 3410: 3408: 3357: 3355: 3304: 3302: 3251: 3192: 3190: 3149: 3147: 3106: 3104: 3064: 3062: 3038: 3036: 2998: 2946: 2941: 2910: 2907: 2904: 2901: 2898: 2895: 2876: 2838: 2708: 2638: 2601: 2523: 2479: 2474: 2435: 2334: 2240: 2185: 2150: 2115: 2071: 1987: 1953: 1919: 1885: 1843: 1826: 1823: 1821: 1779: 1776: 1774: 1767: 1753: 1750: 1729: 1715: 1694:I just wrote a 1692: 1679: 1671: 1668: 1661: 1646: 1612: 1584: 1551: 1515: 1481: 1459: 1411: 1362: 1294: 1268: 1160: 940: 892: 854: 849: 834: 832: 825: 785: 783: 732: 730: 679: 652: 607: 601:User:Nazirrazak 593: 560: 483: 459: 425: 397: 363: 320: 304: 272: 239: 230:OTRS permission 222: 192:Unscintillating 162:Unscintillating 102:Unscintillating 74:Unscintillating 45:Unscintillating 31: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3642: 3632: 3631: 3614: 3613: 3604: 3601: 3599:to take part. 3592: 3591: 3588: 3576: 3567: 3553: 3550: 3549: 3548: 3547: 3546: 3513: 3512: 3495: 3494: 3489: 3487: 3477: 3476: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3471: 3470: 3469: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3427: 3426: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3422: 3421: 3420: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3389: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3367: 3352: 3338: 3337: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3264: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3184: 3183: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3162: 3161: 3160: 3159: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3075: 3074: 3033: 3032: 2997: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2940: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2875: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2837: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2830: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2821: 2820: 2707: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2637: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2600: 2597:Jay Weatherill 2594: 2593: 2592: 2570: 2569: 2519: 2518: 2473: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2434: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2333: 2332:Close requests 2330: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2239: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2217: 2216: 2201: 2200: 2195: 2184: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2149: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2106: 2088: 2087: 2077: 2070: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2046: 2045: 2030: 2029: 2011:Burleigh Bears 1986: 1983: 1981: 1952: 1946: 1918: 1912: 1884: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1842: 1841:Cleanup needed 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1749: 1746: 1743: 1742: 1725: 1714: 1713:A beer for you 1711: 1691: 1688: 1673:TransporterMan 1660: 1647: 1645: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1583: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1568: 1518:Alpha_Quadrant 1462:Alpha_Quadrant 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1404: 1403: 1382: 1381: 1353: 1352: 1313: 1312: 1287: 1286: 1260: 1259: 1234: 1233: 1215: 1214: 1196: 1179: 1178: 1110:permanent link 1048:The Bushranger 1044: 1043: 1042: 1034: 985: 948:Alpha Quadrant 939: 934: 933: 932: 931: 930: 929: 928: 848: 845: 824: 821: 820: 819: 818: 817: 816: 815: 774: 770: 766: 759: 758: 725: 724: 723: 722: 678: 675: 674: 673: 672: 671: 592: 587: 586: 585: 584: 583: 547: 546: 516: 515: 514: 513: 512: 511: 473: 420: 419: 418: 417: 416: 415: 414: 413: 412: 411: 410: 409: 408: 407: 406: 405: 312: 221: 218: 217: 216: 215: 214: 213: 212: 211: 210: 209: 208: 207: 206: 205: 204: 203: 202: 135: 134: 133: 132: 131: 130: 129: 128: 127: 126: 30: 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3641: 3630: 3626: 3622: 3618: 3617: 3612: 3610: 3603: 3600: 3598: 3595:Please click 3589: 3586: 3585: 3584: 3581: 3575: 3573: 3572: 3562: 3558: 3557: 3545: 3541: 3539: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3526: 3522: 3517: 3516: 3511: 3507: 3505: 3497: 3496: 3493: 3490: 3485: 3480: 3465: 3461: 3459: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3446: 3442: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3434: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3430: 3429: 3428: 3419: 3415: 3413: 3406: 3402: 3401: 3400: 3399: 3398: 3397: 3396: 3395: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3366: 3362: 3360: 3353: 3350: 3346: 3342: 3341: 3340: 3339: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3324: 3320: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3309: 3307: 3289: 3285: 3281: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3268: 3259: 3256: 3254: 3247: 3246: 3241: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3223: 3219: 3215: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3206: 3201: 3197: 3195: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3169: 3158: 3154: 3152: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3138: 3134: 3129: 3128: 3127: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3123: 3122: 3115: 3111: 3109: 3101: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3091: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3073: 3069: 3067: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3052: 3048: 3043: 3041: 3031: 3027: 3023: 3018: 3017: 3016: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3003: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2975: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2953:Isbrbangalore 2950: 2932: 2928: 2924: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2914: 2913: 2890: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2881: 2880: 2869: 2865: 2861: 2858:Thank you. -- 2857: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2843: 2819: 2815: 2811: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2802: 2799: 2794: 2791: 2790: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2772: 2769: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2759: 2755: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2746: 2743: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2732: 2728: 2723: 2722: 2721: 2720: 2717: 2714: 2706: 2697: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2680: 2679: 2675: 2671: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2659: 2655: 2651: 2647: 2643: 2636: 2629: 2625: 2621: 2617: 2616: 2615: 2614: 2610: 2606: 2598: 2591: 2587: 2583: 2579: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2504: 2503: 2502: 2499: 2495: 2491: 2487: 2483: 2467: 2463: 2459: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2422: 2418: 2414: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2404: 2400: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2303: 2299: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2289: 2285: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2275: 2271: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2250: 2248: 2245: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2220: 2215: 2211: 2207: 2203: 2202: 2199: 2196: 2193: 2188: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2148:Manly Colours 2143: 2139: 2135: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2124: 2120: 2114: 2110: 2105: 2102: 2101: 2097: 2093: 2085: 2081: 2078: 2076: 2073: 2072: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2044: 2040: 2036: 2032: 2031: 2028: 2024: 2020: 2016: 2012: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2001: 1997: 1993: 1992: 1982: 1979: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1958: 1951: 1945: 1944: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1928: 1924: 1917: 1911: 1910: 1906: 1902: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1883: 1875: 1871: 1867: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1856: 1852: 1848: 1834: 1831: 1829: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1803: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1784: 1782: 1770: 1765: 1761: 1760:this template 1756: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1726: 1723: 1719: 1718: 1710: 1709: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1687: 1686: 1682: 1676: 1674: 1665: 1658: 1651: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1627: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1617: 1615: 1609: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1533: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1524: 1522: 1520: 1519: 1512: 1508: 1504: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1484: 1478: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1468: 1466: 1464: 1463: 1455: 1452: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1414: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1380: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1365: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1351: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1335: 1332: 1328: 1324: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1297: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1271: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1213: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1197: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1177: 1173: 1169: 1165: 1163: 1156: 1153: 1151: 1149: 1147: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1138: 1134: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1111: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1092: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1074: 1071: 1067: 1063: 1059: 1056: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1039: 1035: 1032: 1029: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1015: 1012: 1008: 1004: 1003: 1001: 1000: 999: 995: 991: 986: 982: 981: 980: 979: 975: 971: 967: 963: 959: 956: 953: 949: 945: 938: 927: 923: 919: 915: 911: 910: 909: 905: 901: 897: 895: 889: 888: 887: 883: 879: 874: 873: 872: 871: 867: 863: 859: 857: 844: 843: 839: 837: 830: 814: 810: 806: 802: 797: 796: 795: 790: 788: 779: 775: 771: 767: 763: 762: 761: 760: 757: 753: 749: 745: 744: 743: 742: 737: 735: 721: 717: 713: 709: 708: 707: 703: 699: 695: 694: 693: 692: 688: 684: 670: 666: 665: 661: 656: 655: 647: 646: 645: 641: 637: 632: 628: 627: 626: 625: 621: 620: 616: 611: 610: 602: 598: 591: 582: 578: 574: 569: 568: 567: 563: 557: 553: 549: 548: 545: 541: 537: 533: 532: 531: 530: 526: 522: 510: 506: 502: 498: 497: 496: 493: 492: 491: 487: 486: 479: 474: 472: 469: 468: 467: 463: 462: 455: 454: 453: 449: 445: 441: 440: 439: 438: 435: 434: 433: 429: 428: 404: 400: 394: 389: 386: 385: 384: 380: 376: 372: 371: 370: 366: 360: 356: 353: 352: 351: 347: 343: 339: 334: 329: 328: 327: 323: 317: 313: 311: 307: 301: 296: 295: 294: 290: 286: 281: 280: 279: 275: 269: 264: 263: 262: 258: 254: 249: 248: 247: 246: 242: 236: 231: 227: 201: 197: 193: 188: 187: 186: 182: 178: 173: 172: 171: 167: 163: 159: 155: 151: 147: 146: 145: 144: 143: 142: 141: 140: 139: 138: 137: 136: 125: 121: 117: 113: 112: 111: 107: 103: 99: 98: 97: 93: 89: 86:No, sorry. -- 85: 84: 83: 79: 75: 71: 70: 69: 65: 61: 57: 56: 55: 54: 50: 46: 39: 34: 29: 19: 3605: 3594: 3593: 3577: 3570: 3568: 3566: 3537:Steven Zhang 3503:Steven Zhang 3491: 3457:Steven Zhang 3411:Steven Zhang 3358:Steven Zhang 3305:Steven Zhang 3300: 3248: 3244: 3239: 3193:Steven Zhang 3150:Steven Zhang 3107:Steven Zhang 3065:Steven Zhang 3039:Steven Zhang 3034: 2999: 2947:— Preceding 2942: 2894: 2882: 2877: 2839: 2792: 2725:equation. -- 2709: 2639: 2602: 2571: 2554: 2524:— Preceding 2520: 2480:— Preceding 2475: 2436: 2335: 2241: 2197: 2151: 2116: 2103: 2089: 1994: 1988: 1980: 1960: 1954: 1926: 1920: 1892: 1886: 1844: 1820: 1801: 1793:terms of use 1773: 1751: 1693: 1672: 1669: 1594:, since all 1585: 1517: 1516: 1482: 1476: 1461: 1460: 1412: 1363: 1359: 1333: 1319: 1295: 1269: 1200: 1161: 1113: 1090: 1072: 1054: 1037: 1027: 1013: 954: 946:, regarding 941: 893: 855: 850: 835:Steven Zhang 826: 786: 733: 726: 680: 658: 650: 613: 605: 594: 517: 490: 488: 481: 466: 464: 457: 432: 430: 423: 421: 223: 41: 36: 32: 3621:Mkativerata 3521:Mkativerata 3441:Mkativerata 3379:Mkativerata 3327:Mkativerata 3280:Mkativerata 3214:Mkativerata 3173:Mkativerata 3133:Mkativerata 3082:Mkativerata 3047:Mkativerata 3022:Mkativerata 2982:Mkativerata 2978:This source 2923:Mkativerata 2860:Mkativerata 2810:Mkativerata 2808:Sure. :) -- 2780:Mkativerata 2754:Mkativerata 2727:Mkativerata 2670:Mkativerata 2620:Mkativerata 2582:Mkativerata 2559:Mkativerata 2508:Mkativerata 2458:Mkativerata 2439:Talk:Yadava 2399:Mkativerata 2369:Mkativerata 2298:Mkativerata 2270:Mkativerata 2238:Fai-Fai Loa 2224:Mkativerata 2169:Mkativerata 2134:Mkativerata 2082:(as vector 2053:Mkativerata 2019:Mkativerata 1985:Team Colors 1866:Mkativerata 1806:Mkativerata 1690:Essay on AE 1630:Mkativerata 1503:this debate 1223:Mkativerata 1186:Mkativerata 1133:Mkativerata 990:Mkativerata 878:Mkativerata 805:Mkativerata 748:Mkativerata 698:Mkativerata 636:Mkativerata 597:Nazir Razak 573:Mkativerata 536:Mkativerata 501:Mkativerata 444:Mkativerata 375:Mkativerata 342:Mkativerata 285:Mkativerata 253:Mkativerata 177:Mkativerata 116:Mkativerata 88:Mkativerata 60:Mkativerata 3609:NPP Survey 3006:EdJohnston 2555:appears to 2472:Eddie Tana 2206:Sfan00 IMG 2119:Sfan00 IMG 2092:Sfan00 IMG 2035:Sfan00 IMG 1996:Sfan00 IMG 1969:Sfan00 IMG 1935:Sfan00 IMG 1901:Sfan00 IMG 1851:Sfan00 IMG 1762:to create 1483:S Marshall 1413:S Marshall 1364:S Marshall 1296:S Marshall 1270:S Marshall 1162:S Marshall 894:S Marshall 856:S Marshall 677:Topic ban? 552:this image 484:Balloonman 460:Balloonman 426:Balloonman 226:your close 3405:Holodomor 2836:AE Appeal 2705:Pregnancy 2605:Timeshift 2530:ETSJOE123 2486:ETSJOE123 1700:T. Canens 1588:iPhone 4S 1558:T. Canens 1084:Sandstein 1041:argument. 966:WP:RELIST 801:Holodomor 604:thanks. — 590:User:Drno 556:Dreadstar 393:Dreadstar 359:Dreadstar 316:Dreadstar 300:Dreadstar 268:Dreadstar 235:Dreadstar 2961:contribs 2949:unsigned 2538:contribs 2526:unsigned 2494:contribs 2482:unsigned 2312:Mattlore 2284:Mattlore 2255:Mattlore 2154:Mattlore 1748:Question 1644:Talkback 1582:iPhone 5 1337:contribs 1098:reverted 1094:contribs 1076:contribs 1058:contribs 1031:contribs 1017:contribs 958:contribs 852:agreed?— 653:Yk Yk Yk 608:Yk Yk Yk 2117:Thanks 1769:tagging 1764:another 1755:accused 1602:. Both 1245:109 TPS 1199:cannot. 1158:clear.— 1066:Spartaz 1021:DonCalo 1019:), and 664:contrib 649:much. — 619:contrib 478:WP:TLDR 3240:double 2688:Cunard 2654:Cunard 2443:Sitush 2413:Cunard 2384:Cunard 2354:Cunard 2282:Done. 1802:actual 1797:WP:CWW 1732:rose64 1626:WP:RFD 1536:Cunard 1507:agreed 1393:Cunard 1341:Cunard 1249:Cunard 1203:Cunard 1117:Cunard 1082:. And 970:Cunard 918:Cunard 631:WP:AN3 521:Tznkai 338:WP:VRT 3349:WP:AE 3323:WP:AE 2911:Focus 2338:WP:AN 2104:Also 1824:Night 1777:Night 1608:WP:OR 1325:with 1241:WP:AN 1007:MER-C 778:kafka 16:< 3625:talk 3597:HERE 3525:talk 3445:talk 3383:talk 3331:talk 3284:talk 3252:Talk 3218:talk 3177:talk 3137:talk 3086:talk 3051:talk 3026:talk 3010:talk 2986:talk 2957:talk 2927:talk 2864:talk 2849:talk 2842:here 2814:talk 2793:sigh 2784:talk 2758:talk 2731:talk 2692:talk 2674:talk 2658:talk 2624:talk 2609:talk 2586:talk 2563:talk 2534:talk 2512:talk 2490:talk 2462:talk 2447:talk 2441:. - 2417:talk 2403:talk 2388:talk 2373:talk 2358:talk 2344:and 2316:talk 2302:talk 2288:talk 2274:talk 2259:talk 2228:talk 2210:talk 2173:talk 2158:talk 2138:talk 2123:talk 2096:talk 2057:talk 2039:talk 2023:talk 2013:and 2000:talk 1973:talk 1939:talk 1905:talk 1870:talk 1855:talk 1845:The 1810:talk 1736:talk 1704:talk 1680:TALK 1634:talk 1628:. -- 1606:and 1604:WP:V 1592:WP:V 1562:talk 1540:talk 1477:that 1397:talk 1345:talk 1331:talk 1323:here 1253:talk 1227:talk 1207:talk 1190:talk 1137:talk 1121:talk 1088:talk 1070:talk 1052:talk 1025:talk 1011:talk 994:talk 974:talk 952:talk 922:talk 882:talk 829:here 809:talk 752:talk 728:ban? 716:talk 702:talk 687:talk 660:talk 640:talk 615:talk 577:talk 540:talk 525:talk 505:talk 448:talk 379:talk 346:talk 340:. -- 289:talk 257:talk 196:talk 181:talk 166:talk 120:talk 106:talk 92:talk 78:talk 64:talk 49:talk 3580:WMF 2599:DOB 1730:Red 1613:JOJ 1339:). 1327:Kww 1038:not 160:. 3627:) 3527:) 3519:-- 3447:) 3439:-- 3385:) 3333:) 3286:) 3245:NW 3220:) 3179:) 3139:) 3088:) 3053:) 3028:) 3012:) 2988:) 2963:) 2959:• 2929:) 2921:-- 2866:) 2851:) 2816:) 2786:) 2760:) 2733:) 2694:) 2686:. 2676:) 2660:) 2652:. 2626:) 2611:) 2588:) 2565:) 2540:) 2536:• 2514:) 2506:-- 2496:) 2492:• 2464:) 2449:) 2419:) 2405:) 2397:-- 2390:) 2375:) 2360:) 2340:? 2318:) 2304:) 2290:) 2276:) 2261:) 2230:) 2212:) 2175:) 2160:) 2140:) 2125:) 2098:) 2059:) 2041:) 2025:) 2002:) 1975:) 1941:) 1907:) 1872:) 1857:) 1812:) 1738:) 1706:) 1683:) 1636:) 1564:) 1556:. 1542:) 1399:) 1347:) 1255:) 1247:? 1229:) 1209:) 1192:) 1139:) 1123:) 1096:) 1033:). 996:) 976:) 924:) 884:) 876:-- 811:) 754:) 718:) 704:) 689:) 662:~ 642:) 617:~ 579:) 571:-- 542:) 527:) 507:) 450:) 381:) 348:) 291:) 259:) 251:-- 198:) 183:) 175:-- 168:) 122:) 108:) 94:) 80:) 66:) 51:) 3623:( 3523:( 3443:( 3381:( 3329:( 3282:( 3255:) 3249:( 3216:( 3175:( 3135:( 3084:( 3049:( 3024:( 3008:( 2984:( 2955:( 2925:( 2908:m 2905:a 2902:e 2899:r 2896:D 2862:( 2847:( 2812:( 2801:P 2798:T 2782:( 2771:P 2768:T 2756:( 2745:P 2742:T 2729:( 2716:P 2713:T 2690:( 2672:( 2656:( 2622:( 2607:( 2584:( 2561:( 2532:( 2510:( 2488:( 2460:( 2445:( 2415:( 2401:( 2386:( 2371:( 2356:( 2314:( 2300:( 2286:( 2272:( 2257:( 2226:( 2208:( 2171:( 2156:( 2136:( 2121:( 2111:* 2107:* 2094:( 2086:) 2055:( 2037:( 2021:( 1998:( 1971:( 1937:( 1903:( 1868:( 1853:( 1827:w 1808:( 1780:w 1734:( 1702:( 1677:( 1659:. 1632:( 1560:( 1538:( 1493:C 1491:/ 1489:T 1423:C 1421:/ 1419:T 1395:( 1374:C 1372:/ 1370:T 1343:( 1334:· 1329:( 1306:C 1304:/ 1302:T 1280:C 1278:/ 1276:T 1251:( 1225:( 1205:( 1188:( 1172:C 1170:/ 1168:T 1135:( 1119:( 1108:( 1091:· 1086:( 1073:· 1068:( 1055:· 1050:( 1028:· 1023:( 1014:· 1009:( 992:( 972:( 955:· 950:( 920:( 904:C 902:/ 900:T 880:( 866:C 864:/ 862:T 807:( 750:( 714:( 700:( 685:( 638:( 575:( 561:☥ 538:( 523:( 503:( 446:( 398:☥ 377:( 364:☥ 344:( 321:☥ 305:☥ 287:( 273:☥ 255:( 240:☥ 194:( 179:( 164:( 118:( 104:( 90:( 76:( 62:( 47:(

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

Index