User talk:Onetwothreeip

1249:

maintenance tags as a badge of shame when you lose a content dispute. If you think the article is too long, try to find a way to fix it. If people don't like the way you're trying to fix it, try to understand their concerns. If a majority of people don't agree with you, move on. From what I've seen, I don't think SPECIFICO objects to simply shortening articles by writing more concisely. I suspect he thinks you're using "shortening" as an excuse to systematically remove negative material about Trump that specifico thinks should remain in the articles. In that vein, perhaps something you could try would be to shorten articles by writing more concisely and summarizing. Turn paragraphs into sentences without changing the meaning, as opposed to removing paragraphs altogether, or removing parts of paragraphs in a way that leaves out the negative information. Writing more concisely is not controversial. Significantly canging the meaning of a paragraph is more so and it's reasonable to expect more pushback.

3493:) to eliminate references from the article. Users don't come to an article to read its references but primarily to read its text. References are then read by those wishing to do more research. Even in this case, the researcher, obviously, doesn't "read" them as he reads a book, from cover to cover, but selectively. So for now I have reverted your changes. What I would support 110% is trimming, as you did, all that needs trimming while simultaneously keeping as many references as possible. This can be a challenging task because many editors are in the habit of placing references only at the end of the paragraph where the material is discussed. So, if a paragraph contained, say, 3 sentences and 3 cites at the end, one for each statement made, but the last statement was "spurious", deleting the last sentence and (blindly) deleting also the 3 cites that immediately followed it would have the undesirable effect of removing valid cites for the 2 valid statements left behind as well. 1282:

particular, they like to constantly claim I am exhibiting "I-don't-hear-that" behaviour, for little more than apparently not agreeing with their criticisms of me. Their accusations that I do not collaborate are also troublesome, as I have been a frequent contributor to talk page discussions, ones started both by myself and by others. I have also reached out to Specifico on their talk page on compromises, but I do not recall them approaching me for any such compromise. They also like to misrepresent the opposition to my edits, as they generally imply that the general editing community on these pages as a whole is against me. While other editors have occasionally reverted some of my edits, which is not unreasonable on controversial topics like these, most of the reverts of my edits in the Donald Trump area are by Specifico, and they mostly speak for themselves when they criticise me personally, who also is responsible for the vast majority of personal criticisms against me.

3221:"It's perfectly fine to have disagreements, but let's get specific about those disagreements as they relate to editing and do away with the personal drama stuff." I would like to but many of the reasons you do things differently appear to be personal to you and you resist changing them because they seem to be personal. When you split an article (as you tried to do with the Falcon 9 list) when discussion has largely reached a consensus against a split and then insist that there was a consensus you're just going to generate anger as you're either unable to see the consensus (something personal), or intentionally choosing to ignore the consensus (another personal thing). 804:

the edit warring noticeboard without re-reverting the content. I only restored the content to the previous version (before the initial bold edit) after Gershonmk had been blocked for restoring their bold edit. It doesn't make sense to harass me about waiting an extended period of time for the administrative process to take place and restore the article to how it was, when the process found that the version should be restored. As always, I am more than willing to discuss the content at the article talk page. I ask you, Specifico, not to reflect on me personally again, as your views about me are now well known and further repeating them is not constructive.

766:. 123, there's nothing more I can say. I've pinged a few Admins who've noted your behavior in the past. I urge you to collaborate on talk and not declare your view "consensus" as an involved editor. It's rarely important which version stays in the article while talk paged discussion is underway. What's important is the resolution, and we should all try not to make extra work for our colleagues by making cuts and removing references where such edits are likely to be contentious. The 24-hour BRD is intended to promote this kind of collaboration, and it's worked reasonably well on various articles. No need to disparage 4496:, I was referring specifically to that sub-section, "FORMAL proposal/further RFC", when determining that there was no consensus on how the criteria should be changed, but there is strong consensus that it should be changed. That part of the discussion was becoming inactive and the editor who opened that sub-discussion requested that participants agree on the need for changing the criteria, rather than proposing new criteria. As a result of that sub-discussion, there were multiple new criteria proposed, and there should be another RfC to determine which changes to criteria should be chosen. Cheers. 883:

that, I finished work and came across this issue, and I engaged right away. Unlike Gershonmk, I was not aware of the issue until it had already been resolved by Pipsally, so how could I self-revert? When Specifico first raised the issue with me, they hadn't shown me which edits they were referring to, and hadn't said that the issue was about me not raising it at the talk page. With Gershonmk, they read my comments saying which edits were a problem and why, and also from EdJohnston. They could have self-reverted at any time before or after the block when they weren't away from Knowledge.

3674:, I was actually surprised that nobody, including myself, hadn't thought to do this earlier. I couldn't think of a possible argument against it so I did it boldly, but I appreciate that we have an established format so I take your revert in good faith. How about this, I can put a note on the talk page about this, and if there's no opposition, we go ahead? It would be great if this could apply to all the Australian candidate articles, but I'd still want it applied to the 2022 list and be inconsistent with others rather than to not be applied to any of them. 350:

not take place. More editors have to get involved in order to determine whether the rest of the pages have to be merged (something unlikely in some of them since they have been haevily edited by many editors, and it would also be a lack of respect for other's work to merge that imo). In any case, I have formally asked Knowledge admins to evaluate the outcome of the current debate and to decide whether or not it should be closed. For this reason I would appreciate if you could please let the admins decide it. Cheers.

4185: 1278:

references would support the same content. Most of the time that any of these attempts are reverted, it is by Specifico. When I take these edits to the talk pages, I usually find more support than opposition or there is little interest either way, but this seems to be not enough to satisfy Specifico. Because most of the content about Donald Trump is negative, making any of the content concise typically means that something negative about Donald Trump would be omitted from that article.

3039:

be clear that it is not to punish or reprimand any editors. Valjean is also correct to say that splitting articles is not necessary for most articles, which is why most of the articles I've split have been among the very largest on Knowledge. Specifico is also correct to say that splits that are likely to be contentious should be discussed first, and I wouldn't make a split if I thought it could be contentious, but we shouldn't overstate the likelihood of splitting being contentious.

848:

adding, I would be happy to self-revert since I hadn't brought this to the talk page first, but someone else already reverted my edit before I was aware of this. Pipsally reverted those reverts of mine before I first read anything about this, which was hours afterward when I was viewing a Knowledge article on my phone and saw the message from Specifico. Given the above, and if Pipsally or nobody else had already reverted my edits, I would have definitely self-reverted.

1344:, along with spurious claims that certain sentences of citations have special consensus that nobody else can see, but I don't think there is anything I can do about that. As for those particularly large edits, I wouldn't have known how many bytes an edit like that would remove until after it was already made, but I am now intentionally making those changes over a larger number of edits in the interests of as much size reduction being sustained as circumstances allow. 1958:

for longer than the minimum required period and has countenanced a large number of participants and has been discussed more extensively than the vast majority of requested moves, so continuing the discussion or including more participants would not change the outcome. In my close reasoning, I have opened the possibility for another discussion to form consensus on part of the title, which was not fully resolved and could not be resolved in the past discussion.

3412:

you appear to have made no effort to find the typically easily found sources, nor to tag entries as "citation needed". There is no risk of adding "too many candidates" as no candidate can be listed without it being attached to a group that someone has considered to fit the "Voices" mould. Independent candidates without such a group have announced their candidature, and they don't have any kind of endorsing group that could be confused with a Voices one.

5296: 5143: 4094: 4036: 5013: 2375: 1555:, I have removed entries where there aren't at least two notable players, and I've removed non-notable players from remaining entries. I haven't removed all of those yet, I would guess I removed 60% so far. I haven't had enough time for editing but I would agree with changing the lead. We could even remove the eligibility criteria from the lead. Please feel free to let me know if you pursue this further, and my apologies for not responding sooner. 3086:

the page doesn't break if the split is actually warranted. Simply getting agreement from the common 2-3 editors I see on every single discussion section over a split all over wikipedia's large wiki article talk pages is not sufficient for a split to be considered "in consensus". It's almost the same as using sockpuppets, you're using people who are already likely to agree who are not involved in the article to get a consensus for a split.

5687: 1636: 3215:"That's not true, splits can be reverted using the standard editing tools." That is not true in many cases. Once the article has been split, people will immediately start editing the split article so a revert will lose information. Secondly, if the article is edited in certain ways then an undo becomes impossible and you get a error when trying to revert or undo, this is especially true when some time has passed since the edit. 3974:. While I am trying to expand the content for comprehensiveness, I also am trying to condense the content but I am not that adept at it. If I may kindly request, could you please condense the content a bit more? I have requested both a Peer review and a Guild of Copy Editors copy edit for the article about a month ago, but both would appear to have to wait for a few (or more) months if they are even accepted. Thank you. 2985:

knowledge to know when, where, and how to split a topic. Suggesting a split in a talk page is fine, but if you don't find other regular editors of that article who are also interested in the split (or no response at all) I suggest leaving the page alone. Especially in the case where you have historically split articles with no comment or discussion what so ever, that should NEVER happen. Please never do that again.

5741: 4539: 1340:

They like to frequently say that other editors have had the same issues with me as they have, which is generally not true, except to say that I have had disagreements with other editors as is normal. The editors they refer to are often not able to clarify or refute those characterisations, or don't wish to partake in drama. There also appears to be a serious case of

400:(a page where many editors have worked on). I have already asked the administrators to open the debate, but I would appreacite if you could open it again in order to avoid further conflict (and to avoid wasting their time). The only page that has not been merged yet is currently protected and the user who wants it merged is under a sockpuppet investigation. Cheers. 3218:"The truth is that most articles I've split have very few people active on them or even none, let alone editors who would contest them." If that were actually the case then they wouldn't have kept growing in size enough to get on your radar. It's thus clear that someone is actively editing it, even if they don't talk on the talk page (or maybe don't know how). 3157:

certainly don't do anything to bring them to any article or discussion. I've only split articles which are reasonable to be split and it's far from the only thing I do on Knowledge, not the main activity I'm engaged in. Editors are entitled to disagree with bold edits of mine, as I'm entitled to disagree with theirs. I have always done my best to follow

2652:, I don't understand why you pinged me to this page. What's my connection here? Also doing so apparently in violation of your 2017 ban of which I was unaware. Because either you ask someone to self-revert for a purported violation, or you ping an admin about that purported violation. Trying to do both somehow, I don't like that, ban or no ban. 3993:, I can see you have made substantial work on the article and related articles. If I have time I will look at this article further. I would encourage you to continue finding where you can split substantial parts of the article into their own articles, as the content is quite thorough and would be sufficient for a few articles. Cheers. 965:. In the interim, you denied the problem and disparaged Gershonmk. The immediate problem is not, as you seem to suggest, your failure to respond. It's the initial violation of 24-hour BRD. Failure to respond to a courtesy notification and now claiming you woulda if you coulda does make it hard to AGF especially with repeated 2688:

the course of a friendly and request for a self-revert. That's something I've done from time to time because I think the more context Admins have about DS articles, the better they can deal with whatever issues rise to the level of enforcement. This has not reached that level, and I don't anticipate that it will.

2942:

for your move when in fact there was consensus for the opposite. You were thus obviously acting in bad faith by intentionally trying to ignore any opposition that didn't agree with your bias. You have a past history of forcibly splitting pages against consensus as well after I did some of my own investigation.

827:(emphasis added). Gershonmk violated the part about waiting 24 hours and was blocked when you reported the violation. You violated the part about reinstating your edit without first discussing it on the talk page. Both of you refused to self-revert when the violations were pointed out. What's fair here? 4936:

I found there to be a general consensus against both of the images. I did not and would not consider whether any image was removed, properly or not, because that isn't relevant to the discussion of which image should be in the infobox. The arguments in the discussion were disproportionately regarding

3764:

so I have moved it back to main space. I think because of the repercussions of a page move or draftification, any further action on this page should be made at AFD where the consequences can be considered. I don't think any admin is prepared to delete thousands of pages of broken redirects so that an

3515:

I removed content that was far too detailed for the article, which happened to have many references. For example, for one song by the subject of the article, there was a list of countries where the song reached the top 100 listing of popular songs for each country. While the list was extensive, there

2687:

Ernie, who strangely appeared on this page for the first time ever to intervene, misinterpreted Neil's restriction, which arose from my having solicited (and receiving) Admin enforcement on an article talk page. NeilN reversed the enforcing Admin. But at any rate, I pinged you and Awilley here FYI in

2497:

By "every indication", do you mean a public statement from her about her intentions? If she announced she was not recontesting, we should certainly have recognised that. But if all we had were statements from journos, commentators etc, and nothing from "the horse's mouth" so to speak, I don't see how

2020:

I tried to move it but I do not have the technical permissions to do so. This has been raised with administrators already. The most recent discussion favours a change to "attack" over the current wording, and that supersedes the results of previous discussions such as that in February. What I pointed

1579:

I should perhaps have been more explicit ... the choice of term (violations v issues) wasn't my point, really. It was that I agree with you on the POV failure. The article in question (and as you say, many others) is decidedly and unduly complimentary to its subject and I'll continue to chip away at

1529:

Hi, I've noticed that you're removed all entries where there is at least one member who doesn't have a Knowledge article. While I don't exactly oppose this, the lead should be reworded. The second condition also includes youth international players, who haven't necessarily played senior international

1358:

It's not the size of your edit I'm criticizing, it's the size of your edit summary. You've got 500 characters. Use more than 19 of them. Describe what you're actually doing in the edit and why you're doing it. Instead of "trim, overcites" write: "Removing several instances of OVERCITE. The content is

1147:

I don't think it's reasonable to expect someone to remember edits they made 2 months ago. At some point we've got to reset the counter and start fresh. After a few weeks I tend to view things as new edits rather than reinstatements of old edits, assuming there's not been slow edit warring in between.

1114:

Well I've looked at the diffs, and I now see that it wasn't over any of the series of content changes I made in the last day, but it's over a maintenance tag. Someone removed the tag in January and I restored it, then you removed the tag in March and I restored it. This is getting ridiculous, as this

886:

I don't have a view on the sanction that Gershonmk received. I have nothing against this editor and I have no reason to believe anything other than that they are a good faith editor. I didn't claim to know that their actions deserved a block, I only claimed to know that their action wasn't allowed. I

367:

Yes, I closed the discussion finding there was a consensus to merge all the articles. As the discussion started on 30 September 2020, this has been a discussion of an extraordinarily long duration. There has certainly been enough editors contributing to the discussion, and enough opportunity for more

5240:

Hello, I have been contacting editors with experience in specific areas of editing to participate in a survey study. In order to limit access without forcing editors to disclose their identity in the survey form itself, I have been contacting them via email, which you have disabled for your account.

5070:

the point is that goldfields occur outside of the identified region with the name goldfields - the content is very telling - it involves other regions of the state of western australia - the category of goldfields esperance has been removed - the perceptual problem is understood - western australian

3586:

when faced with a similar situation, and which action resulted in 5 new articles. So, I think his idea is an excellent one. I wished I had more time to devote to this but, unfortunately, I am currently in the midst of completing 2 other projects and will not be able to dedicate the quality time this

3411:

Can you please stop the mass deletions of this article's content with no discussion first. Regarding "Removing entries without either reliable media sources or candidate running", the latter is hardly a good criteria given that the election hasn't been officially announced yet. Regarding the former,

3085:

I agree that SOME articles it is possible to split, but any splitting should be done with much care, after talking with many people, especially by specifically pinging people who show up commonly in the edit history who are most likely to care, and then finally doing it in a way that guarantees that

2941:

That's because it's exactly what you are doing. You came into the discussion having left no comment of your own, directly going against 3 "Oppose" statements written in bold and no agreement among those wanting a split on what kind of split should be done and then claiming that there was "consensus"

2192:

I have reverted the recent major addition to the fugitives article. You will be aware of the message I have left at the talk page for the LGBT characters article and I would be very grateful to you if you notified anyone else who may be interested. Editors need to be more vigilant in what they allow

1748:

Indeed, that would be why I dropped the notice here. The edit to the primary was also reverted by another editor, then cleanup occurred on the primary article and no attempt has been made to further split the article... hence the request to delete the split before we end up with content diverging on

1339:

Thanks for your guidance. I am very reluctant to seek an interaction ban, especially one that would be two-way. Would this simply mean I would not be allowed to revert their edits, and vice versa? Is there also any guideline against an editor claiming that other editors share their opposition to me?

1273:

I too suspect that Specifico objects to my edits because they think I am motivated to remove negative material about Donald Trump. This is categorically and demonstrably false, as I have supported the addition and inclusion of negative material about Donald Trump. In fact, I do not recall supporting

1188:

This is not an isolated memory slip. This editor has a substantial history of failure to collaborate, IDHT, and obstinate insistence on shortening Trump articles at the expense of valuable references and questionable edits to NPOV text. He is, or should be, aware that consenssus does not support his

1072:

After your recent similar violation at Donald Trump and your longstanding tendency not to listen to or fully engage with other editors on difficult subjects, it's hard to believe that you understand or care about the DS that we all rely on for an orderly collaboration on the American Politics pages.

993:

I was at work in the interim, I didn't have time to disparage Gershonmk or respond to your request to self-revert. I finished work after Pipsally already reverted my edit. To be clear, the edit I made was a revert of the content Gershonmk was blocked for adding. I should have made sure that I left a

803:

I simply haven't declared my view as consensus. I haven't disparaged Gershonmk and have no reason to. I have explained the entire situation sufficiently in my previous comment. Over a week ago I reverted a bold edit by Gershonmk and they reverted my revert shortly afterwards. I reported the issue to

5543:

and submit it for review! The reason I removed that comment is because I have only ever seen comments at the top of drafts used as directives for AfC reviewers, not for editorial discussion. If you genuinely think enough has changed since the outcome of both the 2nd AfD and the deletion review then

4951:

A consensus against both images is not what your closure statement says, nor is it a supportable conclusion from the discussion in that RFC IMHO. I find this to be a very ill-considered close and will be pursuing review, of which I of course will formally notify you and link. I do want to thank you

3654:

Hey - just noting I actually think this is a great and overdue idea, I just think we should formally establish such a big change given how many pages it will affect. Can't figure out how to undo the Senate and I don't intend to as I think it's a good example of what a simple and effective change it

3561:"For example, for one song by the subject of the article, there was a list of countries where the song reached the top 100 listing of popular songs for each country. While the list was extensive, there was a reference for every single country. This list was not due in the article, so I removed it." 3077:

As to your next point, in several of the splits you have done you didn't even ask for comment, so your statement is incorrect on it's face. Of course there is no controversy because you didn't even give it a chance to develop. And of course once an article is split and several edits have been made,

3038:

To agree with one point Ergzay has made, it's true that sometimes editors feel insulted when an article they have been particularly focused on editing is split, suggested to be split, or even when its size is scrutinised. Addressing issues with any article, whether its size or anything else, should

2772:

expect you'd correct your error -- that's what everyone does when these things are brought to their attention. But it now appears you're denying that you already knew how 1RR works or even that it is indeed how it works. That's too bad. Anyone can undo your edit, so there's no point belaboring it.

2578:

The second one is particularly problematic, as a small group of users have edit-warred over this content, even when it is under inconclusive active discussion at the article talk page and RSN and noticed at NPOVN. Moreover, there is a BLP issue with respect to Pompeo entailed by your second revert.

1993:

You closed this, but didn't move it. Frankly, I don't think you should be moving it to anything but the title that was proposed based on that discussion. In other words, it should be "not moved", since as you pointed out there was insufficient support for the proposal. Given previous RMs to move it

1957:

I have not been substantially involved in this particular topic, and I did not participate in the discussion itself. I have been involved in American politics articles, but this has not related to the issues of this discussion, as this is not a particularly contentious matter. The discussion lasted

1920:

I see you closed the discussion as having clear consensus to remove "storm" from the title, but didn't actually remove it from the title. Could you? Lots of people made their voices known and it would be bureaucracy in the extreme to have to re-ping them all when the discussion was just closed

1285:

In short, I certainly have tried and continue to attempt to find ways to fix the issues, which you rightly urge to do. The progress in making the articles smaller and more readable are slow but at least going in the right direction, aided by other editors and by the ending of Donald Trump's term as

1269:

As far as I am aware, the maintenance tag has been on the Presidency of Donald Trump article before I had anything to do with it, and I have restored it when editors have sought to remove it without consensus. The situation on the Donald Trump article is more the opposite, where instead I started a

862:

Reading the discussion above, I kind of doubt that you would have self-reverted, at least before the admin came along. And if I understand correctly, Gershonmk also had a mobile device/wikibreak issue with not self-reverting on time, yet you seem satisfied with their block. I'm personally not a fan

349:

Hello. I have realized you have closed a debate on whether or not merging some pages about exoplanets. I would appreciate if you could please not merge since consensus has not been reached. Actually, one of the pages involved has been protected against vandalism, and any merging of that page should

5566:

That is understandable. I also meant the comment directed to whoever may review the draft and not editorial discussion, although I don't think AfC is appropriate here. I would support another editor boldly moving the page into article space. There has been no conclusive discussion that this should

4893:

The RfC closure has no impact on dealing with editing disputes. I would assume that the infobox image has changed several times, causing a Request for Consensus to be needed. You can restore or add images to the infobox (except for those two which have been rejected by the RfC), propose them to be

3239:

As for the Falcon 9 list, I agree the talk page was coming to a consensus against a certain split that someone else proposed. The bold split I did was a different split to that proposal, taking into consideration comments from the talk page, including of those who opposed that other proposal. I've

3081:

As to your next paragraph, it's not that editors feel "insulted" it's that they feel "you don't know what you're talking about even when told". You appear to have a strong superiority complex and the only reason people could disagree with you is because you think we're insulted by your changes. In

1695:

and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion

1504:

I can see your most recent version - replete with a smattering of unsourced statements. You've had months to improve the article but haven't. I wonder if you might leave it to editors who do want to improve it. If you'd like to go ahead and create a consensus on your poorer version of the article,

1311:

and some "Ctrl+F" magic showed me that 76 of them have been reverted. (86 instances of "Reverted" minus 10 instances of "Reverted " with a space indicating edit summary instead of the tag.) If more than 3/4 of those reverts are by SPECIFICO I'd be inclined to see that as problematic, combined with

1281:

I'm also quite tired of Specifico's constant personal reflections on me, which I find completely unnecessary. I happen to think that they are not a productive editor on the Donald Trump articles, but this is not something I feel the need to say like Specifico does about me at every opportunity. In

1248:

123, it would probably be better for you to discuss before reverting again. Maintenance tag edit warring is lame edit warring. For that matter discussing maintenance tags on an article talk page instead of discussing specific improvements to the article is lame too. And I definitely frown on using

847:

I thought I had commented on the talk page before then, and I have done so since then. If I hadn't added to the discussion already, that's an oversight on my part, since I am normally quite prolific on the article talk page. Though I was restoring the content to before what someone was blocked for

612:

Two reverts of the same content within 24 hours is the 24 hour BRD rule, is it not? The 1RR rule is two reverts regardless of content. Nevertheless, can you please show me which content you are referring to that violates 24 hour BRD? I have made numerous edits on the Donald Trump article recently.

4889:

That makes more sense. The timing of the discussion closure was not related to any editing of the article. The relevance for saying that neither image was used at that particular time was because there were no edits for me to make in implementing the consensus result. For many RfCs, it is for the

3537:

Hi, as the main contributor of the article, I can help and I know every single part of the article and the fact that what references are citing what sentence. Tell me what exact phrases you think should be removed and I will delete them. (For example chart positions or etc.) About the 'Legacy and

3152:

Article splits can be reverted using the standard editing tools such as the 'revert' button. I'm referring to both before and after the split when saying there is little controversy. The truth is that most articles I've split have very few people active on them or even none, let alone editors who

1210:

I presume you recall having recently blocked him for related behavior at Donald Trump. At some point, failure to collaborate -- which is the essence of the current page restrictions on AP articles -- becomes a critical drain on community and editor resources. I estimate that less than 20% of this

1118:

I think this is really some kind of attempt to either deter me or to actually cause me to be restricted from editing from articles related to Donald Trump, as most of the reverts of my edits come from you. It's very strange that you were aware that I had restored the tag in January, like you were

923:

I'm considering taking a short break from the Donald Trump article in particular. It's not clear what you mean though, are you saying you think I was editing in bad faith? The edit I made was a revert, not really a bold edit. I didn't have the opportunity to self-revert, but if I did then I would

142:

I find it hard to read a template if there aren't any spaces between the parameters. I've seen people add spaces but I'd never seen someone remove them all before, which prompted me to ask. In terms of restoring it I appreciate the gesture but I don't really edit that article anyway, certainly no

4921:

argument, in which a bluelink is provided but it isn't germane to the actual discussion. The only reason that image, which contains no branding, slogans, etc, could be considered "promotional" is if the real complaint is that it doesn't show the subject in a sufficiently negative light. This was

2984:

To more clearly say what I meant to say above, just some advice. You seem to be confused and think you are doing a good thing by trying to split articles everywhere. However that's generally not appreciated by many people who actually contribute to those articles and usually requires specialized

882:

I'd have to contemplate that. I wasn't on a wikibreak or anything, and it's nothing to do with me using my phone. I made the revert in the morning before I started work. While I was at work, Specifico raised the issue here. Some time after that, Pipsally reverted my revert. Then some hours after

627:

No. That's not the restriction. It requires discussion and is intended to promote respectful collaboration which, as I've previously said, is something I find lacking in most of your work. If you choose to edit pages with DS restrictions on them, the responsibility is with you and nobody else to

474:

If it is necessary to reduce the size of the article, at this point I would support splitting the article. I was just hoping that articles that were not even 475k characters were still acceptable. Just a month ago, there were several articles over 500k, and now an article in the 430s is the 2nd

5507:

The election will be no later than 24 May 2025 for both the House of Representatives and Senate. While it is legally an option for the House of Representatives election to be held separately as late as September, there is zero chance of this happening. Elections for both houses can also be held

3608:

To the editor with a username in Middle Eastern script, we can move certain sections into their own articles, but there is still the issue of the article having too much information which is effectively a duplication of other articles. For example, we do not need to state the chart position for

1791:

Don't agree, otherwise would have gone straight to AfD but we can go that route as the split was reverted in the Primary article by another editor and we have duplicative content that provides considerable risk of content diverging in the two sections. Perhaps address the split at the Primary

5511:

As there are several candidates already declared in reliable sources, and the election is relatively soon, the article should be restored to main space. The hesitancy that some editors have in publishing this article is unprecedented and this would be the latest we have published this article

3862:

forward indeed it was. I thought it was going to be an easy improvement, but it turned out a bit of a mess as I started to bump into parsoid's time constraints. I'll work on it in my sandbox. Now there's the matter of changing all the redirects back to the list article, away from the orphaned

3156:

As for the "common 2-3 editors" you're referring to, I've never seen them before until recently either. The first article I created as a result of a split was in June 2018, and in all the time from then until probably a couple of months ago, I had never seen those particular editors before. I

2616:

It's a stretch to call that first revert a revert. It removed text that had been in the article for a while (at least several months), and as such would be considered a bold edit. There is also overwhelming consensus that the material restored in the edit called second revert should be in the

1277:

I have tried many different ways of reducing the size of these two articles, including but not limited to rewriting paragraphs and sentences to be more concise, removing sentences of extraneous detail which can be better placed in sub-articles, and removing unnecessary references where fewer

3587:

project requires. With both of you guys' approvals, I will leave it to you guys to work out the procedural details. Again, my apologies if this is all I can contribute for now. Thanks to both of you for your understanding and willingness to work with such outstanding goodwill. Best regards,

3034:

I wish editors to have more experience and knowledge on this before making these comments, but you are welcome here nonetheless. Most of the time, there is no controversy at all over splitting an article. I have always done so in a deliberate manner, to minimise the chance of controversy or

4162:

There was not much cutting down. There were many changes made, and most of them did not improve the article. For example, the introduction was changed to describe Shanks as a "self-help guide", when this should not be in the introduction before describing him as a political commentator.

2767:

Onetwothreeip, on this page, in an earlier thread, you stated that . Did you forget that in a few months' time? Now that you've been reminded, It's hard to justify disregarding my request as an "unhelpful threat". FYI I didn't come here with any intention of launching an AE complaint. I

1024:

You provided me with diffs long after you initially raised the issue. My understanding is that Pipsally undid my revert before I read your message here, which I did at 07:39 26 February. What was the "ad hominem" I made about Gershonmk? An extraordinary claim surely requires evidence.

143:

need to restore it on my account, I just was curious about the edit. I'm not sure if having a space is "utility" or just personal preference, so I think you and the other editors who regularly edit that article should have it however you want it. Thanks for explaining, and cheers!

4729:

I will stay neutral on which image should be used. You can start a discussion on whether this image should be used in the infobox. You can alternatively add the image to the infobox (if it hasn't already been attempted), and see if anybody opposes it. Also, the image you added in

1936:

It would be inappropriate to do so with so inconclusive and brief a poll. Moreover, I don't think it's best practice for any editor who's been active in this or adjacent topic areas to close so contentious a poll. No harm requesting a close at AN -- even if it turns out to be an

422:. I was expecting this, as the article is the 2nd largest in Knowledge at this time. I hoped that the issue would not arise until we were closer to the half-million character mark, but I am not surprised it has become an issue. A few years back we worked to reduce the size of 4937:

the weaknesses of the images, rather than their strengths, and the "promotional" nature of image A (as described by discussion participants, not me) was one of those weaknesses. The community should be able to find an image which has more support than either of those options.

1270:

discussion in order to have the tag placed there. It's absolutely not intended to be some "badge of shame", or anything in response to "losing a content dispute". All of my activity related to maintenance tags is certainly a small minority of my activity on those two articles.

489:

I'm not sure what you mean, a month ago the largest article was at around 500,000 bytes. An article of 430,000 bytes has always been one of the largest articles on Knowledge, and now happens to be the second largest as of right now. My goal is absolutely readability.

2144:

is too long again because someone decided to combine the article of fugitives from justice that are no longer sought with the main article, so that should be split again somehow. So since I know you are the person who usually handles the splits you should do these.

4890:

closer to implement the decision if applicable, and I was saying that this was not applicable as there was nothing for me to remove. If the infobox included one of the two images being discussed, I would have removed one of them on the conclusion of the discussion.

3053:

That's constructive. You and I have discussed a similar issue in "trimming" various American Politics articles even against recent consensus. I think the same principle should apply for cutting content that's been discussed at length on talk pages. Thanks for your

1316:

edit was reverted. You can't get away with −6,089 byte edits using 19 byte edit summaries. I'm definitely not saying run to AN/I right now...I'd wait to see if SPECIFICO takes the hint and backs off a bit, assuming, as you say, that most of the reverts are by him.

2086: 3235:

If editors are editing an article after a split has taken place (and they aren't reverting the split) and time has passed, that becomes the stable version. It's then a bold edit to merge articles together. Many articles I've split weren't actively edited at the

5320:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

5167:

4118:

4060:

475:

largest. If your goal is to reduce article size, congratulations. My goal is readability, but I guess we shall propose splitting the article in the talk page, and if the users buy off on it, we shall split it and see if it still remains comfortably readable.

3512:, I did not mean to say that I am only removing references from the article. I could just as well have said the article size of 500,000 bytes was too much. Both of these aren't themselves the problem, they are indicators of the problem which we both can see. 3396:

If a reliable media source says it then I would think that should be included. Otherwise, we are at risk of including too many candidates, which could conceivably be every single independent candidate. The table and the article needs redesigning regardless.

4870:

One of the two images referenced in the RFC had been in the infobox since it was added per talk page consensus, in June 2021. That image was removed, while the RFC was open and active, by an involved editor less than a day before you closed the RFC. Saying

2746:

was placed by JzG, then later adjusted by AWilley. But aside from you touching on that (sorta), you don't really respond to the substance of what I said. As for your note RE: the 2017 sanction, I was unable to follow your explanation (no links, appeal,

5316: 4398:, but what are the situations when administrators can apply these sanctions? These don't seem any different to the sanctions that are broadly applicable. I'm not familiar at all with how contentious topics are treated differently than other topics. 4122:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

4064:

4472: 3297: 2679:

El C, I pinged you because I believe you were the Admin who placed that page restriction on this article. Both edits undid recently-added and recently-deleted article text, so I do not view either as BOLD. They fit the definition of "revert" at

3164:

Finally, I would like you to be constructive, as I hope editors consider me to be. It's perfectly fine to have disagreements, but let's get specific about those disagreements as they relate to editing and do away with the personal drama stuff.

1823:

The content fork needs to be resolved. If re-directing to the primary article is a solution, cool. If the split needs to be put back in the primary page, cool. But absent either of those, the page is a fork and should be deleted. So AfD would

1627: 863:

of blocking users who were editing in good faith, so let's do this: you take a week off of editing that article, and I won't block your account. (You can edit the talk page and related articles, but not the Donald Trump article itself.) Deal?

5187: 3017:

I agree. In general, any edit that is likely to be contentious is best raised first on talk. And it's up to each of us to gauge more or less accurately what is likely to elicit dissent. Splitting an article is generally liklely to be such a

4582: 4100: 4084: 1612:, I didn't think your main contention was about that, you were clearly more concerned about the POV content. No need to thank me, we should all be more vigilant across Australian political biographies, as this isn't the only one affected. 5323:

5170:

4115: 3293: 2758:. So, hopefully, you've learned this really basic thing wrt xRR, just like SPECIFICO did about how a removal isn't automatically counted as revert (well, at the very least, I hope they've learned that). So, basics for all, I guess...? 703:

Those edits are eight days apart from each other. I never claimed consensus, what are you talking about? Please stop making things up about me. The person I reverted was blocked for edit warring for that edit so it's not me making the

3575:. Unfortunately, sometimes if a statement indicates there are, say, 9 countries where the song reached 100M, but no single RS states all such 9 countries, we are forced to provide up to 9 cites, one per country, to support the claim. 3426:

I don't see any consensus for the entries. We shouldn't be adding entries that don't have a candidate or don't have significant media attention, and there is no consensus for it. We require reliable sources, not self-published ones.

887:

would have thought a warning would be sufficient, as other editors I have reported were warned in the past, but that is something not for me to determine and I wasn't seeking a block in particular, just that the matter was addressed.

1915: 2720:

The two edits are completely different, so this appears to be yet another one of Specifico's unhelpful request-threats. I'm not part of any edit war or talk page battleground here and my edits were not in relation to anybody else.

4778:

I did not remove any images from the article, as neither of the two images being discussed were in the infobox. There was a different image at the time the discussion was closed, but it was removed by Feoffer shortly afterwards.

3542:, we can create an article for his cultural impact, and then put just a summary of it here. But I disgaree with just removing the info. (For the songs and their commerical performance, there are already articles, so that is ok.) 3078:

the "undo" tool no longer works and reversing the split requires manual effort. Many people will simply give up and not protest in the face of an activist such as yourself. Think about the position you're putting other people in.

1676:. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Knowledge. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at 163: 574:

Can you please show me where I have made two reverts of the same content within 24 hours? If I have inadvertently done so, I will certainly self-revert. You haven't provided any edit histories here or on the article talk page.

4412:

The way I think of it is that it's the same rules more strictly enforced. Strict in this sense means both that sanctions are given sooner than they might be in a non-CT area and that sanctions can be more severe when placed.

3082:

fact we think that the articles are properly better when not split. Several of the splits you have suggested or performed in fact make the articles worse, harder to browse, harder to read, more confusing, or all of the above.

4082: 434:, which is growing very very rapidly, so on that page, I have initiated an early talk page discussion which I think will be relevant to reducing the size of List of 2020 albums if it is necessary to go there. Please review 2582:

Please restore the page to the status quo ante and please be more careful in the future, as this article has been prone to edit-warring and advocacy in the past -- behaviour that has lost us many good editors on the page.

2237: 3133:

has persisted with aggressive edits that most editors know deserve a modicum of discussion beforehand, and other editors have asked 123IP to stop it, but s/he consistently refuses. As I said on this Talk page a year ago,

1530:

football or in a fully-pro league (thus, no Knowledge article). What are your thoughts? Should "or capped by a national team on the U-17 level or above" be changed into "or capped by a national team on the senior level"?

4916:

even if the image hadn't been improperly removed? Why is that? That does lead to my 2nd concern with this closure, that it did not address the frivolous nature of the "promotional image" argument. That's an example of a

3516:

was a reference for every single country. This list was not due in the article, so I removed it. This had the effect of removing many references for the unnecessary content, but it was not about removing the references.

2665:

parameter. As Mr Ernie points out, a removal in isolation, indeed, is just a bold edit. Now, if it replicates an earlier removal, then yes, this current removal would be seen as reverting back to that earlier one (i.e.

707:

Gershonmk made an edit to the article and I reverted it on 18 February. They reverted my revert shortly afterwards, claiming they had consensus. I reported the matter to WP:AN3 and did not re-revert. After a few days,

4152: 2789:

There’s no error. You are the one who is wrong. Please provide the diff inserting material the “first revert” removed. Otherwise it would be best if you simply said there’s no problem and moved on to something else.

5284: 5163: 386:) For me it's fine if it's closed as consensus reached for 3 out of the 4 mergers, and no consensus reached for KOI-4878.01 (page in which btw many of us have spent a significant amount of time working on). Cheers. 3715: 3307: 2511:

We should reflect what the reliable sources say. On the election itself, losing preselection has roughly the same impact as otherwise retiring, so the list should include both to avoid these kinds of situations.

5131: 5353:

The guidance form the House of Lords is very clear ion how to properly address a Peer of the Realm. Please don't disrespect The Right Honourable, The Lord Houchen of High Leven as you did by reverting my edit.

4966:

I have no issue with review of this. I am not enforcing any image or lack thereof onto the article, or anything else. In the closure statement, I outlined that the discussion was broadly against both images:

4347:

While the rules for editors editing around infoboxes are the same, administrators have more tools at their disposal to deal with disruption. As such, it's more important to edit carefully and constructively.

1478:

This is your second attempt at boldly adding the same content without consensus. Now that an editor has challenged the bold content, a consensus is required to reinstate that content. You are surely aware of

3332: 2329: 4589:

I say this having gotten my own close of this RfC overturned: You really ought to elaborate on why you closed the way you did, for such a high profile RfC. Otherwise it will likely be overturned. Cheers,

4969:

As discussion opposes both images more than they support them, and there has been discussion about other options, the infobox should use neither "A" or "B" and discussion should continue assessing other

1427:

Yes, that was in February, and the edit summary you refer to was in January. I believe my edit summaries are more like your examples now. Can you provide guidance on my interaction ban question? Cheers.

5220:. I did not determine that this was specifically a local consensus. I do not see a reason to withdraw the close but I am willing to consider arguments. What reason do you see for withdrawing the close? 1115:

is clearly not an instance of edit warring. When I restored the tag that you removed in March, I had no reason to believe I had already restored it in January, as I've made hundreds of edits since then.

5745: 5733: 1008:

Did you even look at the diffs I gave you? Work or no work, you replied dismissively before Pipsally undid your revert and the ad hominem about his block is disparagement. The timeline is in the diffs.

4666:

that you do not attribute consensus to the community as a whole, but have not explained why you found consensus (and no one needed to see the resolutions copy-pasted). Please give detailed reasoning.

3925:

because you redirected the former page to the latter. As it is, we now have a mess because none of the 3,000 redirects to the Casualties of the September 11 attacks page points to a proper section. –

170: 161: 1995: 3563:

I support this sort of situation you state. However, the challenge in that particular instance is, IMO, to ensure the article on the song already does have such reference so that the wikilink from

301:

I have split three of the sections off, and revised and published them. The main page as a whole is only about 312K, less than half of when it was created. Should I go ahead and move to mainspace?

5708:

In accordance with our policy that Knowledge is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can

3382:) and I dare say similar references can be found for the other removals. If there's any evidence that a listed item isn't a Voices group, perhaps we can quote the source saying that with a cite. 5188: 4583: 1666:. First, thank you for your contribution; Knowledge relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – 4464: 2133: 2129: 1692: 1662: 1629: 342: 2021:

out was there was insufficient support for "riot", but based on the discussion that occurred there is likely but not certain to be sufficient support if it was put to a separate discussion.

2383: 37: 5433: 2704:

SPECIFICO, please show the diff inserting the material which the edit labeled "first revert" removed. You say "recently-added and recently-deleted" so presumably you have that diff handy.

2338:

When you move a page from the main space of the project to Draft space or User space, it's helpful if you tag the original page for speedy deletion, CSD R2. I don't know if you use it but

1710:. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the 904:

Just to be clear, the choice is between this, a short partial block, or a short formal topic ban. (What I'm saying is don't bother trying to negotiate something that isn't negotiable.)

5093:

article referred to gold mining areas of Western Australia, including those outside Goldfields-Esperance, and is not a contiguous region or topic in its own right. We have the article

1758: 1723: 3350: 1930: 1308: 5527: 4204:

Contentious topics are the successor to the former discretionary sanctions system, which you may be aware of. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see

2007: 5343: 890:

I'm short on time today so I will be away from Knowledge for at least a few hours, but I can certainly respond further later. I won't be editing on any articles for some time.

5731: 5210: 3800: 2368: 2125: 1847: 1714:

and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Knowledge looks forward to your future contributions.

343: 4134: 4380:

for infoboxes lists what those are. As a note, everything box infobox probation is standard across all CT topics, but some CT topics (like infoboxes) have additional rules.

4148: 3649: 5458:

I read through that and both the AfD discussions before making this comment- I was just curious about 123's reasoning of their comment they left at the top of the draft ;)

3003:, well said. Splitting is rarely necessary and should always be preceded by a thorough discussion and near 100% consensus for splitting. It should never be a BOLD move. -- 1681: 192: 5182: 4599: 3962: 128:), that was simply to reduce the download size of the article, since it's a very large article. If there is a utility to the spaces I have no issue with restoring them. 2629:

from this type of reporting, that is going to an editors talk page and pinging admins instead of using the actual processes. Coincidentally, they also received a short

5753: 5610: 1451: 1044: 2924: 6380: 6161: 6145: 5975: 5828: 5804: 5702: 5680: 4543: 4531: 3768:

I think it's unlikely that you would encounter this with another article but you might just check "What links here" before you move a page to a different namespace.

3692:

Agreed. Honestly I now regret the revert - we've done so well keeping these pages consistent but once I actually started looking I agree, this is such a no-brainer.

404: 354: 6258:

STORM: AI agents role-play as "Knowledge editors" and "experts" to create Knowledge-like articles, a more sophisticated effort than previous auto-generation systems

1360: 5855: 5536: 5410: 5409:

gives the date for the next election as "On or before 24 May 2025 (half-Senate) On or before 27 September 2025 (House of Representatives)", but in your comment on

5021: 3338: 409: 5383:

I am very serious actually when it comes to British protocol and I will keep giving The Right Honourable, The Lord Houchen of High Leven the respect he deserves.

2526:

I don't agree with your reasoning. At the moment it's a null argument, but for the future it should be partitioned where necessary, as it was before. Cheers. --

6372: 6257: 6055: 5991: 5847: 5812: 2927:

on an article talk page that I am using sockpuppet accounts. You are yet to remove your claims that I am acting in bad faith and that I am vandalising articles.

1677: 1668: 1860:, of whether or not the theory that a genetic link exists between race and intelligence is a fringe theory. This RfC supercedes the recent RfC on this topic at 6404: 6356: 6297: 6281: 6273: 6153: 6063: 5959: 5951: 5879: 5871: 5796: 5642: 5602: 5594: 2483:

could contest the election, despite every indication being the opposite of that. We shouldn't find ourselves reporting the obvious months (11 1/2) afterwards.

4192:

and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. This is a standard message to inform you that discussions about

3341:

All the groups removed claim to use the same "community group carefully choosing then nominating an independent" method as the original Voices for Indi group.

3264:

Coming from the ASPI dispute, Onetwothreeip, you really need to knock off the wikilaywering and stonewalling if you want to work effectively on this project.

2979: 2395: 1876: 1469: 435: 5400: 3631: 3547: 3460: 2111: 1499: 5250: 4377: 4057: 1359:

fully supported by the remaining citations. No changes to content." Or if you did change content, say specifically what you changed and why. You can review

6364: 6249: 6177: 5983: 5820: 5618: 3983: 3436: 3421: 3406: 3391: 3369: 1204: 3664: 6396: 5779: 5709: 5217: 5202: 3765:

article can be worked on in Draft space, especially if the article will eventually be moved back to main space and these redirects need to be restored.

3750: 2630: 2328: 1092: 994:

comment about the matter on the article talk page. Please withdraw this lie that I disparaged Gershonmk, I have done no such thing, I have no reason to.

5267:. Have you started a sandbox page for this split? If not, I'd gladly create one myself. If you'd like to correspond with me, my talk page is available. 5301: 5286: 5148: 5133: 4875:

is technically true but not accurate, in that it does not exhibit comprehension of the disruptive behavior that resulted in that condition being true.

4707: 4172: 1263: 3582:) has joined the dialogue. He has proposed separating portions of the article into other articles of their own. This was the approach I follow myself 2406: 2362: 447: 6388: 6193: 6031: 5553: 2102:. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. 1702: 51:

Don't ever use an article talk page to accuse a colleague of willfully misreprenting you. If I see you doing that again, you will be referred to AE.

3374:

I think that bar for inclusion is too high. And besides, ProACT is "Inspired by the ‘Voices for…’ model from the electorate of Indi and elsewhere,"(

3195:

Though I don't appreciate the tone Specifico, you are correct. I will try to not engage with any more personal stuff and I shouldn't have taken the

6265: 6185: 5999: 5967: 5241:

If you would like to participate, please send me an email through Knowledge and I will follow up with additional details and a link to the survey.

5235: 5006: 4856:

I'm not sure what you mean. How was my statement not accurate? There was an image in the infobox, but it was not one of the two options discussed.

4024: 3627: 3543: 3450: 753: 5071:- and not just one region - it has been very useful to see the problem, thanks for that, I do hope you understand the potential misunderstanding. 3583: 2220: 2202: 2180: 1514: 1492: 1211:

user's edits on Trump articles are constructive. Editors are repeatedly reverting them to restore longstanding NPOV text and important references.

6289: 6047: 6015: 6007: 5903: 5836: 5422: 3812: 3635: 3551: 3327: 2233: 2078: 1133:

I'm willing to remove the tag for now out of an abundance of caution while this matter is resolved, but this tag is longstanding in the article.

769: 3904: 3888: 3874: 3853: 3839: 3472: 3339:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Voices_groups_in_Australia&type=revision&diff=1069539879&oldid=1068961122&diffmode=source

2320: 2306: 2207:

Ok. I am unsure of who usually participates in split discussions though. You pinged a few people but they do not seem to have responded either.

6426: 6412: 6322: 6308: 6215: 6201: 6099: 6077: 6039: 5917: 5895: 5678: 5656: 5043:. These comments on my user talk page are not part of the RfC closure, by the way. They aren't relevant in enforcing consensus on the article. 2866: 2141: 1570: 660:

I'm not asking you to explain rules to me, which I understand already. I'm asking you to show me which edit violates discretionary sanctions.

324: 310: 289: 275: 261: 240: 226: 212: 4016: 4002: 3934: 6169: 6023: 5887: 5863: 5634: 5626: 4196:

and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes is a designated contentious topic. This message

3950: 3744: 3279: 3208: 3190: 3065: 2813: 1983: 1967: 1833: 1818: 1801: 1780: 1742: 1621: 1602: 1564: 1522: 1236: 1142: 1128: 1108: 1034: 1019: 1003: 813: 725: 698: 669: 639: 622: 600: 584: 562: 377: 84: 6442: 4077: 3779: 3379: 2534: 2521: 2506: 2492: 2463: 2443: 2064: 1545: 499: 484: 469: 153: 137: 4793:

I did not say you removed any images. The status quo (as it had been in place for over 3 years) was interrupted by Feoffer on December 23,

4529: 4156: 3701: 3683: 3621: 3596: 3528: 2852: 1437: 1399: 1353: 1331: 1295: 1176: 1162: 933: 918: 899: 877: 857: 6338: 3249: 3230: 3174: 3106: 3048: 2965: 2951: 2936: 2880: 2409:? All we know at this stage is that he's been disendorsed. Has he made any public statement about retiring that we should know about? -- 3918: 3751: 2379: 2030: 548: 390: 382:

I understand you and I appreciate your help, but no consensus has been reached in 100% of the merger requests (as you can also see here:

6231: 2829: 2799: 2762: 2730: 2713: 2642: 2626: 2095: 958: 6093: 5933: 5672: 4577: 3794: 2099: 2088: 1952: 1222: 1099:

I don't believe I have made any of those series of edits more than once, but I am happy to revert them and take them to the talk page.

6128: 3147: 3029: 2911: 2897: 2610: 5432:, I'd encourage anyone thinking of moving it to mainspace to consider the closing admin's remarks at the deletion review discussion, 5305: 5152: 4458: 4283: 4105: 4047: 3240:

never insisted there was a consensus for that, I've always acknowledged my action was bold and any editor was entitled to revert it.

1700:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the 5829:

Progress on the plan — how the Wikimedia Foundation advanced on its Annual Plan goals during the first half of fiscal year 2023-2024

3571:

article and carry them to the other song's article. I say this because such references need to be preserved in order to comply with

3012: 2784: 2699: 2674: 5194:

I was hoping to ask you to reconsider this close one more time; I don't think there is any basis for you to decide that this was a

4551: 4486: 3303: 3273: 3124: 2743: 2451:

On your latter point, there really is a difference between losing preselection and deciding not to renominate. The latter usually,

1907: 1312:

some of the "aspersions" you mention. My opinion would change if many of the edits had obvious problems. Like I can understand why

821:"If a change you make to this article is reverted, you may not reinstate that change unless you discuss the issue on the talk page 5726: 5115:

in terminology over time in popular usage do not help - even the distinction between the mineral field and gold field as found at

4648:

I have added some elaboration. Please let me know if you think anything should be further explained or if you have any questions.

6105: 3486: 2550: 2158: 6430: 6326: 6219: 6081: 5921: 5660: 5064:

The Western Australian Goldfields is a term for areas in Western Australia that have had significant areas of gold mining occur

5017: 3922: 3864: 3538:

Influence' section, if you think it is too much, I think we should separate it to another article; like what has been done for

2956:

The split I made was not the proposal those editors were opposing. The rules that apply to everyone have always applied to me.

2684:, "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert." 5075: 2994: 5764: 5246: 4952:

for your replies here, though. While we disagree on the closure, you have been both patient and methodical in explaining it.

4562: 3289: 1886: 1809:. What would apply to a page created by a split would be to redirect it to the initial article, so AfD doesn't apply either. 1523: 1066: 1063: 108: 5229: 4734:

was different to the two images proposed in the RfC, and did not need to be removed on the basis of the discussion closure.

6438: 6334: 6227: 6089: 5929: 5668: 5521: 5495: 5467: 5453: 5363: 5348: 3463:

in response to the tag you added. Feel free to add why you decided to suggest a split and participate in the conversation!

3323: 2216: 2154: 1896: 1060: 1057: 5123: 5106: 5033: 3502: 678:(and at least one other editor's objection) that violation is these two edits without any talk page engagement in between: 173:

to draftspace. I have split part of it off, and performed some fixes. Do you think it is ready to be moved to mainspace?

5116: 5058: 4521: 4505: 4436: 4422: 4407: 4389: 4342: 4324: 4240: 3112: 1189:

repeated tagging of Trump articles with the long tag. He's been on this long tag issue for nearly 2 years, over and over.

280:

It's hard to put a number on that, but if it can be split further without difficulty, then that would be enough for now.

4749: 3626:

Ok, I will take a look on your edits and remove the country by country chart positions, except the most important ones.

3579: 716:. Therefore, I restored the content to what I described as the pre-edit warring version, as that had not been done yet. 4743: 3729: 3567:

to that other song's article will have such references present; otherwise, we may need to abstract such cites from the

3360:, I think we need these organisations to specifically reference "Voices", and for media sources to link them together. 2476: 2297:

Your message is not at all clear, but I do not believe you have insulted me. I have no idea what you're talking about.

427: 5821:

National cable networks get in on the action arguing about what the first sentence of a Knowledge article ought to say

5392: 5378: 5279: 5052: 4980: 4961: 4946: 4931: 4903: 4884: 4865: 4851: 4833: 4812: 4788: 4689: 4675: 4657: 4636: 2455:, follows the former. There are many, many cases of disendorsed members going on to campaign as independents etc. -- 2432:

Mr Andrews said he would finish up his term in Parliament and look at other ways to "serve Australia" into the future.

1053:

article, edit warring over this just as you have promoted this tag at Donald Trump and perhaps others I haven't seen.

203:. It looks like the D6001-7000 article can be moved into the main space, but the main (D) article is still too large. 6344: 4371: 4357: 4276: 3417: 3387: 3346: 2284: 2052: 188: 5576: 4723: 4221: 1382: 675: 438:

for my and others thoughts on article size issues, and then lets initiate this discussion for the 2020 albums list.

5406: 5242: 5094: 4765: 4127: 3859: 3825: 3485:

While I support 110% the trimming of this article, I would object to your trimming it if your basis is, as you did

2417: 1300:

I can imagine that the absence of the constant torrent of news articles about the latest controversy is helpful :-)

987: 797: 525: 3761: 368:

to contribute. You are entitled to ask administrators to review the closure, but not to unilaterally overturn it.

6434: 6330: 6237: 6223: 6085: 5925: 5664: 4821: 4753: 4627:, I have thought about elaborating on the close. This close was deliberately brief and very specifically worded. 4147:

Can I ask why you undid just about all the edits I made. The wording's clunky and it ought to be cut down a bit.

2620: 2618: 2571: 2565: 1881: 841: 90: 27: 5748:, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months 4711: 4546:, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months 2622:. A quick glance at the talk page discussion shows about 6 or so editors supporting inclusion and 2 opposing it. 1456:

Your recent mass deletion, which I note you've done before, does not represent an improvement of the article on

5264: 4618: 1227:

It is a lie that I have ever been blocked for any behaviour, including in regards to the Donald Trump article.

962: 681: 679: 628:

ensure you understand and observe them. Please don't ask other editors to micro-tutor you in proper WP conduct.

149: 125: 104: 96: 22: 6133: 5255: 5090: 3971: 3964: 3477: 3718:, you forgot to update the archive location. This is just a reminder - don't worry, I've fixed it. Thanks! 3519:

I hope this clarifies the edits, and I would ask that you review them in light of this explanation. Thanks.

2561:

You have violated the Discretionary Sanctions 1RR page restriction at Julian Assange with these two edits:

62: 6421: 6317: 6210: 6072: 5939: 5912: 5784: 5651: 5582: 4797: 4794: 4701: 4205: 3413: 3383: 3357: 3342: 2116: 1645: 32: 17: 2835: 4297: 3940: 3380:

https://www.smh.com.au/national/liberal-revolt-as-voters-push-for-independent-change-20210807-p58goo.html

2311:

Yes, I did not insult you. That's the important thing. It's fine if you don't understand more than that.

2171:

I'll take a look later today. I recommend reverting a controversial or poor merger if possible to do so.

5189:

Knowledge:Village_pump_(WMF)/Archive_6#RfC_to_issue_a_non-binding_resolution_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation

4584:

Knowledge:Village pump (WMF)/Archive 6#RfC to issue a non-binding resolution to the Wikimedia Foundation

2353:

I'm not sure if the original should be deleted or not. I do use Twinkle to nominate pages for deletion.

1313: 4178: 1853: 1697: 1167:

That's what I thought. I take it that it would be fine for me to self-revert my edit removing the tag.

1050: 426:, and came up with the decision to remove citations, although that was not mandated by the discussion ( 3799:

I have reverted the article to the previous stable version and I have retained a copy of the draft at

5309: 5156: 4109: 4051: 5317:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Candidates of the next Australian federal election (2nd nomination)

4245:

Good question. There aren't any specicial rules for infoboxes, just the general expectations around

5195: 3709: 3319: 2229: 2212: 2150: 1902: 1652: 1510: 1465: 5712:. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. 4465:

Talk:2024 United States presidential election § RfC: Polling criteria for “major candidate” status

3578:

I see another editor above (whose username unfortunately I can't reproduce with my KB's cut-paste

3284:

There are currently two pages where I have suggested splits and they have received no opposition:

1994:

to "riot" or "attack" failed, it cannot be moved on the basis of this most recent discussion. See

460:

Would you rather removing references for albums with Knowledge articles or splitting the article?

266:

It can be split further, and I'll do that. What should be a maximum of the length of the article?

2044: 184: 4473:§ FORMAL proposal/further RFC: Change "major candidate" criteria for primary election candidates 2434:

We really should stop implying that MPs who lose preselection might still contest the election.

6154:

Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification

5206: 4269: 3947: 3901: 3871: 3836: 3090: 2316: 2280: 924:

have done so. Another editor has already reverted my revert, and I am happy to leave it there.

396:

I just realized you have closed the debate, but no consensus has been reached for KOI-4878.01:

5434:

Knowledge:Deletion review/Log/2024 April 25#Candidates of the next Australian federal election

3601:

Thanks Mercy11. The content about any of the songs by Martin and his concerts that are in the

5960:

Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification vote underway, new Council may surpass power of Board

5463: 5418: 4731: 4517: 4482: 4073: 2400: 2251:, I indeed called shenanigans. But the requisite accompanying summary did not, in fact, call 1589:

I had already noticed that you have been dealing with this on the JA article for ages, and I

514:

Per my comment on the article talk page, I beieve you've violated 24-hr BRD at Donald Trump..

306: 271: 236: 222: 4116:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Results of the 2022 Swedish general election by constituency

4042: 4026: 2661:

is structured in a way that prominently features (and sadly is often prominently ignored) a

95:

Hi 123! Can you explain the rationale for removing spaces before vertical bars in templates

5775: 5413:

you said that we're now within a year of the election so it should move back to mainspace?

5201:

At the very least, would you be willing to withdraw your close and let someone else do so?

4922:

brought up in RFC discussion but never addressed by the folks wanting to change the image.

4573: 4131: 4012: 3979: 3930: 3605:

article, we can safely presume is already within the articles for those songs and concerts.

3468: 2532: 2504: 2461: 2415: 2391: 2069:

Looking back, I definitely agree that the opening should be reordered. I have done so now.

1872: 509: 176: 5968:

How the Russian Knowledge keeps it clean despite having just a couple dozen administrators

4308:

if you are unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations.

2193:

to be added to these articles, and splitting these articles would not solve that problem.

8: 6146:

Internet users flock to Knowledge to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo

5178: 4918: 4913: 4418: 4385: 4320: 4217: 4139: 3724: 3315: 3185: 3143: 3060: 3024: 2892: 2779: 2694: 2605: 2256: 2242: 2208: 2187: 2166: 2146: 1996:

Talk:2021_storming_of_the_United_States_Capitol/Archive_14#Requested_move_4_February_2021

1978: 1947: 1891: 1829: 1797: 1754: 1719: 1536: 1506: 1475: 1461: 1460:. I strongly recommend you do some research and actually add to this article. Thank you. 1217: 1087: 1014: 982: 780: 709: 693: 634: 595: 543: 520: 431: 423: 419: 411: 57: 4475:

section seems to be the specific further RfC you talked about in the closing statement.

6413:

Local man halfway through rude reply no longer able to recall why he hates other editor

6357:

WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked

5568: 5513: 5480: 5438: 5370: 5328: 5275: 5221: 5098: 5044: 4972: 4938: 4895: 4857: 4825: 4780: 4735: 4681: 4649: 4628: 4497: 4428: 4399: 4363: 4334: 4232: 4164: 3994: 3917:

Redirecting the article caused an issue of its own, though. The 3,000 redirects to the

3894: 3880: 3845: 3829: 3804: 3786: 3736: 3675: 3613: 3556: 3520: 3456: 3428: 3398: 3361: 3241: 3200: 3166: 3130: 3071: 3040: 2957: 2928: 2821: 2805: 2795: 2722: 2709: 2638: 2513: 2484: 2435: 2354: 2298: 2194: 2172: 2070: 2060: 2022: 1959: 1810: 1772: 1734: 1613: 1556: 1484: 1429: 1345: 1304: 1287: 1228: 1168: 1134: 1120: 1100: 1026: 995: 925: 891: 849: 805: 717: 661: 614: 576: 554: 491: 480: 461: 443: 369: 316: 296: 281: 253: 204: 129: 119: 76: 3879:

I assume you used some program to create the few thousand articles and redirect them.

2255:, old pal, a "sucka". That was just a nod to five-time WCW World Heavyweight Champion 6124: 5896:

Knowledge rattled by sophisticated cyberattack of schoolboy typing "balls" in infobox

4719: 3944: 3898: 3868: 3833: 3697: 3660: 3592: 3498: 3008: 2846: 2339: 2312: 2292: 2276: 2248: 2121:

The following article needs to be split since there is no consensus against a split:

1926: 1916:

Move 2021 storming of the United States Capitol to 2021 United States Capitol Attack?

1393: 1371: 1325: 1257: 1156: 912: 871: 835: 1073:

I regard this as a serious matter that may require a significant block or topic ban.

6109: 5757: 5698: 5502: 5459: 5429: 5414: 5388: 5359: 5029: 4957: 4927: 4880: 4847: 4808: 4761: 4671: 4614: 4595: 4555: 4209: 4069: 3269: 3226: 3120: 3102: 2990: 2947: 2907: 2876: 2820:

I would like to assure that I did not mean to imply anything about 1RR/3RR itself.

1888: 757: 553:

I'm currently on my phone but I will reach a computer and review this immediately.

436:

Talk:List of 2021 albums#Early discussion on splitting the list due to rapid growth

302: 267: 247: 232: 218: 200: 180: 5164:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Candidates of the next Australian federal election

4894:

added, or revert changes made by others. It's not for me to get involved in that.

3844:

It looks like the version you linked to was in the middle of significant changes.

5771: 5120: 5084: 5072: 4569: 4353: 4008: 3990: 3975: 3926: 3464: 3074:

First off, I think it is you who need more experience and knowledge in this area.

2387: 2107: 2003: 1868: 1307:

at AN/I and get a 1 or 2-way interaction ban if you ask for it. I took a peek at

1198: 713: 2047:, it's important that the outcome be clear when closing the RM. In this case, " 1696:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

1193: 6162:

Wikimedia Foundation Board resolution and vote on the proposed Movement Charter

5549: 5540: 5528: 5174: 4839: 4511: 4493: 4476: 4414: 4395: 4381: 4330: 4316: 4246: 4228: 4213: 3719: 3196: 3180: 3139: 3094: 3055: 3019: 2887: 2774: 2735: 2689: 2649: 2600: 2552: 2275:? In either case, keep up the good work, no hard feelings, shenanigans happen. 1973: 1942: 1825: 1793: 1764: 1750: 1730: 1715: 1707: 1609: 1599: 1552: 1531: 1457: 1212: 1082: 1009: 977: 966: 952: 792: 788: 775: 688: 629: 607: 590: 569: 538: 515: 401: 387: 362: 351: 70: 52: 6373:

Simulated Knowledge seen as less credible than ChatGPT and Alexa in experiment

2617:

article. There are 2 editors who are removing it, one of them being SPECIFICO

5749: 5694: 5475: 5271: 4547: 3716:

Talk:List of International Organization for Standardization standards, 1–1999

3158: 2791: 2751: 2739: 2705: 2681: 2658: 2634: 2527: 2499: 2480: 2470: 2456: 2425: 2410: 2056: 2040: 1861: 1857: 1768: 1711: 1673: 1480: 1341: 761: 476: 455: 439: 231:

I just improved the main article, do you think it's ready now for mainspace?

144: 115: 99: 46: 5744:

Hello, Onetwothreeip. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that

5693:

Hello, Onetwothreeip. It has been over six months since you last edited the

4542:

Hello, Onetwothreeip. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that

3378:) "We Are Fadden" is included in the movement by the Sydney Morning Herald,( 6120: 6116: 4715: 3693: 3671: 3656: 3602: 3588: 3568: 3564: 3509: 3494: 3479: 3004: 2841: 2591: 1922: 1581: 1422: 1388: 1366: 1336: 1320: 1252: 1183: 1151: 1076: 972: 907: 866: 830: 745: 533: 5627:

Wikidata to split as sheer volume of information overloads infrastructure

5611:

Ruined temples for posterity to ponder over – arbitration from '22 to '24

5384: 5355: 5040: 5025: 4953: 4923: 4876: 4843: 4817: 4804: 4773: 4757: 4667: 4643: 4624: 4610: 4591: 4007:

Thank you. I will also see which parts could be further split. Regards. —

3572: 3265: 3222: 3116: 3098: 3000: 2986: 2943: 2918: 2903: 2872: 1644:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

1049:

123, you have at least twice violated the 24-hour BRD restriction at the

418:

OneTwoThreeIP, you have made your first approach on reducing the size of

5020:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is

2871:

This is in violation of Knowledge rules. Do not continue these actions.

2382:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is

4838:

Yeah, because someone had just removed it. That's an obvious issue per

4349: 2103: 2015: 1999: 4609:

result, just one that is non-obvious enough to require justification.

4333:. The rules for contentious topics are not different to other topics? 3153:

would contest them. I'm trying not to respond to any personal attacks.

1680:. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at 1663:

List of federal political scandals in the United States (21st century)

1630:

List of federal political scandals in the United States (21st century)

5797:

Wikimedia Foundation publishes its Form 990 for fiscal year 2022-2023

5561: 5545: 4208:. For a summary of difference between the former and new system, see 2834:

It looks like most of the material removed in the "first revert" was

2759: 2671: 2595: 1687:

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may

749: 6381:

Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election

3939:

I started fixing it, but someone didn't like it, and reported me at

3136:

if others seek to have you sanctioned, I'll be right there with them

430:). I have come to regret that, and I anticipated this issue for the 75:

Show me a relevant guideline or precedent, or withdraw your threat.

6178:

What's on Putin's fork, the court's docket, and in Harrison's book?

5717: 5619:

Deadnames on the French Knowledge, and a duel between Russian wikis

5474:

And suggest that when editors think it is ready for mainspace that

3770: 3612:

I think we can reinstate the edits I made with this understanding.

2902:

The editor did not and does not appear to be acting in good faith.

2348: 3375: 2134:

List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2016–2019

2130:

List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2010–2015

1580:

it. (My preferred way of dealing with this sort of problem is the

5848:

ChatGPT did not kill Knowledge, but might have reduced its growth

4193: 4189: 3539: 2342:

is a very useful tool for tagging pages for deletion. Thank you!

6104:

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

6032:

On a day of independence, beat crosswords into crossploughshares

5715:

Thank you for your submission to Knowledge, and happy editing.

5535:

If you genuinely believe in the comment you wrote at the top of

3333:

How have you determined which groups are 'not linked to Voices'?

2804:

No, I am not denying how 1RR works. You should respond to El_C.

5508:

earlier than May 2025, at the discretion of the prime minister.

3298:

List of March for Our Lives locations outside the United States

2479:, but we had a situation last time where we were implying that 1672:. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for 1363:

for examples of what I consider to be adequate edit summaries.

5740: 5119:

can be slippery when dealing with certain areas of the state.

4538: 3801:

User:Onetwothreeip/List of victims of the September 11 attacks

2126:

List of dramatic television series with LGBT characters: 2010s

344:

Talk:List of Kepler exoplanet candidates in the habitable zone

5603:

Will the new RfA reform come to the rescue of administrators?

4463:

I was checking closure requests when I noticed your close at

4101:

Results of the 2022 Swedish general election by constituency

4085:

Results of the 2022 Swedish general election by constituency

2055:" should be the first thing we see when reading the result. 5544:

there is no reason why you cannot be the review submitter.

683:. And your baseless claim of consensus and accusation that 4188:

You have recently made edits related to discussions about

3294:

List of March for Our Lives locations in the United States

1706:, or if you have already done so, you can place a request 1505:

feel free to argue for it on the talk page of the article.

397: 383: 252:

Definitely improvement. Can the article be split further?

6000:

Hanif Al Husaini, Salazarov, Hyacinth, and PirjanovNurlan

4469:

no consensus for how inclusion criteria should be changed

2773:

But I don't think you've put your best foot forward here.

5537:

Draft:Candidates of the next Australian federal election

5411:

Draft:Candidates of the next Australian federal election

4752:

The lead image had been in place for years prior to its

6108:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 5880:

Chimps, Eurovision, and the return of the Baby Reindeer

5805:

New Page Patrol receives a much-needed software upgrade

5300:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

5147:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

4820:, it was accurate at the time I closed the discussion. 4796:, before they removed the 2nd image the following day, 4098:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

4040:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

3832:, not the redirect (not an article) you reverted to. — 1678:

List of federal political scandals in the United States

1669:

List of federal political scandals in the United States

1660:

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page,

164:

Draft:List of ASTM International standards (D6001-7000)

5263:

I'd be interested in aiding you with the splitting of

2633:

a little while ago from Assange for similar behavior.

2369:

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

1848:

RfC on racial hereditarianism at the R&I talk-page

1767:

That is explicitly not a case for speedy deletion per

6024:

Why you should not vote in the 2024 WMF BoT elections

5531:

on Candidates of the next Australian federal election

3461:

2022 United States House of Representatives elections

3302:

Splitting out the 19th century historians section on

2043:, I'd ask you to consider rewording your close. Per 1792:

article as other editors expressed concern with it.

1598:*No frogs were harmed in the making of this analogy. 6365:

AI is not playing games anymore. Is Knowledge ready?

6202:

Joe Biden withdraws RfA, Donald Trump selects co-nom

5304:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge according to

5151:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge according to

4680:

I've included the reason why I found the consensus.

4104:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge according to

4046:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge according to

3785:

That's unfortunate, but thanks for letting me know.

3111:

For anyone who wants to assist that reads this, the

2430:

The source says it, from when he lost preselection.

2228:

Another article seems to have consensus on a split:

6064:

Talking about you and me, and the games people play

5369:Thank you for confirming that you are not serious. 2384:

RfC: Is the MichaelWestMedia/APAC.news content due?

6298:Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really 5401:Candidates of the next Australian federal election 5302:Candidates of the next Australian federal election 5287:Candidates of the next Australian federal election 5149:Candidates of the next Australian federal election 5134:Candidates of the next Australian federal election 4202:imply that there are any issues with your editing. 4058:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Georgina Rodríguez 3199:. I've reduced the size of that previous comment. 1452:Deleting and putting in poorer content is not okay 1045:24-HR BRD violations at Presidency of Donald Trump 5976:Wikipedians are hung up on the meaning of Madonna 4873:neither image was used in the infobox at the time 4824:was the live version of the article at the time. 4801:neither image was used in the infobox at the time 4662:Sorry, but I don't think this helps much. You've 4264:, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and: 1119:finding something that you could use against me. 3115:page can be used to watch for disruptive edits. 2756:whether involving the same or different material 2238:List of national days of mourning (2000–present) 6250:Portland pol profile paid for from public purse 3760:Moving this article to draft space resulted in 3308:List of 19th century historians of the Crusades 2234:List of national days of mourning (before 2000) 1856:revisits the question, considered last year at 1274:the addition or inclusion of anything positive. 6048:Counting to a billion — manuscripts don't burn 5763:If the page has already been deleted, you can 4561:If the page has already been deleted, you can 2142:List of fugitives from justice who disappeared 1998:: what you are doing was already !voted down. 785:21:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)Fixing Red pings 5236:Invitation to participate in a research study 3970:Hello. I appreciate your efforts in trimming 1385:is why I was having that feeling of deja vu. 5770:Thank you for your submission to Knowledge. 5752:, so if you wish to retain the page, please 5111:Thanks. If only it were as simple as that - 4912:result would have resulted in reversing the 4568:Thank you for your submission to Knowledge. 4550:, so if you wish to retain the page, please 3609:several countries for any of Martin's songs. 687:were edit-warring? Those only make it worse. 6397:What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year 6282:Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear? 6100:Disambiguation link notification for July 6 5952:WMF board elections and fundraising updates 5066:is the lead and refers to the whole state. 3919:List of victims of the September 11 attacks 3752:List of victims of the September 11 attacks 3650:Removal of "candidates" in candidate tables 2738:, I placed DS on like a million pages (see 2380:Knowledge:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard 2330:Bibliography of Japanese history up to 1912 1864:that was closed as improperly formulated. 3828:is the article's previous stable version, 3161:and it is a principle I stand strongly by. 2100:2021 storming of the United States Capitol 2089:2021 storming of the United States Capitol 1867:Your participation is welcome. Thank you. 1733:, are you aware that I split the article? 5746:Draft:List of mines in Australia by state 5734:Draft:List of mines in Australia by state 4605:Not that "consensus for all three" is an 4293:in force within the area of conflict; and 4256:Within contentious topics, you must edit 2886:Do not bark orders at good faith editors. 1972:Disappointing you didn't undo your close. 819:@Onetwothreeip, the rule clearly states: 398:https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:KOI-4878.01 384:https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:KOI-4878.01 315:Yes, that should be good enough for now. 6056:Is Knowledge Politically Biased? Perhaps 4756:minutes before you made this statement. 3451:Split Discussion on 2022 House elections 3304:List of later historians of the Crusades 171:List of ASTM International standards (D) 6106:United Kingdom general election records 5984:War and information in war and politics 5595:Democracy in action: multiple elections 4284:editorial and behavioural best practice 4149:2603:7000:D03A:5895:2985:DCA0:EC54:5C93 3459:, I started a split discussion over at 2247:At 01:34 this UTC morning, at or about 1646:the guide to writing your first article 947:123, You are not helping yourself here. 4459:Your close of candidate criteria stuff 4290: 4231:, what are the rules that apply here? 3923:Casualties of the September 11 attacks 3865:Casualties of the September 11 attacks 3559:, thanks for your comments. You said, 2867:Do not edit articles against consensus 1571:Intention - John Anderson Talk comment 5478:might be the more appropriate route. 5405:Hi, just a bit confused- the article 5018:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard 3290:List of March for Our Lives locations 3280:Two pages with consensus on splitting 1524:List of association football families 1309:your last 500 mainspace contributions 963:the other editor undid your violation 6170:Reflections on editing and obsession 5760:that it be moved to your userspace. 5198:, rather than a standard consensus. 4558:that it be moved to your userspace. 2498:we can just make the assumption. -- 5767:so you can continue working on it. 5643:Crawl out through the fallout, baby 5306:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 5153:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 5117:Mineral_fields_of_Western_Australia 5022:RFC Closure Review - Enrique Tarrio 5016:There is currently a discussion at 4565:so you can continue working on it. 4362:Then what are the different tools? 4106:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 4048:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 3113:Special:Contributions/Onetwothreeip 2742:for eg.), though in this case, the 2378:There is currently a discussion at 1698:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 1651:You may want to consider using the 1303:You may be able to make a case for 676:my comment on the article talk page 13: 6351: 6244: 6140: 5946: 5837:Public response to the editors of 5791: 5685: 5589: 2039:Following up on the discussion at 1921:with clear consensus for removal. 1634: 428:Talk:List of 2017 albums/Archive 2 14: 6454: 5349:Disrespecting a Peer of The Realm 5314:The article will be discussed at 5161:The article will be discussed at 4467:. I'm curious as to why you said 4315:Hope that answers your question. 4114:The article will be discussed at 4056:The article will be discussed at 2053:2021 United States Capitol attack 1807:This does not include split pages 6274:Another Wikimania has concluded. 5739: 5512:compared to previous elections. 5407:Next Australian federal election 5294: 5141: 5095:Gold mining in Western Australia 5059:I can see where the problem lies 5011: 5007:Notice of noticeboard discussion 4537: 4183: 4092: 4034: 3491:"700 references is far too many" 2405:Hi. How do you know that he is 2373: 4510:Ah, I have misread it. Cheers! 3376:https://www.proact.org.au/about 3306:into a separate article titled 3089:Finally, you should read up on 949:On the article talk page, both 5872:RetractionBot is back to life! 5265:List of Glagolitic manuscripts 4712:multiple editors have proposed 2838:so yeah, that's not a revert. 2643:19:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC) 2611:17:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC) 2535:05:14, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2522:04:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2507:04:20, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2493:04:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2475:That is correct, such as with 2464:03:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2444:03:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2418:03:42, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 2396:01:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC) 674:It's already quite clear from 1: 6443:13:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC) 6290:HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing 6194:Vaguely bird-shaped crossword 6008:Etika: a Pop Culture Champion 5091:Western Australian Goldfields 5053:01:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC) 5034:04:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4981:06:32, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4962:03:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4947:03:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4932:02:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4904:01:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4885:01:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4866:01:34, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4852:01:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4834:01:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4813:01:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4789:00:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC) 4766:22:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC) 4744:05:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4724:04:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4690:04:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4676:04:31, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4658:04:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4637:04:09, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4619:04:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4600:04:04, 24 December 2023 (UTC) 4578:13:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC) 4522:20:53, 10 November 2023 (UTC) 4506:20:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC) 4487:16:28, 10 November 2023 (UTC) 4437:09:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC) 4423:09:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC) 4408:09:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC) 4390:17:16, 20 February 2023 (UTC) 4372:21:39, 18 February 2023 (UTC) 4358:17:02, 18 February 2023 (UTC) 4343:07:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC) 4325:15:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC) 4241:06:53, 14 February 2023 (UTC) 4222:16:16, 13 February 2023 (UTC) 3972:Presidency of Rodrigo Duterte 3965:Presidency of Rodrigo Duterte 3762:thousands of broken redirects 3636:14:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC) 3622:08:47, 28 February 2022 (UTC) 3597:14:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC) 3552:09:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC) 3529:08:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC) 3503:03:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC) 3473:01:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC) 3437:08:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC) 3422:13:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC) 2363:04:07, 5 September 2021 (UTC) 2321:18:19, 2 September 2021 (UTC) 2307:03:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC) 2285:02:34, 2 September 2021 (UTC) 1020:22:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC) 1004:21:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC) 988:20:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC) 934:06:27, 27 February 2021 (UTC) 919:01:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC) 900:00:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC) 878:00:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC) 858:23:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 842:23:04, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 814:21:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 798:21:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 726:21:18, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 699:20:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 670:20:40, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 640:18:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 623:07:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 601:07:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 585:07:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 563:07:39, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 549:00:17, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 526:00:16, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 500:08:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 485:01:05, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 470:08:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC) 448:04:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC) 405:16:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC) 391:15:44, 18 February 2021 (UTC) 378:08:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC) 355:14:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC) 6389:A month after Wikimania 2024 5230:10:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC) 5211:06:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC) 5183:23:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC) 5039:Thank you for notifying me, 4206:Knowledge:Contentious topics 4173:06:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC) 4157:03:12, 22 January 2023 (UTC) 4135:13:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC) 3407:06:35, 3 February 2022 (UTC) 3392:06:17, 3 February 2022 (UTC) 3370:05:47, 3 February 2022 (UTC) 3351:23:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC) 3328:16:34, 6 November 2021 (UTC) 3274:00:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC) 3250:03:42, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3231:03:35, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3209:03:25, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3191:03:21, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3175:03:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3148:03:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3125:03:05, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3107:02:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC) 3066:22:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC) 3049:21:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC) 3030:19:11, 16 October 2021 (UTC) 3013:18:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC) 2995:17:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC) 2966:05:25, 15 October 2021 (UTC) 2952:03:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC) 2937:22:04, 14 October 2021 (UTC) 2912:18:00, 14 October 2021 (UTC) 2898:20:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC) 2881:18:16, 12 October 2021 (UTC) 2668:Previous version reverted to 2663:Previous version reverted to 1655:to help you create articles. 1377:18:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC) 325:21:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC) 311:15:49, 7 February 2021 (UTC) 290:22:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 276:21:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 262:21:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 241:15:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 227:03:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 213:02:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 193:00:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 169:Not too long ago, you moved 154:17:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC) 138:07:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC) 109:04:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC) 85:21:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC) 63:21:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC) 7: 6339:22:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC) 5243:Jonathan Engel (researcher) 5124:00:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC) 5107:19:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC) 5076:10:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC) 4275:comply with all applicable 4078:17:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC) 3714:Hey! During your moving of 2853:16:26, 2 October 2021 (UTC) 2830:02:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC) 2814:02:28, 2 October 2021 (UTC) 2800:23:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2785:23:48, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2763:08:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2731:07:20, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2714:12:49, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2700:03:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2675:02:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC) 2625:Additionally SPECIFICO was 10: 6459: 6435:MediaWiki message delivery 6422:Read this Signpost in full 6331:MediaWiki message delivery 6318:Read this Signpost in full 6309:I'm proud to be a template 6224:MediaWiki message delivery 6211:Read this Signpost in full 6086:MediaWiki message delivery 6073:Read this Signpost in full 5926:MediaWiki message delivery 5913:Read this Signpost in full 5665:MediaWiki message delivery 5652:Read this Signpost in full 5280:21:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC) 5256:Helping with the Splitting 5251:13:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC) 4799:. Your closing statement, 4706:Do you think we could use 4306:err on the side of caution 3702:07:36, 23 April 2022 (UTC) 3684:06:45, 23 April 2022 (UTC) 3665:03:17, 23 April 2022 (UTC) 3129:I fully concur with this. 2980:Article splitting activism 2221:18:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC) 2203:11:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC) 2181:22:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC) 2159:20:02, 4 August 2021 (UTC) 2094:An editor has asked for a 1854:Talk:Race and intelligence 1834:05:02, 24 April 2021 (UTC) 1819:21:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC) 1802:21:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC) 1781:20:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC) 1759:12:37, 23 April 2021 (UTC) 1743:09:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC) 1724:12:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC) 1628:Your contributed article, 1622:23:01, 20 April 2021 (UTC) 1603:01:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC) 1565:22:53, 20 April 2021 (UTC) 1546:01:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC) 1515:10:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC) 1493:10:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC) 1470:10:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC) 1438:21:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC) 1400:19:03, 14 March 2021 (UTC) 1354:01:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC) 1332:23:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1296:20:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1264:19:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1237:20:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1223:17:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1177:08:02, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1163:04:11, 11 March 2021 (UTC) 1143:21:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC) 1129:20:53, 10 March 2021 (UTC) 1109:20:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC) 1093:18:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC) 1051:Presidency of Donald Trump 6232:09:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC) 5344:11:04, 7 April 2024 (UTC) 4702:Fairuse mugshot of Tarrio 4427:Thank you, that is fair. 3951:00:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC) 3935:16:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC) 3905:02:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC) 3889:02:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC) 3875:01:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC) 3854:01:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC) 3840:16:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC) 3813:23:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC) 3795:08:33, 24 June 2022 (UTC) 3780:07:36, 24 June 2022 (UTC) 3745:07:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC) 3730:06:45, 18 June 2022 (UTC) 1035:05:22, 1 March 2021 (UTC) 6129:06:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC) 6094:13:39, 4 July 2024 (UTC) 5934:12:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC) 5888:The Wikipediholic Family 5856:We didn't start the wiki 5839:Settler Colonial Studies 5780:17:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC) 5727:20:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC) 5673:10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC) 5572: 5539:, then I urge you to be 5517: 5374: 5308:or whether it should be 5225: 5216:Thanks for your message 5155:or whether it should be 5102: 5048: 4976: 4942: 4899: 4861: 4829: 4784: 4739: 4685: 4653: 4632: 4501: 4432: 4403: 4367: 4338: 4236: 4168: 4108:or whether it should be 4050:or whether it should be 4017:16:58, 7 July 2022 (UTC) 4003:09:07, 7 July 2022 (UTC) 3998: 3984:21:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC) 3884: 3849: 3808: 3790: 3740: 3679: 3617: 3524: 3432: 3402: 3365: 3245: 3204: 3170: 3044: 2961: 2932: 2825: 2809: 2726: 2517: 2488: 2439: 2358: 2302: 2259:, in recognition of the 2230:National day of mourning 2198: 2176: 2112:04:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 2079:05:00, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 2074: 2065:04:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 2031:02:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 2026: 2008:00:03, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 1984:01:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC) 1968:23:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC) 1963: 1953:22:58, 31 May 2021 (UTC) 1931:19:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC) 1908:01:49, 15 May 2021 (UTC) 1814: 1776: 1738: 1712:article creation process 1617: 1560: 1488: 1433: 1349: 1291: 1232: 1172: 1138: 1124: 1104: 1030: 999: 929: 895: 853: 809: 721: 665: 618: 580: 558: 495: 465: 373: 320: 285: 257: 208: 133: 80: 5765:request it be undeleted 5681:Draft:James Ker-Lindsay 5577:12:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC) 5554:10:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC) 5522:03:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC) 5496:02:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC) 5468:06:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC) 5454:02:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC) 5423:01:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC) 5393:23:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC) 5379:23:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC) 5364:23:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC) 4563:request it be undeleted 4544:Draft:James Ker-Lindsay 4532:Draft:James Ker-Lindsay 4277:policies and guidelines 4179:Contentious topic alert 3414:Transient-understanding 3384:Transient-understanding 3358:Transient-understanding 3343:Transient-understanding 2923:Thank you for removing 1882:In case you missed this 1877:22:36, 3 May 2021 (UTC) 1682:the article's talk page 91:Removing template space 6266:Twitter marks the spot 6016:Spokane Willy's photos 5710:request its undeletion 5690: 3963:Request in condensing 3757:Hello, Onetwothreeip, 3091:False consensus effect 2453:but by no means always 2335:Hello, Onetwothreeip, 1703:deleting administrator 1689:contest the nomination 1657: 1639: 589:24 hour BRD. Not 1RR. 5992:On editing Wikisource 5695:Articles for Creation 5689: 4908:So you're saying the 4270:purposes of Knowledge 3314:Can you split these. 1642: 1638: 961:several hours before 959:objected to your edit 710:Gershonmk was blocked 6117:Opt-out instructions 5679:Your draft article, 5609:Arbitration report: 3097:both seem to apply. 2750:Onetwothreeip, from 2448:Ok, thanks for that. 2117:Articles to be split 6405:After the gold rush 6379:News from the WMF: 6160:News from the WMF: 6144:Discussion report: 5974:Discussion report: 5827:News from the WMF: 5813:The lore of Kalloor 5803:Technology report: 5701:page you started, " 5567:not be an article. 4710:in the infobox, as 4376:Good question. The 2267:in the part marked 432:List of 2021 albums 424:List of 2017 albums 420:List of 2020 albums 412:List of 2020 albums 6348:: 4 September 2024 5854:Featured content: 5732:Concern regarding 5691: 5097:for that. Cheers. 5089:That's right, the 4914:previous consensus 4530:Concern regarding 4378:individual CT page 4247:contentious topics 4043:Georgina Rodríguez 4027:Georgina Rodríguez 2271:. Now can you dig 1640: 28:July–December 2019 6371:Recent research: 6256:Recent research: 6054:Recent research: 5990:Sister projects: 5846:Recent research: 5811:Deletion report: 5703:James Ker-Lindsay 5196:WP:LOCALCONSENSUS 4803:is not accurate. 4329:Thanks for that, 4298:gaming the system 4291:page restrictions 2850: 2551:1RR violation at 2249:Talk:Donald Trump 2140:Also the article 1941:non-Admin closer. 1693:visiting the page 1542: 1397: 1375: 1329: 1261: 1160: 916: 875: 839: 410:Reducing size of 217:OK, I'll do that 179:comment added by 23:January–June 2019 6450: 6403:Traffic report: 6355:News and notes: 6296:Traffic report: 6280:Special report: 6272:News and notes: 6241:: 14 August 2024 6152:News and notes: 6110:National Liberal 6062:Traffic report: 5958:Special report: 5950:News and notes: 5878:Traffic report: 5870:Special report: 5795:News and notes: 5743: 5725: 5688: 5641:Traffic report: 5601:Special report: 5593:News and notes: 5565: 5506: 5298: 5297: 5145: 5144: 5088: 5015: 5014: 4777: 4647: 4541: 4514: 4479: 4289:comply with any 4187: 4186: 4140:Re Jordan Shanks 4096: 4095: 4038: 4037: 3778: 3710:Archiving notice 2922: 2851: 2844: 2599: 2530: 2502: 2474: 2459: 2429: 2413: 2377: 2376: 2352: 2296: 2191: 2170: 2087:Move review for 2045:WP:THREEOUTCOMES 2019: 1899: 1894: 1705: 1637: 1575:Hi Onetwothreeip 1538: 1503: 1426: 1398: 1391: 1376: 1369: 1330: 1323: 1262: 1255: 1187: 1161: 1154: 1080: 976: 956: 917: 910: 876: 869: 840: 833: 796: 773: 765: 611: 573: 537: 459: 366: 300: 251: 195: 74: 6458: 6457: 6453: 6452: 6451: 6449: 6448: 6447: 6446: 6445: 6417: 6350: 6342: 6341: 6313: 6243: 6235: 6234: 6206: 6139: 6102: 6097: 6096: 6068: 5945: 5937: 5936: 5908: 5790: 5737: 5716: 5686: 5684: 5676: 5675: 5647: 5588: 5559: 5533: 5500: 5403: 5351: 5325: 5299: 5295: 5291: 5258: 5238: 5192: 5172: 5146: 5142: 5138: 5082: 5061: 5012: 5009: 4771: 4704: 4641: 4587: 4535: 4512: 4477: 4461: 4310: 4184: 4181: 4142: 4125: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4067: 4039: 4035: 4031: 3968: 3867:#name links. — 3769: 3755: 3728: 3712: 3652: 3489:(edit summary: 3483: 3453: 3335: 3282: 2982: 2916: 2869: 2839: 2589: 2556: 2528: 2500: 2468: 2457: 2423: 2411: 2403: 2374: 2371: 2346: 2333: 2290: 2263:I echoed those 2245: 2185: 2164: 2119: 2092: 2013: 1918: 1897: 1892: 1884: 1850: 1749:the two pages. 1701: 1674:speedy deletion 1658: 1635: 1633: 1573: 1543: 1527: 1497: 1454: 1420: 1386: 1364: 1318: 1250: 1181: 1149: 1074: 1047: 970: 950: 905: 864: 828: 786: 767: 743: 605: 567: 531: 512: 453: 416: 360: 347: 294: 245: 174: 167: 152: 107: 93: 68: 49: 12: 11: 5: 6456: 6418: 6416: 6415: 6408: 6407: 6400: 6399: 6392: 6391: 6384: 6383: 6376: 6375: 6368: 6367: 6363:In the media: 6360: 6359: 6352: 6349: 6343: 6314: 6312: 6311: 6304: 6303: 6293: 6292: 6285: 6284: 6277: 6276: 6269: 6268: 6261: 6260: 6253: 6252: 6248:In the media: 6245: 6242: 6236: 6207: 6205: 6204: 6197: 6196: 6189: 6188: 6181: 6180: 6176:In the media: 6173: 6172: 6165: 6164: 6157: 6156: 6149: 6148: 6141: 6138: 6137:: 22 July 2024 6132: 6101: 6098: 6069: 6067: 6066: 6059: 6058: 6051: 6050: 6043: 6042: 6035: 6034: 6027: 6026: 6019: 6018: 6011: 6010: 6003: 6002: 5995: 5994: 5987: 5986: 5982:In the media: 5979: 5978: 5971: 5970: 5963: 5962: 5955: 5954: 5947: 5944: 5938: 5909: 5907: 5906: 5904:Palimpsestuous 5899: 5898: 5891: 5890: 5883: 5882: 5875: 5874: 5867: 5866: 5864:No queerphobia 5859: 5858: 5851: 5850: 5843: 5842: 5832: 5831: 5824: 5823: 5819:In the media: 5816: 5815: 5808: 5807: 5800: 5799: 5792: 5789: 5783: 5750:may be deleted 5736: 5730: 5697:submission or 5683: 5677: 5648: 5646: 5645: 5638: 5637: 5630: 5629: 5622: 5621: 5617:In the media: 5614: 5613: 5606: 5605: 5598: 5597: 5590: 5587: 5581: 5580: 5579: 5532: 5526: 5525: 5524: 5509: 5498: 5472: 5471: 5470: 5402: 5399: 5398: 5397: 5396: 5395: 5350: 5347: 5293: 5292: 5290: 5285:Nomination of 5283: 5257: 5254: 5237: 5234: 5233: 5232: 5191: 5186: 5140: 5139: 5137: 5132:Nomination of 5130: 5129: 5128: 5127: 5126: 5079: 5078: 5060: 5057: 5056: 5055: 5008: 5005: 5004: 5003: 5002: 5001: 5000: 4999: 4998: 4997: 4996: 4995: 4994: 4993: 4992: 4991: 4990: 4989: 4988: 4987: 4986: 4985: 4984: 4983: 4891: 4747: 4746: 4703: 4700: 4699: 4698: 4697: 4696: 4695: 4694: 4693: 4692: 4639: 4586: 4581: 4548:may be deleted 4534: 4528: 4527: 4526: 4525: 4524: 4460: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4453: 4452: 4451: 4450: 4449: 4448: 4447: 4446: 4445: 4444: 4443: 4442: 4441: 4440: 4439: 4302: 4301: 4294: 4287: 4280: 4273: 4268:adhere to the 4262:constructively 4254: 4253: 4252: 4251: 4250: 4180: 4177: 4176: 4175: 4141: 4138: 4091: 4090: 4088: 4083:Nomination of 4081: 4033: 4032: 4030: 4025:Nomination of 4023: 4022: 4021: 4020: 4019: 3967: 3961: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3908: 3907: 3818: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3754: 3749: 3748: 3747: 3722: 3711: 3708: 3707: 3706: 3705: 3704: 3687: 3686: 3651: 3648: 3647: 3646: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3640: 3639: 3638: 3610: 3606: 3576: 3532: 3531: 3517: 3513: 3482: 3476: 3452: 3449: 3448: 3447: 3446: 3445: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3440: 3439: 3334: 3331: 3316:Blubabluba9990 3312: 3311: 3300: 3281: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3258: 3257: 3256: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3252: 3237: 3219: 3216: 3213: 3212: 3211: 3162: 3154: 3150: 3127: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3075: 3068: 3036: 3032: 3015: 2981: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2868: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2858: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2802: 2748: 2718: 2717: 2716: 2685: 2654: 2653: 2646: 2645: 2623: 2576: 2575: 2569: 2555: 2553:Julian Assange 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2449: 2402: 2399: 2386:. Thank you.— 2370: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2332: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2244: 2241: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2209:Blubabluba9990 2188:Blubabluba9990 2183: 2167:Blubabluba9990 2147:Blubabluba9990 2138: 2137: 2118: 2115: 2091: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2067: 2034: 2033: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1917: 1914: 1912: 1883: 1880: 1849: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1784: 1783: 1746: 1745: 1653:Article Wizard 1641: 1632: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1595: 1594: 1586: 1585: 1576: 1572: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1537: 1526: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1507:Erasmus Sydney 1500:Onettwothreeip 1476:Erasmus Sydney 1462:Erasmus Sydney 1453: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1301: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1208: 1202: 1196: 1190: 1179: 1131: 1116: 1112: 1056:The diffs are 1046: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 948: 945: 944: 943: 942: 941: 940: 939: 938: 937: 936: 888: 884: 825:wait 24 hours" 817: 816: 741: 740: 739: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 732: 731: 730: 729: 728: 705: 704:determination. 649: 648: 647: 646: 645: 644: 643: 642: 565: 551: 511: 508: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 415: 408: 394: 393: 380: 346: 341: 340: 339: 338: 337: 336: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 330: 329: 328: 327: 229: 166: 160: 159: 158: 157: 156: 148: 103: 92: 89: 88: 87: 48: 45: 43: 41: 40: 35: 30: 25: 20: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6455: 6444: 6440: 6436: 6432: 6428: 6424: 6423: 6414: 6410: 6409: 6406: 6402: 6401: 6398: 6395:Serendipity: 6394: 6393: 6390: 6386: 6385: 6382: 6378: 6377: 6374: 6370: 6369: 6366: 6362: 6361: 6358: 6354: 6353: 6347: 6340: 6336: 6332: 6328: 6324: 6320: 6319: 6310: 6306: 6305: 6302: 6301: 6295: 6294: 6291: 6287: 6286: 6283: 6279: 6278: 6275: 6271: 6270: 6267: 6263: 6262: 6259: 6255: 6254: 6251: 6247: 6246: 6240: 6233: 6229: 6225: 6221: 6217: 6213: 6212: 6203: 6199: 6198: 6195: 6191: 6190: 6187: 6183: 6182: 6179: 6175: 6174: 6171: 6167: 6166: 6163: 6159: 6158: 6155: 6151: 6150: 6147: 6143: 6142: 6136: 6131: 6130: 6126: 6122: 6118: 6113: 6111: 6107: 6095: 6091: 6087: 6083: 6079: 6075: 6074: 6065: 6061: 6060: 6057: 6053: 6052: 6049: 6045: 6044: 6041: 6037: 6036: 6033: 6029: 6028: 6025: 6021: 6020: 6017: 6013: 6012: 6009: 6005: 6004: 6001: 5997: 5996: 5993: 5989: 5988: 5985: 5981: 5980: 5977: 5973: 5972: 5969: 5965: 5964: 5961: 5957: 5956: 5953: 5949: 5948: 5943:: 4 July 2024 5942: 5935: 5931: 5927: 5923: 5919: 5915: 5914: 5905: 5901: 5900: 5897: 5893: 5892: 5889: 5885: 5884: 5881: 5877: 5876: 5873: 5869: 5868: 5865: 5861: 5860: 5857: 5853: 5852: 5849: 5845: 5844: 5841: 5840: 5834: 5833: 5830: 5826: 5825: 5822: 5818: 5817: 5814: 5810: 5809: 5806: 5802: 5801: 5798: 5794: 5793: 5788:: 8 June 2024 5787: 5782: 5781: 5777: 5773: 5768: 5766: 5761: 5759: 5755: 5751: 5747: 5742: 5735: 5729: 5728: 5724: 5722: 5721: 5713: 5711: 5706: 5704: 5700: 5696: 5682: 5674: 5670: 5666: 5662: 5658: 5654: 5653: 5644: 5640: 5639: 5636: 5632: 5631: 5628: 5624: 5623: 5620: 5616: 5615: 5612: 5608: 5607: 5604: 5600: 5599: 5596: 5592: 5591: 5586:: 16 May 2024 5585: 5578: 5574: 5570: 5569:Onetwothreeip 5563: 5558: 5557: 5556: 5555: 5551: 5547: 5542: 5538: 5530: 5523: 5519: 5515: 5514:Onetwothreeip 5510: 5504: 5499: 5497: 5494: 5493: 5492: 5489: 5486: 5483: 5477: 5473: 5469: 5465: 5461: 5457: 5456: 5455: 5452: 5451: 5450: 5447: 5444: 5441: 5435: 5431: 5427: 5426: 5425: 5424: 5420: 5416: 5412: 5408: 5394: 5390: 5386: 5382: 5381: 5380: 5376: 5372: 5371:Onetwothreeip 5368: 5367: 5366: 5365: 5361: 5357: 5346: 5345: 5342: 5341: 5340: 5337: 5334: 5331: 5322: 5319: 5318: 5311: 5307: 5303: 5288: 5282: 5281: 5277: 5273: 5268: 5266: 5261: 5253: 5252: 5248: 5244: 5231: 5227: 5223: 5222:Onetwothreeip 5219: 5215: 5214: 5213: 5212: 5208: 5204: 5199: 5197: 5190: 5185: 5184: 5180: 5176: 5169: 5166: 5165: 5158: 5154: 5150: 5135: 5125: 5122: 5118: 5114: 5110: 5109: 5108: 5104: 5100: 5099:Onetwothreeip 5096: 5092: 5086: 5081: 5080: 5077: 5074: 5069: 5068: 5067: 5065: 5054: 5050: 5046: 5045:Onetwothreeip 5042: 5038: 5037: 5036: 5035: 5031: 5027: 5024:. Thank you. 5023: 5019: 4982: 4978: 4974: 4973:Onetwothreeip 4971: 4965: 4964: 4963: 4959: 4955: 4950: 4949: 4948: 4944: 4940: 4939:Onetwothreeip 4935: 4934: 4933: 4929: 4925: 4920: 4915: 4911: 4907: 4906: 4905: 4901: 4897: 4896:Onetwothreeip 4892: 4888: 4887: 4886: 4882: 4878: 4874: 4869: 4868: 4867: 4863: 4859: 4858:Onetwothreeip 4855: 4854: 4853: 4849: 4845: 4841: 4837: 4836: 4835: 4831: 4827: 4826:Onetwothreeip 4823: 4819: 4816: 4815: 4814: 4810: 4806: 4802: 4798: 4795: 4792: 4791: 4790: 4786: 4782: 4781:Onetwothreeip 4775: 4770: 4769: 4768: 4767: 4763: 4759: 4755: 4751: 4745: 4741: 4737: 4736:Onetwothreeip 4733: 4728: 4727: 4726: 4725: 4721: 4717: 4713: 4709: 4691: 4687: 4683: 4682:Onetwothreeip 4679: 4678: 4677: 4673: 4669: 4665: 4661: 4660: 4659: 4655: 4651: 4650:Onetwothreeip 4645: 4640: 4638: 4634: 4630: 4629:Onetwothreeip 4626: 4622: 4621: 4620: 4616: 4612: 4608: 4604: 4603: 4602: 4601: 4597: 4593: 4585: 4580: 4579: 4575: 4571: 4566: 4564: 4559: 4557: 4553: 4549: 4545: 4540: 4533: 4523: 4519: 4515: 4509: 4508: 4507: 4503: 4499: 4498:Onetwothreeip 4495: 4491: 4490: 4489: 4488: 4484: 4480: 4474: 4470: 4466: 4438: 4434: 4430: 4429:Onetwothreeip 4426: 4425: 4424: 4420: 4416: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4405: 4401: 4400:Onetwothreeip 4397: 4393: 4392: 4391: 4387: 4383: 4379: 4375: 4374: 4373: 4369: 4365: 4364:Onetwothreeip 4361: 4360: 4359: 4355: 4351: 4346: 4345: 4344: 4340: 4336: 4335:Onetwothreeip 4332: 4328: 4327: 4326: 4322: 4318: 4314: 4313: 4312: 4311: 4309: 4307: 4299: 4296:refrain from 4295: 4292: 4288: 4285: 4281: 4278: 4274: 4271: 4267: 4266: 4265: 4263: 4259: 4248: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4238: 4234: 4233:Onetwothreeip 4230: 4226: 4225: 4224: 4223: 4219: 4215: 4211: 4207: 4203: 4201: 4195: 4191: 4174: 4170: 4166: 4165:Onetwothreeip 4161: 4160: 4159: 4158: 4154: 4150: 4145: 4137: 4136: 4133: 4129: 4124: 4120: 4117: 4111: 4107: 4103: 4102: 4086: 4080: 4079: 4075: 4071: 4066: 4062: 4059: 4053: 4049: 4045: 4044: 4028: 4018: 4014: 4010: 4006: 4005: 4004: 4000: 3996: 3995:Onetwothreeip 3992: 3988: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3981: 3977: 3973: 3966: 3952: 3949: 3946: 3942: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3932: 3928: 3924: 3921:now point to 3920: 3916: 3906: 3903: 3900: 3896: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3886: 3882: 3881:Onetwothreeip 3878: 3877: 3876: 3873: 3870: 3866: 3861: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3851: 3847: 3846:Onetwothreeip 3843: 3842: 3841: 3838: 3835: 3831: 3830:Onetwothreeip 3827: 3824: 3823: 3822: 3821: 3820: 3819: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3805:Onetwothreeip 3802: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3787:Onetwothreeip 3784: 3783: 3782: 3781: 3777: 3775: 3774: 3766: 3763: 3758: 3753: 3746: 3742: 3738: 3737:Onetwothreeip 3734: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3726: 3721: 3717: 3703: 3699: 3695: 3691: 3690: 3689: 3688: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3676:Onetwothreeip 3673: 3669: 3668: 3667: 3666: 3662: 3658: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3628:آرمین هویدایی 3625: 3624: 3623: 3619: 3615: 3614:Onetwothreeip 3611: 3607: 3604: 3600: 3599: 3598: 3594: 3590: 3585: 3581: 3577: 3574: 3570: 3566: 3562: 3558: 3557:Onetwothreeip 3555: 3554: 3553: 3549: 3545: 3544:آرمین هویدایی 3541: 3536: 3535: 3534: 3533: 3530: 3526: 3522: 3521:Onetwothreeip 3518: 3514: 3511: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3500: 3496: 3492: 3488: 3481: 3475: 3474: 3470: 3466: 3462: 3458: 3457:Onetwothreeip 3438: 3434: 3430: 3429:Onetwothreeip 3425: 3424: 3423: 3419: 3415: 3410: 3409: 3408: 3404: 3400: 3399:Onetwothreeip 3395: 3394: 3393: 3389: 3385: 3381: 3377: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3367: 3363: 3362:Onetwothreeip 3359: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3340: 3330: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3317: 3309: 3305: 3301: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3275: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3262: 3251: 3247: 3243: 3242:Onetwothreeip 3238: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3228: 3224: 3220: 3217: 3214: 3210: 3206: 3202: 3201:Onetwothreeip 3198: 3194: 3193: 3192: 3189: 3188: 3184: 3183: 3179:Stop digging. 3178: 3177: 3176: 3172: 3168: 3167:Onetwothreeip 3163: 3160: 3155: 3151: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3137: 3132: 3131:Onetwothreeip 3128: 3126: 3122: 3118: 3114: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3104: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3088: 3084: 3080: 3076: 3073: 3072:Onetwothreeip 3069: 3067: 3064: 3063: 3059: 3058: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3046: 3042: 3041:Onetwothreeip 3037: 3035:disagreement. 3033: 3031: 3028: 3027: 3023: 3022: 3016: 3014: 3010: 3006: 3002: 2999: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2992: 2988: 2967: 2963: 2959: 2958:Onetwothreeip 2955: 2954: 2953: 2949: 2945: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2934: 2930: 2929:Onetwothreeip 2926: 2920: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2909: 2905: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2896: 2895: 2891: 2890: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2878: 2874: 2854: 2848: 2843: 2837: 2836:added in 2019 2833: 2832: 2831: 2827: 2823: 2822:Onetwothreeip 2819: 2815: 2811: 2807: 2806:Onetwothreeip 2803: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2783: 2782: 2778: 2777: 2771: 2766: 2765: 2764: 2761: 2757: 2753: 2749: 2745: 2741: 2737: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2728: 2724: 2723:Onetwothreeip 2719: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2698: 2697: 2693: 2692: 2686: 2683: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2673: 2669: 2664: 2660: 2657:In any case, 2656: 2655: 2651: 2648: 2647: 2644: 2640: 2636: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2621: 2619: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2609: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2597: 2593: 2587: 2584: 2580: 2573: 2572:second revert 2570: 2567: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2559: 2554: 2536: 2533: 2531: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2519: 2515: 2514:Onetwothreeip 2510: 2509: 2508: 2505: 2503: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2490: 2486: 2485:Onetwothreeip 2482: 2481:Jane Prentice 2478: 2472: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2462: 2460: 2454: 2450: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2441: 2437: 2436:Onetwothreeip 2433: 2427: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2416: 2414: 2408: 2401:Kevin Andrews 2398: 2397: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2355:Onetwothreeip 2350: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2341: 2336: 2331: 2322: 2318: 2314: 2310: 2309: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2299:Onetwothreeip 2294: 2289: 2288: 2287: 2286: 2282: 2278: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2240: 2239: 2235: 2231: 2222: 2218: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2195:Onetwothreeip 2189: 2184: 2182: 2178: 2174: 2173:Onetwothreeip 2168: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2143: 2135: 2131: 2127: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2114: 2113: 2109: 2105: 2101: 2097: 2090: 2080: 2076: 2072: 2071:Onetwothreeip 2068: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2023:Onetwothreeip 2017: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2005: 2001: 1997: 1985: 1982: 1981: 1977: 1976: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1965: 1961: 1960:Onetwothreeip 1956: 1955: 1954: 1951: 1950: 1946: 1945: 1940: 1935: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1928: 1924: 1913: 1910: 1909: 1906: 1904: 1900: 1895: 1889: 1887: 1879: 1878: 1874: 1870: 1865: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1835: 1831: 1827: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1811:Onetwothreeip 1808: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1773:Onetwothreeip 1770: 1766: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1756: 1752: 1744: 1740: 1736: 1735:Onetwothreeip 1732: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1704: 1699: 1694: 1690: 1685: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1670: 1665: 1664: 1656: 1654: 1649: 1647: 1631: 1623: 1619: 1615: 1614:Onetwothreeip 1611: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1601: 1596: 1592: 1587: 1583: 1582:frog in a pot 1577: 1566: 1562: 1558: 1557:Onetwothreeip 1554: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1544: 1541: 1535: 1534: 1525: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1501: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1485:Onetwothreeip 1482: 1477: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1458:John Anderson 1439: 1435: 1431: 1430:Onetwothreeip 1424: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1401: 1395: 1390: 1384: 1380: 1373: 1368: 1362: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1351: 1347: 1346:Onetwothreeip 1343: 1338: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1327: 1322: 1315: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1288:Onetwothreeip 1284: 1280: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1259: 1254: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1229:Onetwothreeip 1226: 1225: 1224: 1221: 1220: 1216: 1215: 1209: 1206: 1203: 1200: 1197: 1195: 1191: 1185: 1180: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1169:Onetwothreeip 1166: 1165: 1164: 1158: 1153: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1140: 1136: 1135:Onetwothreeip 1132: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1121:Onetwothreeip 1117: 1113: 1111: 1110: 1106: 1102: 1101:Onetwothreeip 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1091: 1090: 1086: 1085: 1078: 1070: 1068: 1065: 1062: 1059: 1054: 1052: 1036: 1032: 1028: 1027:Onetwothreeip 1023: 1022: 1021: 1018: 1017: 1013: 1012: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1001: 997: 996:Onetwothreeip 992: 991: 990: 989: 986: 985: 981: 980: 974: 968: 964: 960: 954: 935: 931: 927: 926:Onetwothreeip 922: 921: 920: 914: 909: 903: 902: 901: 897: 893: 892:Onetwothreeip 889: 885: 881: 880: 879: 873: 868: 861: 860: 859: 855: 851: 850:Onetwothreeip 846: 845: 844: 843: 837: 832: 826: 824: 815: 811: 807: 806:Onetwothreeip 802: 801: 800: 799: 794: 790: 784: 783: 779: 778: 771: 763: 759: 755: 751: 747: 727: 723: 719: 718:Onetwothreeip 715: 711: 706: 702: 701: 700: 697: 696: 692: 691: 686: 682: 680: 677: 673: 672: 671: 667: 663: 662:Onetwothreeip 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 641: 638: 637: 633: 632: 626: 625: 624: 620: 616: 615:Onetwothreeip 609: 604: 603: 602: 599: 598: 594: 593: 588: 587: 586: 582: 578: 577:Onetwothreeip 571: 566: 564: 560: 556: 555:Onetwothreeip 552: 550: 547: 546: 542: 541: 535: 530: 529: 528: 527: 524: 523: 519: 518: 501: 497: 493: 492:Onetwothreeip 488: 487: 486: 482: 478: 473: 472: 471: 467: 463: 462:Onetwothreeip 457: 452: 451: 450: 449: 445: 441: 437: 433: 429: 425: 421: 413: 407: 406: 403: 399: 392: 389: 385: 381: 379: 375: 371: 370:Onetwothreeip 364: 359: 358: 357: 356: 353: 345: 326: 322: 318: 317:Onetwothreeip 314: 313: 312: 308: 304: 298: 297:Onetwothreeip 293: 292: 291: 287: 283: 282:Onetwothreeip 279: 278: 277: 273: 269: 265: 264: 263: 259: 255: 254:Onetwothreeip 249: 244: 243: 242: 238: 234: 230: 228: 224: 220: 216: 215: 214: 210: 206: 205:Onetwothreeip 202: 198: 197: 196: 194: 190: 186: 182: 178: 172: 165: 155: 151: 146: 141: 140: 139: 135: 131: 130:Onetwothreeip 127: 124: 121: 117: 113: 112: 111: 110: 106: 101: 97: 86: 82: 78: 77:Onetwothreeip 72: 67: 66: 65: 64: 61: 60: 56: 55: 44: 39: 36: 34: 31: 29: 26: 24: 21: 19: 16: 15: 6420: 6346:The Signpost 6345: 6316: 6299: 6239:The Signpost 6238: 6209: 6135:The Signpost 6134: 6114: 6103: 6071: 5941:The Signpost 5940: 5911: 5838: 5786:The Signpost 5785: 5769: 5762: 5738: 5719: 5718: 5714: 5707: 5692: 5650: 5584:The Signpost 5583: 5534: 5490: 5487: 5484: 5481: 5479: 5448: 5445: 5442: 5439: 5437: 5404: 5352: 5338: 5335: 5332: 5329: 5327: 5326: 5315: 5313: 5289:for deletion 5269: 5262: 5259: 5239: 5218:BilledMammal 5203:BilledMammal 5200: 5193: 5173: 5162: 5160: 5136:for deletion 5112: 5063: 5062: 5010: 4968: 4919:WP:UPPERCASE 4910:no consensus 4909: 4872: 4822:This version 4800: 4748: 4708:this mugshot 4705: 4663: 4606: 4588: 4567: 4560: 4536: 4468: 4462: 4305: 4303: 4261: 4257: 4255: 4199: 4197: 4182: 4146: 4143: 4126: 4121: 4113: 4099: 4087:for deletion 4068: 4063: 4055: 4041: 4029:for deletion 3969: 3945:Guarapiranga 3899:Guarapiranga 3869:Guarapiranga 3834:Guarapiranga 3772: 3771: 3767: 3759: 3756: 3713: 3653: 3603:Ricky Martin 3569:Ricky Martin 3565:Ricky Martin 3560: 3490: 3484: 3480:Ricky Martin 3454: 3336: 3313: 3283: 3186: 3181: 3135: 3061: 3056: 3025: 3020: 2983: 2893: 2888: 2870: 2780: 2775: 2769: 2755: 2695: 2690: 2667: 2662: 2606: 2601: 2588: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2566:first revert 2560: 2557: 2452: 2431: 2404: 2372: 2337: 2334: 2313:InedibleHulk 2293:InedibleHulk 2277:InedibleHulk 2272: 2268: 2264: 2260: 2252: 2246: 2227: 2139: 2120: 2093: 2048: 1992: 1979: 1974: 1948: 1943: 1938: 1919: 1911: 1890: 1885: 1866: 1851: 1806: 1747: 1688: 1686: 1667: 1661: 1659: 1650: 1643: 1597: 1590: 1588: 1584:approach.*) 1578: 1574: 1539: 1532: 1528: 1455: 1378: 1247: 1218: 1213: 1098: 1088: 1083: 1071: 1055: 1048: 1015: 1010: 983: 978: 946: 822: 820: 818: 781: 776: 742: 694: 689: 684: 635: 630: 596: 591: 544: 539: 521: 516: 513: 510:DS violation 417: 414:, discussion 395: 348: 175:— Preceding 168: 122: 94: 58: 53: 50: 42: 6431:Unsubscribe 6427:Single-page 6387:Wikimania: 6327:Unsubscribe 6323:Single-page 6220:Unsubscribe 6216:Single-page 6192:Crossword: 6082:Unsubscribe 6078:Single-page 6030:Crossword: 5922:Unsubscribe 5918:Single-page 5661:Unsubscribe 5657:Single-page 5635:Generations 5503:GraziePrego 5460:GraziePrego 5430:GraziePrego 5415:GraziePrego 4607:implausible 4304:You should 4070:Thesixserra 3093:, and also 2558:Hello 123. 2407:not running 2243:To be clear 2096:Move review 1608:No worries 1305:WP:Hounding 1286:president. 758:Doug Weller 303:5a5ha seven 268:5a5ha seven 248:5a5ha seven 233:5a5ha seven 219:5a5ha seven 201:5a5ha seven 181:5a5ha seven 162:Concerning 6264:In focus: 6184:Obituary: 5998:Obituary: 5966:In focus: 5772:FireflyBot 5260:Hi there, 5121:JarrahTree 5085:JarrahTree 5073:JarrahTree 4623:Thank you 4570:FireflyBot 4128:Obi2canibe 4009:Sanglahi86 3991:Sanglahi86 3976:Sanglahi86 3943:for it. — 3927:Epicgenius 3860:this point 3465:Wildfire35 3288:Splitting 2925:your claim 2529:Jack of Oz 2501:Jack of Oz 2477:Peter King 2458:Jack of Oz 2412:Jack of Oz 2388:Mikehawk10 2265:four words 1939:uninvolved 1869:NightHeron 1852:An RfC at 1593:for that. 969:incidents. 714:EdJohnston 98:? Thanks, 6288:Opinion: 6046:Cobwebs: 6014:Gallery: 6006:Opinion: 5902:Concept: 5835:Opinion: 5756:again or 5324:finished. 5175:Teraplane 5171:finished. 5113:slippages 4732:this edit 4554:again or 4513:Aaron Liu 4494:Aaron Liu 4478:Aaron Liu 4415:Barkeep49 4396:Barkeep49 4382:Barkeep49 4350:—Femke 🐦 4331:Barkeep49 4317:Barkeep49 4258:carefully 4229:Barkeep49 4214:Barkeep49 4210:WP:CTVSDS 4194:infoboxes 4190:infoboxes 3720:Aidan9382 3478:Edits at 3182:SPECIFICO 3140:soibangla 3057:SPECIFICO 3021:SPECIFICO 2889:SPECIFICO 2776:SPECIFICO 2736:SPECIFICO 2691:SPECIFICO 2650:SPECIFICO 2631:topic ban 2602:SPECIFICO 2586:Thanks. 2261:two times 1975:SPECIFICO 1944:SPECIFICO 1826:Slywriter 1794:Slywriter 1765:Slywriter 1751:Slywriter 1731:Slywriter 1716:Slywriter 1610:Wayne aus 1591:thank you 1553:Nehme1499 1214:SPECIFICO 1192:See, e.g. 1084:SPECIFICO 1011:SPECIFICO 979:SPECIFICO 953:Gershonmk 793:Gershonmk 789:Cullen328 777:SPECIFICO 754:Cullen238 690:SPECIFICO 631:SPECIFICO 608:SPECIFICO 592:SPECIFICO 570:SPECIFICO 540:SPECIFICO 517:SPECIFICO 402:ExoEditor 388:ExoEditor 363:ExoEditor 352:ExoEditor 199:Hi there 71:SPECIFICO 54:SPECIFICO 6411:Humour: 6307:Humour: 6200:Humour: 6038:Humour: 5894:Humour: 5272:Sink Cat 5270:Thanks! 4750:Um, huh? 3735:Cheers. 3324:contribs 3054:comment. 2792:Mr Ernie 2744:sanction 2706:Mr Ernie 2635:Mr Ernie 2471:JackofOz 2426:JackofOz 2257:Booker T 2217:contribs 2155:contribs 2057:162 etc. 1893:starship 1483:by now. 770:Gershomk 762:MelanieN 477:Mburrell 456:Mburrell 440:Mburrell 189:contribs 177:unsigned 145:Levivich 126:contribs 116:Levivich 100:Levivich 6168:Essay: 6121:DPL bot 6022:Op-Ed: 5886:Comix: 5862:Essay: 5758:request 5754:edit it 5633:Comix: 5625:Op-Ed: 5541:WP:BOLD 5529:WP:BOLD 5310:deleted 5157:deleted 4970:images. 4840:WP:GAME 4754:removal 4716:Feoffer 4556:request 4552:edit it 4394:Thanks 4282:follow 4110:deleted 4052:deleted 3893:I used 3694:Frickeg 3672:Frickeg 3670:Thanks 3657:Frickeg 3589:Mercy11 3540:Shakira 3510:Mercy11 3495:Mercy11 3197:WP:BAIT 3095:WP:IDHT 3018:matter. 3005:Valjean 2842:Awilley 2592:Awilley 2340:Twinkle 1923:Feoffer 1423:Awilley 1389:Awilley 1367:Awilley 1337:Awilley 1321:Awilley 1253:Awilley 1184:Awilley 1152:Awilley 1077:Awilley 973:Awilley 967:WP:IDHT 908:Awilley 867:Awilley 831:Awilley 774:either. 760:, and 746:Awilley 534:Awilley 38:2021–22 6186:JamesR 6040:A joke 5476:WP:AfC 5385:Dn9ahx 5356:Dn9ahx 5041:VQuakr 5026:VQuakr 4954:VQuakr 4924:VQuakr 4877:VQuakr 4844:VQuakr 4818:VQuakr 4805:VQuakr 4774:VQuakr 4758:VQuakr 4668:Mach61 4644:Mach61 4625:Mach61 4611:Mach61 4592:Mach61 4471:. The 4227:Hello 3941:WP:ANI 3266:Cjhard 3223:Ergzay 3159:WP:BRD 3117:Ergzay 3099:Ergzay 3001:Ergzay 2987:Ergzay 2944:Ergzay 2919:Ergzay 2904:Ergzay 2873:Ergzay 2752:WP:3RR 2747:etc.). 2740:WP:AEL 2682:WP:3RR 2659:WP:AN3 2627:banned 2269:Survey 2041:WP:RMT 1898:.paint 1862:WP:RSN 1858:WP:FTN 1824:apply. 1769:WP:A10 1481:WP:3RR 1383:Here's 1342:WP:OWN 957:and I 685:others 6300:weird 6119:.) -- 5699:draft 4664:added 4198:does 4132:talk) 3858:From 3580:this? 3292:into 3236:time. 2568:, and 2232:into 2128:into 2104:Srnec 2049:Moved 2016:Srnec 2000:Srnec 1903:exalt 1600:Wayne 1533:Nehme 1381:Aha! 1379:Added 150:hound 105:hound 47:Trump 6439:talk 6335:talk 6228:talk 6125:talk 6090:talk 5930:talk 5776:talk 5705:". 5669:talk 5573:talk 5562:J2m5 5550:talk 5546:J2m5 5518:talk 5491:Path 5464:talk 5449:Path 5419:talk 5389:talk 5375:talk 5360:talk 5339:Path 5276:talk 5247:talk 5226:talk 5207:talk 5179:talk 5103:talk 5049:talk 5030:talk 4977:talk 4958:talk 4943:talk 4928:talk 4900:talk 4881:talk 4862:talk 4848:talk 4830:talk 4809:talk 4785:talk 4762:talk 4740:talk 4720:talk 4714:? 4686:talk 4672:talk 4654:talk 4633:talk 4615:talk 4596:talk 4574:talk 4518:talk 4502:talk 4483:talk 4433:talk 4419:talk 4404:talk 4386:talk 4368:talk 4354:talk 4339:talk 4321:talk 4260:and 4237:talk 4218:talk 4169:talk 4153:talk 4144:Hi, 4074:talk 4013:talk 3999:talk 3980:talk 3931:talk 3897:. — 3885:talk 3850:talk 3826:This 3809:talk 3791:talk 3741:talk 3725:talk 3698:talk 3680:talk 3661:talk 3655:is. 3632:talk 3618:talk 3593:talk 3584:here 3573:WP:V 3548:talk 3525:talk 3499:talk 3487:here 3469:talk 3433:talk 3418:talk 3403:talk 3388:talk 3366:talk 3347:talk 3337:Re: 3320:talk 3296:and 3270:talk 3246:talk 3227:talk 3205:talk 3187:talk 3171:talk 3144:talk 3121:talk 3103:talk 3062:talk 3045:talk 3026:talk 3009:talk 2991:talk 2962:talk 2948:talk 2933:talk 2908:talk 2894:talk 2877:talk 2847:talk 2826:talk 2810:talk 2796:talk 2781:talk 2760:El_C 2727:talk 2710:talk 2696:talk 2672:El_C 2639:talk 2607:talk 2596:El C 2594:and 2518:talk 2489:talk 2440:talk 2392:talk 2359:talk 2317:talk 2303:talk 2281:talk 2273:that 2236:and 2213:talk 2199:talk 2177:talk 2151:talk 2132:and 2108:talk 2075:talk 2061:talk 2027:talk 2004:talk 1980:talk 1964:talk 1949:talk 1927:talk 1873:talk 1830:talk 1815:talk 1798:talk 1777:talk 1755:talk 1739:talk 1720:talk 1708:here 1618:talk 1561:talk 1540:1499 1511:talk 1489:talk 1466:talk 1434:talk 1394:talk 1372:talk 1361:this 1350:talk 1326:talk 1314:this 1292:talk 1258:talk 1233:talk 1219:talk 1205:this 1199:this 1194:this 1173:talk 1157:talk 1139:talk 1125:talk 1105:talk 1089:talk 1031:talk 1016:talk 1000:talk 984:talk 930:talk 913:talk 896:talk 872:talk 854:talk 836:talk 810:talk 791:and 782:talk 750:El C 722:talk 695:talk 666:talk 636:talk 619:talk 597:talk 581:talk 559:talk 545:talk 522:talk 496:talk 481:talk 466:talk 444:talk 374:talk 321:talk 307:talk 286:talk 272:talk 258:talk 237:talk 223:talk 209:talk 185:talk 134:talk 120:talk 81:talk 59:talk 33:2020 18:2018 6112:. 5488:hed 5485:nis 5482:Tar 5446:hed 5443:nis 5440:Tar 5336:hed 5333:nis 5330:Tar 4492:Hi 4200:not 3989:Hi 3895:JWB 3508:Hi 3455:Hi 3356:Hi 3322:) ( 2770:did 2670:). 2349:Liz 2253:you 2215:) ( 2153:) ( 2098:of 2051:to 1771:. 1729:Hi 1691:by 1684:. 1551:Hi 1201:and 823:and 712:by 114:Hi 6441:) 6433:* 6429:* 6425:* 6419:* 6337:) 6329:* 6325:* 6321:* 6315:* 6230:) 6222:* 6218:* 6214:* 6208:* 6127:) 6092:) 6084:* 6080:* 6076:* 6070:* 5932:) 5924:* 5920:* 5916:* 5910:* 5778:) 5723:iz 5671:) 5663:* 5659:* 5655:* 5649:* 5575:) 5552:) 5520:) 5466:) 5436:. 5421:) 5391:) 5377:) 5362:) 5312:. 5278:) 5249:) 5228:) 5209:) 5181:) 5159:. 5105:) 5051:) 5032:) 4979:) 4960:) 4945:) 4930:) 4902:) 4883:) 4864:) 4850:) 4842:. 4832:) 4811:) 4787:) 4764:) 4742:) 4722:) 4688:) 4674:) 4656:) 4635:) 4617:) 4598:) 4576:) 4520:) 4504:) 4485:) 4435:) 4421:) 4406:) 4388:) 4370:) 4356:) 4341:) 4323:) 4239:) 4220:) 4212:. 4171:) 4155:) 4112:. 4076:) 4054:. 4015:) 4001:) 3982:) 3933:) 3887:) 3852:) 3811:) 3803:. 3793:) 3776:iz 3743:) 3700:) 3682:) 3663:) 3634:) 3620:) 3595:) 3550:) 3527:) 3501:) 3471:) 3435:) 3420:) 3405:) 3390:) 3368:) 3349:) 3326:) 3272:) 3248:) 3229:) 3207:) 3173:) 3146:) 3138:. 3123:) 3105:) 3047:) 3011:) 2993:) 2964:) 2950:) 2935:) 2910:) 2879:) 2828:) 2812:) 2798:) 2754:: 2729:) 2712:) 2641:) 2520:) 2491:) 2442:) 2394:) 2361:) 2319:) 2305:) 2283:) 2219:) 2201:) 2179:) 2157:) 2110:) 2077:) 2063:) 2029:) 2006:) 1966:) 1929:) 1875:) 1832:) 1817:) 1800:) 1779:) 1757:) 1741:) 1722:) 1620:) 1563:) 1513:) 1491:) 1468:) 1436:) 1352:) 1294:) 1235:) 1175:) 1141:) 1127:) 1107:) 1069:. 1033:) 1002:) 932:) 898:) 856:) 812:) 756:, 752:, 748:, 724:) 668:) 621:) 583:) 561:) 498:) 483:) 468:) 446:) 376:) 323:) 309:) 288:) 274:) 260:) 239:) 225:) 211:) 191:) 187:• 136:) 83:) 6437:( 6333:( 6226:( 6123:( 6115:( 6088:( 5928:( 5774:( 5720:L 5667:( 5571:( 5564:: 5560:@ 5548:( 5516:( 5505:: 5501:@ 5462:( 5428:@ 5417:( 5387:( 5373:( 5358:( 5274:( 5245:( 5224:( 5205:( 5177:( 5101:( 5087:: 5083:@ 5047:( 5028:( 4975:( 4956:( 4941:( 4926:( 4898:( 4879:( 4860:( 4846:( 4828:( 4807:( 4783:( 4776:: 4772:@ 4760:( 4738:( 4718:( 4684:( 4670:( 4652:( 4646:: 4642:@ 4631:( 4613:( 4594:( 4572:( 4516:( 4500:( 4481:( 4431:( 4417:( 4402:( 4384:( 4366:( 4352:( 4337:( 4319:( 4300:. 4286:; 4279:; 4272:; 4249:: 4235:( 4216:( 4167:( 4151:( 4130:( 4072:( 4011:( 3997:( 3978:( 3948:☎ 3929:( 3902:☎ 3883:( 3872:☎ 3848:( 3837:☎ 3807:( 3789:( 3773:L 3739:( 3727:) 3723:( 3696:( 3678:( 3659:( 3630:( 3616:( 3591:( 3546:( 3523:( 3497:( 3467:( 3431:( 3416:( 3401:( 3386:( 3364:( 3345:( 3318:( 3310:. 3268:( 3244:( 3225:( 3203:( 3169:( 3142:( 3119:( 3101:( 3070:@ 3043:( 3007:( 2989:( 2960:( 2946:( 2931:( 2921:: 2917:@ 2906:( 2875:( 2849:) 2845:( 2840:~ 2824:( 2808:( 2794:( 2725:( 2708:( 2637:( 2598:: 2590:@ 2574:. 2516:( 2487:( 2473:: 2469:@ 2438:( 2428:: 2424:@ 2390:( 2357:( 2351:: 2347:@ 2315:( 2301:( 2295:: 2291:@ 2279:( 2211:( 2197:( 2190:: 2186:@ 2175:( 2169:: 2165:@ 2149:( 2136:. 2106:( 2073:( 2059:( 2025:( 2018:: 2014:@ 2002:( 1962:( 1925:( 1905:) 1901:( 1871:( 1828:( 1813:( 1796:( 1775:( 1753:( 1737:( 1718:( 1648:. 1616:( 1559:( 1509:( 1502:: 1498:@ 1487:( 1464:( 1432:( 1425:: 1421:@ 1396:) 1392:( 1387:~ 1374:) 1370:( 1365:~ 1348:( 1328:) 1324:( 1319:~ 1290:( 1260:) 1256:( 1251:~ 1231:( 1207:. 1186:: 1182:@ 1171:( 1159:) 1155:( 1150:~ 1137:( 1123:( 1103:( 1081:. 1079:: 1075:@ 1067:4 1064:3 1061:2 1058:1 1029:( 998:( 975:: 971:@ 955:: 951:@ 928:( 915:) 911:( 906:~ 894:( 874:) 870:( 865:~ 852:( 838:) 834:( 829:~ 808:( 795:: 787:@ 772:: 768:@ 764:: 744:@ 720:( 664:( 617:( 610:: 606:@ 579:( 572:: 568:@ 557:( 536:: 532:@ 494:( 479:( 464:( 458:: 454:@ 442:( 372:( 365:: 361:@ 319:( 305:( 299:: 295:@ 284:( 270:( 256:( 250:: 246:@ 235:( 221:( 207:( 183:( 147:/ 132:( 123:· 118:( 102:/ 79:( 73:: 69:@

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

Index