User talk:Petergriffin9901/Archive 23

423:

based on existing FA Criteria). Why I was asking Sandy to transfer those comments of mine was for the nom page to feel like inviting for other reviewers. Even if I crash my Oppose out, still there's no clear consensus. FAC takes more than one or two Supports. Besides, my review was grounded on the contents. There are so many aspects that reviewers look into. And nitpicking? That is very common in that area. While at work, I was actually thinking if my comments there have made the FAC (and for you) stressful (and perhaps frustrating). --

1372: 31: 831: 1281: 1893:

what I said was: " it was my understanding (based on looking at other discussions for GA reviews) that should problems arise in the review, that you, the reviewer, were to prepare a list of things to be improved and give the nominating party, me in this case, an opportunity to remedy those faults."--L1A1 FAL (talk) 14:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC)(on your talk page)

1889:

understanding of the GA criteria"--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 19:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC) <--this for example could have been phrased more politely) and dismissive - you have simply refused to clearly address my concerns, and simply resorted to hiding behind the GA standards whenever I ask you to address my concerns.

926: 1765:

I did not say (nor infer) that the reviewer is supposed to rewrite the article in question. I was under the impression that the reviewer highlights a specific listing of problems to be fixed so that the article can be passed. I also encourage you to look at the review page, as I posted several issues

703:

I'll send a mail to the owner asking for permission. However, I don't think he/she will allow to use it (see the "Request to license Streuth! ;-)'s photos via Getty Images" tag below (C) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED? I think he/she wants us to pay for the image.) Btw, you didn't reply to my IKWYW part :P And,

1896:

You claim that you would gladly re-review the article with no wait when (more likely "if" now, since I am still not really sure of what all the things you were pointing out are) I get the article GA-worthy - however, you really offered no help in the interim, since you really aren't clear as to what

1888:

It seems to me that you didn't really look closely over the article, as I would expect a reviewer to not make such trivial mistakes, much less refuse to acknowledge them, and that is exactly what you have done - you have been condescending ("I'm sorry to say this, but all this shows is your lack of

1871:

You cite Infowars as a unreliable source...in the context that it is used in (Mustaine on the Alex Jones Show) it is perfectly reliable since it is Jones' website. I would think he would be a reliable source for his own show. Would I use infowars as a source for George W. Bush or Queen Elizabeth II

644:

As you wish. I've started collecting material, as I said. You can work on LB :) Well, "SI" is a good choice (we can show the use of live band). We can merge the article today, but can you wait till my confirmation? I'll notify you within a few hours. As for the pics, no reply yet :( I asked for all

321:

Commercial performance. Perhaps you make another subsection for the album's commercial performance since you added the singles. But I am concerned about how that (singles) is presented. Its sort of a collection of info culled from each single's page and pasted unto that subsection. Since its under

1892:

Furthermore, you put words in my mouth: "I don't know here you got the idea that a GA reviewer is a copy-editor, who fixes all the issues."--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 18:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)(on my talk page) when I never said, nor inferred that the reviewer was supposed to rewrite the article;

1749:

for GA. Although I am new to the world of GA reviews, it was my understanding (based on looking at other discussions for GA reviews) that should problems arise in the review, that you, the reviewer, were to prepare a list of things to be improved and give the nominating party, me in this case, an

310:

I think Sandy's not going a run though the FACs so Mimi's not going anywhere until the following week, I think. My time's limited during weekdays, so I'll have to make this quick. Great improvement on the article. Cannot have a review, however, but I went to see it very very quick and here are my

1428:

Everything has been addressed and changed or responded to as to why it wasn't changed. Only thing left to do is crop the producer image which i really don't feel like doing right now; you can pass the article and ill do it later, i had been meaning to anyways. Thanks for doing the review by the

422:

Honestly, based on the current standing of the article, I still Oppose. What is bothering me is how the article was organized. Well, there are pretty much information in the article, but then those ramdom quotes, at times non-existent cohesion, and what not are bothering me (well, personally and

1908:

I would also like to note that I am seriously considering putting the article up for reassessment - not that the immediate assessment result may be much different, but if it is, hopefully I can get some better feedback from another reviewer other than yourself on how to improve problems in the

495:

Regarding your comment "They are meant to be solved in between you and me." I feel its going against the principle of Knowledge. I actually don't believe in that. While FA reviews are meant to be resolved by and between the reviewer and the nominator, there have been many instances that better

787:

YAY!!! It's finally live!! Amazing samples btw. I'm very proud of the article, what about you? However, I'm not so proud about the Development section :| I feel that there's no connection... I can see that you've already added the credits :) Also, the image above. Can you tell me the song?

759:

Thanks! :D I've posted the sources on the talk page of the sandbox. Also, yes, we need that too. I thought of creating a "Artwork and title" section but couldn't find many sources (esp. the artwork. I know it was shot in Capri though). Also, can you tell me which song she's singing

516:

Hmmm, I actually reviewed the article intermittently. I feel most of my prose concerns (at least those stated) have been addressed, that is why I sort of having this "brash" comments. Anyway, I will do another review if not on Saturday, I promise it will be on Sunday. Thank you.

1897:

needs to be done (how is the prose bad? MoS violations? what/where? so I can fix them. How are the references poorly formatted? I can't fix this stuff if you don't explain a little more clearly what exactly the problem is. Most of what you have pointed out is quite vague.

130:

Hey, maybe you didn't read my last message, but can you please cross out the points you feel have been addressed? It makes it easier to navigate throughout the review and do what's still missing. Also, sorry I haven't gotten on this. I've had lots of homework. --

1518:

Hello, Nathan. I understand that you are one of those select people around here who know the difference between the two and when (not) to use them as you find errors like these in FACs and GANs. I was wondering if you can quickly explain when to actually use

1750:

opportunity to remedy those faults. I would like to request that either you retract your 'automatic fail' to allow me a chance to improve said article, or re-review to give me such chance to actually react to faults you find in the article in question.--

1673:

How are you buddy? Thanks for the advice in the Rehab peer review. I removed the picture, however can you read the synopsis and find suitable screenshot from it and uploaded for me, cause I really think the section needs a screenshot. Thanks & SY !

1900:

Ultimately, while I must again stress that I was displeased by the result of your review, I am most irritated by your condescending and dismissive attitude and what I believe to be a lack of attention to, and/or interest in the subject matter of the

189:

Actually, The Oskosh West Index was the first site that appeared when I clicked on Google News archive. And when we're talking about the archive, I don't know why but every time I search something there I can find news just till 10th page.

1853:

I must say that while I was understandably disappointed by the result of your review alone, I am even more irritated by the fact that you still have not even addressed my concerns about your reviewing of the article. You have said that:

314:

There's a lot of random quotes in the music and lyrics section. Most of them pertains to individual songs actually. As emphasized in the FAC review, there has to be cohesion in the entire idea that is presented for that particular

1088:

I'm glad you like it. I found it to be excessive and confusing detail. Its not something noteworthy. You have to list the important things, not every detail that happens in the video or it gets confusing. What do you think of the

1875:

you claim that there is a source by the name of "Megahammer" There was none. Perhaps you were seeing "Metal Hammer" which is a heavy metal news magazine, and would be perfectly acceptable as a reference on a heavy metal-related

1867:

To quote you: "The references are just in shambles. So many poorly formatted references and just plain unreliable ones; infowars.com, megahammer.com, roadrunners.com, everydayjoe.com" - What part of the format is poor exactly?

273:

Okay I have crossed out resolved issues / concerns. I will be back perhaps tomorrow. You know that's huge. BTW, I don't know the existing policy now. Can I possibly use a template to hide (collapsible) those resolved?

1912:

Lastly, while I would greatly appreciate if you would grant me assistance so that I may improve the article, I expect otherwise. Quite frankly, I can't say I even expect you to read my complaint in its entirety.

1845:

Firstly, I should point out that I am quite reluctant to voice my complaints in such a bold and up-front manor (even as I am typing this, I am hoping that you would render more useful assistance in improving

1271: 1635:

Yes WP. They are very different. After reading what I wrote on Jivesh's page, know that those you listed (RS, BB) are cite web. Only newspapers (NYT, USA, Chicago-Sun Times, Newsday etc) use cite web.--

1472:

Hey, just commented back. As far as the introduction of how this concert was different from the Up! Tour, I thought the point was evident. Apparently not, where exactly is it confusing you the most? --

682:

Also CB is done. I forgot to ask something before: Should we include "I Know What You Want" in the singles section? I mean, it was from Busta R's album, included on the re-release of CB. Is it needed?

1272: 318:

I was wondering if Mariah did improve her vocals in Mimi. Did critics noted that (in considerable coverage)? I was wondering if you could also emphasize that (perhaps along music and lyrics).

1858:

the prose is not strong - How is it not strong? I personally haven't found a great deal of issues with it, just a few here and there, although that is not to say that it could not be better.

559: 664:

Towards the end, maybe some portion between showcasing her whispers and the belting? I can't really choose a definite time lol (maybe, where she sings "If you really need me baby...")?

1872:

being 7 1/2 foot tall lizard people or whatever? Probably not. But in the context that it IS used in it is perfectly suitable - I would think Jones should know who was on his own show.

1302: 1879:"Roadrunners.com" - You were right in that it was a typo (supposed to be "Roadrunnerrecords.com", the website for Megadeth's label), but not that its an unreliable source (fixed now) 1378: 1371: 1422: 1861:

MoS violations...You specifically cited Billboard - Were you talking about in text (one instance only) or in the references? what other MoS-contradicting features are there?

764:? I can't figure it out. Lastly, don't care about my comment on "BOTH"'s guitar solo etc. It's not possible, I just listened to the song again. Upload a portion you like :) 1738: 1598: 578:

I was born in 1990. I did like them and boybands such as Westlife and BSB were very popular in the Philippines. I also like Britney. Yeah. I will support in due time. --

1840: 1344:. I was wondering if you are able to review it though because you are also signed up to review 14 other articles at the same time. Is this right or was this a mistake? 497: 146:

Oh, OK. That makes sense. I think one of the major problems is how to make it clear that she wasn't on her Up! Tour, just performing three concerts before it began. --

1759: 1014: 1575: 1455: 1436: 981: 1925: 1229: 1208: 1182: 1161: 1135: 1110: 241: 227: 213: 199: 1083: 1730: 1711: 1461: 1385: 876:

Wow, thank you so much :D You're one of my best friends on Wiki too ;) I'd love to work with you on other articles and yes, you need to push me sometimes :D

1834: 1449: 1430: 1329: 1630: 155: 1656: 1795: 1775: 1442: 976: 907: 889: 871: 820: 777: 754: 736: 695: 677: 807:

Lol, I can see a sofa and maybe you can use it in "TTR". The Flickr user has not sent any mail :( I'll try and find more sources for Re-release.

1140:

I do. I still don't think its worth mentioning, but honestly if you do, then by all means revert. I really don't mind. Its was just a thought.--

1009: 408:

Sandy to transfer my comments (perhaps in toto) on the nom's talk page. That'll invite other reviewers to weigh in on their comments. Thanks. --

1553: 1482: 1360: 362:

for example. If you want to keep those mentioning of almost all songs, try weeding out the unnecessary stuffs like random quotes. Also, like

1508: 619: 605: 587: 571: 554: 540: 526: 509: 466: 446: 432: 417: 336: 322:

commercial performance, it is suggested that you revamp that to make it read like commercial performance. There's unnecessary details, too.

297: 283: 140: 723:

Yes, a separate section for re-release would be awesome. We can include the information about IKWYW, Miss You, There Goes My Heart etc.

1819: 946: 1882:"everydayjoe.com" - re-reporting a story from Roadrunner Records' news website 'Blabbermouth.net' (since replaced w/ original source) 288:

Peter, I have added my comments there. I might be able to respond during weekdays, but not on re-reviewing the article. Thank you. --

1864:

Unsourced content...you specifically cited the chart positions - You 100% were correct in pointing that out (and it has been fixed)

1416: 1266: 1057: 966: 941: 183: 936: 545:

Sort of. Having been born in the 90s, I grew up listening to pop songs that were very popular late into the 90s and early 20s. --

1166:

Ok Nathan. I hope you are not angry. Actually, i think it should be added because in my opinion the tattoo is there on purpose.

120: 108: 1684: 1067:, before she bathes in a tub of flowers as well as berries and blows billows of smoke", especially the part i put in bold??? 94: 86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 1421: 1355: 931: 1004: 405: 1031: 849: 801: 717: 658: 1783: 1467: 858:

Sure. I'll post the sources within a few hours, maybe? It's 10 AM here and I have to go to temple, pray et cetera :)

761: 218:

Yes, I added those. But for ex. when I click on page 11 it returns me back to p. 10. Is the same happening with you?

1782:

Furthermore, I did correct a few things, but again, I have mentioned what I believe to be a few errors on your part

921: 382: 267: 531:

I am presently writing, having read 90% of the prose. In a while, I'll have my comments posted. Thanks Nathan. --

1335: 995: 125: 1487: 991: 1298: 1825:

Thank you, Nathan! You're such a good reviewer and wikipedian. Thanks again for being so amazing! :) -

1706: 1651: 1324: 1203: 1156: 1105: 741:

I'm not so good in writing lol. I'll provide the sources, can you create the section? Pretty please :)

496:

outcomes are generated by the participation of other reviewers. I don't mean like butting in like what

47: 38: 17: 1000: 1513: 1365: 358: 237: 223: 209: 195: 179: 1247: 961: 1745: 1614: 1570: 1503: 1350: 1224: 1177: 1130: 1078: 1052: 1801: 1581: 1536: 610:

Hehe. Not quite familiar with their music. I listen to I think 5% of Philippine music. (shame) --

1830: 1815: 1691: 1636: 1341: 1309: 1188: 1141: 1090: 116: 1725: 1679: 1480: 233: 219: 205: 191: 175: 153: 138: 8: 1604: 1560: 1493: 1345: 1263: 1214: 1167: 1120: 1068: 1042: 1921: 1791: 1771: 1755: 1520: 1187:

That's okay Jivesh, just emphasis that the tattoo is a reference to the album title.--

1524: 1036: 1025: 971: 901: 883: 865: 843: 814: 795: 771: 748: 730: 711: 689: 671: 652: 1826: 1811: 1668: 1559:

See my talk page. And wow at that title. Did you see it on "1+1" revision history?

1407: 161: 112: 102: 1807: 1743:

As per the title, I am here to complain about your reviewing of my nomination of

1474: 956: 951: 147: 132: 986: 46:

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

1258: 1253: 1041:

Hi Nathan. Finally, i watched the video. Can you do a screenshot 3:46 please?

1917: 1787: 1767: 1751: 1626: 830: 615: 601: 583: 567: 550: 536: 522: 505: 462: 442: 428: 413: 378: 332: 293: 279: 263: 1535:

News for a while now, but I have a feeling that I might be wrong. Thanks, —

1065:

A quick peek at the "IV" tattoo inked on Knowles' left ring finger is shown

1019: 895: 877: 859: 837: 808: 789: 765: 742: 724: 705: 683: 665: 646: 253: 1394: 1308:

I have the page watch-listed and have already left additional comments.--

1289: 639: 453: 1273:

Knowledge:Featured list candidates/Jennifer Lopez discography/archive1

366:, I would suggest you give an analysis (based on reliable sources) of 437:

So you don'w want to get those comments of mine transferred then? --

1622: 1340:

Hey. I'd like to say thank you for signing up for the GA review of

611: 597: 579: 563: 546: 532: 518: 501: 458: 438: 424: 409: 374: 328: 289: 275: 259: 1810:

take another look and tell me if there is something still. :) -

1379:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Jennifer Connelly/archive4

373:

s musical style, and perhaps her voice, to support the lead. --

356:

Regarding my concern about the section music and lyrics, take

1582: 1537: 1063:

The image is perfect. Thanks. Why did you remove this line: "

327:

That's all for now. Thanks for the patience, Nathan. Ciao! --

171: 166:

Sorry about disturbing you, but could you please tell me are

1388:

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

258:

Yep. Its on my watchlist. I'll visit the page right away. --

167: 1448:

Again, talkback, all GA requirement have been addressed. -

996:

I know, an article about Britney. But, they do mention "LB"

1115:

Nathan, in case you forgot, Beyonce's new album is called

1806:

Hey, Nathan! I think I have fixed everything you said on

1605: 1561: 1494: 1215: 1168: 1121: 1069: 1043: 1690:

Sure Tommy. Give me some time and I'll get to it :)--

1615: 1571: 1504: 1225: 1178: 1131: 1079: 1053: 1739:

Complaint about your review of my nominated article

1377:Hello, Petergriffin9901. You have new messages at 1621:(butting in) I think both have different usage. -- 204:I'm looking for "Sweet Sacrifice" by Evanescence. 1841:I'm still waiting for you to address my concerns 1766:there that I don't feel like retypinging here.-- 1527:}}. I have been using the former for MTV News, 1850:), but I feel that you have marginalized me. 1400: 1395: 500:perhaps. So what would you like me to do? -- 1409: 562:. Sorry I feel I still have to oppose. -- 922:MTV (a small something about the video) 596:. I'll get back to it maybe tonight. -- 14: 704:thanks heaps for sending the scans :) 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 25: 1720:Sure, take your time :). Greetings 23: 1370: 24: 1936: 1916:Extremely disappointed in you, -- 1279: 829: 645:the images of the uploader lol. 29: 1726: 1680: 1588: 1543: 451:One good example to take from: 107:Hey friend, could you comment 13: 1: 1926:23:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1835:16:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC) 1820:17:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1796:18:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1776:18:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1760:14:02, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1731:19:14, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1712:18:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1685:12:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1657:18:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1631:14:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1599:11:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1576:11:28, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1554:11:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1509:09:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1483:04:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1462:04:10, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1443:03:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 1417:17:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 1361:04:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 1330:03:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 1303:03:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 1267:14:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1230:08:35, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1209:08:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1183:08:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1162:08:26, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1136:08:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1111:08:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1084:08:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1058:06:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1032:14:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 908:04:38, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 890:04:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 872:04:30, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 850:04:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 821:04:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 802:04:12, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 620:06:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 606:06:15, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 588:03:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 572:03:46, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 555:03:21, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 541:03:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC) 527:12:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC) 510:13:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 467:13:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 447:12:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1423:Talk:Sleazy (Kesha song)/GA1 174:reliable sources for songs? 7: 1290: 1119:. did you get what i mean? 778:08:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 755:07:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 737:06:44, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 718:06:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 696:08:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 678:07:34, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 659:04:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 592:Saw it. Taking a rest from 433:14:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 418:11:32, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 383:04:16, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 337:13:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC) 298:12:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC) 284:16:00, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 268:15:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC) 242:17:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 228:16:59, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 214:16:45, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 200:16:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 184:13:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC) 156:22:00, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 141:21:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 121:21:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC) 10: 1941: 232:Yes. Thank you very much. 18:User talk:Petergriffin9901 1468:Up! Live in Chicago again 364:Love. Angel. Music. Baby. 359:Love. Angel. Music. Baby. 1375: 1603:Lol. It is the same. 1374: 1342:The Drug in Me Is You 1336:The Drug in Me Is You 311:additional comments: 168:The Oskosh West Index 126:Up! Live in Chicago 2 42:of past discussions. 1580:Lol, no I didn't. — 1523:}} as opposed to {{ 957:This is kinda funny 894:You take care too. 1727:Question Existing? 1681:Question Existing? 1488:I'm trying my best 1386:remove this notice 1376: 937:Video info (a bit) 1905:album's article. 1514:Cite news vs. web 1366:Jennifer Connelly 855: 854: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 1932: 1728: 1723: 1709: 1703: 1696: 1682: 1677: 1654: 1648: 1641: 1617: 1611: 1593: 1592: 1573: 1567: 1548: 1547: 1506: 1500: 1458: 1452: 1439: 1433: 1414: 1413: 1406: 1404: 1399: 1389: 1358: 1353: 1348: 1327: 1321: 1314: 1294: 1287: 1283: 1282: 1261: 1256: 1252:You're welcome! 1227: 1221: 1206: 1200: 1193: 1180: 1174: 1159: 1153: 1146: 1133: 1127: 1108: 1102: 1095: 1081: 1075: 1055: 1049: 987:NME Track review 833: 826: 825: 372: 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 1940: 1939: 1935: 1934: 1933: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1843: 1808:Kill the Lights 1804: 1802:Kill the Lights 1741: 1721: 1707: 1697: 1692: 1675: 1671: 1652: 1642: 1637: 1587: 1542: 1516: 1490: 1470: 1456: 1450: 1437: 1431: 1426: 1408: 1393: 1390: 1383: 1368: 1356: 1351: 1346: 1338: 1325: 1315: 1310: 1301: 1280: 1278: 1276: 1259: 1254: 1250: 1213:Thanks Nathan. 1204: 1194: 1189: 1157: 1147: 1142: 1106: 1096: 1091: 1039: 642: 370: 256: 234:My love is love 220:My love is love 206:My love is love 192:My love is love 176:My love is love 164: 128: 105: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1938: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1880: 1877: 1873: 1865: 1862: 1859: 1842: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1803: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1779: 1778: 1740: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1715: 1714: 1670: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1583: 1578: 1538: 1515: 1512: 1489: 1486: 1469: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1425: 1420: 1382: 1369: 1367: 1364: 1337: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1297: 1275: 1270: 1249: 1248:You're welcome 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1038: 1035: 1017: 1016: 1012: 1007: 1002: 998: 993: 989: 984: 979: 974: 969: 964: 959: 954: 949: 944: 939: 934: 929: 924: 915: 914: 913: 912: 911: 910: 853: 852: 834: 824: 823: 785: 784: 783: 782: 781: 780: 701: 700: 699: 698: 641: 638: 637: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 626: 625: 624: 623: 622: 513: 512: 492: 491: 490: 489: 488: 487: 486: 485: 484: 483: 482: 481: 480: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 474: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 354: 353: 352: 351: 350: 349: 348: 347: 346: 345: 344: 343: 342: 341: 340: 339: 324: 323: 319: 316: 255: 252: 251: 250: 249: 248: 247: 246: 245: 244: 163: 160: 159: 158: 127: 124: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1937: 1928: 1927: 1923: 1919: 1914: 1910: 1906: 1904: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1881: 1878: 1874: 1870: 1869: 1866: 1863: 1860: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1851: 1849: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1797: 1793: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1780: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1757: 1753: 1748: 1747: 1732: 1729: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1713: 1710: 1704: 1702: 1701: 1695: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1683: 1658: 1655: 1649: 1647: 1646: 1640: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1612: 1610: 1609: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1597: 1594: 1591: 1586: 1579: 1577: 1574: 1568: 1566: 1565: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1555: 1552: 1549: 1546: 1541: 1534: 1533:Rolling Stone 1530: 1526: 1522: 1511: 1510: 1507: 1501: 1499: 1498: 1485: 1484: 1481: 1478: 1477: 1463: 1459: 1453: 1451:(CK)Lakeshade 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1440: 1434: 1432:(CK)Lakeshade 1424: 1419: 1418: 1415: 1412: 1405: 1403: 1398: 1387: 1380: 1373: 1363: 1362: 1359: 1354: 1349: 1343: 1331: 1328: 1322: 1320: 1319: 1313: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1300: 1295: 1293: 1286: 1274: 1269: 1268: 1265: 1262: 1257: 1231: 1228: 1222: 1220: 1219: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1207: 1201: 1199: 1198: 1192: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1181: 1175: 1173: 1172: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1160: 1154: 1152: 1151: 1145: 1139: 1138: 1137: 1134: 1128: 1126: 1125: 1118: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1109: 1103: 1101: 1100: 1094: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1082: 1076: 1074: 1073: 1066: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1056: 1050: 1048: 1047: 1034: 1033: 1029: 1028: 1023: 1022: 1015: 1013: 1011: 1008: 1006: 1003: 1001: 999: 997: 994: 992: 990: 988: 985: 983: 980: 978: 975: 973: 970: 968: 965: 963: 960: 958: 955: 953: 950: 948: 947:NY Daily News 945: 943: 940: 938: 935: 933: 930: 928: 925: 923: 920: 919: 918: 909: 905: 904: 899: 898: 893: 892: 891: 887: 886: 881: 880: 875: 874: 873: 869: 868: 863: 862: 857: 856: 851: 847: 846: 841: 840: 835: 832: 828: 827: 822: 818: 817: 812: 811: 806: 805: 804: 803: 799: 798: 793: 792: 779: 775: 774: 769: 768: 763: 758: 757: 756: 752: 751: 746: 745: 740: 739: 738: 734: 733: 728: 727: 722: 721: 720: 719: 715: 714: 709: 708: 697: 693: 692: 687: 686: 681: 680: 679: 675: 674: 669: 668: 663: 662: 661: 660: 656: 655: 650: 649: 621: 617: 613: 609: 608: 607: 603: 599: 595: 591: 590: 589: 585: 581: 577: 576: 575: 574: 573: 569: 565: 561: 558: 557: 556: 552: 548: 544: 543: 542: 538: 534: 530: 529: 528: 524: 520: 515: 514: 511: 507: 503: 499: 494: 493: 468: 464: 460: 456: 455: 450: 449: 448: 444: 440: 436: 435: 434: 430: 426: 421: 420: 419: 415: 411: 407: 403: 402: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 386: 385: 384: 380: 376: 369: 365: 361: 360: 338: 334: 330: 326: 325: 320: 317: 313: 312: 309: 308: 307: 306: 305: 304: 303: 302: 301: 300: 299: 295: 291: 287: 286: 285: 281: 277: 272: 271: 270: 269: 265: 261: 243: 239: 235: 231: 230: 229: 225: 221: 217: 216: 215: 211: 207: 203: 202: 201: 197: 193: 188: 187: 186: 185: 181: 177: 173: 169: 157: 154: 151: 150: 145: 144: 143: 142: 139: 136: 135: 123: 122: 118: 114: 110: 96: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1902: 1899: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1852: 1847: 1844: 1805: 1744: 1742: 1699: 1698: 1693: 1672: 1644: 1643: 1638: 1607: 1606: 1595: 1589: 1584: 1563: 1562: 1550: 1544: 1539: 1532: 1528: 1517: 1496: 1495: 1491: 1475: 1471: 1427: 1410: 1401: 1396: 1391: 1339: 1317: 1316: 1311: 1291: 1284: 1277: 1251: 1217: 1216: 1196: 1195: 1190: 1170: 1169: 1149: 1148: 1143: 1123: 1122: 1116: 1098: 1097: 1092: 1071: 1070: 1064: 1045: 1044: 1040: 1026: 1020: 1018: 932:Morning Call 916: 902: 896: 884: 878: 866: 860: 844: 838: 815: 809: 796: 790: 786: 772: 766: 749: 743: 731: 725: 712: 706: 702: 690: 684: 672: 666: 653: 647: 643: 593: 452: 367: 363: 357: 355: 257: 165: 148: 133: 129: 106: 75: 43: 37: 1827:Sauloviegas 1812:Sauloviegas 982:Music video 972:Music video 454:In Rainbows 113:Xwomanizerx 36:This is an 1722:Tomica1111 1676:Tomica1111 1531:News, and 1476:ipodnano05 1429:way. :) - 498:I did here 172:the-trades 149:ipodnano05 134:ipodnano05 111:?, Thanks 95:Archive 30 87:Archive 25 82:Archive 24 76:Archive 23 70:Archive 22 65:Archive 21 60:Archive 20 1909:article. 1521:Cite news 1037:1+1 video 917:Sources: 406:requested 1918:L1A1 FAL 1788:L1A1 FAL 1768:L1A1 FAL 1752:L1A1 FAL 1669:Hey Nath 1529:Bilboard 1525:Cite web 1492:Thanks. 1411:Tell me! 1384:You can 1299:contribs 1089:video?-- 836:Cheers! 315:section. 162:Question 103:Criminal 1903:Endgame 1876:article 1848:Endgame 1746:Endgame 1708:Talk2Me 1653:Talk2Me 1616:Talk2Me 1608:Jivesh 1590:PENGUIN 1572:Talk2Me 1564:Jivesh 1545:PENGUIN 1505:Talk2Me 1497:Jivesh 1457:talk2me 1438:talk2me 1326:Talk2Me 1226:Talk2Me 1218:Jivesh 1205:Talk2Me 1179:Talk2Me 1171:Jivesh 1158:Talk2Me 1132:Talk2Me 1124:Jivesh 1107:Talk2Me 1080:Talk2Me 1072:Jivesh 1054:Talk2Me 1046:Jivesh 1021:Novice7 967:Slant 2 897:Novice7 879:Novice7 861:Novice7 839:Novice7 810:Novice7 791:Novice7 767:Novice7 744:Novice7 726:Novice7 707:Novice7 685:Novice7 667:Novice7 648:Novice7 39:archive 1700:Nathan 1694:CallMe 1645:Nathan 1639:CallMe 1347:Ground 1318:Nathan 1312:CallMe 1292:Status 1264:(talk) 1197:Nathan 1191:CallMe 1150:Nathan 1144:CallMe 1099:Nathan 1093:CallMe 1255:Loves 977:A bit 962:Slant 942:a bit 560:There 16:< 1922:talk 1831:talk 1816:talk 1792:talk 1784:here 1772:talk 1756:talk 1627:talk 1402:uwen 1352:Z3R0 1285:Done 1260:Macs 1027:talk 927:SPIN 903:talk 885:talk 867:talk 845:talk 816:talk 797:talk 773:talk 762:here 750:talk 732:talk 713:talk 691:talk 673:talk 654:talk 616:talk 602:talk 594:Mimi 584:talk 568:talk 551:talk 537:talk 523:talk 506:talk 463:talk 457:. -- 443:talk 429:talk 414:talk 379:talk 368:Mimi 333:talk 294:talk 280:talk 264:talk 254:Mimi 238:talk 224:talk 210:talk 196:talk 180:talk 170:and 117:talk 109:here 1623:Efe 1585:WP: 1540:WP: 1357:002 640:Hi! 612:Efe 598:Efe 580:Efe 564:Efe 547:Efe 533:Efe 519:Efe 502:Efe 459:Efe 439:Efe 425:Efe 410:Efe 375:Efe 329:Efe 290:Efe 276:Efe 260:Efe 1924:) 1833:) 1818:) 1794:) 1786:-- 1774:) 1758:) 1724:• 1705:• 1678:• 1650:• 1629:) 1613:• 1569:• 1519:{{ 1502:• 1479:* 1460:- 1454:- 1441:- 1435:- 1397:GD 1392:-- 1323:• 1288:— 1223:• 1202:• 1176:• 1155:• 1129:• 1104:• 1077:• 1051:• 1030:) 1010:OS 1005:BB 952:EW 906:) 888:) 870:) 848:) 819:) 800:) 776:) 753:) 735:) 716:) 694:) 676:) 657:) 618:) 604:) 586:) 570:) 553:) 539:) 525:) 517:-- 508:) 465:) 445:) 431:) 416:) 404:I 381:) 335:) 296:) 282:) 274:-- 266:) 240:) 226:) 212:) 198:) 182:) 152:* 137:* 119:) 91:→ 1920:( 1829:( 1814:( 1790:( 1770:( 1754:( 1625:( 1596:· 1551:· 1381:. 1296:{ 1117:4 1024:( 900:( 882:( 864:( 842:( 813:( 794:( 770:( 747:( 729:( 710:( 688:( 670:( 651:( 614:( 600:( 582:( 566:( 549:( 535:( 521:( 504:( 461:( 441:( 427:( 412:( 377:( 371:' 331:( 292:( 278:( 262:( 236:( 222:( 208:( 194:( 178:( 115:( 50:.

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