User talk:SheffieldSteel/Archive 5

461:- I have a question. Don't take this the wrong way, because I will heed your warning about edit warring, and do accept the final warning on the merits that i was edit warring. However, you said that I 'clearly' violated 3RR. I am not sure how this is the case. I do understand that 3RR can be interpreted rather loosely, and it doesn't have to be 4 reverts in 24 hours to be 3RR. However, I had 4 reverts in 96 hours, and all my reverts were to undo the modification of my words under the guise that the phrase 'POV' was 'hate speech'. yes, i edit warred. but did i 'clearly' violate 3rr? i really don't think the acronym 'POV' is 'offensive hate speech', so i felt somewhat justified in removing the fallacious claim. if someone reverts me for a reason that is clearly wrong, shouldn't i be able to add it back? i mean, this guy has been blocked over 10 times for NPA, 3RR, and so on, amongst his various sockpuppet accounts, and he's been warned countless times. every time i've tried to reason with him, he just makes personal attacks and reverts all attempts at discussion with him on his talk page as 'vandalism'. but anyway, was it really 'clearly' 3RR? and in the future, if someone reverts you with a blatantly fallacious reasoning, shouldn't you be allowed to explain to them that they're wrong, revert them, and report them, without facing potential consequences? if you just let someone get away with making unnecessary changes based on false premises, don't we end up with an encyclopedia with bullies getting the final say, regardless of the merits of their changes? 3124:

edits stupid repeatedly before (landon 1980). The outcome of that discussion was that he was attacking my edits, not me personally. By the way, landon and I have since become much more ammicable and help each other (the entire thing was because he thought I was someone else anyway). Also, I've just reviewed the no personal attacks and the incivility pages, and my comment does not qualify as incivil or as an attack. I'm certainly allowed to be of the opinion that a specific edit is not an intelligent one (which would imply it is a stupid one), and I can express this without insulting the editor... I do realize you're an admin, but to be honest, I don't care. You might abuse your authority by making improper, trumped-up threats, but in the end, that's not beneficial to anyone. Have a wonderful day!

4332:(od) I feel a little foolish for responding to what turned out to be a form letter, especially since there hasn't been any followup. I would really prefer to see these things on noticeboards and major article talk pages only. It doesn't seem to fall under the current canvassing guidelines, tho, except in a pretty squishy way - the part about preselecting recipients according to their established opinions. If he were engaging in serious dialogue with all the individuals to whom he sent the letter (in response to their votes for other proposals), it would look better. I don't know to what extent that's happening, and I don't really want to dig thru diffs and contribs to find out. Just my personal take. 117:

was displeasing to a large extent - which convinced me get away from Knowledge for good - since it allows such Nazi treatment of contributors. Now I see that I am not the only person with such claims. My next "crime against humanity" was that I found spelling errors in this person's writings and questioned how my posts could be deleted only 12 seconds after they were posted - indicating my answers were not even looked at - just straight out deleted. That type of behavior has not been seen since the time of the Nazis - including the MegaNazi - Stalin who outHitlered the Fuehrer himself.

2997:. However, it may still be possible to argue that a violation was justified. Of course, other editors may not agree and a block may follow, but in general, the more severe and urgent your edit is, the more likely you are to get support for it. The phrase "no reasonable editor" was an attempt on my part to formulate the sort of test that might be used in this situation. Of course most editors think of themselves as reasonable - the point is what others will think, and not every editor will be good at applying such a test to their own edits. In other words, use at your own risk. 2638: 31: 180:

discussion I added my comments on that (page prior to this one) having failed to open a new tab. Yes it is a mistake on my end - but it sort of makes sense if we conclude that the same moderator had stated only 5 days ago "Alright, I shall do so in the future rather than edit war.— Dædαlus Contribs 21:43, 23 March 2009" - obviously the future for this moderator is any time period under 4 days, since my own posts on my talkpage were deleted by this person.

2081:. How dare you, or your ilk, lecture an Irishman on "civility" - particularly while you people are trying to claim that me and my entire very large Irish Catholic and republican family are "British" by virtue of being part of what British nationalists such as you claim is your "British Isles". Have you ever, ever spoken with an Irish person? With these "British Isles" ideas, I doubt it very very much. Open your mind, and your heart will follow. 3213:

generally agree that I can be more specific in why I'm reverting, I disagree that adding "another... edit" is harmful. In fact, that was mostly a cynical commentary on what I perceive to be your attempt to censor my comments about my OWN edits. I believe that should I have called my own edit stupid again, you'd have escalated the "blocking" threats, even though no WP policy addresses this. Therefore, I did not call my edit stupid this time.

3838: 5065: 2504:... I would like to point your attention to the fact that this Buckley quote was not removed; I cross-checked the accuracy of the 'cite' ] provided, and found that it was taken out of context of the original text, and some liberties were taken with it by Dapi89. I have replaced his 'cites' from Buckley with actual, direct quotes from the said author from the referenced page. Ever since you warned him , Dapi89 still 4752:. Commenting on contributors is the explicit purpose of such a page. And yes, now that you mention it, I don't see personal attacks there. I see some questionable claims that should be backed up by solid evidence, but no personal attack. I've no doubt that there are things going on here I'm not familiar with, but such a warning for posting an outside view just struck me as very odd. 2388: 3233:(reduce indent) In my second post to you, linked above, I did not say that your summary was incivil. I am not interested in debating whether your edit summary was within the letter of the law. What I said was that it was unhelpful, and not compatible with a friendly collaborative editing environment. Even if you were to clearly and unambiguously label 968:. I know that you were at best peripherally involved, but I thought that you might be interested in making comments. The request currently has four accept votes and no rejections, so I think that it will probably be accepted by the end of the day, and comments from any and all parties knowledgable about the subject will probably be welcome. Thank you. 762:? One editor (using at least 2 IP's) is persistently edit-warring to insert inappropriate material. They've violated 3RR (if you total their reverts under various IPs), but semiprotection might be more useful than blocks since their IPs appear somewhat dynamic. Anyhow, wondering if you'd be willing to take a look - if not, I'll send it to 487:. Unfortunately, the latter is simpler to understand, evaluate and enforce (barring admin error, of course!) and so it tends to be cited more often. If you read up on 3RR, you'll see that there are a few important exceptions - cases where reverts will not be counted against you. It's a very good idea to study that list, and in the cases 1489:

stuff done and won't be checking in at all during that time. I think things tend to stay a lot more chill at the Obama page when there's an admin or two hanging around over there, so I was just hoping that you could continue to do that. And if not no worries since we are, like, volunteers or something. I'll be back after

398:

that no further reverts should be made until consensus has been established through discussion, but I also believe that the person who reverts has to initiate the discussion. If there is no discussion started, I think it is reasonable to assume participants are happy to settle the dispute through editing.

4306:

I am not implying and have not implied bad faith; I quite carefully and straightforwardly stated what you had done. If any user read my message and formed the opinion that your conduct was problematic, we must consider whether such an opinion was formed on the basis of my words, or of your actions. I

4272:

I do not think that your contacting these editors was a good idea. I do not think that you are the right person to be contacting those who have endorsed a position that's in opposition to your own view. One of the editors changed their position, endorsing your view, after you contacted them. Whatever

2973:

Does this view not differ from the discussion we've just had on the Administrators' noticeboard, where the consensus about Abd was that *any* edit construed a violation of his ban? Also "no reasonable editor" can be an extremely subjective viewpoint in these cases (doesn't everyone believe their own

2488:

occasions. Is it me, or is this vandalism? When I revert, whatever he has put in inbetween deleting it and adding text, gets reverted. That's his problem. Unfortunately any attempt at reaon and compromise only works when it is in his favour - you can see this from the talk page too. All his edits are

1488:

Hey Sheffield (can I call you that? or Sheff? or is a shortening of your nom de plume verboten?...anyway), I notice that you seem to be watching the main Obama article pretty closely which is obviously good. I've been doing that as well but am going to sign off for about a week to get some real-world

4174:

I'm sorry you feel that way, but I've not asked anyone to change their position. Please don't misrepresent my comments that way. If you check the discussion page, you'll see that (for instance) John Carter has posted a description of why he thinks NPOV's criteria aren't sufficient in this case. I've

2657:

Looking at your revert you note that the change is not supported by the source. Actually it is. The source spells it both ways. The predominant spelling is the one given by the user (2 uses of TBWA versus one of TWBA). The Guardian is known for spelling mistakes. In fact its parodied by being called

2109:

Considering that someone who clearly did not have consensus to remove a section of a policy did so just before you locked this page, you should restore it back to the longstanding consensus version. This is not some mere article, this is a policy page. Right now the policy page is completely lacking

1578:

You saw a reason for interfering previously with the matters going on at that talkpage and well now we have this guy scjussey deleting my remarks. My remarks there are in no way of less significance than yours for example and it is totally unjustified to revert them. I ask that you permanently block

1293:

who has done both, I think, in response to your actions). Nonetheless, I'm always willing to listen to complaints and criticism. In this instance, if you want to see evidence of my talking to Scjessey regarding personal attacks, I suggest you look at the thread immediately above this one. It may not

179:

I am sorry I failed to open a new tab. I have found some traces of a moderator who has been criticized and instructed to do otherwise - to have violated the same requirement (Daedalus) doing the same thing to my talk page. Invariably, thinking this would be a constructive continuation of a preceding

120:

Naturally no human desires such frustrations, especially not from such source with questionable abilities, but unlimited power to block one's views and thoughts. I do not endorse thought police and I gladly bowed out and away from all Knowledge activities - although I will find adequate forums where

4826:

history of attacking you, I do not see any reason to commit myself to not taking any future action in an administrative capacity, and such may include warning you. I find it rather odd that you would ask me to "step back" when you have recently commented at an RfC in which I took part, but to which

3483:

Sheffield Steel, I think you may have misunderstood the position. The text now protected contains text proposed by AVDL, which he has inserted in contravention of the views of the great majority of editors involved on that page. The unfortunate situation this morning was merely a culmination of a

3018:

I'd bet money that if Abd reverted vandalism on the Cold Fusion article, he'd get slapped with an immediate block. So why should the ground rules be any different for another editor? The consensus around this point on the Administrators' board was black & white, not grey. I don't think we're

1938:

I think it is kinda notable to have it because few people know where it actually is/was. I've not reinserted it but I'd like to talk it over with you. It was called the Cambridge Arms and before that something else it changes its name so often. The oddest thing is it is not on Hobson St or Hobson's

1688:

I have to say that I interpret this as biased against me, I was merely answering remarks that had been made regarding me there and the accusation that I was deleting comments when I infact was deleting personal attacks. I ask that you strike your remarks out cause my comments were clearly legit and

802:

sooo i got kicked out again, or should i sai my finrad page got deleted. if you check the wikipedia of SunGard, who is similar to FinRad, they are up and running and not getting deleted. Have i done something wrong? they are not really different from the page i had created. let mek now. thanks for

358:

You haven't edited the article in question, but since you are or have been actively involved in the IEC prefix discussion (sorry to remind you of it if you, like me, got tired of the uncivil discussion and wanted to have nothing to do with the issue anymore), I invite you to consider the nomination

289:

This is a courtesy notice to all parties who had more than a one word comment in the previous discussion. I think it is a problem that won't go away, and I hope that you will be part of the solution, whether or not you and I have agreed previously. I hope that we can at least clarify the problem,

116:

Equal measure of self-aggrandizing brought Deadalus to my page talk page, where s/he kept deleting my own posts - although I found none offensive - I had just listed facts and pointed out how s/he views him/herself in a higher esteem than a 20 year tenured professor at MIT (Harvard). Obviously this

4090:

that things should be termed by "the common English language name as found in verifiable reliable sources"? "Republic of Macedonia" is neither the common English language name nor is it (by a very long way) the predominant term in reliable sources, the vast majority of which use simply "Macedonia"

3921:

Long answer: If the article is intended to be a joke, or has been written to make or to prove a certain point, you should make that clear on its talk page, and arguably at its AfD. If it is meant to be a serious article, then you will have to accept that other editors will edit it, it will have to

3243:

Editing collaboratively means not raising unproductive and divisive issues such as stupidity, bad faith, etc. Instead, describe edits that you revert as being in good faith yet uninformed or mistaken in some way - ideally with a link to policy or guideline pages, so that other editors can see what

2012:

I'm sorry to hear that I did something stupid. Unfortunately, I'm not getting any smarter - I can't see how protecting the wrong version would be any different to warning editors that they'll be blocked for continuing to edit war. If the edit war stops, I've achieved my goal. The advantage of this

397:

I apologise if I came across as hostile. I seem to be getting grouchy lately. It's something I'm going to have to address. I stand by the fact that someone in that editing exchange should have commented on the talk page before I did, but I was wrong to jump down your throat. I pretty much agree

290:

if not immediately agree upon a solution. If anyone thinks this is inappropriate canvassing, I am sure they will express that. I don't anticipate too many separated discussions on this topic, but if this one is closed and a new one opens, I'll probably notify you again, unless you ask me not to.

146:

Seems a little strange that the person (Daedalus) writes "Alright, I shall do so in the future rather than edit war.— Dædαlus Contribs 21:43, 23 March 2009" - and obviously "the future" expired on March 27th (four days later) when this contributor plowed into my discussion page. Just caught my eye

5311:

Can we make some progress on this please? We appear to have gone from one extreme to another. If we had a problem with edit warring before, we now have a situation where everyone is afraid to revert anything, even when there is agreement on it, for fear of being blocked. Surely that can't have

5265:

to "lock in" their preferred content. If they are in a tiny minority, a discussion will easily establish consensus to overturn their edit, and they will have been blocked for nothing; if their edit has overwhelming support then it ought to be easy to get consensus for it, and again it's not worth

5206:

That's a bit harsh, he was just returning it to the position it would have been in if your rule had been followed. Might encourage an IP to get him/her self banned just to get a position locked in. Looks like its been sorted now with the citation etc. however which is good news so hopefully the

3212:

With respect, I fully understand your point. I just disagree with your assertion that I was incivil (civility is a highly subjective concept, by the way). "another... edit" is in NO WAY incivil, nor am I inciting the trolls looking for lulz. That comment was not targeting that editor. While I

3123:

First, you do not know whether I meant that individual's edit was stupid or my own. To be clear, I DO think it's stupid that I repeatedly have to make the same vandalism revert due to ignorance (or blatant vandalism) of other editors. Further, I've TRIED taking task with an editor who called my

2877:

and I have reached a point of impasse with regard to the page itself... I'm afraid that his actions (and to some extent, my own) are harming the page, and that is why I'm asking for your help as an administrator to sort out my dilemma... this user has continually refused to leave the page alone,

1877:

It is true that C++ translates as "C Plus One", any programmer would know this as if you have a variable such as int number = 0; in a later line number++ would be equal to "number + 1", "number = number + 1" or "number += 1" and it does have a source which I added at the bottom in external links.

1152:

Thanks for your comments on ANI. I'm a bit perplexed by the discussion there that an uncivil user posting a duplicitous external link and forging a media-wiki interface is being condoned, yet this well-intended admin is being bashed. It's clear that I spend far too much time trying to help this

849:

Both users who reverted my edits did not cite any reason, Future Perfect of Sunrise made an unsubstantiated claim of plagiarism, for which he was challenged to substantiate, and the next reverted citing no reason whatsoever. I am afraid edit-warring is ahead, and I am afraid to revert the article

4140:

The final decision is actually up to the process referees, based on the arguments that have been put forward. It's not a vote but essentially a viewpoint-gathering exercise. It's just that if you're putting forward an argument that NPOV should be set aside in this instance, it would be useful to

2918:

If you're sure your proposed edit improves Knowledge, you should have no difficulty persuading another editor to make it for you. However, if you're sure that any reasonable editor would agree that your proposed edit improves Knowledge, don't let the rules stop you making it yourself. Just don't

4291:

I don't expect you to, but there's a difference between "not making any statement or edit" approving of my actions and pro-actively going out to other users' talk pages, with whom you have not communicated before on this issue, and posting implications of bad faith. I hope you will refrain from

3237:

as stupid, there is still a problem, because your revert would not be necessary if not for the original edit, and it is quite reasonable for any stupidity associated with an edit-revert pair to be associated by implication with one or the other editor. This can offend people and put them on the

2615:

I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not

1990:

Hi Sheffield, unfortunately you've done a stupid thing at British Isles. With your uncalled-for threat in an edit summary you've left the position whereby the advocates of one point-of-view, i.e. the currect edit, can now just walk away from the debate laughing at their good fortune - having a

1718:

Perhaps Scjessey may interpret my above post as biased against themself too, but all I have said is that the two of you need to avoid either making personal attacks or using the article Talk page for arguing user conduct. In other words, respect our policies. I haven't singled either of you

1270:

Well I do happen to have a problem regarding your administrator status on wikipedia and the way you behave yourself. You contact me on my talkpage regarding reverts that I have made to the dreamhost talkpage due to obvious personal attacks and yet I don't see any evidence that you have Ever

4556:

I'd like to unblock him now because of the idiotic attempt to get him further blocked. Let's let him comment on his Rfc, etc, it serves no useful purpose I can think of to keep him blocked and just drags this on. I think he will end up blocked indefinitely, but meanwhile what do you think?

1001:

Re your contribution to the arbitration page, I feel I should make one small but important correction - I only moved the page, I didn't touch the move permissions. I feel your wording is a bit ambiguous on that point and could be misinterpreted; maybe you could have another look at it? --

1666:

on any subject other than improving that article, and I don't think either of you needs to say anything about the other editor anywhere on Knowledge. Future disruption and personal attacks will be seen, and dealt with, without either of you needing to point anything out to anyone else.

5295:⬅Would have a quick look at the talk page of British Isles. There looks to be an agreement on a change on the use of Welsh, and a consensus (with one active dissenter) to a suggested phrase on the contentious issue. Some advice would be appreciated on where we are on these issues. -- 5142:

After blocking this editor, I am not about to revert their change just yet - particularly since several editors clearly have views on the subject. I'd like to see a discussion before anyone changes that again, even if the only consensus possible is to restore the pre-edit-war version.

4235:. I see that you have posted followups on a number of user talk pages, prior to Fritzpoll's post. I am concerned that these could be very misleading, given that I have been cleared of any wrongdoing, so I would appreciate it you could in good faith remove those followups you posted. -- 2914:

To be clear, should you violate this restriction and edit in areas you are topic-banned from, you will be blocked. - This should not require any further clarification. You might not want to take the advice of User:Abd, who was recently blocked from editing for editing in violation of a

475:

Apologies for the belated response. Looking back over the history, I see that I was mistaken about the 3RR violation, and that you are quite correct. Thank you for understanding my warning and accepting it in the spirit in which it was offered, i.e. a warning against edit warring in

1904:... prints 2, not 3. The statements above, that you suggest are equivalent, do not all produce the same result. More importantly than any argument I could make, though, the author/designer of the language has commented on its name and, to my knowledge, has never used that phrase. 2341:

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA, which was unable pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Hopefully, if/when I have another RfA I will win your support. Special thanks go to

1383:, or for the burning of Rome? Will this change as time goes by? It's been almost a decade since September 11, and I think the event (the most significant event in the history of the United States, should be closely examined without fear of gross censorship in the United States. ( 1182:. The IP editor was subsequently blocked for this. Now the IP has returned to disruptively remove comments from the same talk page, claiming they are personal attacks (against a different editor). Would you mind taking a look at this issue, since you are an uninvolved admin? -- 4961:

as well, but I'll wait to see if you think that is necessary. Since the original text of a ban is not kept in some handy place like the block log, they tend to disappear. For other community-ban entries at RESTRICT, I see that the newfangled convention is to make a file like

1354:

Thank you for stating your opinion politely and succinctly. Unfortunately, I have to inform you that in the absence of a more compelling argument than that already provided, I do not think it would be in Knowledge's best interests for me be avoid the pages in question.

1766:

The keep arguments that could be identified were all variations on the theme of "it's useful" and the delete arguments were based on notability and/or what wikipdia is not. Comparing those arguments against deletion policy, there just wasn't a good reason to keep.

2878:

despite the facts that his edits are unsourced... I hope that a resolution is available that can prevent any further harmto the page's contents, and I thank you for any advice on this matter that you can provide... you can find what I'm talking about here -: -->

2947:, which is where the "worms" factor comes in. If an edit is so self-evidently correct that no reasonable editor would disagree that making it improved Knowledge, then a case can be made that even a banned editor can make the edit. In the case of e.g. reverting 1271:

confronted this user Scjessey regarding his personal attacks which seem to have been ongoing for quite some time. What ever you do here you do it with your green color behind you showing that you are an administrator and therefor you do it as an administrator.

3588:

If you're worried about whether the right version or the wrong version of an article is protected, you are worrying about the wrong thing. You should be more concerned with finding a way to reach consensus to resolve the conflict, i.e. seeking a compromise.

3186:", you are more likely to be effective in changing the behaviour of good faith editors, and the bad faith editors will also find it less entertaining to see than if you show signs of being annoyed. Don't forget, some people edit here for the "lulz". See also 4725:

Well... is the problem that I wrote a comment after a templated warning, or that you think that no personal attack was made? Should I have warned him not to disrupt Knowledge to make a point? (If you don't know what that point is, I am happy to email you).

4622:

The user is continuously calling others sock puppets, he does more by baselessly accusing Gwen and another. Check his talk page. I suggest a reblock as he still thinks he's in the right, and will most likely try to get his articles back or something.—

3986:

I'm sorry if this was a problem. I really did think that a closure might be the best way to prevent further needless drama. If you wish to continue to discuss the issue there, I suggest starting a new thread as suggested by the discussion top notice.

850:

because of the three-revert rule, since am a newbie here can you help me out here by guiding me on what should I do next? Can I revert the article? As it stands there is no argumentative reason not to since my edits are very clean as you can see.

4155:

Having visited the talk pages of the other editors who have endorsed the same option as myself, I do not think that your actions are really appropriate, having the appearance of lobbying or pressuring other users into changing their positions.

283: 4175:

no intention of "lobbying" him because he's obviously addressed the issue of NPOV directly. It's only in a few cases where contributors have not addressed NPOV that I've asked them to clarify the issue - it's certainly not indiscriminate. --

4273:

your intentions - and I do not mean to imply that they are anything but good - the appearance of impropriety is clear and stark. I am not prepared to make any statement or edit that might give the impression that I approve of your actions.

2231:

That's the problem though, isn't it? You think you're on the side of the angels, doing what's right whatever it takes - the epitome of the chaotic good character - and maybe one day the right thing to do might involve doing something rather

5257:

Sorry for my incomplete post. I should have said that both users are now unblocked, having agreed to abide by the restriction. I took some care to word the block log entires fairly, and hopefully neither user comes out of this looking

4079: 556:. Thought I'd bring it here; I think it's worth a longer block on the Eye.earth account for obvious block evasion, but I'm hardly objective having long ago reached the point of frustration with him. So I'll leave it up to you. 4863:

Thanks for sharing your viewpoint Daedalus. This is the first place I ask people to bring any problems they have with me, and I hope that Law Lord can restrain himself from raising such matters on otherwise unrelated pages.

1411:

If you feel that the event should be "closely examined" I recommend that you find an appropriate online community who wishes to do so, and contribute to their efforts. You might find a suitable link if you start looking at

4121:

Chris, if policy is as strict and clear as you say, then there is no room for individual opinion to affect this decision. On the other hand, if there is room for individual opinions here, please respect mine. Thank you.

4141:

explain (and I would be personally interested to know) why you consider that to be necessary. I'm certainly not disrespecting your opinion - far from it; it's because I respect it that I'm asking for a clarification. --

3019:

being fair by treating people that are subject to the same rules in different ways. Furthermore, if something is so obviously wrong with an article, surely no "reasonable editor" would decline a request to fix it?

366:

I beg you to try to keep your sentiments about the actual IEC prefix on Knowledge question out of the deletion discussion and consider the merits of the deletion proposal, namely, notability in the Knowledge sense

3584:

I am aware of who reverted who and when. This information is a matter of record and I did not act in ignorance of it. I've restored the version that existed before this edit war began, which is in accordance with

3901:, and you explained your edit very well in the comment section. However, this particular article was intentionally written with a separate section for every tiny detail. Would you be willing to revert your edit? 1703:

Oh I would like to ad that the reason for my block that scusssey refered to was that I was judged to be a sockpuppett something which was later apologized for and reversed so I can not see how that is relevant.--

2422:

Apologies if I missed anyone out. I was attempting to warn everyone who'd recently reverted that particular edit, in an effort to stop the edit war. I must not have seen Snowded on the article's History page.

2613:'s support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record. 2745:

I think that's a fine edit you made. The edit summary invites a reply, however: Even if it's always the same reason, it could still be cantankerosity. Hard to prove, of course; good thing we don't have to.

2616:

performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much.

4658:

The goal is to more fully explain all the nuance and detail about dealing with plot summaries without bloating WP:NOT any more than it already is. In that regard, this page is intended to parallel

4094:). It would be helpful if you could consider this point, and if you continue to favour the option you supported, if you could explain why you believe NPOV should be set aside in this instance. -- 4341: 797: 4103: 4080: 3053:

If something is obviously wrong, no reasonable editor would decline a request to fix it. That's why, if you were banned from editing an article, but saw a problem, you'd ask someone to fix it.

1289:

Thanks for raising your concerns here. I haven't yet used my administrative tools in relation to this matter. I haven't blocked an editor, protected a page, etc. (compare the actions of admin

4244: 4115: 4035: 2923:

The first point was crystal clear, however the second opens the door to a potential can of worms. Please can you clarify, as I think you might have undermined the community ban here. Thanks

276: 3554:

Oh, I've just noticed - the claim above relating to "great majority of editors" is a downright lie. Did you spot that? Also, the complaining editors are themselves serial reverters of note.

2695:

Actually its because of its reputation that I'm not sure which way it really should be spelled, though I see there is a wiki page for TBWA and that TWBA redirects to it. All very confusing.

1923: 2597:. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors ( 4807:

with regards to your actions. If you honestly believe that you are unbiased with regards to me, then perhaps just step back in spite of this, and show how great you are at staying cool. --

3898: 1465:, you should know that he was just recently blocked as part of a long string of sockpuppets, most of which had been going around harassing me in one way or another. And while you may be 5332:

Hi. Are you still monitoring this article? An IP has been reverting an established editor against consensus and we can't do anything about it without risking a block ourselves. Thanks.

329:

I have filed a request for arbitration regarding recent bans of user accounts from which no activities could be found that dispupt Knowledge. The arbitration request can be found here:

258: 1991:

statement with a bum reference to "support" it. Instead of threatening editors, why don't you protect the article, if you see a need. I belive that's normal practice in these matters.

1406:

of 9/11-related articles. I'm not aware of any "special rules" for those articles, and I assume that this is because there haven't been particularly high levels of disruption there.

3366:

Not true. The text has no consensus. You are edit warring despite saying you wouldn't. I have requested page protection in order to protect the page from your disruptive behaviour.

4981:

Thanks for the notification; I sppreciate your thoughtfulness. Since you've gone to the trouble of digging out that link, I've gone ahead and added it to WP:RESTRICT. Regards,

1227:". Clearly the IP shouldn't be edit-warring to delete your comments, but I think they will stop if you can focus the discussion on content. I'll comment on their Talk page too. 2811:

I'm not sure who was who, but after reviewing the contribs & talk page history of that editor, I would say that this seems to be resolved. Thanks for the notice. Regards,

1416:. Knowledge, however, is not the place to right great wrongs, to unearth hidden truths, or to challenge received wisdom. On the contrary, the purpose of an encyclopaedia is to 5123:

I just caught myself in time responding! Would you restore the stable version? I think the insertion was a follow up on the mess with ArmChair and his Greek/Roman map. --

3385: 812: 1954: 1262: 920:

for more on harmonious editing. When an edit of yours is disputed, you can either accept that it doesn't have support, or you can discuss the edit in the hopes of getting a

337:

mentioned as an involved party, I send you this message as a courtesy for your information, and I hope that your opinion there can contribute to solve the issue. Thank you!

4452: 4426: 1964:). My only concern was that there might be a commercial interest in promoting the pub. I appreciate that you took time to discuss this rather than just reverting. Thanks. 1348: 1283: 5102:

Due to your guidelines on the talk page this constitutes a block. I'd do it myself, but they're your guidelines and didn't know what kind of length you where considering.

4027: 4940: 4934: 4073: 3648: 3628: 3360: 2512:

Its quite simply a misuse of the original source, removing what the actual author said with what Dapi89 would like him to say, and the two are in very different context.

1567: 195: 187: 165: 157: 136: 128: 4957:, the words 'community sanction' in Rotational's topic ban entry now are a link to your edit to his Talk page announcing the ban. For completeness, somebody should add 330: 3852: 2403:

Hello SheffieldSteel, please don't take this as criticism, but I'm wondering why you put a 3RR warning on my talk page for just a single revert at British Isles, when

324: 257:. Figuring the evidence speaks for itself (at least to most people) I was stretching a point to be generous and wrap things up, resisting my well known inclination to 4975: 4041: 4031: 2308: 4023: 3284:

i disagree that it was unhelpful. bottom line. furthermore, i did read your post before i deleted it, therefore, no disservice done! have a wonderful day, buddy!

3160:

Again, I was referring to my own edit as stupid, not the other editors, due to the fact that I think it's stupid I have to make the same edit over and over again.

2219: 1392: 342: 2031:

Fair point, but it's not a stupid issue, it's an issue of accuracy. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the BI article but you may be aware that consensus is

1469:

me, in the end the people doing the most complaining about me tend to get permanently banned later when others finally catch on to what exactly they are doing.

4774:

Our No Personal Attacks policy clearly says that some kinds of statement are never acceptable, including accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence.

4466: 4405: 4054: 3825: 3478: 2072: 2050: 2026: 375: 191: 183: 161: 153: 150:

I have never found any reference showing that future means only next two, three or four days. Must be my own shortcoming - since everything else was, as well.

132: 124: 3602: 2473: 2324: 2090: 1917: 1735: 1368: 1333: 504: 470: 2836: 2824: 1882: 1374: 747: 3102: 3071: 3033: 3013: 2988: 2968: 2852: 2257: 2129:? That's unfortunate. However, I am not going to make the final decision as to whether the disputed text is included or not. I am also not going to violate 2013:

approach is that editors can continue to edit and improve the article, even before this particular stupid issue has been resolved. I hope this makes sense.

1821: 1526: 1450: 218: 4877: 4858: 4636: 3953: 3935: 3410:

Yes can you restore the text to before the disruption? Otherwise the disruptive editors may think that their behaviour will get them what they want. Thanks

3278: 3222: 3207: 3169: 3155: 2730: 2704: 2686: 2302: 1746:

I know we still have no rule on this, but after a relisting, one additional immediate comment is not really enough to close. Others need time to respond.

996: 240: 4994: 4617: 4585: 4232:

One more thing. Fritzpoll, one of the referees in the discussion, has stated that he is "happy with what ChrisO has done" and does not see it as improper

4000: 3787:

continue to make revert to back the edit despite the obvious lack of consensus or even discussion on the page. I think it may be time for full protection!

3774: 3705: 3436:

Rather than block the three main editors involved in the above-mentioned edit war, I've protected the page so you can all take part in a discussion. That

2869:

Normally, I would only involve an administrator as a last resort, but I'm afraid I've reached it... in a series of revisions and counter-revisions of the

3569: 3549: 3493: 3453: 3429: 2769: 2214: 1977: 1866: 708: 5133: 4840: 4250:

Thank you for your reply on the Macedonia naming discussion page; could you please respond to this request, as I am concerned that while you may not be

3886: 3525: 3511: 2436: 2146: 1680: 1657: 1254: 1240: 1210: 1139: 791: 663: 652: 626: 581: 5279: 5232: 5217: 5201: 5179: 5156: 4697: 4652: 4297: 4263: 4240: 4212: 4180: 4146: 4111: 4099: 3649:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:British_Isles#An_Honest_Question:__How_is_this_related_article_.28British_Isles_naming_dispute.29_not_Original_Research.3F

2806: 1302:. Scjessey has been around long enough to be familiar with that wording and to understand the reference, and he was good enough to withdraw the remark. 1057: 1007: 451: 318: 4803:

Please stop writing on my talk page. Your insights are not welcomed, and given your history of attacking me, it is becoming increasingly difficult to

4788: 4759: 4739: 4599: 4320: 4301: 4286: 4216: 4202: 4184: 4169: 4150: 4135: 3910: 2535: 2447: 2268: 1890: 1120: 1061: 1047: 1029: 1011: 831: 2590: 2160: 960:

There is a request for arbitration regarding the naming dispute regarding the Republic of Macedonia and the recent unilateral move of the article to

949: 1513:

Hope you have a good break. I will certainly continue to keep an eye on the page. Either short form of the name is fine, by the way :-) Regards,

719:

Bingo. That's exactly what I would have liked to say to explain why I was fighting so hard to keep it open. Thanks for articulating it for me. :-)--

4651:

Good morning. You recently made a cogent and articulate comment at WT:NOT on the topic of plot summaries. Would you consider joining the effort at

3404: 1780: 607: 524: 5321: 4545: 4517: 3783:

needs to be protected again. After Armchair's editing without consensus on a volatile page, other editors who seem to like the disruption such as

1935:

you've removed my addition of the coaching house he lived in. As I imagine you guessed, I live quite close by there. But I've no connexion to it.

4808: 3859: 3669: 1757: 5184:

I've also blocked Footyfanatic3000 for reverting that same edit. With a view to further preventing this in future, I've added an edit notice to

5117: 4531: 4233: 3178:" you're likely to antagonise the other editor and possibly provoke more of the same. On the other hand, if you use a summary such as "removing 2543: 1648:(which has been blissfully quiescent for a while), including making personal attacks against me and one of your fellow administrators. Sigh. -- 284:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive187#Proposal for unban, apology, amnesty for Jvolkblum and related others, and topic ban for Orlady

5009:

to Knowledge! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

4551: 1396: 4267: 299: 4293: 4259: 4236: 4208: 4176: 4142: 4107: 4095: 3969: 2889: 2287: 2286:

I believe the reason that my post didn't get an edit conflict notice was because I was editing a different section to the hat/hab templates.

1741: 1053: 1003: 965: 804: 772: 562: 3867: 3674: 3293: 3133: 2845:, could help in finally tracking that character down. The D.C. area location reminds me of one who was blocked back sometime in the winter. 2567: 2174: 1763:

To be honest, I didn't really take the relisting notice into account when evaluating the contributions. I hope that doesn't cause a problem.

1339:

A single remark out of dozens. I think that it would be best if you stayed away from matters regarding Dreamhost from now on. Thank you. --

4915: 4386: 3806: 2910:

Thanks for your input in this matter. I have a question though about two of your recommendations that apparently contradict one another:

1548: 3757:. I have reverted my edit twice today, and I will not go for 3rd Revert today (as per respecting 3-Revert Rule). Ghmyrtle and MITH have 2484:

Its more than just the Blitz. Please look at the talk page. I have outlined clearly his removal of cited information from John Buckley on

879: 4566: 4364: 1712: 1698: 1611: 1588: 387: 5305: 3980: 2560:. There is a proposal to formally ban that idiot, now that he's branching out into harassment and trying to get other users in trouble. 1960:

Personally, I think the coordinates are a bit trivial, but I have no objection to your reinserting them in the article (as long as it's

680:

Thank you for telling me, but I actually like it the way it is. One little typo dose not hurt me unless it is in the book I am writing.

254: 199: 4013: 3892: 3298: 1316:

The green in my signature is not a signal that I'm an admin; it is just a custom signature (which any registered user can create - see

1089: 909:

you simply made a mistake in posting it here. Perhaps you used the wrong link? It shows the state of the article on the 16th of April,

4375: 3657:

then please dump it. If you feel that it is worth addressing, then please do so. Anyways ... I don't want to get blocked over this.

2793: 1507: 899: 3971:. The most recent comments were barely an hour old, and discussion was not restricted to the validity of the expired original block. 2280: 2006: 2974:

actions are reasonable?). I'm still not seeing the consistent approach here that I feel we should have towards all banned editors.

3770: 3701: 3665: 3624: 3356: 2841:

It's someone pretending to be Axmann8, just like a month or two ago. The IP he posted along with the other Axmann8 impostoring, in

412: 4021:

is now inviting comments on a number of competing proposals from the community. Please register your opinions on the RfC subpages

3922:

conform to the Manual of Style, and you'll have to provide arguments in favour of any particular format you think it should have.

3459:

You don't have to, but keeping the text inserted by the most disruptive editor will only encourage the behaviour the happen again.

2667: 2454: 689: 5049: 4954: 4508: 2937: 1872: 1802: 1223:" and refactoring it yourself, so that it looks less like a comment on the contributor, perhaps to something along the lines of " 265: 5207:

sanction is having an effect as people realise you are serious in its application. Maybe give him the same option as Tharky? --

2750: 2625: 1099:

tend to rely upon what is / is not expressly forbidden, rather than what might be productive or controversial. Just because you

4422: 924:

for it. The other party has the same options. What is not acceptable is continuing to revert other editors reversions. This is

728: 270: 169: 140: 4678: 1191: 983:

Thanks for the notification, John. I'll certainly be following the case, and will contribute if I feel I can help. Regards,

4006: 2498: 2416: 1847: 347: 5052:

on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out

4816: 843: 147:

that this person can not operate without restraint - and should be removed for repeated offenses against your own policies.

5341: 5266:

getting blocked over; for all situations in between, i.e. where consensus isn't obvious, a compromise ought to be sought.

4503: 2864: 2380: 2151:

I think that unprotecting the "wrong" version is going to result in the protecting of the "right" version. But we'll see.

1605: 1275: 1175: 753: 589: 540: 514: 110: 3682: 3633: 2717:

Luckily, a Google search for either spelling will take you to the correct one. I reverted my edit accordingly. Regards,

2224: 1722:

I'm familiar with the circumstances surrounding your block. I assure you that it hasn't affected anything I've said here.

977: 4912: 4352: 4051: 3831: 3766: 3697: 3661: 3620: 3391:

Sheffield Steel, I appreciate your comments on the talk page. Can an admin (hint, hint) now take some action on AVDL at

3352: 2849: 2833: 2803: 2564: 1545: 913: 4590:

So, will you do it and explain why or shall I do it? I agree with your view by the way (although I must read it again).

2203: 1942:

Suggestion: keep the coords but lose the name of the pub (which will probably change in six months anyway)? How's that?

862: 3084:, yet PJH might get away with it. So I don't expect the treatment to be fair, regardles of what we've discussed here. 2781: 2119: 1503: 84: 72: 67: 59: 5089: 3250: 3139: 1215:

Having taken a look at this, I think you both could behave less confrontationally. I'd like you to consider striking "

1164: 407: 4855: 4709: 4633: 4418: 4415: 1939:

Passage (but just round the corner). You'd think if you DID want to advertise it you'd make a better job than I did!

874:

Hello. I'm afraid that you've overreacted a bit. You see, that map was not added by me at all, it was in the article

215: 107: 4719: 2784:

maybe one of your past acquaintances trying to evade an indefinite block you placed. My apologies if I am wrong. --

1478: 5094: 3249:

A minor point: Your cynicism, and your continued talk of blocking threats, is another sign that you didn't read my

3118: 1073: 867: 5327: 1853:

I don't see anything obvious. I'll refrain from commenting at that page for now, to see what others have to say.

554: 1462: 617: 534: 4893: 1267:"If you have a problem with my use of administrator tools, tell me so and hopefully we can resolve the matter." 4963: 4958: 4909: 4086:

With regard to your endorsement of the main article naming, I wondered if you were aware of the requirement in

4048: 2829:

It's an obvious (and admitted) sock, and I'm fairly certain who it is, but it doesn't matter, as it's history.

2549: 2520: 2516: 1542: 1245:

Agreed. I will go and refactor that comment exactly as you suggest. Thank you for looking into this for me. --

5100: 1635: 5033: 3963: 2799:

Either that or someone pretending to be. There's been an unusual amount of impostoring going on this spring.

2775: 1623: 5018: 5006: 1629: 1403: 435: 2531: 2528: 2524: 2509: 2505: 606:

for a bit, as opposed to blocking the entire Sacramento Public Library system? Probably also worth giving

4921:

Okay. Your edit does make sense, now that I think about it in that light. Sorry to've undone your work.

4369: 4346: 3683:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:British_Isles#Island_of_Great_Britain_and_Island_of_Ireland_need_to_be_used

4414:

FYI: Although I have no opinion regarding the issue itself I think you should take a look at this diff

3440:

be more productive. Of course, it's up to your folks to make it so. I can't resolve the issue for you.

1617: 1573: 282:

This relates to the 4 part proposal i opened on March 26, which was closed on March 27 and archived at

38: 3498:

That is often the case when pages are protected due to a content dispute. Let me review the history.

875: 600: 551: 5110: 5038: 4462: 4382: 3848: 3788: 3562: 3542: 3484:

long dispute involving many editors and much, much, discussion, which AVDL has utterly disregarded.

3460: 3411: 3367: 3174:

With respect, I think you missed the point of my last post. If you continue to use comments such as "

2263: 2043: 1999: 1896:

C++ does not "translate" as C plus one. If C is 2, "C plus one" would be 3. But the following code...

1483: 277:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard#Long-running problem with respect to New Rochelle area articles

4011:

Since you have in the past taken part in related discussions, this comes as a notification that the

3175: 1402:

You should be aware that the Arbitration Committee case was a response to significant and prolonged

5099:

Just thought you should know. TharkunColl has just reverted a reversion on the British Isles page.

3851:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 2995:

any edit made by a banned editor, to a page they're banned from, construes a violation of their ban

2621: 2086: 1886: 1791:

Thanks, but I usually try to avoid that template; just a bit too fancy for my tastes. :) Regards, –

1708: 1694: 1599: 1584: 1344: 1279: 868: 675: 594: 545: 466: 174: 47: 17: 1274:

Your talk of block history on my talkpage is an insult as well and I ask that you strike it out.--

5222:

Just seen that you had already done that - thanks and apologies for bothering your talk page. --

5085: 4360: 2373: 1079: 724: 4092: 422:

Since you've never been blocked, I'm not going to issue one now. But you should consider this a

5013: 4798: 4646: 4374:

Hey Sheff. Following the suggestion of others, I'd like to limit my involvement. But his block

3531: 3094: 3025: 2980: 2929: 2740: 2673:

Thanks for pointing this out. I'm aware of the reputation of the publications you mention :-)

2650: 2550: 2479: 2213:

Nice fishapods. I try to think of myself as chaotic good. Saw your switch at Everking. Cheers,

1800: 1499: 1388: 537:), I thought I'd let you know that he's using his local public library to evade his block with 431: 363:, which I believe can fairly be said to have been created only as a hammer for the discussion. 360: 349: 4483:

Hey Sheff, I just wanted to thank you for the best wiki-smile I've had in days, maybe weeks.

4087: 5045: 4905: 4896:

revert: I'm preparing for the implementation of the results of the centralised discussion at

4852: 4630: 4355:. I haven't added you as an involved party, but if you're interested, feel free to jump in.-- 3949: 3906: 3289: 3218: 3165: 3129: 2700: 2663: 2276: 1983: 1579:

the user for this as well as other personal attacks from him that appear on that talk page.--

1169: 1082:. Thought you might be interested, since it's the same thing you've just described at AN/I. 973: 212: 104: 3765:). That is how-things-are at ole Knowledge (I know-the-ropes!). Take care, and best wishes 2539: 1832:

If you have the time and inclination, would you be so kind as to review the material in the

5103: 4971: 4595: 4562: 4496: 4458: 4378: 3976: 3784: 3555: 3535: 2905: 2398: 2036: 1992: 1786: 248: 8: 5317: 5267: 5189: 5144: 5053: 4982: 4922: 4865: 4828: 4776: 4727: 4685: 4663: 4605: 4573: 4440: 4393: 4308: 4274: 4190: 4157: 4123: 4061: 3988: 3923: 3874: 3813: 3615:

article after June 22, 2009. I won't be editing it. Take care eh (btw ... I've been to

3590: 3499: 3441: 3266: 3195: 3143: 3059: 3001: 2956: 2812: 2757: 2718: 2674: 2617: 2461: 2451: 2442: 2424: 2312: 2290: 2245: 2197: 2134: 2082: 2060: 2014: 1965: 1950: 1905: 1854: 1841: 1827: 1809: 1768: 1723: 1704: 1690: 1668: 1594: 1580: 1555: 1538: 1514: 1438: 1413: 1356: 1340: 1321: 1228: 1198: 1108: 1035: 1017: 984: 937: 819: 779: 735: 696: 685: 640: 611: 569: 528: 492: 462: 439: 306: 228: 2133:

policy by both taking part in an edit war at, and protecting, the same article. Sorry.

5028: 4950: 4942: 4812: 4542: 4528: 4356: 4337: 3863: 3727: 3521: 3489: 3400: 3258: 3183: 2885: 2846: 2830: 2800: 2789: 2609:

especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read

2561: 2412: 2365: 2332: 2115: 1833: 1653: 1641: 1474: 1290: 1250: 1187: 858: 720: 635:

had actually expired! Ah well, I've dealt with it. Extended the block to 48 hours per

5337: 5071: 4897: 4887: 4674: 4104:

Knowledge:Centralized discussion/Macedonia/main articles#Users who endorse Proposal A

4081:

Knowledge:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia/main_articles#Users_who_endorse_Proposal_B

3968:

Can you please stop archiving ANI threads so quickly, as you did with the CoM thread

2897: 2572: 2130: 2078: 1793: 1532: 1494: 1384: 1159: 714: 295: 262: 3696:

article becomes un-locked. I just wanted you to know eh. Take care and best wishes

2637: 5000: 4847: 4756: 4716: 4625: 4478: 3945: 3902: 3285: 3214: 3161: 3125: 2696: 2659: 2494: 2272: 1932: 1086: 969: 808: 403: 331:

Knowledge:Requests for arbitration#Block of editors related to sockpuppet Jvolkblum

207: 99: 4748:

I thought it was weird to see "comment on content, not contributors" applied to a

5081: 4967: 4659: 4591: 4558: 4491: 4060:

Thanks. I've responded on three of them; I'll think a bit more about 2 & 4.

3972: 2874: 2185: 2170: 2156: 2126: 933: 895: 837: 636: 392: 92: 1537:

Hi, you might want to have a look at a comment I left regarding your warning at

905:

It's possible that you're trying to deceive me with that link, but I'm going to

46:

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

5313: 5262: 4822:

I'm sorry to hear that my insights are not welcome. However, given that I have

4538: 4524: 4520: 4510: 3187: 2747: 2651: 2193: 2102: 1946: 1837: 1663: 1645: 1380: 1308: 1179: 1147: 955: 763: 681: 520: 275:

New Rochelle problem discussion notification: I've opened a new discussion at

3000:

I hope this is clear. It seems so to me, so perhaps I'm not explaining well.

2184:

Bah, I think you did the right thing by protecting. It's always going to the

205:

The user above has been blocked indefinitely for continued personal attacks.—

5185: 5023: 4804: 4703: 4684:

I make no promises of further intelligent thought, but I'll take a look :-)

4333: 3780: 3731: 3693: 3612: 3517: 3485: 3396: 3392: 3311: 3300: 3191: 3081: 3041: 2948: 2944: 2881: 2842: 2785: 2557: 2408: 2360: 2208: 2189: 2111: 2103: 1984: 1753: 1649: 1490: 1470: 1317: 1299: 1246: 1183: 1135: 921: 917: 906: 854: 768: 759: 659: 622: 558: 484: 427: 383: 4485:(e.g. "Support Candidate is a member of Wikiproject Foo. Down with WP:BAR!") 5333: 5296: 5223: 5208: 5170: 5124: 4670: 3812:

Thanks for the update. Please read the notice I've left at the Talk page.

3761:

to revert it more than 3-times ... but them is the breaks eh (an effective

2610: 2602: 2404: 2343: 2056: 1429: 1154: 929: 925: 480: 458: 414: 338: 291: 2879: 4845:

LL, please stop bringing your grudge into disputes which are unrelated.—

4753: 4713: 4487:. OK, full disclosure: It was a downright "Laugh Out Loud" moment. ;D — 3754: 3257:

before deleting messages on your Talk page, because that act is taken as

3179: 2490: 2347: 1961: 1456: 1425: 1421: 1083: 1078:

Just today I invented a name for a disease we see around here. I call it

399: 368: 305:

Thank your for the notice. I'm sorry, but I can't support your request.

4662:, a drill-down page which very successfully elaborates on and clarifies 1836:

and identify any further Policy content that should be moved? Thanks!

1294:

be obvious, because all I said was that the disputed text looked like a

5077: 3616: 2598: 2166: 2152: 891: 603: 3349:

MITH keeps deleting it ... without explaination. He just deletes it.

2110:

a section that is currently policy because of the timing of the lock.

4901: 3844: 2870: 2351: 961: 5064: 4439:

This seems to be covered at ANI. I don't really have much to add.

3858:

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

3837: 2606: 2515:

I also have to point out that Dapi89 ever since your warning keeps

1748: 1420:

received wisdowm. In practice, that means that we document what is

1307:

SarekOfVulcan has also addressed the issue of personal attacks, at

379: 4017:

page set up to decide on a comprehensive naming convention about

3735: 3050:

The rules should not be applied differently to different editors.

5060:

on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

2955:

make the edit. Clearly they should not then revert themselves.

3723: 3611:

I am throwing in the towel on this. No need to re-protect the

2241: 798:

Hi me again! the ones that doesnt know anything about wikipedia

620:) a formal sanction for repeated block evasion, but up to you. 371:), regardless of which units you believe Knowledge should use. 121:

I will convey my Nazi-type subjugation over the last few days.

4908:, so all links to plain "Macedonia" need to be disambiguated. 3265:

your Talk page messages, you are doing yourself a disservice.

2951:, I would go so far as to say that any editor, banned or not, 479:

I personally feel that editors should usually be warned about

2407:

reverted the same text three times and didn't get a warning.

1379:

Is there a special rule for Pearl harbor (1941)?, or for the

438:

in order to avoid this kind of situation in future. Thanks.

4712:? The warning makes no sense, as far as I can figure out. 3641:

This is a sincere question. I am not trying to disrupt the

3261:

that you have read them. If you don't take the time to read

2387: 932:

to Knowledge, and to prevent such disruption editors may be

97:

Alright, I shall do so in the future rather than edit war.—

3076:

I stand by my contention that other editors will block Abd

2556:

You may be aware of this already, since you tend to patrol

2233: 1924:

Hobson's Choice- why lose the coords of his coaching house?

4772:

I have rewritten the post slightly. I stand by this part:

3853:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/DreamHost_(2nd_nomination)

2059:

can be difficult. Edit warring isn't the answer, though.

734:

Glad to be able to help. I hope people listen. Regards,

4307:

believe Occam's Razor would apply to such a question.

4102:) 15:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC) I've posted some comments at 2165:

And I called it. I had little doubt it would happen...

1225:

your edits have the sole effect of attacking the company

886:, since he is the one that deliberately removed the map 3238:

defensive, which makes discussion and education harder.

1428:

according to what has been published on the subject by

878:. See the history of the article. Don't you think that 519:

Hey - as you were kind enough to respond to my post at

2658:

the Grauniad in the Private Eye news humour magazine.

2311:

about? It really does seem that you can't let it go.

491:

listed, seek assistance from other editors. Regards,

376:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/JEDEC memory standards

2523:. He also methodically removes cited references, see 1263:

Complaint regarding dreamhost talkpage administration

4827:you have no other apparent connection whatsoever. 4669:Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might have. 1640:

has just emerged from a block and immediately begun

4904:(i.e. country) article is soon to be moved back to 3843:An article that you have been involved in editing, 3080:if he touched the Cold Fusion aticle on grounds of 758:If you're about, could I ask you to take a look at 4653:Knowledge:Plot-only description of fictional works 4572:I agree. I'm just writing up a view for the RfC. 3619:, it is very nice patch of England. Cheers eh!) 3047:If you see a BLP violation, remove it immediately. 2188:to somebody. In the end, it makes no difference, 325:Request for arbitration - Unjustified ban of users 4949:You're the admin who entered Rotational's ban in 4254:bad faith your talk page followups do seem to be 3534:and you've succumbed to their claims. Well done! 3530:And thank you from me! The editors above claimed 2337: 1467:"aware that other editors have had problems with" 5261:I don't believe that any editor will attempt to 2576: 2035:reached on anything to do with the Irish angle. 1095:Interesting essay - thanks for the link. People 916:. Please, if you have not already done so, read 3395:, and return the text to its earlier version? 657:You're too nice. Thanks for looking into this. 5297: 5224: 5209: 5171: 5125: 2506:keeps deleting the original quote from Buckley 1662:I think that neither of you should comment at 1311:. Between us, I hope we can keep things civil. 3038:Let me try to be black and white here, then. 1375:Why is there a special rule for September 11? 4351:I've requested arbitration for DreamHost at 3653:If you feel that the section is bad for the 1900:int C = 2; int N = C++; printf( "%i", N ); 639:and semiprotected the article for a week. 190:) 16:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Iliya Pavlovich 160:) 16:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Iliya Pavlovich 131:) 15:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Iliya Pavlovich 5044:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a 3918:Short answer: Not without a better reason. 3897:Hi. I understand why you did that edit to 2780:I am not certain, but it is possible that 1491:defeating those damned French imperialists 1437:I hope this information helps. Regards, 1176:commented on the talk page of an IP editor 5070:Hello. Please don't forget to provide an 4457:Okay. Thanks for looking into it for me. 3738:, and numerous smaller adjacent islands. 3194:for other approaches to unwanted edits. 2450:, imo. Concise and fairly balanced. :) -- 3750:are correct, and in accordance with the 3328:Mikra Britannia (Little Britain) Insulae 2636: 3742:The usage of the long-form name of the 3726:archipelogo off the northwest coast of 3324:Megale Britannia (Great Britain) Insula 2240:- hey, it's not as if you don't have a 602:). Would you be willing to semiprotect 14: 4900:, which were concluded yesterday. The 4189:I've amended my posting accordingly. 1689:you are implying that they were not.-- 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2593:, which passed with a final tally of 1742:List of supermarket chains in Bahrain 4417:in case you didn't already see it.-- 2271:was done after the topic is closed. 1298:- a reference to the wording of our 1129:do something, doesn't mean that you 1103:do something, doesn't mean that you 25: 5056:, ask me on my talk page, or place 4353:Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Case 3338:many years before December 6, 1921 3044:applies everywhere, like it or not. 2580: 1178:who was disruptively commenting at 23: 5063: 4019:Macedonia-related naming practices 3899:Barack Obama fly swatting incident 3893:Barack Obama fly swatting incident 3336:Britanniae Insulae (British Isles) 2589:Thank you for participating in my 2354:for nominating me. Thanks again, 24: 5352: 4106:which you might find helpful. -- 3944:OK. Thank you for your response. 2641:Well, back to the office it is... 2510:replaces it with his own version. 631:Unbelievable. The original block 3836: 3556: 3536: 2993:I agree with the consensus that 2386: 2037: 1993: 853:Thank you and have a nice day.-- 568:Thanks. I'm looking into this. 426:since you have clearly violated 29: 3314:article. MITH keeps deleting a 2374: 2370: 2366: 2361: 2357: 1873:Why did you revert my C++ edit? 1808:Well, that's fine with me :-) 523:and are the blocking admin for 4964:User:Calton/Community sanction 4959:the link to the ANI discussion 3767:ArmchairVexillologistDonLives! 3698:ArmchairVexillologistDonLives! 3662:ArmchairVexillologistDonLives! 3621:ArmchairVexillologistDonLives! 3353:ArmchairVexillologistDonLives! 2355: 1554:Thanks; I have replied there. 374:The deletion discussion is at 271:New Rochelle discussion notice 13: 1: 5090:03:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC) 5074:. Thanks, and happy editing. 5014:The five pillars of Knowledge 4292:repeating that in future. -- 4007:Macedonia request for comment 3714:I have made the follow edit, 3090: 3021: 2976: 2925: 918:The Bold-Revert-Discuss Cycle 5112: 5104: 5034:How to write a great article 4419:The Magnificent Clean-keeper 3711: 3563: 3543: 2943:The second point relates to 2865:Administrative assistance... 2044: 2000: 1300:"No Personal Attacks" policy 1174:I noticed that you recently 884:discuss it and get consensus 818:Ok, let me look into this. 754:No good deed goes unpunished 515:Eye.earth evading your block 359:for deletion of the article 7: 5005:Hello, SheffieldSteel, and 3832:AfD nomination of DreamHost 3730:that include the Island of 2919:revert yourself afterwards. 2288:Odd that you didn't either. 695:You're welcome. Regards, 10: 5357: 4537:Never mind. Re-blocked by 3752:Oxford Style Manual (2003) 2582: 1699:23:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 1681:23:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 1658:22:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 1589:22:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 1568:21:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 1549:05:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC) 1527:12:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 1508:22:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC) 1479:00:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC) 1451:21:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC) 1393:21:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC) 1369:21:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC) 1349:19:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC) 1334:12:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC) 1296:comment on the contributor 1284:23:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC) 1255:19:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC) 1241:18:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC) 1211:18:15, 20 April 2009 (UTC) 1192:18:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC) 1165:22:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1140:20:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1121:19:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1090:19:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1062:22:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1048:19:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1030:19:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 1016:Gosh, let me check that. 1012:19:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 997:13:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 978:13:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 950:13:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 914:you added the disputed map 900:07:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 863:02:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC) 832:20:42, 16 April 2009 (UTC) 813:20:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC) 792:23:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 773:23:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 748:18:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 729:17:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 709:15:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 690:15:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 664:15:49, 15 April 2009 (UTC) 653:20:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC) 627:20:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC) 582:20:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC) 563:20:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC) 505:13:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC) 483:rather than violating the 408:12:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC) 266:20:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC) 241:13:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC) 219:04:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC) 200:16:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC) 170:16:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC) 141:15:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC) 111:21:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC) 5342:13:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC) 5322:16:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC) 5306:16:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC) 5280:21:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5233:20:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5218:20:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5202:20:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5180:18:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5157:18:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5134:18:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 5118:17:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC) 4995:12:59, 10 July 2009 (UTC) 4976:04:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC) 4406:21:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC) 4387:21:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC) 4365:03:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC) 4342:18:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC) 4321:22:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4302:22:13, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4287:21:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4268:21:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4245:20:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4217:19:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4203:19:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4185:19:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4170:18:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4151:18:23, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4136:17:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4116:16:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4074:14:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4055:07:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 4001:13:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 3981:02:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC) 3954:22:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC) 3936:21:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC) 3911:21:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC) 3887:17:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC) 3868:17:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC) 3826:17:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC) 3807:16:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC) 3775:15:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC) 3706:02:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC) 3670:05:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC) 3629:01:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC) 3603:17:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3570:16:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3550:16:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3526:14:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3512:13:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3494:13:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3479:13:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3454:13:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3430:13:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3405:13:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3386:12:56, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3361:12:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 3294:15:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 3279:14:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 3223:13:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 3208:13:35, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 3170:13:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 3156:20:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 3134:20:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 3103:09:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC) 3072:14:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 3034:13:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 3014:13:16, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 2989:09:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 2969:23:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 2938:23:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC) 2634: 2579: 2517:vandalizing the talk page 2384: 2340: 1125:... and just because you 633:would have expired by now 471:07:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC) 452:21:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC) 388:22:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC) 343:23:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC) 319:21:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC) 300:03:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC) 5095:British Isles reversions 4935:13:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC) 4916:05:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC) 4878:21:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4859:21:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4841:20:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4817:20:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4789:18:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4760:18:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4740:18:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4720:18:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4698:16:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4679:15:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4637:08:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC) 4618:13:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4600:13:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4586:13:29, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4567:13:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4546:00:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4532:00:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 4504:23:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC) 4467:18:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC) 4453:14:56, 1 July 2009 (UTC) 4427:00:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC) 3873:Already posted; thanks. 3330:. This establishes the 3182:info" or even "removing 3093: 3091: 3058:Hope this is now clear. 3024: 3022: 2979: 2977: 2928: 2926: 2890:02:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2853:02:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC) 2837:13:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC) 2825:13:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC) 2807:22:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC) 2794:22:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC) 2770:19:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC) 2751:19:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC) 2731:13:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC) 2705:13:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC) 2687:13:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC) 2668:13:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC) 2626:15:30, 24 May 2009 (UTC) 2568:03:52, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 2544:00:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 2499:22:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 2474:15:07, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 2455:15:01, 15 May 2009 (UTC) 2437:13:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 2417:08:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 2381:01:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 2325:18:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 2303:18:17, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 2281:18:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 2258:18:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 2225:18:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC) 2175:15:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC) 2091:21:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 2073:18:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 2051:18:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 2027:18:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 2007:18:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1978:13:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1955:13:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC) 1881:Thank you for your time 1080:"because I can" syndrome 1074:Newly discovered disease 869:Macedonia naming dispute 18:User talk:SheffieldSteel 4945:for one of your actions 3744:Island of Great Britain 3679:Hello ShieffieldSteel. 3608:Hello ShieffieldSteel. 3316:referenced contribution 2204:16:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 2161:18:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 2147:16:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 2120:16:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC) 1918:18:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1891:18:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1867:17:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1848:16:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC) 1822:18:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 1803:16:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 1781:18:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 1758:16:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 1736:00:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 1713:00:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC) 5068: 4552:Unblock Frei Hans now? 4088:WP:NPOV#Article naming 4014:Centralized discussion 3847:, has been listed for 3712:Hello ShieffieldSteel. 2642: 2551:User:Pioneercourthouse 2448:Good closure statement 1463:this talk page comment 842:Please take a look at 361:JEDEC memory standards 350:JEDEC memory standards 227:Thanks for the info. 5067: 4906:Republic of Macedonia 3964:Archiving ANI threads 3759:collectively combined 3192:Revert, Block, Ignore 2776:Possible bock evasion 2640: 2519:and continues making 2244:that you live by... 2236:to someone, but it's 1878:(AKA cplusplus.com). 1221:to attack the company 1217:You are editing here 778:I will take a look. 436:WP:Dispute resolution 42:of past discussions. 5312:been the intention. 3785:User:MidnightBlueMan 3318:showing the (c. 135 3310:I need advice about 2192:will rule the day. 934:blocked from editing 413:Re: Edit-warring on 5054:Knowledge:Questions 4708:Did you mean to do 4392:I'll take a look. 4377:needs to reviewed. 4370:Block review needed 4347:Arbitration request 3675:A Heads-Up (part 2) 2077:Hello? This is not 1539:User talk:3rdAlcove 1414:9/11 Truth Movement 1034:Sorry. Corrected. 586:Back for more with 5069: 5019:How to edit a page 4604:Give me a sec... 3734:and the Island of 3728:continental Europe 2644: 2643: 2587: 2396: 2391: 2125:Did I protect the 2057:dispute resolution 2055:I appreciate that 1574:Dreamhost talkpage 1291:User:SarekOfVulcan 888:without discussion 259:berserkly run amok 5304: 5276: 5272: 5231: 5216: 5198: 5194: 5178: 5153: 5149: 5132: 4991: 4987: 4931: 4927: 4874: 4870: 4837: 4833: 4785: 4781: 4736: 4732: 4694: 4690: 4677: 4614: 4610: 4582: 4578: 4509:Block evasion by 4502: 4449: 4445: 4402: 4398: 4317: 4313: 4283: 4279: 4199: 4195: 4166: 4162: 4132: 4128: 4070: 4066: 3997: 3993: 3932: 3928: 3883: 3879: 3822: 3818: 3599: 3595: 3508: 3504: 3450: 3446: 3322:) description of 3275: 3271: 3204: 3200: 3152: 3148: 3068: 3064: 3010: 3006: 2965: 2961: 2821: 2817: 2766: 2762: 2727: 2723: 2683: 2679: 2648: 2647: 2635: 2581: 2470: 2466: 2433: 2429: 2395: 2394: 2385: 2336: 2321: 2317: 2299: 2295: 2264:Closed ANI thread 2254: 2250: 2202: 2143: 2139: 2069: 2065: 2023: 2019: 1974: 1970: 1914: 1910: 1863: 1859: 1846: 1818: 1814: 1777: 1773: 1732: 1728: 1677: 1673: 1564: 1560: 1523: 1519: 1506: 1484:Obama admin stuff 1447: 1443: 1365: 1361: 1330: 1326: 1237: 1233: 1207: 1203: 1163: 1117: 1113: 1044: 1040: 1026: 1022: 993: 989: 946: 942: 828: 824: 788: 784: 744: 740: 705: 701: 649: 645: 578: 574: 501: 497: 485:three revert rule 448: 444: 406: 315: 311: 237: 233: 90: 89: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5348: 5303: 5301: 5277: 5274: 5270: 5230: 5228: 5215: 5213: 5199: 5196: 5192: 5177: 5175: 5169:Deal and done -- 5154: 5151: 5147: 5131: 5129: 5114: 5108: 5059: 4992: 4989: 4985: 4941:Added a link in 4932: 4929: 4925: 4875: 4872: 4868: 4850: 4838: 4835: 4831: 4786: 4783: 4779: 4750:user conduct RFC 4737: 4734: 4730: 4695: 4692: 4688: 4673: 4628: 4615: 4612: 4608: 4583: 4580: 4576: 4501: 4499: 4488: 4450: 4447: 4443: 4403: 4400: 4396: 4318: 4315: 4311: 4284: 4281: 4277: 4200: 4197: 4193: 4167: 4164: 4160: 4133: 4130: 4126: 4071: 4068: 4064: 3998: 3995: 3991: 3933: 3930: 3926: 3884: 3881: 3877: 3840: 3823: 3820: 3816: 3804: 3802: 3799: 3796: 3793: 3748:Island of Island 3713: 3600: 3597: 3593: 3567: 3560: 3547: 3540: 3509: 3506: 3502: 3476: 3474: 3471: 3468: 3465: 3451: 3448: 3444: 3427: 3425: 3422: 3419: 3416: 3383: 3381: 3378: 3375: 3372: 3332:geographic usage 3276: 3273: 3269: 3205: 3202: 3198: 3188:Deny recognition 3184:personal opinion 3153: 3150: 3146: 3142:on user's Talk. 3101: 3100: 3099: 3097: 3069: 3066: 3062: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3028: 3011: 3008: 3004: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2983: 2966: 2963: 2959: 2945:Ignore all rules 2936: 2935: 2934: 2932: 2901: 2822: 2819: 2815: 2767: 2764: 2760: 2728: 2725: 2721: 2684: 2681: 2677: 2632: 2586: 2577: 2521:personal attacks 2471: 2468: 2464: 2434: 2431: 2427: 2390: 2379: 2376: 2372: 2368: 2363: 2359: 2338: 2322: 2319: 2315: 2300: 2297: 2293: 2255: 2252: 2248: 2222: 2217: 2200: 2196: 2144: 2141: 2137: 2070: 2067: 2063: 2048: 2041: 2024: 2021: 2017: 2004: 1997: 1975: 1972: 1968: 1915: 1912: 1908: 1864: 1861: 1857: 1844: 1840: 1819: 1816: 1812: 1796: 1778: 1775: 1771: 1733: 1730: 1726: 1678: 1675: 1671: 1639: 1612:deleted contribs 1565: 1562: 1558: 1524: 1521: 1517: 1497: 1448: 1445: 1441: 1430:reliable sources 1366: 1363: 1359: 1331: 1328: 1324: 1238: 1235: 1231: 1208: 1205: 1201: 1157: 1118: 1115: 1111: 1045: 1042: 1038: 1027: 1024: 1020: 994: 991: 987: 947: 944: 940: 829: 826: 822: 789: 786: 782: 745: 742: 738: 706: 703: 699: 676:User name change 650: 647: 643: 598: 592: 579: 576: 572: 549: 543: 502: 499: 495: 449: 446: 442: 430:. Please review 402: 316: 313: 309: 238: 235: 231: 210: 175:Deadalus (again) 102: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5356: 5355: 5351: 5350: 5349: 5347: 5346: 5345: 5330: 5268: 5263:game the system 5190: 5145: 5106:Canterbury Tail 5097: 5075: 5057: 5039:Manual of Style 5003: 4983: 4947: 4923: 4890: 4866: 4848: 4829: 4801: 4777: 4728: 4706: 4686: 4649: 4626: 4606: 4574: 4554: 4541:. Thx, anyway! 4514: 4497: 4489: 4481: 4459:ChildofMidnight 4441: 4394: 4379:ChildofMidnight 4372: 4349: 4309: 4275: 4191: 4158: 4124: 4084: 4062: 4009: 3989: 3966: 3924: 3895: 3875: 3841: 3834: 3814: 3800: 3797: 3794: 3791: 3789: 3692:to edit if the 3688:Here is what I 3677: 3636: 3591: 3532:WP:WRONGVERSION 3500: 3472: 3469: 3466: 3463: 3461: 3442: 3423: 3420: 3417: 3414: 3412: 3379: 3376: 3373: 3370: 3368: 3344:political usage 3305: 3267: 3244:they did wrong. 3196: 3176:another... edit 3144: 3121: 3089: 3060: 3020: 3002: 2975: 2957: 2924: 2908: 2895: 2867: 2813: 2778: 2758: 2743: 2719: 2675: 2655: 2575: 2554: 2489:agenda driven. 2482: 2462: 2460:Thank you :-) 2445: 2425: 2401: 2335: 2313: 2291: 2266: 2246: 2220: 2215: 2211: 2198: 2135: 2107: 2061: 2015: 1988: 1966: 1933:Hobson's Choice 1926: 1906: 1901: 1875: 1855: 1842: 1830: 1810: 1794: 1789: 1769: 1744: 1724: 1669: 1597: 1576: 1556: 1535: 1515: 1486: 1459: 1439: 1377: 1357: 1322: 1265: 1229: 1199: 1172: 1150: 1109: 1076: 1036: 1018: 985: 958: 938: 872: 840: 820: 800: 780: 756: 736: 717: 697: 678: 641: 588: 587: 570: 539: 538: 517: 493: 440: 432:WP:edit warring 418: 395: 353: 327: 307: 273: 251: 229: 208: 192:Iliijapavlovich 184:Iliijapavlovich 177: 162:Iliijapavlovich 154:Iliijapavlovich 133:Iliijapavlovich 125:Iliijapavlovich 100: 95: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5354: 5329: 5326: 5325: 5324: 5293: 5292: 5291: 5290: 5289: 5288: 5287: 5286: 5285: 5284: 5283: 5282: 5259: 5244: 5243: 5242: 5241: 5240: 5239: 5238: 5237: 5236: 5235: 5220: 5162: 5161: 5160: 5159: 5137: 5136: 5096: 5093: 5062: 5050:sign your name 5042: 5041: 5036: 5031: 5026: 5021: 5016: 5002: 4999: 4998: 4997: 4946: 4939: 4938: 4937: 4889: 4886: 4885: 4884: 4883: 4882: 4881: 4880: 4800: 4797: 4796: 4795: 4794: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4765: 4764: 4763: 4762: 4743: 4742: 4705: 4702: 4701: 4700: 4648: 4647:re: WP:NOTPLOT 4645: 4644: 4643: 4642: 4641: 4640: 4639: 4588: 4553: 4550: 4549: 4548: 4521:User:Free Hans 4513: 4511:User:Frei Hans 4507: 4480: 4477: 4476: 4475: 4474: 4473: 4472: 4471: 4470: 4469: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4409: 4408: 4371: 4368: 4348: 4345: 4330: 4329: 4328: 4327: 4326: 4325: 4324: 4323: 4230: 4229: 4228: 4227: 4226: 4225: 4224: 4223: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4207:Thank you. -- 4083: 4078: 4077: 4076: 4008: 4005: 4004: 4003: 3965: 3962: 3961: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3939: 3938: 3919: 3894: 3891: 3890: 3889: 3835: 3833: 3830: 3829: 3828: 3740: 3739: 3710: 3676: 3673: 3635: 3632: 3606: 3605: 3586: 3581: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3577: 3576: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3552: 3435: 3433: 3432: 3389: 3388: 3304: 3297: 3282: 3281: 3263:and understand 3255:take more care 3246: 3245: 3240: 3239: 3231: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3120: 3119:"stupid edits" 3117: 3116: 3115: 3114: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3092:Socrates2008 ( 3056: 3055: 3054: 3051: 3048: 3045: 3023:Socrates2008 ( 2998: 2978:Socrates2008 ( 2949:BLP violations 2927:Socrates2008 ( 2921: 2920: 2916: 2907: 2904: 2893: 2866: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2858: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2777: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2742: 2741:Cantankerosity 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2690: 2689: 2654: 2652:Lewis Hamilton 2649: 2646: 2645: 2633: 2618:LessHeard vanU 2614: 2574: 2571: 2553: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2513: 2481: 2480:terror bombing 2478: 2477: 2476: 2452:Moonriddengirl 2444: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2400: 2397: 2393: 2392: 2383: 2334: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2265: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2210: 2207: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2106: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2083:Dunlavin Green 1987: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1925: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1883:Darkmonkeyz321 1874: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1829: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1788: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1764: 1743: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1720: 1705:194x144x90x118 1691:194x144x90x118 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1664:Talk:DreamHost 1646:Talk:DreamHost 1595:194x144x90x118 1581:194x144x90x118 1575: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1534: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1485: 1482: 1458: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1434: 1433: 1408: 1407: 1381:Trail of Tears 1376: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1341:194x144x90x118 1337: 1336: 1313: 1312: 1309:Talk:DreamHost 1304: 1303: 1276:194.144.90.118 1264: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1213: 1180:Talk:DreamHost 1171: 1168: 1149: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1075: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1032: 957: 954: 953: 952: 871: 866: 839: 836: 835: 834: 799: 796: 795: 794: 755: 752: 751: 750: 716: 713: 712: 711: 677: 674: 673: 672: 671: 670: 669: 668: 667: 666: 590:216.190.22.151 541:216.190.22.200 516: 513: 512: 511: 510: 509: 508: 507: 477: 463:Theserialcomma 417: 411: 394: 391: 352: 346: 326: 323: 322: 321: 272: 269: 250: 247: 246: 245: 244: 243: 222: 221: 176: 173: 145: 115: 94: 91: 88: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5353: 5344: 5343: 5339: 5335: 5323: 5319: 5315: 5310: 5309: 5308: 5307: 5302: 5300: 5281: 5278: 5264: 5260: 5256: 5255: 5254: 5253: 5252: 5251: 5250: 5249: 5248: 5247: 5246: 5245: 5234: 5229: 5227: 5221: 5219: 5214: 5212: 5205: 5204: 5203: 5200: 5187: 5186:British Isles 5183: 5182: 5181: 5176: 5174: 5168: 5167: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5158: 5155: 5141: 5140: 5139: 5138: 5135: 5130: 5128: 5122: 5121: 5120: 5119: 5116: 5115: 5109: 5107: 5101: 5092: 5091: 5087: 5083: 5079: 5073: 5066: 5061: 5055: 5051: 5047: 5040: 5037: 5035: 5032: 5030: 5027: 5025: 5022: 5020: 5017: 5015: 5012: 5011: 5010: 5008: 4996: 4993: 4980: 4979: 4978: 4977: 4973: 4969: 4965: 4960: 4956: 4952: 4944: 4936: 4933: 4920: 4919: 4918: 4917: 4914: 4911: 4907: 4903: 4899: 4895: 4879: 4876: 4862: 4861: 4860: 4857: 4856: 4854: 4851: 4844: 4843: 4842: 4839: 4825: 4821: 4820: 4819: 4818: 4814: 4810: 4806: 4790: 4787: 4775: 4771: 4770: 4769: 4768: 4767: 4766: 4761: 4758: 4755: 4751: 4747: 4746: 4745: 4744: 4741: 4738: 4724: 4723: 4722: 4721: 4718: 4715: 4711: 4699: 4696: 4683: 4682: 4681: 4680: 4676: 4672: 4667: 4665: 4661: 4656: 4654: 4638: 4635: 4634: 4632: 4629: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4616: 4603: 4602: 4601: 4597: 4593: 4589: 4587: 4584: 4571: 4570: 4569: 4568: 4564: 4560: 4547: 4544: 4540: 4536: 4535: 4534: 4533: 4530: 4526: 4522: 4518: 4512: 4506: 4505: 4500: 4494: 4493: 4486: 4468: 4464: 4460: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4451: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4435: 4434: 4433: 4428: 4424: 4420: 4416: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4407: 4404: 4391: 4390: 4389: 4388: 4384: 4380: 4376: 4367: 4366: 4362: 4358: 4357:SarekOfVulcan 4354: 4344: 4343: 4339: 4335: 4322: 4319: 4305: 4304: 4303: 4299: 4295: 4290: 4289: 4288: 4285: 4271: 4270: 4269: 4265: 4261: 4257: 4253: 4249: 4248: 4247: 4246: 4242: 4238: 4234: 4218: 4214: 4210: 4206: 4205: 4204: 4201: 4188: 4187: 4186: 4182: 4178: 4173: 4172: 4171: 4168: 4154: 4153: 4152: 4148: 4144: 4139: 4138: 4137: 4134: 4120: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4113: 4109: 4105: 4101: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4082: 4075: 4072: 4059: 4058: 4057: 4056: 4053: 4050: 4046: 4044: 4043: 4038: 4037: 4033: 4029: 4025: 4020: 4016: 4015: 4002: 3999: 3985: 3984: 3983: 3982: 3978: 3974: 3970: 3955: 3951: 3947: 3943: 3942: 3941: 3940: 3937: 3934: 3920: 3917: 3916: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3900: 3888: 3885: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3869: 3865: 3861: 3856: 3855:. Thank you. 3854: 3850: 3846: 3839: 3827: 3824: 3811: 3810: 3809: 3808: 3805: 3803: 3786: 3782: 3781:British Isles 3777: 3776: 3772: 3768: 3764: 3760: 3756: 3753: 3749: 3745: 3737: 3733: 3732:Great Britain 3729: 3725: 3721: 3720:British Isles 3717: 3716: 3715: 3708: 3707: 3703: 3699: 3695: 3694:British Isles 3691: 3686: 3684: 3680: 3672: 3671: 3667: 3663: 3658: 3656: 3651: 3650: 3646: 3644: 3639: 3631: 3630: 3626: 3622: 3618: 3614: 3613:British Isles 3609: 3604: 3601: 3587: 3583: 3582: 3571: 3568: 3566: 3561: 3559: 3553: 3551: 3548: 3546: 3541: 3539: 3533: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3523: 3519: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3510: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3491: 3487: 3482: 3481: 3480: 3477: 3475: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3455: 3452: 3439: 3431: 3428: 3426: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3406: 3402: 3398: 3394: 3387: 3384: 3382: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3347: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3317: 3313: 3312:British Isles 3308: 3302: 3301:British Isles 3299:Advice about 3296: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3280: 3277: 3264: 3260: 3256: 3253:. You should 3252: 3251:previous post 3248: 3247: 3242: 3241: 3236: 3232: 3224: 3220: 3216: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3206: 3193: 3189: 3185: 3181: 3177: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3167: 3163: 3159: 3158: 3157: 3154: 3141: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3104: 3096: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3070: 3057: 3052: 3049: 3046: 3043: 3040: 3039: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3027: 3017: 3016: 3015: 3012: 2999: 2996: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2982: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2967: 2954: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2941: 2940: 2939: 2931: 2917: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2903: 2899: 2892: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2880: 2876: 2872: 2854: 2851: 2848: 2847:Baseball Bugs 2844: 2840: 2839: 2838: 2835: 2832: 2831:Baseball Bugs 2828: 2827: 2826: 2823: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2805: 2802: 2801:Baseball Bugs 2798: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2782:this new user 2771: 2768: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2749: 2732: 2729: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2713: 2712: 2711: 2706: 2702: 2698: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2688: 2685: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2665: 2661: 2653: 2639: 2631: 2628: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2585: 2578: 2570: 2569: 2566: 2563: 2562:Baseball Bugs 2559: 2552: 2545: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2514: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2487: 2475: 2472: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2453: 2449: 2438: 2435: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2418: 2414: 2410: 2406: 2389: 2382: 2378: 2377: 2369: 2364: 2353: 2349: 2345: 2339: 2326: 2323: 2310: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2301: 2289: 2285: 2284: 2283: 2282: 2278: 2274: 2270: 2259: 2256: 2243: 2239: 2235: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2226: 2223: 2218: 2206: 2205: 2201: 2195: 2191: 2187: 2186:wrong version 2176: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2158: 2154: 2150: 2149: 2148: 2145: 2132: 2128: 2127:wrong version 2124: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2105: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2080: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2071: 2058: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2049: 2047: 2042: 2040: 2034: 2030: 2029: 2028: 2025: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2005: 2003: 1998: 1996: 1986: 1985:British Isles 1979: 1976: 1963: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1952: 1948: 1943: 1940: 1936: 1934: 1929: 1919: 1916: 1903: 1902: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1879: 1868: 1865: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1845: 1839: 1835: 1823: 1820: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1801: 1798: 1797: 1782: 1779: 1765: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1750: 1737: 1734: 1721: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1701: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1682: 1679: 1665: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1643: 1637: 1634: 1631: 1628: 1625: 1622: 1619: 1616: 1613: 1610: 1607: 1604: 1601: 1596: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1569: 1566: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1547: 1544: 1540: 1528: 1525: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1496: 1492: 1481: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1464: 1452: 1449: 1436: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1415: 1410: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1370: 1367: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1335: 1332: 1319: 1315: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1305: 1301: 1297: 1292: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1272: 1268: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1239: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1214: 1212: 1209: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1181: 1177: 1170:IP disruption 1167: 1166: 1161: 1156: 1141: 1138: 1137: 1132: 1128: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1119: 1107:. Regards, 1106: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1088: 1085: 1081: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1046: 1033: 1031: 1028: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1000: 999: 998: 995: 982: 981: 980: 979: 975: 971: 967: 963: 951: 948: 935: 931: 927: 923: 919: 915: 912: 908: 904: 903: 902: 901: 897: 893: 889: 885: 881: 877: 870: 865: 864: 860: 856: 851: 847: 845: 833: 830: 817: 816: 815: 814: 810: 806: 793: 790: 777: 776: 775: 774: 771: 770: 765: 761: 760:water ionizer 749: 746: 733: 732: 731: 730: 726: 722: 721:SarekOfVulcan 710: 707: 694: 693: 692: 691: 687: 683: 665: 662: 661: 656: 655: 654: 651: 638: 634: 630: 629: 628: 625: 624: 619: 616: 613: 609: 605: 601: 596: 591: 585: 584: 583: 580: 567: 566: 565: 564: 561: 560: 555: 552: 547: 542: 536: 533: 530: 526: 522: 506: 503: 490: 486: 482: 478: 474: 473: 472: 468: 464: 460: 456: 455: 454: 453: 450: 437: 433: 429: 425: 424:final warning 420: 419: 416: 410: 409: 405: 401: 390: 389: 385: 381: 377: 372: 370: 364: 362: 356: 351: 345: 344: 340: 336: 332: 320: 317: 304: 303: 302: 301: 297: 293: 287: 285: 280: 278: 268: 267: 264: 260: 256: 242: 239: 226: 225: 224: 223: 220: 217: 216: 214: 211: 204: 203: 202: 201: 197: 193: 189: 185: 181: 172: 171: 167: 163: 159: 155: 151: 148: 143: 142: 138: 134: 130: 126: 122: 118: 113: 112: 109: 108: 106: 103: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5331: 5298: 5294: 5225: 5210: 5172: 5126: 5111: 5105: 5098: 5076: 5072:edit summary 5043: 5004: 4948: 4891: 4846: 4823: 4802: 4773: 4749: 4707: 4668: 4664:WP:NOTDICDEF 4657: 4650: 4624: 4555: 4523:, clearly a 4515: 4490: 4484: 4482: 4373: 4350: 4331: 4255: 4251: 4231: 4085: 4047: 4040: 4022: 4018: 4012: 4010: 3967: 3896: 3857: 3842: 3790: 3778: 3762: 3758: 3751: 3747: 3743: 3741: 3719: 3709: 3689: 3687: 3681: 3678: 3660:Best wishes 3659: 3655:Wiki-Process 3654: 3652: 3647: 3643:Wiki-process 3642: 3640: 3637: 3610: 3607: 3564: 3558:MidnightBlue 3557: 3544: 3538:MidnightBlue 3537: 3516:Thank you! 3462: 3437: 3434: 3413: 3390: 3369: 3351: 3348: 3343: 3339: 3335: 3334:of the term 3331: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3315: 3309: 3306: 3283: 3262: 3259:confirmation 3254: 3234: 3122: 3086:C'est la vie 3085: 3077: 2994: 2952: 2922: 2909: 2906:Self reverts 2902:- answered. 2894: 2868: 2779: 2744: 2656: 2629: 2594: 2588: 2583: 2555: 2485: 2483: 2446: 2405:User:Snowded 2402: 2399:3RR Warnings 2356: 2267: 2237: 2212: 2183: 2108: 2045: 2039:MidnightBlue 2038: 2032: 2001: 1995:MidnightBlue 1994: 1989: 1945:Best wishes 1944: 1941: 1937: 1930: 1927: 1880: 1876: 1831: 1795:Juliancolton 1792: 1790: 1787:Re: Talkback 1747: 1745: 1702: 1687: 1632: 1626: 1620: 1614: 1608: 1602: 1577: 1541:. Cheers, – 1536: 1495:Bigtimepeace 1487: 1466: 1460: 1417: 1397:peterbadgely 1385:Peterbadgely 1378: 1338: 1295: 1273: 1269: 1266: 1224: 1220: 1219:specifically 1216: 1173: 1151: 1134: 1130: 1126: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1077: 959: 926:edit warring 910: 887: 883: 873: 852: 848: 841: 801: 767: 757: 718: 679: 658: 632: 621: 614: 557: 531: 518: 488: 481:edit warring 459:Talk:Firearm 423: 421: 415:Talk:Firearm 396: 373: 365: 357: 354: 334: 328: 288: 281: 274: 263:Tom Harrison 255:you're right 252: 249:Running amok 206: 182: 178: 152: 149: 144: 123: 119: 114: 98: 96: 78: 43: 37: 5328:Monitoring? 4951:WP:RESTRICT 4943:WP:RESTRICT 4799:Please stop 3946:Grundle2600 3903:Grundle2600 3779:Hi I think 3755:Style guide 3342:(i.e., its 3286:Wikiwikikid 3235:your revert 3215:Wikiwikikid 3162:Wikiwikikid 3126:Wikiwikikid 3078:immediately 2697:beardybloke 2660:beardybloke 2443:ANI closure 2307:And what's 2273:Ottava Rima 1834:WP:NPOV/FAQ 1828:WP:NPOV/FAQ 1052:Thanks! -- 970:John Carter 966:User:ChrisO 880:Δρακόλακκος 803:your help! 36:This is an 5058:{{helpme}} 5046:Wikipedian 5024:Help pages 4968:EdJohnston 4898:WP:MOSMAC2 4592:Dougweller 4559:Dougweller 3973:MickMacNee 3746:, and the 3634:A Heads-Up 3617:Kenilworth 2900:|NRen2k5}} 2875:Nukes4Tots 2756:True :-) 2333:RfA Thanks 2131:protection 1962:verifiable 1928:Hey there 1630:block user 1624:filter log 1426:verifiable 1404:disruption 930:disruptive 604:zidovudine 253:Of course 5314:Skinsmoke 5048:! Please 4910:Fut.Perf. 4902:Macedonia 4888:Redirects 4539:Gwen Gale 4049:Fut.Perf. 3845:DreamHost 3180:unsourced 2871:M4 cannon 2748:GTBacchus 2595:153/39/22 2573:ThankSpam 2238:justified 2221:cierekim 2194:Dreadstar 1947:SimonTrew 1838:Dreadstar 1636:block log 1543:Fut.Perf. 1533:3rdAlcove 1153:project. 962:Macedonia 922:consensus 715:Boyle AfD 682:Hawkey131 608:Eye.earth 525:Eye.earth 85:Archive 6 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 5271:HEFFIELD 5193:HEFFIELD 5148:HEFFIELD 5029:Tutorial 5001:Welcome! 4986:HEFFIELD 4926:HEFFIELD 4892:Hi, re. 4869:HEFFIELD 4832:HEFFIELD 4809:Law Lord 4780:HEFFIELD 4731:HEFFIELD 4689:HEFFIELD 4660:WP:WINAD 4609:HEFFIELD 4577:HEFFIELD 4543:MuZemike 4529:MuZemike 4444:HEFFIELD 4397:HEFFIELD 4334:Novickas 4312:HEFFIELD 4278:HEFFIELD 4256:implying 4252:assuming 4194:HEFFIELD 4161:HEFFIELD 4127:HEFFIELD 4065:HEFFIELD 3992:HEFFIELD 3927:HEFFIELD 3878:HEFFIELD 3860:Judas278 3849:deletion 3817:HEFFIELD 3594:HEFFIELD 3518:Ghmyrtle 3503:HEFFIELD 3486:Ghmyrtle 3445:HEFFIELD 3397:Ghmyrtle 3270:HEFFIELD 3199:HEFFIELD 3147:HEFFIELD 3063:HEFFIELD 3005:HEFFIELD 2960:HEFFIELD 2898:talkback 2882:Magus732 2816:HEFFIELD 2786:Scjessey 2761:HEFFIELD 2722:HEFFIELD 2678:HEFFIELD 2536:Kurfürst 2532:and here 2465:HEFFIELD 2428:HEFFIELD 2409:LevenBoy 2316:HEFFIELD 2294:HEFFIELD 2249:HEFFIELD 2138:HEFFIELD 2112:DreamGuy 2064:HEFFIELD 2018:HEFFIELD 1969:HEFFIELD 1909:HEFFIELD 1858:HEFFIELD 1813:HEFFIELD 1772:HEFFIELD 1727:HEFFIELD 1672:HEFFIELD 1650:Scjessey 1606:contribs 1559:HEFFIELD 1518:HEFFIELD 1504:contribs 1493:. Best, 1471:DreamGuy 1442:HEFFIELD 1360:HEFFIELD 1325:HEFFIELD 1247:Scjessey 1232:HEFFIELD 1202:HEFFIELD 1184:Scjessey 1136:MastCell 1112:HEFFIELD 1039:HEFFIELD 1021:HEFFIELD 988:HEFFIELD 941:HEFFIELD 928:, it is 855:Gkeorgke 823:HEFFIELD 783:HEFFIELD 769:MastCell 739:HEFFIELD 700:HEFFIELD 660:MastCell 644:HEFFIELD 637:WP:EVADE 623:MastCell 618:contribs 573:HEFFIELD 559:MastCell 535:contribs 496:HEFFIELD 476:general. 443:HEFFIELD 333:You are 310:HEFFIELD 232:HEFFIELD 5334:Wiki-Ed 5299:Snowded 5226:Snowded 5211:Snowded 5173:Snowded 5127:Snowded 5007:welcome 4955:my edit 4671:Rossami 4258:it. -- 3736:Ireland 3722:are an 3638:Howdy. 3585:policy. 3307:Hello. 3303:article 3140:Replied 2850:carrots 2834:carrots 2804:carrots 2611:Buster7 2603:Noroton 2591:"RecFA" 2565:carrots 2344:MBisanz 1642:ranting 1422:notable 1155:Toddst1 882:should 876:already 838:Request 764:WP:RFPP 521:WP:AN/I 393:Apology 355:Hello, 348:AfD of 339:doxTxob 292:doncram 93:Re: 3RR 39:archive 4953:. Per 4757:(talk) 4754:Friday 4717:(talk) 4714:Friday 4675:(talk) 4479:Thanks 4294:ChrisO 4260:ChrisO 4237:ChrisO 4209:ChrisO 4177:ChrisO 4143:ChrisO 4108:ChrisO 4096:ChrisO 3724:island 3690:intend 3565:(Talk) 3545:(Talk) 3438:should 3393:WP:AN3 3082:WP:IAR 3042:WP:IAR 2953:should 2873:page, 2843:WP:ANI 2630:~~~~~ 2584:My RfA 2558:WP:ANI 2491:Dapi89 2350:, and 2348:GT5162 2190:WP:CON 2104:WP:NOT 2046:(Talk) 2002:(Talk) 1418:record 1318:WP:SIG 1148:Thanks 1127:should 1105:should 1087:(talk) 1084:Friday 1054:ChrisO 1004:ChrisO 956:ArbCom 907:assume 805:Yslane 550:. See 428:WP:3RR 400:Hiding 5086:email 5078:Xiner 4853:dαlus 4704:Huh?? 4631:dαlus 4091:(per 3763:Cabal 2599:Ceoil 2375:sign! 2234:harsh 2209:hello 2167:Hobit 2153:Hobit 2033:never 1320:). 1197:OK. 1133:. :) 911:after 892:Bomac 599:(see 213:dαlus 105:dαlus 16:< 5338:talk 5318:talk 5275:TEEL 5258:bad. 5197:TEEL 5152:TEEL 5113:talk 5082:talk 4990:TEEL 4972:talk 4930:TEEL 4894:this 4873:TEEL 4836:TEEL 4813:talk 4784:TEEL 4735:TEEL 4710:this 4693:TEEL 4613:TEEL 4596:talk 4581:TEEL 4563:talk 4525:sock 4516:See 4492:Ched 4463:talk 4448:TEEL 4423:talk 4401:TEEL 4383:talk 4361:talk 4338:talk 4316:TEEL 4298:talk 4282:TEEL 4264:talk 4241:talk 4213:talk 4198:TEEL 4181:talk 4165:TEEL 4147:talk 4131:TEEL 4112:talk 4100:talk 4069:TEEL 4039:and 3996:TEEL 3977:talk 3950:talk 3931:TEEL 3907:talk 3882:TEEL 3864:talk 3821:TEEL 3771:talk 3718:The 3702:talk 3666:talk 3625:talk 3598:TEEL 3522:talk 3507:TEEL 3490:talk 3449:TEEL 3401:talk 3357:talk 3340:A.D. 3326:and 3320:A.D. 3290:talk 3274:TEEL 3219:talk 3203:TEEL 3190:and 3166:talk 3151:TEEL 3130:talk 3095:Talk 3067:TEEL 3026:Talk 3009:TEEL 2981:Talk 2964:TEEL 2930:Talk 2915:ban. 2886:talk 2820:TEEL 2790:talk 2765:TEEL 2726:TEEL 2701:talk 2682:TEEL 2664:talk 2622:talk 2605:and 2540:talk 2529:here 2525:here 2508:and 2495:talk 2486:four 2469:TEEL 2432:TEEL 2413:talk 2367:load 2362:down 2352:MC10 2320:TEEL 2309:this 2298:TEEL 2277:talk 2269:This 2253:TEEL 2242:code 2216:Dloh 2171:talk 2157:talk 2142:TEEL 2116:talk 2087:talk 2079:1916 2068:TEEL 2022:TEEL 1973:TEEL 1951:talk 1913:TEEL 1887:talk 1862:TEEL 1817:TEEL 1776:TEEL 1754:talk 1731:TEEL 1719:out. 1709:talk 1695:talk 1676:TEEL 1654:talk 1618:logs 1600:talk 1585:talk 1563:TEEL 1522:TEEL 1500:talk 1475:talk 1461:Per 1446:TEEL 1424:and 1389:talk 1364:TEEL 1345:talk 1329:TEEL 1280:talk 1251:talk 1236:TEEL 1206:TEEL 1188:talk 1160:talk 1116:TEEL 1058:talk 1043:TEEL 1025:TEEL 1008:talk 992:TEEL 974:talk 945:TEEL 896:talk 859:talk 844:this 827:TEEL 809:talk 787:TEEL 743:TEEL 725:talk 704:TEEL 686:talk 648:TEEL 612:talk 595:talk 577:TEEL 553:and 546:talk 529:talk 500:TEEL 467:talk 457:per 447:TEEL 434:and 384:talk 378:. -- 369:WP:N 314:TEEL 296:talk 279:. 236:TEEL 196:talk 188:talk 166:talk 158:talk 137:talk 129:talk 5188:. 4805:AGF 4519:by 3346:). 2607:Lar 1931:In 1749:DGG 1644:at 1502:| 1457:FYI 1131:can 1101:can 964:by 936:. 846:. 489:not 380:SLi 341:\ 335:not 5340:) 5320:) 5088:) 5084:, 4974:) 4966:. 4849:Dæ 4824:no 4815:) 4666:. 4655:? 4627:Dæ 4598:) 4565:) 4527:. 4498:? 4495:: 4465:) 4425:) 4385:) 4363:) 4340:) 4300:) 4266:) 4243:) 4215:) 4183:) 4149:) 4114:) 4045:. 4034:, 4030:, 4026:, 3979:) 3952:) 3909:) 3866:) 3773:) 3704:) 3685:. 3668:) 3645:. 3627:) 3524:) 3492:) 3403:) 3359:) 3292:) 3221:) 3168:) 3132:) 3088:. 2896:{{ 2888:) 2792:) 2703:) 2666:) 2624:) 2601:, 2542:) 2534:. 2527:, 2497:) 2415:) 2346:, 2279:) 2227:+ 2173:) 2159:) 2118:) 2089:) 1953:) 1889:) 1799:| 1756:) 1711:) 1697:) 1656:) 1587:) 1498:| 1477:) 1391:) 1347:) 1282:) 1253:) 1190:) 1097:do 1060:) 1010:) 976:) 898:) 890:? 861:) 811:) 766:. 727:) 688:) 469:) 386:) 298:) 286:. 261:. 209:Dæ 198:) 168:) 139:) 101:Dæ 64:← 5336:( 5316:( 5273:S 5269:S 5195:S 5191:S 5150:S 5146:S 5080:( 4988:S 4984:S 4970:( 4928:S 4924:S 4913:☼ 4871:S 4867:S 4834:S 4830:S 4811:( 4782:S 4778:S 4733:S 4729:S 4691:S 4687:S 4611:S 4607:S 4594:( 4579:S 4575:S 4561:( 4461:( 4446:S 4442:S 4421:( 4399:S 4395:S 4381:( 4359:( 4336:( 4314:S 4310:S 4296:( 4280:S 4276:S 4262:( 4239:( 4211:( 4196:S 4192:S 4179:( 4163:S 4159:S 4145:( 4129:S 4125:S 4110:( 4098:( 4067:S 4063:S 4052:☼ 4042:5 4036:4 4032:3 4028:2 4024:1 3994:S 3990:S 3975:( 3948:( 3929:S 3925:S 3905:( 3880:S 3876:S 3862:( 3819:S 3815:S 3801:H 3798:T 3795:I 3792:M 3769:( 3700:( 3664:( 3623:( 3596:S 3592:S 3520:( 3505:S 3501:S 3488:( 3473:H 3470:T 3467:I 3464:M 3447:S 3443:S 3424:H 3421:T 3418:I 3415:M 3399:( 3380:H 3377:T 3374:I 3371:M 3355:( 3288:( 3272:S 3268:S 3217:( 3201:S 3197:S 3164:( 3149:S 3145:S 3128:( 3098:) 3065:S 3061:S 3029:) 3007:S 3003:S 2984:) 2962:S 2958:S 2933:) 2884:( 2818:S 2814:S 2788:( 2763:S 2759:S 2746:- 2724:S 2720:S 2699:( 2680:S 2676:S 2662:( 2620:( 2538:( 2493:( 2467:S 2463:S 2430:S 2426:S 2411:( 2371:׀ 2358:- 2318:S 2314:S 2296:S 2292:S 2275:( 2251:S 2247:S 2199:† 2169:( 2155:( 2140:S 2136:S 2114:( 2085:( 2066:S 2062:S 2020:S 2016:S 1971:S 1967:S 1949:( 1911:S 1907:S 1885:( 1860:S 1856:S 1843:† 1815:S 1811:S 1774:S 1770:S 1752:( 1729:S 1725:S 1707:( 1693:( 1674:S 1670:S 1652:( 1638:) 1633:· 1627:· 1621:· 1615:· 1609:· 1603:· 1598:( 1583:( 1561:S 1557:S 1546:☼ 1520:S 1516:S 1473:( 1444:S 1440:S 1432:. 1395:) 1387:( 1362:S 1358:S 1343:( 1327:S 1323:S 1278:( 1249:( 1234:S 1230:S 1204:S 1200:S 1186:( 1162:) 1158:( 1114:S 1110:S 1056:( 1041:S 1037:S 1023:S 1019:S 1006:( 990:S 986:S 972:( 943:S 939:S 894:( 857:( 825:S 821:S 807:( 785:S 781:S 741:S 737:S 723:( 702:S 698:S 684:( 646:S 642:S 615:· 610:( 597:) 593:( 575:S 571:S 548:) 544:( 532:· 527:( 498:S 494:S 465:( 445:S 441:S 404:T 382:( 367:( 312:S 308:S 294:( 234:S 230:S 194:( 186:( 164:( 156:( 135:( 127:( 50:.

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

Index