656:"Hare quota" is not). In instant-runoff voting, there is no "quota" because no votes will be distributed among remaining candidates (since there will only be one winning candidate). There is still the logical "magic number" that is equal to the number of votes in a "Droop quota" i.e. the candidate that gets 50%+1 is assured to win, that is also the number that the formula for a "Droop quota" would produce. Counting can stop there and it will not affect the outcome. In a real world election once that number has been reached the winning candidate would start celebrating, the TV stations would declare the winner, the losers would demand a recount and so forth. But ...
1219:); when they were actually sovereigns the two things were one and the same. I don't think there needs to be two articles, one for the ruling segment of the historic septs and then one for the septs as a whole (since the pleb element itself isn't remarkable/notable). IMO they should just be kept together, under one, with the name "____ Clan". The only rough parallel I can think of is the Arabic clans and they seem to just have one article (ruling and general plebs together). -
1257:
I am not a direct descendant of the founder of that clan in a feudal sense. I doubt that I am "chief of the name" or anything close to it. But, none the less, I am a descendant of the clan founder one-way-or-the-other. If the clan system was still in place, I would be a royal. That is why making a distinction between the name, dynasty and clan (at least for a general encyclopedia) are artificial. They are different parts of the same thing. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1188:"...a clan may be defined as a unilineal (in the Irish case, patrilineal) descent group forming a definite corporate entity with political and legal functions. This latter part is an important one, for the functions of the clan in a clan-organised society lie entirely in the 'political-jural' and not in the 'socio-familial' sphere; that is to say they are concerned with the political and legal aspects of life and not with those of the family."
390:
1336:
1044:
issue of "changes in the abstract". I tried to say in every post that I think the abstract discussion is pointless, and I said why I think it's pointless. That doesn't mean I was trying to invite further abstract discussion, about whether it is or is not pointless. Quite to the contrary, I was trying to make it stop, by saying "stop".
698:
preferences. I'm sure it would be enlightening. The option that comes in "second" is arguably that which defeats all other options bar the winner. I discovered this mode in OpenSTV a couple of weeks ago, after having spent the best part of 6 hours hacking together a spreadsheet to do the same in Calc. Oh well ... ;-)
1256:
WTR "the pleb element", one of the characteristics of a clan system is that the "pleb element" very quickly gets bred out by royals (cf. Nicholls again). Rule in a clan system is not by feudal progeniture. For example, I bear the surname of a Gaelic sept. I don't know for certain but chances are that
1152:
Not a fan personally, disapointed that Mel Gibson who claims to be a trad, alligned himself to
Rosseaunism/Jacobin victim ideology, spouting lies against a great King Edward I (even claiming he was a "pagan"). Sadly Gibson seems to be one of those cringe-worthy "diaspora republican" types you find in
984:
I had been trying to suggest that the quickest and best way to get a discussion rolling without creating unnecessary friction would be to do so by working on one piece at a time, via editing and/or discussion. I still think that was good advice, I think events show this, and I think that even if you
712:
I didn't see that option in OpenSTV either. I repeated the election 5 times, withdrawing every option but "F" and one other option - a 6x1 matric :) The only question I had in mind was, "Was the IRV winner a
Condorcet candidate?" Rather than, "Is there a Condorcet candidate?" In the case of the full
1051:
I thought that even the tabularised list was too abstract, because it was about 14 edits at once. My suggestion has been and remains that single edits be discussed, singly. That's all I was trying to say that whole time. Still on the page now, I see that there remains discussion of how policy pages
829:
It reflects the divisions within the WP:IECOLL voters. Five WP:IECOLL voters voted for "everything except F". Likewise, two WP:IECOLL voters voted "only F". "F" won the preference vote in both WP:IECOLL members and the wider community. Among WP:IECOLL members, however, "D" would have won a straight
1106:
As for moving targets, I agree. I think the best approach is to pick one that seems important, and focus on it. After we come to decision on that one, pick another. If one slips by, then it must not be such a glaring problem, or if it is, someone will notice, and say, "hey, why is this policy page
1043:
This is something I've run into before. When I look at that thread, I see myself repeating that the abstract discussion is pointless, and that it would be better to go start a new thread and talk about specific changes. I don't see how that could be seen as "trying to steer the thread" towards the
729:
The last time I did a tally, the "second preferred" option (if there is such a thing) turned out to be D, but it was eliminated early one because F was doing so well (there having been 40 "F-D" votes out of 160 at the time). I was curious as to whether that was still the case, and whether D and E
1214:
I see what you're saying to an extent, obviously due to communism and capitalism these septs no longer exist in an ordered societal fashion today, while the ruling element can still claim to exist as dynasties. But the specific septs and the dynasties still come from the same bood-line and derive
1018:
I have tried to find where discussion of the changes took place - I'm getting mixed messages about that, to be honest - but I still can't see it. That's not to say they don't exist. My original premise about the changes was that, "I find it difficult to believe that all of them carry consensus."
1014:
My sarcastic comment about "tacking in the wind" was in reply to your suggestion that I should, "discuss and not the issue of changes w/out consensus in the abstract." I was ticked off at that because that was how I understood you had been trying to steer the thread since the very beginning. (I
992:
what's important), I did so precisely as an active response to a direct invitation in an ongoing discussion on the talk page. That was indicated by my edit summary, "how's this?" - it was a line of dialogue, inviting further discussion and improvement. Is that the best way to indicate context to
655:
First about the "quota" in STV: The quota in STV is not used *only* to deem that a candidate has been elected. Votes in excess of the quota are redistributed among remaining candidates. This quota is not necessarily the "magic number" that logically guarantees election (the "Droop quota" is, the
496:
I knew you'd do that. Truth hurts, doesn't it? Like I said: next time actually read what's written and listen when people explain to you how and exactly why you are wrong. Continuing to bang on when you have been explicitly told otherwise doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you have any idea
224:
In hindsight it was spite that motivated me to undo Scoláire's edit. I agree with this reasoning. Yes, Sarah's statement does express a preference ("D"), but to say that it speaks "in favour of" A, B, C or E just because it says "anything but F" is a bit much. In a similar vein, I think that "in
697:
It's also worth noting that in the final round, the "loser" isn't necessarily the option that comes in second place. I noticed you did some additional tests using what looked like first-preference votes. OpenSTV has a "Condorcet's method" option which will produce the full 6x6 matrix of all
973:
You were right to correct my tone there. I was wrong to mix my irritation with you into the discussion about naming conventions. I was feeling very offended when I posted, and I want to tell you why I felt that way. I don't claim to excuse my personal complaint in the wrong context; nor do I
659:... since IRV is also seen as a substitute for multi-round elections, the proper end-point is the final round in a multi-round elections i.e. when all but two candidates have been eliminated and there are two candidates remaining to be voted on: one will be the winner, one will be the loser.
798:
Careful. Total number of votes is not meaningful independent of the preference, since A-B-C-D-E-F and A-B-C-D-E are functionally identical, but the latter does not literally contain a vote for F. It might suggest which options most people had an opinion on, but since there were lots of
350:. I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the inaugural meeting, though. On one side of the table, , and . On the other side, , , and ... Order of business opens with a 5-hour debate on the name of the chapter... Second item on the agenda is the split... Of course, because I've no
1078:
You're making perfect sense. I've looked over the exchange again. It's clear you wanted to end the thread. (I could tell that at the time.) What's not clear is that you did not want to talk about the "abstract" of policy. It looks (to me) like you wanted to talk about policy in the
1082:
I would also say that it is difficult to discuss changes one-by-one when so many changes had taken place and when revisions of those changes were happening at the same time. It means that there are not only many "targets" but that they are moving targets. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1056:
that abstract topic, and towards specific discussion of specific naming conventions? Why must we talk about whether the right editing model is being followed? Why don't we just talk about whether or not field experience indicates consensus for this convention, that convention?
1000:
Now, I'm willing to discuss the naming conventions on that page, and I'll check myself, and remember not to make it personal over there. However, if I feel offended by your treatment of me, I'm going to let you know, calmly and without attacking, as I hope I've done here.
815:
Yes, that is what I meant. "Careful"? The question is "What can you support?"; if people left things off the ballot it means that that was definitely not an option for them. D does best amongst IECOLL members here, which I think is both instructive and indicative. --
301:
Nearly ready, though Scoláire has thrown up a surprise roadblock. I think it is a very good idea to let this run two weeks into
September. That puts the end during the school period which ensures that people will be back from any summer holidays, short or long. --
1114:
work in move requests, and changes to that page do not ripple to that page in the form of disturbances. This tempest is entirely contained in the teacup. People out there forming consensus aren't reading WP:NC, for the most part. They're ignoring it, per policy.
1193:
I'm open to be corrected (in fact I would love to be), but from what I can see those articles are concerned with the O'Brain, O'Neill, O'Donnell, etc. dynasties and not with the O'Brain, O'Neill, O'Donnell, etc. clans (or septs), or as the
English called them
744:"...the pain of manually extracting all the votes..." Yup. Hence the bot :) I working developing the bot I made to do that to make a fairly accessible tool for scripting tasks like that (wherever the may occur) in future. Stay posted. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
833:
I would not be comfortable going solely with the opinion of WP:IECOLL members (a self-selecting group of editors). Even if we had reached consensus, we would still have had to bring that consensus to the wider community for approval. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
782:
31:
You just beat me to that revert. Interesting that a good faith edit was prompted by the impression that because our article on
Knowledge is named Republic of Ireland, that must be the name of the state. Seems our Dab is creating genuine confusion.
1047:
If you thought I was trying to steer towards more abstraction, I can see why you would find that annoying. How can I be clearer when I'm trying to say: "This is a bad conversation; I recommend dropping it and having a better one instead"?
461:
as it would appear following the update) and b.) update the instructions on how to use the voting template on the ballot page (they fix requires that a slight change to it's operation to account for fancy sigs). --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1157:
was good. In any case, onto the topic of hand, the term "____ Clan" is often used to refer to certain well established septs, particularly those in a position of sovereignty, from the High Middle Ages onwards; not only in academic
1015:
posted the tabularised list of changes just so they could be discussed in concrete and found myself in a discussion that seemed to steered towards a philosophical conversation about policy, CCC and the meaning of the universe.)
500:
And yeah, you'll wipe this too, I'm sure. Sad that you can't see the problems with your own behaviour, and infinitely depressing that you have any say in anything on this site when you dive in without knowing anything and
1036:
I think we understand each other, as far as not wishing to be frustrating, offensive, etc. I make mistakes, and I try to dust off and continue after each one, hopefully a bit wiser. I'm puzzled by something you say here:
1022:
Thank you for your explanation above. It's appreciated. I offended you with my remarks - and I'd like to take that back now. It's just, if I feel I'm being push, I'll push back. But peace, OK? --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
546:
Yes, it was uncivil. Worse things have been said between editors but on that occasion (as ever) you were acting with civility and faith and a smart-ass and uncalled-for remark like that out of me crossed a line. I
1102:
Gradually, I get better at this kind of thing, one hopes. Maybe I shouldn't back up my suggestions with reasons, but then why would anyone take the suggestions? They're generally good ones, I'm pretty sure.
713:
vote, the answer was "F". In the case of the WP:IECOLL subset "F" beat every other option except "D" (meaning "D" must have been the
Condorcet candidate - see my caveat though on the ballot talk page).
1396:
explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.
981:
my suggestion as "wisdom about a boat sailing into the wind". I certainly took the tone to be sarcastic, because you clearly didn't mean the word "wisdom". I don't think anybody likes to be mocked.
397:
1100:
about policy in the abstract to back up a suggestion. I guess that seems to invite reply; I'd quite prefer to do without the debate part, and hasten to the part where the suggestion is taken.
451:
548:
974:
apologize for being irritated. I'm here to tell you, directly and honestly, what bothers me, rather than being snarky at you on a project talk page. I hope you can respect that.
1351:
there is a complete lack of referencing; questionable notability; original research; unconfirmed future subject; lack of proper styling (title should have an "é" in "Pokémon")
808:
73:
55:
752:
739:
724:
633:
450:
When you used the template you signed it and everything went OK. If your signature had a fancy font or something in it then a bug in the template would cased a problem (see
1424:
1253:) as it captures dynasty, clan and modern surname all at one go. By trying to add extra precision, I think you are complicating something that can is actually quite simple.
424:. The order that the choices appear in the list has been generated randomly. Voting will end at 21:00 (UTC) of the evening of 13 September 2009 (that is 22:00 IST and BST).
1307:
1265:
1228:
1205:
619:
605:
470:
1197:
WRT Inchiquin, his clan is long-gone though his dynasty still remains. Although I'm sure it doesn't do his tourist trade any harm to say otherwise! --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1393:
1133:
1119:
1091:
1064:
1031:
684:
670:
977:
When we were talking further up the page, I had suggested that a wholesale revert, while reasonably in line with BRD, might be less useful than a 0RR approach, and you
954:
941:
928:
914:
842:
793:
559:
310:
296:
259:
246:
233:
197:
183:
1324:
899:
374:
97:
414:
347:
1110:
I think it helps to realize that very, very little harm to articles is done if the wording of that page is temporarily unstable, incorrect, self-contradictory. I
707:
89:
I like. Maybe after re-unification there would have to be some sop the the unionist community. "Aviva Island in co-operation with Orange"? --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1343:
1329:
1005:
84:
532:
That was uncivil. The smiley on my Talk page does not alleviate it. For the first time I am considering removing myself from the
Collaboration project. --
324:
824:
170:
988:
I'm also irritated with your allegation that these edits were made without discussion. When I added that list of "criteria" (by any name, the name is
41:
336:
435:
I'm not sure what the changes you're requesting mean, so I'm kind of loath to do them. Could you explain what the purpose of these changes is?
891:. The dots over some of the consonants are the traditional equivalent to a "h" after a consonant in contemporary Irish. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
366:
LOL. "Underwhelming" is certainly the word. In principle though, would you be in favour of exploring the idea at least? --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
156:
122:
799:
five-preference votes, any such analysis needs to either drop all sixth preferences, or infer any sixth preferences not explicitly listed.
652:
Instant-runoff voting is arguable two things: a) a special subset of STV b) a multi-round election conducted using only one round of voting.
486:
968:
646:
776:
587:
540:
133:
1175:
594:
875:
730:
were still far ahead of A, B and C. Not quite curious enough to endure the pain of manually extracting all the votes again, though.
360:
444:
458:
282:
218:
413:
pages. The result of this poll will be binding on the affected article names for a period of two years. This poll arose from the
1325:
1039:
I was ticked off at that because that was how I understood you had been trying to steer the thread since the very beginning.
1260:
1200:
1128:
1086:
1026:
949:
923:
894:
837:
800:
788:
747:
719:
665:
600:
554:
465:
369:
318:
291:
254:
228:
178:
92:
50:
731:
699:
521:
115:
1380:, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add
26:
1161:
637:
50% the total count) to ensure victory? Is it a function of the bot used or just to show additional information?
768:
Can you extract the total number of votes for each of the options and put that up on your table page please? --
327:? I ask this because it was apparently you who first asked for 42 days, but I really think that is excessive.
288:
Wasn't around. I was hoping for a green light from Masem, but really we should get going. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
47:
It's partition that's creating the confusion ... but that's out of our hands for now ;-) --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1159:
920:
Tomato, tomato (never works in writing, does it?). Could you write it up in IPA for me? --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1400:
1377:
871:
570:
Hi! Is Dublin
Airport convenient to where you are? If so, would you mind photographing the headquarters of
78:
Considering the state of the economy - in a couple of years it'll be "Aviva Island" - or maybe "O2land"...
1359:
1011:
Don't worry about it. Anybody willing to look at their own posts like you do above can't be all that bad.
138:
205:
109:
1346:, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done for the following reason:
1181:
A "clan" (or a "sept") was distinct from the dynastic family that may have ruled it. From
Nicholls in
985:
disagreed with it, being sarcastic was an entirely unhelpful reaction. It certainly hurt my feelings.
662:
I used software (not my bot) to calculate the result. It stopped at that point. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1241:
I don't think there needs to be two articles either. That's why I favour the old naming method (e.g.
380:
804:
627:
527:
410:
69:
37:
225:
favour of option D; against option F" would be a suitable description also. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
735:
703:
850:
1373:
1303:
1224:
1171:
615:
583:
565:
440:
341:
859:
17:
785:? Sorry again for the "Madam Evertype" thing, that was out of line. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
8:
1376:, articles that do not meet basic Knowledge criteria may be deleted at any time. Please
680:
642:
406:
65:
33:
632:
More out of general interest than anything else I was just wondering why the tallies at
1420:
1147:
1125:
All of
Knowledge is storm-in-a-teacup stuff. That's nothing new. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
938:
911:
821:
773:
537:
332:
307:
279:
243:
215:
193:
167:
152:
1399:
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria
1154:
269:
1291:
1415:. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
1299:
1220:
1167:
867:
611:
579:
436:
421:
64:
in our hands here in Knowledge...what would we agree to call it? The mind boggles!
1019:
That's still how it looks to me. But let's keep discussion of the NC on that page.
1385:
430:
389:
144:
636:
include counts after one of the options has met the quota of votes needed (: -->
1412:
1408:
1116:
1061:
1002:
676:
638:
513:
119:
1416:
1404:
1358:
You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the
934:
907:
830:
vote against F (though that might simply be a reflection of the sample size).
817:
769:
533:
328:
303:
275:
239:
211:
189:
175:
It was spiteful. I apologise. I partially reverted it. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
163:
148:
1378:
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article
351:
863:
476:
398:
Knowledge:WikiProject_Ireland_Collaboration/Poll on Ireland article names
355:
128:
79:
1216:
571:
1295:
1287:
993:
future viewers? - No. However, the edit was made as an integral part
506:
1335:
1242:
997:
a discussion. I'm irritated that you seem not to acknowledge this.
1153:
Boston, New York and West-Central Scotland. Oh well, at least the
575:
402:
251:
Probably the best solution of them all. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1283:
1164:
118:. Have you ever edited Knowledge with any other accounts?
1096:
Yeah.... :) It depends what you mean by "talk about". I'll
883:
I don't understand IPA symbols so here it is in "English":
274:
OK, 21:00 UTC is in two hours' time. What should we do? --
210:
I don't understand why you self-reverted that actually. --
114:
I have moved the conversation you started about Domer48 to
675:
Thanks for the very thorough and informative explanation.
1319:
634:
User:Rannpháirtí anaithnid/Poll on Ireland article names
116:
Knowledge:ANI#Domer48_and_Rannph.C3.A1irt.C3.AD_anaithni
610:
Thank you! I'll see if I can find a Dubliner there. :)
716:
I feel you pain too re: Calc :) --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
143:
That was a bit spiteful, do you not think, not to say
593:
Sorry, I don't live near Dublin. Maybe a message at
401:. This is a formal vote regarding the naming of the
1215:from the same ancestor (all O'Briens descend from
1292:http://www.obrienclan.com/community/community.htm
906:ran-far-chee ann-ah-nij" in that orthography. --
1183:Gaelic and Gaelicized Ireland in the Middle Ages
887:. "Comhrá" ("chat") in my sign is pronounced,
1052:should be edited. How can I steer discussion
238:I left a note on Sarah's page to ask her. --
188:You're a getleman, Rannpháirtí. Thank you.
597:would find you a Dub. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1392:on the top of the page and leave a note on
1166:that is the Lord Inchiquin to you and I. -
457:The change would a.) fix this bug (see the
595:Knowledge:Irish Wikipedians' notice board
497:whatsoever of what you're talking about.
855:Please, how is it pronounced? Thank you
1060:I don't know; am I making sense here? -
14:
551:from the page. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
1282:This is what I have a problem with:
969:What was behind my comments at WT:NC
384:
23:
1334:
1288:http://www.clanobrien.com/coat.htm
24:
1435:
418:case at the Arbitration Committee
127:Hehehe. Welcome back, Mr. Youth.
388:
162:I thought it quite rational. --
1163:but by the noble family itself,
1134:23:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
1120:23:16, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
1092:23:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
1065:22:11, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
1032:08:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
1006:00:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
955:01:30, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
946:Thanks. --rannṗáirtí anaiṫnid
942:12:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
929:19:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
915:17:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
900:21:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
876:20:51, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
843:01:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
825:12:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
809:07:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
794:19:02, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
777:17:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
753:12:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
740:17:26, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
725:17:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
708:14:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
685:12:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
671:12:06, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
647:11:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
13:
1:
1294:. Truly disgusting. Buy your
1107:wrong?" Then they'll fix it.
422:Ireland Collaboration Project
381:Poll on Ireland article names
1425:23:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
1374:criteria for speedy deletion
325:time the poll should run for
7:
1308:23:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
1266:23:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
1229:21:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
1206:20:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
1176:03:18, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
620:00:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
606:08:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
588:02:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
560:09:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
541:17:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
522:22:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
323:Have you an opinion on the
10:
1440:
1284:http://www.clanobrien.com/
471:18:16, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
445:17:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
395:A poll has been set up at
375:13:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
361:09:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
337:13:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
311:14:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
297:13:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
283:19:05, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
260:16:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
247:15:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
234:15:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
219:14:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
198:13:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
184:13:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
171:19:05, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
157:12:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
1342:A tag has been placed on
1290:. You can get to it from
904:No it's not. It would be
134:14:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
123:13:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
98:07:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
85:00:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
74:20:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
56:20:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
42:07:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
885:ryan-vair-jee an-aih-nij
485:This comment relates to
411:Ireland (disambiguation)
346:...seems to have had an
1394:the article's talk page
1296:Clan O'Brien Teddy Bear
354:, I should stop now...
319:Time-frame for the poll
1364:
1339:
348:underwhelming response
1356:
1338:
783:Is this what you mean
505:what you are told. →
416:Ireland article names
27:'Republic of Ireland'
1344:Pokemon Generation 5
1330:Pokemon Generation 5
407:Republic of Ireland
139:Position statements
1340:
487:a deleted exchange
459:same person's vote
452:this person's vote
110:Conversation moved
1264:
1204:
1155:Passion of Christ
1132:
1090:
1030:
953:
927:
898:
879:
862:comment added by
841:
792:
751:
723:
669:
604:
558:
524:
492:
469:
428:
427:
409:and possibly the
373:
295:
258:
232:
182:
96:
54:
1431:
1391:
1390:
1384:
1368:
1286:and especially
1258:
1198:
1126:
1084:
1024:
947:
921:
892:
878:
856:
835:
786:
745:
717:
663:
628:STV counting bot
598:
552:
528:Madame Evertype?
520:
518:
511:
482:
463:
454:for an example).
392:
385:
367:
358:
289:
252:
226:
176:
131:
90:
82:
48:
1439:
1438:
1434:
1433:
1432:
1430:
1429:
1428:
1401:for biographies
1388:
1382:
1381:
1370:
1366:
1354:
1333:
1326:Speedy deletion
1322:
1247:O'Brien dynasty
1150:
971:
857:
853:
630:
568:
530:
514:
507:
479:
433:
383:
356:
344:
321:
272:
208:
141:
129:
112:
80:
29:
22:
21:
20:
18:User talk:Tóraí
12:
11:
5:
1437:
1360:Article Wizard
1355:
1348:
1332:
1328:nomination of
1323:
1321:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1254:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1209:
1208:
1195:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1149:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1080:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1020:
1016:
1012:
970:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
852:
851:Your User Name
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
831:
813:
812:
811:
801:81.111.114.131
766:
765:
764:
763:
762:
761:
760:
759:
758:
757:
756:
755:
714:
690:
689:
688:
687:
660:
657:
653:
629:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
567:
564:
563:
562:
529:
526:
494:
493:
478:
475:
474:
473:
455:
432:
429:
426:
425:
393:
382:
379:
378:
377:
343:
340:
320:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
271:
268:
267:
266:
265:
264:
263:
262:
207:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
173:
140:
137:
111:
108:
107:
106:
105:
104:
103:
102:
101:
100:
66:RashersTierney
60:Yea but if it
34:RashersTierney
28:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1436:
1427:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1413:for companies
1410:
1406:
1405:for web sites
1402:
1397:
1395:
1387:
1379:
1375:
1369:
1363:
1361:
1353:
1352:
1347:
1345:
1337:
1331:
1327:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1289:
1285:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1267:
1262:
1255:
1252:
1248:
1244:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1207:
1202:
1196:
1192:
1187:
1186:
1184:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1177:
1173:
1169:
1165:
1162:
1160:
1156:
1135:
1130:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1118:
1113:
1108:
1104:
1099:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1088:
1081:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1067:
1066:
1063:
1058:
1055:
1049:
1045:
1040:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1028:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1004:
998:
996:
991:
986:
982:
980:
975:
956:
951:
945:
944:
943:
940:
936:
932:
931:
930:
925:
919:
918:
917:
916:
913:
909:
903:
902:
901:
896:
890:
886:
882:
881:
880:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
844:
839:
832:
828:
827:
826:
823:
819:
814:
810:
806:
802:
797:
796:
795:
790:
784:
781:
780:
779:
778:
775:
771:
754:
749:
743:
742:
741:
737:
733:
732:81.110.104.91
728:
727:
726:
721:
715:
711:
710:
709:
705:
701:
700:81.110.104.91
696:
695:
694:
693:
692:
691:
686:
682:
678:
674:
673:
672:
667:
661:
658:
654:
651:
650:
649:
648:
644:
640:
635:
621:
617:
613:
609:
608:
607:
602:
596:
592:
591:
590:
589:
585:
581:
577:
573:
566:Photo request
561:
556:
550:
545:
544:
543:
542:
539:
535:
525:
523:
519:
517:
512:
510:
504:
498:
491:
490:
488:
481:
480:
472:
467:
460:
456:
453:
449:
448:
447:
446:
442:
438:
423:
419:
417:
412:
408:
404:
400:
399:
394:
391:
387:
386:
376:
371:
365:
364:
363:
362:
359:
353:
349:
342:Your proposal
339:
338:
334:
330:
326:
312:
309:
305:
300:
299:
298:
293:
287:
286:
285:
284:
281:
277:
261:
256:
250:
249:
248:
245:
241:
237:
236:
235:
230:
223:
222:
221:
220:
217:
213:
199:
195:
191:
187:
186:
185:
180:
174:
172:
169:
165:
161:
160:
159:
158:
154:
150:
146:
136:
135:
132:
125:
124:
121:
117:
99:
94:
88:
87:
86:
83:
77:
76:
75:
71:
67:
63:
59:
58:
57:
52:
46:
45:
44:
43:
39:
35:
19:
1398:
1371:
1365:
1357:
1350:
1349:
1341:
1251:O'Brien clan
1250:
1246:
1182:
1151:
1111:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1098:make a claim
1097:
1059:
1053:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
999:
994:
989:
987:
983:
978:
976:
972:
905:
888:
884:
854:
767:
631:
569:
531:
515:
508:
502:
499:
495:
484:
483:
434:
415:
396:
345:
322:
273:
209:
142:
126:
113:
61:
30:
1300:DinDraithou
1221:Yorkshirian
1168:Yorkshirian
1079:"abstract".
858:—Preceding
612:WhisperToMe
580:WhisperToMe
1372:Under the
1367:Thank you.
1217:Brian Boru
1194:"nations".
1148:Braveheart
572:Aer Lingus
1409:for bands
1117:GTBacchus
1062:GTBacchus
1054:away from
1003:GTBacchus
677:Guest9999
639:Guest9999
578:? Thanks
549:struck it
270:Lá Lúnasa
120:Jehochman
1417:DKqwerty
935:Evertype
908:Evertype
872:contribs
860:unsigned
818:Evertype
770:Evertype
534:Evertype
503:ignoring
420:and the
329:Scolaire
304:Evertype
276:Evertype
240:Evertype
212:Evertype
206:Sarah777
190:Scolaire
164:Evertype
149:Scolaire
145:WP:POINT
1320:Pokemon
1298:today!
1243:O'Brien
576:Ryanair
431:Well...
403:Ireland
1386:hangon
979:mocked
889:co-raw
864:Bielle
437:john k
357:Bastun
130:Bastun
81:Bastun
1411:, or
1261:coṁrá
1245:over
1201:coṁrá
1158:works
1129:coṁrá
1112:still
1087:coṁrá
1027:coṁrá
950:coṁrá
933:. --
924:coṁrá
895:coṁrá
838:coṁrá
789:coṁrá
748:coṁrá
720:coṁrá
666:coṁrá
601:coṁrá
555:coṁrá
466:coṁrá
370:coṁrá
352:WP:RS
292:coṁrá
255:coṁrá
229:coṁrá
179:coṁrá
93:coṁrá
51:coṁrá
16:<
1421:talk
1304:talk
1225:talk
1172:talk
868:talk
805:talk
736:talk
704:talk
681:talk
643:talk
616:talk
584:talk
574:and
509:ROUX
441:talk
405:and
333:talk
194:talk
153:talk
70:talk
38:talk
1249:or
990:not
477:Hah
147:?
62:was
1423:)
1407:,
1403:,
1389:}}
1383:{{
1362:.
1306:)
1227:)
1185::
1174:)
1041:"
995:of
874:)
870:•
807:)
738:)
706:)
683:)
645:)
618:)
586:)
443:)
335:)
196:)
155:)
72:)
40:)
1419:(
1302:(
1263:)
1259:(
1223:(
1203:)
1199:(
1170:(
1131:)
1127:(
1115:-
1089:)
1085:(
1037:"
1029:)
1025:(
1001:-
952:)
948:(
939:✆
937:·
926:)
922:(
912:✆
910:·
897:)
893:(
866:(
840:)
836:(
822:✆
820:·
803:(
791:)
787:(
774:✆
772:·
750:)
746:(
734:(
722:)
718:(
702:(
679:(
668:)
664:(
641:(
614:(
603:)
599:(
582:(
557:)
553:(
538:✆
536:·
516:₪
489:.
468:)
464:(
439:(
372:)
368:(
331:(
308:✆
306:·
294:)
290:(
280:✆
278:·
257:)
253:(
244:✆
242:·
231:)
227:(
216:✆
214:·
192:(
181:)
177:(
168:✆
166:·
151:(
95:)
91:(
68:(
53:)
49:(
36:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.