User talk:TAnthony/Archive 3

956:

exclusive rights to the series including that DirecTV completely paid for the production cost leaving NBC Universal to pay zero. However NBC does own the show and if NBC decided they wanted to air the DirecTV episodes or have another broadcast network purchase the rights to air Passions, can NBC do that or would it violate the contract NBC had with DirecTV? I am just asking out of curiosity. Did NBC at least try to find another broadcast network to air Passions because it seems like NBC did not make hard enough attempts to continue keep the series on broadcast television. After DirecTV bought the new episodes to air, most fans could not see the episodes and I assume that the ratings dropped a lot after leaving NBC for a specific subscription service. LOL to be honest I wish My Network TV had picked up the series and air it as a weekend soap instead of the traditional weekdays that way it can attract more of the young audiences on a weekend and at least the production cost would be a lot cheaper to air it once a week. It would have been great for My Network TV. I wish that NBC would have left it canceled instead of giving it to DirecTV if no broadcast network was willing to take it in because at least all fans would have seen a happy ending and then leave at that, but they gave the show to DirecTV and it caused all these complaints on NBC.com.

5671:

page about/because of a single name of an editor and also, I just know that I would have a lot to comment on and I really don't feel like it. I know why I was blocked, what bothers me is that I can find at least three thing in that report that are false, made up, but nobody even cares about that. It also bothers me that I was not notified about being reported, so I couldn't even comment on it - basically punishment without giving a chance to explain yourself - it's like they do it in North Korea. But you have nothing to do with that report so there is no point in comlaining here about it. Anyhow, I got the point, but I also realized how people on Knowledge work and what are they like (and I am really not implicating you here) and I just don't want to be a part of it. And it's not about being in any way offended or anything remotely similar, because I'm really not.

7074:. Actually I didn't want an edit war so I came here to solve this minor problem by discussion. It seems that you and I have different opinions on whether to keep son of Daenerys's name or not. As I said before, as Daenerys is a female member, her children cannot be considered Targaryens. The names of so many Targaryen princesses's children are not included in that family tree. Daenerys shouldn't be an exception. All other family trees are also like this. Except House Arryn which I now think that you were right about it and names of descendants in female line should be kept, as the male line has come to an end and the next heir is from the female line according to the books. Also I know these are all fictional family trees and we shouldn't be so serious about them, but I just want this part to be similar with the other ones. 201:

at all. My issue here is mispresentation of facts. Editors make assumptions and perform calculations. We can perhaps say, "Viewer reaction to the discrepancy created by Erica having a 16-year-old daughter as the product of a 24-year-old rape prompted the series to adjust her child's age to 23" (if that's true). But all the talk about Erica's birthdate and age changing is a misrepresentation, and OR, unless a reliable source is actually saying "Erica is now said to be born in 1962 and is 47" or whatever. Rewrite the section how you think it should go, I know you have a grasp on what is a reporting of the facts and what is OR or editor POV. There may not be a direct source at the moment that credits viewers with the Kendall change, but it's OK for now if the way it's written is likely true.—

4932:

whether you are correct or not. I appreciate your attention to detail but certainly the fact that the information is easily verifiable in the linked biographical articles is enough? In practice most templates don't incorporate citations for simple readability. You are confirming these are navigation templates and yet insisting on citations. I'm not sure why, though I suppose your argument makes more sense in context of real-world biographical articles. But fictional characters, across the board?? Be serious. And the spirit of WP:CHALLENGE is the likelihood of real challenge when corroborating material is not easily available. You're really challenging JFK's parents in a tree that appears in all related articles? —

941:, but I would guess that it's under another business unit either because of the genre (talk vs. scripted), the distribution (syndicated vs. network), or something to do with ownership; the show originated as a coproduction between CBS and Povich's production co, and its ownership has changed a few times over the years, so I'm sure it's convoluted. For example, NBCU may own all or a portion of the series but not directly fund production. In any case, if you are asking so that you can add these types of details to the respective articles, I would remind you that we can only cite facts from verifiable sources, we cannot try to interpret what they mean. If I'm remembering the 990:

times. This is the typical procedure; for the initial run of the series, the NBC network paid NBC Studios a license fee as well. Even though it is internal, these business units still act as separate entities for various reasons, including a proper accounting of expenses and revenues as well as tax and insurance reasons. We can also assume that NBC Studios made some kind of profit per episode from DirecTV and from the NBC network before it, just as DirecTV earns revenue from subscribers and the NBC Network earns revenue from advertisers. I do not know the particulars of the NBC-DirecTV deal, but it can also be assumed that DirecTV purchased the right to air certain

590:

the soap articles here need a lot of work, but not necessarily in the way you think. Whether you are right or not, Knowledge is a collaborative effort, and often times we have to compromise to make the community happy with the way an article is changed. And try to understand, you're new, and some people aren't going to trust your judgment on controversial issues because you haven't really been around long enough to have seen policy and discussion in action across different articles. I know sometimes we just want to get things done, but there's never a rush, and discussing drastic changes first is always the best policy.—

362:

to the character infobox, though. Plus, readers know that a character with a lot of history has usually changed over the years, which includes the character's storyline; the character may currently be listed as something else, despite whatever point the viewer or reader is within the story. I would say that things in the infobox which indicate time should simply be seen as a "skip ahead in the story" (simply a future part of the story they now know due to having gotten a glimpse of what is ahead for the character). If you look at the well-written and well-sourced article for

6099:

still don't see that point of listing Lewis ANYWHERE. First I should note that I haven't seen a source besides IMDb of her character's name, and the obit just mentions the show. But assuming she did play this character for an episode or two ... she is no more notable than any other of the thousands of day players who appeared on the show as judges and waiters and detectives and doctors over its 8 years. She died, yes, but 8 years after she appeared on the show ... and her appearance isn't even noted in her own article yet, by the way.

718:, I'm fairly certain there's enough to start a sock investigation. There's no way those three aren't related. I'm going to start an SPI draft in my user space once I eat and down some advil. If I'm going overboard let me know, and this may be pointless since as soon as anything's filed he's likely going to turn around and do the same thing accusing you of being my sock (or vice-versa, still not sure which one of us is supposed to be the master here). Anyway, tell me what you think if you're around. I'm off to Ralphs. 5113:. They are related to this discussion. Two other things of note: 1) One doesn't usually redirect a template page to an article. The template page should be deleted. 2) In alot of cases, usually more complex the template, one doesn't simply copy the template into the article. The template contains "template programming" that isn't necessary in the article. The family templates contained if, switch and program variables. Program variables are those with three brackets, ie {{{width|100%}}}. 31: 7089:

and as there is not (and shouldn't be) a separate Drogo tree, there is no other chart on which to note that she had a child. As far as I'm concerned, generations of characters only mentioned in passing are crufty, but characters actually appearing in novels and stories are notable. Now it's not a huge deal either way considering that Rhaego is a small plot point that will never have his own article, but if you don't agree I do think it is worthy of wider discussion. Thanks! —

4469: 4512: 3632:, I started my own character overhauls with them because there's a lot of material out there on them (they're popular). I've been collecting other research as I go and as you can imagine, I'm finding a lot more on Daenerys, Arya, Cersei and Jaime, etc. Though there should be some notable Ned stuff around. I imagine he's mentioned in a lot of articles about Season 1 of the TV series (though you also want to find whatever novel-specific stuff you can). 4569: 3738: 2292: 6311: 6276: 6241: 6164: 4423: 4364: 4313: 3310:

place as a reaction to the AfD. I'm fine with the "keep" result, but you and I both know that editors see a few respectable-looking sources listed and get the impression that the topic is notable without actually looking into how reliable the sources really are and what the spirit of that coverage is. I don't object to the analysis presented in the references, but we can't assume weblinks are

2116:

was like, "Maybe, off by one day is okay in this case, since we got it nominated soon enough." But, really, it seems that every day, as in all chances you have to get the article accepted, should be taken advantage of. Not that big of a deal, though, since it is not like it was nominated at the last minute, LOL. It is all good, either way... Though I say they should have chosen the article.

6415:

this. The templates serve a very good purpose. There are discussion about templates which seem to fall into two different opinions - deletion or expansion - and every discussion on that makes it more obvious. These templates are good, useful, and attract the eyes of people like me, and I hope you continue to discuss them on the talk page (I'll give it another go as well later). Thanks.

1395:) and I would then consider the article fixed. However, I do not consider it appropriate to walk in and say, "give me back my template," without providing an alternative. So my plan was to find out what people were actually using it for, to determine if my "gotta-have-a-#" interpretation is correct, and to find an appropriate substitute for its current minority use. -- 5625:, credit Erika with a role on the show, so I watched a clip of the episode on YouTube. The character wakes from a coma at the very end of the episode, and though there may be a slight resemblance, it is definitely not Erika. You may want to look into removing the credit from IMDb (not a reliable source for Knowledge but still a much-referenced website) and other places.— 2356:

them is not very honest. If I have any issue with you, it is that you behave like everything you post/say here(soap section) is fact and anything otherwise is false. I don't think I'll need to grow up. You certainly need to calm down though. Please learn to spell and use proper grammar. I do apologize for claiming theft, that wasn't needed to get my message across.

6224:. The basic rationale is that these lists are potentially endless and push the boundaries of notability, to say nothing of being possibly self-promoting for the publisher. Like I said, I'm not going to make a case about this one myself, but I didn't want you to put in a lot of work maintaining the list and be surprised when it is challenged and deleted.— 215:

Kendall too young. The writers attempted to rectify this by aging Kendall to 23 years old and scripting the character to repeatedly mention her new age, emphasizing the change". Your wording would probably work better since it's straight to the point. I don't have the Spence book anymore because I got it on inter-library loan, but

995:

the DirecTV deal was either the only one or the only profitable one, we'll never know. You have to remember that TV is a business and TV shows are products being sold. For a network to "buy" them, they have to believe that they will be able to earn more advertising dollars from airing the shows than they spent to buy them.

2500:

literally dozens (of which I'm only watching a few). Many of her edits in general seem fine, but of course she is indefinitely blocked, and continues to add blatant copyvios as the mood strikes her. I'm definitely considering a rangeblock when I'm in the mood to research it and contruct a case. Don't be a stranger! —

3169:

and interpretation are opinions, and as a rule we cannot reference opinions here unless the source is reliable. I have not removed the references because we both know that the points made by these authors make perfect sense, are better than nothing, and are not controversial. But if I wrote an essay analyzing

691:

easily find and remove this trivia. In many cases this info has a natural place in the text of an article, like the way we've added the conflicting info about Erica Kane's "age," but in cases like Sam McCall these silly IP fangirls are doing our work for us by calling attention to the idiocy of this trivia.—

6754:(which is for the TV series) also need improvement. I'll try to change the material of these articles and improve them in the future but I'm afraid that I can't do it alone. I hope you also participate in this progress by continuing your researches for finding more sources and information. Thanks again. :) 2409:

had no idea that they released the second season, but now I do thanks to your image. I'm literally bouncing in my seat with joy and have ordered the gold edition. Hee! I'm considering going to hunt down some cherry pie. I wish typing conveyed how painfully excited I am right now! I may just dance a jig!

4952:, but a family tree like an ancestor tree arranges the information in such a way that the tree is itself conveying information, and it conveys information that is often not available in any Knowledge article (for example great-grandparents of). Indeed there is a strong argument that these trees breaks 6720:

Yes, time is always a problem. I have also found information for different articles but I can't use them as I come to Knowledge once or twice a week and I don't have time for editing articles because I'm studying for university enterance exams. So I understand what you say, but I'm also happy to hear

6004:

Would you accept a revised red link guideline that required a minimum of three blue links to existing stand-alone articles or lists, with at least 50% of all included links being blue, coupled with the clarification of the "succession" and "complete set" exceptions? Personally, I think that would be

4168:

Ah OK. But I also removed the image size on purpose, it's no longer really necessary in most cases because the template will default based on individual user prefs. The only time you really need to use the size parameter in this info box template now is if the source image is too large or an odd size

3383:

You're linking directly to a site that sells the t-shirts (and presumably created them), and also have not provided any source asserting that this merchandising is particularly notable. I personally think some of the game/music info is trivial, but it is cited with third-party references that seem to

2115:

Thanks for helping to clear up the Oliver Fish creation date. I was so tempted to have you put the article in the 25 section, TAnthony, because I wanted you to have an extra day for the chance to get the article on the main page through DYK, but I kept quiet about it for the reasons I stated above. I

2078:

Thank you for the help with "Roaker" today. You're much more diplomatic than me. You needn't worry too much about the trivia nuts. They mainly focus on General Hospital, though Days and Y&R get their fair share. I just wish someone would beef up some of the other soap articles. My bet is within a

1941:

created controversy when an actress objected to the storyline and was subsequently replaced?" Well, something like that. "Prompted" is probably a better word to use in place of "created," for different reasons (I also considered "resulted in," but nah). They prefer the show's name to be in it, I know

1077:

have been ordered (which is noted within the article), not that six more episodes will be produced. This is an important differentiation. This is a common situation when it has not been decided whether a series will be kept or cancelled; scripts are obviously written in advance of production, and not

1004:

ratings were comparatively low for a network series, but if only a fraction of its existing viewers had signed up for DirecTV, it would have been a significant gain for DirecTV. DirecTV has never made it public the number of subscribers they were hoping for or how many they may have gotten because of

932:

There are actual several sub-companies under NBC Universal, for various reasons ... and to clarify, the NBC network (which airs shows) and the NBC Universal production companies (which produce shows) are also separate divisions. For example, some shows are produced under the "Universal Media Studios"

732:

I'm so with you, it totally occurred to me that this Clau5dia8 was a sock, they both seem to use "shit" the same way, LOL ... I was serious about reporting Roak the next time I see some disruptive behavior, I'd love to see your formal assessment of that situation. And a sock investigation of us might

589:

characters like Carly; he did a lot with page moves and redirects regarding her name. I don't necessarily think you're him, but you have made some Randy-like edits, and AniMate is more of an "Randy expert" than I am. Anyway, you just need to be a little more thoughtful when making major changes; yes,

474:

I'm not sure if you're really a new editor or not, but I would seriously stay away from drastic changes like this until you've gained more experience, and the trust of other editors. I think people are less likely to trust the judgement of a new editor, and you may not know enough to adequately argue

333:

Flyrer, the reason I think it goes against WP: TENSE is because it changes depending on the current present of the character and isn't true throughout the rest of the character's storyline, even though that too should be in the present. If that makes any sense at all. While watching a 1970 episode of

180:

The viewer response to Kendall's age causing inconsistencies with Erica's age is not unsourced, though the term "outcry" was probably exaggerating it. It is sourced by the source nearest it. Are supposed to put a source after every period? I'm all for taking the years that aren't mentioned in sources

102:

Sorry for eavesdropping, but we're moving towards removing age fields from fictional character infoboxes. We took them out of the South Park characters recently, for instance. The problem is that the ages of fictional characters can change (which is what I think this discussion is about. tl;dr and

7102:

Thank you for your response. Actually I agree with you in some ways. Daenerys is the last confirmed member of her family and the most important one in the novels. So it can be an exception-worthy add as you said and it's fair to show that once she had a child. Although I don't agree to keep his name

7088:

Thanks for your message, I was going to comment on the Targaryen tree talk page at some point. I see where you're coming from as far as Rhaego not being a Targaryen, but this seems like an exception-worthy add considering that Daenerys is a current, active character (unlike 99% of the others noted),

6098:

currently exist, though the Cast list looks pretty basic. I think it would actually be an improvement to leave only contract cast and perhaps notable guest stars in the main article, then move Recurring and Deceased to the Cast members page (along with copies of Contract and Guest stars). HOWEVER, I

6074:

Ok. I understand your point of view. But what do you think about this solution then? To create an own article for cast members list like GH and the other shows that will be linked from the main article? In that way the main article won't be affected but we can still note the minor roles in the list.

6055:

and lists like this have been argued about forever, though I suppose they're less objectionable when they are in a self-contained list like my GH example. Listing non-notable day players in the main article, dead or otherwise, is silly. I'm not the boss though, so I'm fine if you'd like to open this

6024:

Who is to say that only Main/contract cast members shall be listed in the show? I don't see any rule about that except from your personal opinion. And where shall we draw the line? The most reasonable thng is to list everyone who has appeared in the show as the normal procedure is in the other shows

5538:, and attributed the copy. I have used a soft link in the template. I understand why you thought a hard link was not appropriate, so I am hoping that we can have the same affect of keeping the history intact in the template while allowing the text to be in the article. Is that acceptable for you? -- 4931:

against every family tree template, real or fictional? This is an interesting new application of that policy which I admit I've never seen. I think that and your navbox change (an interesting one I'm not totally against) should be discussed if you're going to implement them so widely in this manner,

4706:

Hi TAnthony, thanks for your initial edit on this book. Unlike articles, Knowledge books have all italics and quotation marks placed within the link, not on the outside of the link, as this is for the purpose of printing (i.e. Pedia Press). So, it was no mistake that the initial layout happens to be

4208:

Thank you for your input on the Game of Thrones article. I'm not as familiar with that series of articles and you and others and I understand the rationale behind the changes and the move now. I also see that you work in the Entertainment industry. I was at Hanna Barbera and Warner Bros. for several

3977:

I have a complete list of all titles and ISBN numbers Valancourt Books has published. I am referencing their website to see what genre/time period they should be catalogued under. I am doing the Horror/Gay/Literary tomorrow. I held off because many of their titles are duplicated across each category

3173:

and got a website to publish it, would you consider it a reliable source? Reliable sources exist that make all the right/same points about Paul as hero and messiah, we just haven't found them yet (and most will not be on the web). I'm going through the Touponce book now to find Paul-related analysis

3168:

is already or can be covered elsewhere adequately. I appreciate your efforts to find sources that mention Muad'Dib, but self-published essays by unknowns with no credentials as literary critics are not reliable sources. I'm not saying I disagree with the analyses made in these articles, but analysis

2977:

I'm not sure if it's technically a reliable source (it's a paper by someone who is not an acknowledged reviewer/expert/authority and I'm not sure what the publishing requirements of the site are) but it's a good application of Herbert's ideas and is exactly the kind of citation that could be useful.

2906:

comes from Arabic, and asks questions about Herbert's intentions in creating this varying similarities. But it does not a) come to any any real conclusions, or b) assert any kind of notability or explanation for the term Muad'Dib. I like this source and am glad you've brought it into the mix, I just

2821:

Sorry, Anthony, I should have warned you first about my edit. I felt the sourcing got improved, the article is on your watch list, thus notability issue is less urgent. After I noticed that the article has pretty impressive list of foreign language siblings, notability doubt almost disappeared. I'll

2101:

It's only 12:30! I also don't work tomorrow, I'm home alone (save for a very needy cat), and... I'm a wiki-nerd. I'm actually working on some real life things, but having a browser window open keeps me from working too hard. I still say you're much more diplomatic than I am, since it takes you a few

1185:

article, but the section has little content, so a) actually redirecting to that section would be jostling because the reader has no context of what it's all about, and b) the article is so short that I think it would appear the same in many browsers (lead still visible at the top). I do think you're

361:

You make good points about this, Rocksey, which is basically what I stated you probably meant above. But this "being in a different part of the story than another viewer or reader" thing is "problematic" with character infoboxes from other genres as well. I would not say that WP:TENSE really applies

259:

Yeah, that's great, I'm not insisting that you use my exact words, but the old way seemed to ramble a bit, and citing "1955" and the wording "since Erica's age at the time of the rape combined with Kendall's age conflicted with the All My Children timeline and made Erica and Kendall too young" makes

214:

I mentioned the change of the ages in article. This is what it said before, "Due to Erica's original 1955 birth year, this caused an outcry from viewers of the series since Erica's age at the time of the rape combined with Kendall's age conflicted with the All My Children timeline and made Erica and

7103:

in any of those family trees because of his unimportant appearance (and for the other reasons that I mentioned above), I think as a solution we can remove his name from extended Targaryen family tree (as he's not a Targaryen) and keep it in family tree of Maekar as Rhaego is one of his descendants.

6040:

Hi I appreciate your discussing this. There are plenty of guidelines and policies in place regarding this kind of trivia. The fact that other shows may list deceased cast members that were in a single episode does not mean anything, as we both know soap-related articles are plagued with trivia that

5947:

sources, (Is Brian Tyler's webpage reliable? Unbiased?) which can be easily seen to be false, but require "original research"? Do we say, "Statement X is true" or "Person Y claims that statement X is true"? I think the former should NOT be used, but will gladly hear any arguments you might have for

5072:

Hmm, you're convincing me; I often use FA articles to prove a point and it looks like you've given me a taste of my own medicine. I'm actually big on citations (I will add three where one would suffice) but something about this felt wrong, probably because I tend to use trees as much for navigation

4985:

you will see that in fact most of the early Kennedy family tree is not supported by citations in the articles (I explain what is and is not cited in the articles on the template talk page --if they were then I would have copied the citations over to the family tree). If you look at FAs that contain

4970:

to one side as many people like to create trees and providing they are properly sourced they do little harm if they are collapsed. A problem is that they frequently generated by using easily accessible genealogical websites of dubious quality which is a good reason to insist on their being verified

4014:

Hello, I noticed that you are the most recent editor for the page on Richard III. I thought you might be able to correct/clarify a reference I noticed. It refers to Richard being made Knight of the Bath. When I followed the link, it refers to an order that was not established until 300 years later.

3547:

Unfortunately, official US DVD releases contain mistakes (not only in texts, bus also with pictures - photos from season 5 or 7 are on DVD season 1). The most frequent mistakes are with date of opening episodes of season 2 and 3. Btw, premiere airing of episodes of season 4 are right on Knowledge -

3335:

Hello Anthony, could you please re-size the Clash of the Titans (2010) poster to match the Wrath of the Titans one? you can do this by adding a small amount of black onto the bottom of the Clash poster, it will look better on the wikipedia facebook page as well as wikipedia page. Thank you for your

3309:

fan, so if the article is going to exist I want it to represent the material the best way it can. You may see tagging sources during an AfD as me trying to influence it in my direction, but I see untagging them as doing the same thing for your position, especially since they were added in the first

2452:

Thanks to you, the most frequent phrase heard at my home is "I don't know." Somehow I fell in love with a David Lynch virgin. I've managed to control my disgust and am trying to explain that Lynch's productions aren't necessarily meant to be understood... even after repeated viewings. Anyway, we're

2408:

in a messy break up. That was back when people still used VCRs. I have the first season on DVD and was always disappointed that Lynch never released the second season. While I'm not overly fond of the whole Windom Earle saga, I did enjoy Leland's death and Josie getting turned into a drawer knob. I

1915:

prompted an actress unhappy with the plot to be replaced?" I hate to be sensationalistic, but to a general reader that's probably what makes the character notable. At least, that was my justification for creating an article about a relatively minor character ;) Anyway, I requested a peer review to

468:

editors would consider them worthy of articles. And the Ethan article actually survived an AfD recently, which means that in a formal discussion it at least met the minimum requirements for inclusion. Another thing you may not have thought about is that most of the images will end up being removed;

200:

OK, my head is spinning here, LOL. Are we saying that Kendall was aged from 16 to 23 while Gellar was in the role? This is one of those times some kind of direct quote in the reference would help, because I've looked through the Spence book and don't see anything that mentions the Kendall situation

6596:

If you actually took the time to look, I was doing a series of edits exactly as described in my edit summary, but another editor had already made the change manually in that particular article (in the previous edit) and I didn't notice. I appreciate your need to scold everyone who makes a mistake,

6414:

They shouldn't be deleted. All the pro-deletion editors are saying is that they should be categories, which implies that the vision of one editor prevails when actually the use of templates and categories are two different things, something not everyone takes into account when labeling things like

5670:

I honestly don't care if they ban this IP and I am really not trying to be anonymous or anything. You posted, I answered (I can't on my talk page because it is semi-protected). I have read policies, I know a lot about them. It's "too long to read" because I don't really feel like reading a half of

5609:

Hey there. At the time, I reverted your removal because you didn't explain in the edit summary why you were doing it. I've removed it again just now per your objection to the material. Normally an editor saying "I know this for a fact" isn't considered a reliable source, but the information itself

5257:

You are correct about the copyright reasons. However you and TAnthony didn't do one crucial step to satisfy copyright, you didn't give attribution. In the edit summary of the destination article, it needs to have that it was merged from ]. Otherwise, it is not known where to find the past edit

5157:

exist...) Fiction family trees were mentioned above. All the trees mentioned above were also stand-alone templates. Just because you didn't mention them doesn't make these trees different or not related to the discussion. I think, but not sure, that from PBS' question above he also doesn't see

4764:

I didn't mean to sound too accusatory, but in deleting negative quotes, splicing others together, and adding editor POV about the show's cult following, it was beginning to seem like you were trying to convey positive impressions where none existed, or muffle the negatives. I like the show as well

3877:

because that just happens to be a newspaper where I can find everything easily online. I don't know that it serves a purpose to show just the one paper out of many that probably have the column. Elavsky's own website is too complicated to use to find a specific column, not to mention that might be

3623:

is high profile now and it will probably get tagged and then redirected relatively quickly. There have been various individual character articles in the past that didn't last. I'd say the article should be at least 50% "other material" like analysis, that is backed up by citations. You've probably

3395:

Thanks for the reply. Actually the link out was to "the awesomer" which is a blog of all manner of cool stuff from cars to games to viral memes - pretty much anything you can imagine. They did not create the shirts and they are also not selling them either. Being one of the most heavily trafficked

3206:

Hey there, I'm aware that I can have a steamroller approach at times LOL, but obviously it's never personal and I'm always just trying to improve articles. We don't know yet what will happen with the Muad'Dib article yet, but as you can see I've been copyediting it and such as if it will be around

2385:

that I "stole" this image and have misrepresented its origins. I care nothing about getting "credit" for capturing or uploading images, I am merely documenting sources where I can. Your edit summary was ridiculous, but I'm glad you've taken credit for this image and given us the details of how you

2355:

There is no need to respond so bitterly. That was taken by me in September 2006 from a December 1995 opening sequence. I uploaded that on September 24, 2006 to the MSN OLTL Groups website under my account there. These are owned by ABC, but for you to be posting these on Knowledge like you captured

994:

episodes a certain amount of times over certain period of time, but NBCU retained its right to eventually sell and/or distribute them at some point in the future, be it on other GE-owned networks, or sold to external networks, or on DVD or something. NBC definitely did shop the series around, but

184:

The longer this discussion goes on, the more I see that it's probably best to take the age out of the infobox. The character's age has changed so much in ways that aren't even mentioned in the article, that it just seems pointless to try to pinpoint and argue about it. Besides, I still say it goes

6389:

I hope they get to stay, these templates give an excellent overview of what the viewers of a decade were either interested in or served outright. Nice work. If they "survive" the process it would be nice to see similar treatments for the 2000s and 2010s (have you worked on those as yet?). Best of

6045:

and her character are not notable enough within the context of the series to be mentioned elsewhere, and her death had no relation to the series. I've resisted challenging Lewis' own article via AfD on notability grounds. I think it's silly to list deceased actors at all because eventually, every

5640:

Could you please stop with the posting on my talk page, especially with the long posts that I have no intention of reading, because frankly, I am not that interested in knowing what is written in it (I would have read it if it was shorter). Would have answered to you on my talk page, but well - I

5234:

is that we can not simply copy the content into article space and delete the template with its history as that would breach Wikiepdia copyright restrictions. Usually the way that two articles are merged is go copy the text across and then leave a redirect behind. The reason for leaving a redirect

3508:

First of all, IMDb is not considered a reliable source whereas an "official site" is. I realize that in many cases the links you're removing are not being used as citations, but Knowledge itself is basically an archive of information and a road map to external sources, removing one for the reason

2787:

and comment on anything you disagree with. We can work on cleaning up the article if you wish, however I foresee large amounts of research in expanding the scope as I describe. My suggested course of action would be to let it fail, do a little more work on the article in the coming weeks and then

2499:

Hey man! Yeah, I was in Paris for Thanksgiving, so no turkey for me LOL. They did protect the article in question from my last report, and there are definitely an identifiable group of regular articles she (just guessing at gender here) edits, but this editor is actually very active and there are

2003:

Hey, TAnthony. Did you create this article on the 24th or the 25th of July? I have been meaning to ask, because I saw you listed it in the 24 section. I did not ask earlier and did not want to say anything because I am sure you would know better than anyone the day you created the article. But my

404:

I still do not feel that WP:TENSE should apply to the character infobox, for the reasons I stated above. Take Todd Manning's name, for example. It is not revealed until 1998 that his birth name is Thomas. Does that mean that we should take his birth name out of the lead of the article? That is my

389:

Flyer, I guess I interpret WP: TENSE as applying to the infobox too because I think it should apply to all of the plot, which would include most of the infobox information. I don't think we can do the same for Erica Kane as is done for Bella Swan though since the character is a diffinitive age at

5656:

You should not be editing while you are blocked, whether with another username or anonymously. Not reading my comments because they are too long? Well that explains why you don't seem to know much about policies, they are too long for you to read? Hopefully you know why you were blocked and have

3998:

Oh OK, that's great. The one other thing is the order; order by Valancourt date is fine but I think it has less value without the actual years, that's something that should be considered for the future. And actually, converting it to a table so that readers can sort by title, author, original or

3485:

Hi TAnthony. I did know about archived web links, but I feel like they are irrelevant. What's the point if the web page has been removed in the present? If people want to find info on the show(s), they can click on the IMDb link that's at the bottom of the Wiki article. Most Wiki articles for tv

989:

I'm not sure where you got the idea that "DirecTV completely paid for the production cost leaving NBC Universal to pay zero" ... technically what occurred is that NBCU produced the episodes at its own expense, and DirecTV paid a licensing fee for the right to air the episodes a certain amount of

898:

different companies within the NBC network company? I have seen that at the end of The Maury Show, it shows "NBC Universal Television Distribution". But with Passions, Law and Order and other shows, it is "NBC Universal Television Studio". Isn't Maury produced by NBC Universal Television Studio?

897:

This is Cantai101 again. Last time I asked you about how NBC was selling new Passions episodes to DirecTV and why NBC continued the website. I have a new question to ask you. I have seen that there is a NBC Universal Television Studio and a NBC Universal Television Distribution. Why is there two

279:

I am still not seeing how what Rocksey notes goes against WP:TENSE, but her perhaps she can explain that on my talk page. If we have to compromise with TAnthony on noting the outcry about Erica's first age change, as it seems we do, I am okay with his wording: "Viewer reaction to the discrepancy

5899:

That's how I so quickly noted your inclusion of a redirect. You can of course change the color, but I find the use of the color red makes the inclusion particularly obvious. The italics helps distinguish (above the use of the color) between red links and redirect links. Now if only anchor links

4250:

page, I know all too well just ridiculous things can get. Speaking of, looks like the main GoT article is due for some trimming or another split. 100K makes it a prime target. I'm happy to participate in a Talk page discussion and make some recommendations if you want a fresh set of eyes on the

3317:. But at some point I'd also really like to discuss what you see as the concept of that section of the article. Right now it's just sort of a jumble of any sourced sentence that could be found on the topic. And maybe you'd better explain to me your view of the separation of Paul from Muad'Dib.— 955:

Hi TAnthony, Thanks for the reply. Although I don't seem to quite understand it clearly, I can see how the ownerships are different. I researched articles on NBC making a deal to air Passions only on DirecTV after the peacock(NBC) network canceled the series. I researched that DirecTV purchased

690:

Roak, by all means participate in the discussion at WP:TV, but you are against consensus thus far, so it stays removed. The Sam McCall thing is annoying, but I actually like that the info is no longer hidden in the infobox, because now editors and admins with an understanding of policy can more

6126:

If we do as you suggested, move deceased and recurring, then non-fans can focus on the notable information of the show and those who would like to immerse themselves in the, let's say less important information can do that in a seperate article. I think that's a fair compromise and then we can

1276:

I understand you to say that there should be some template with which to tag a redirect whose title is not synonymous with the target article, but which is covered in a section, and that you possibly think that there should be a distinction between those cases where it is the main topic of the

1349:

is intended to mark such redirects, and 96.5% of redirects tagged with this template do link to a section. Some of the remaining 3.5% used to link to a section but have been subsequently redirected without having the template removed. The balance, however, were specifically tagged with this

126:

a long time ago). I am pro-infobox, but I feel that despite some revisions over time there are some inherent problems at times and a lot of abuse. People get really caught up in fictional topics (myself included) and can forget this is an encyclopedia and not a compendium of infinite detail.—

5189:

Yes I tagged the category for deletion but redirected the actual templates because I thought perhaps their creator, FrickFrack (who is not super active lately), might appear and have some justification for recreating them. Thank you though, I was indeed sloppy in that I ignored the template

4748:

I do not believe I "misrepresented " any review I posted. A descriptive title of a review can and has been used in multiple articles written by/for legitimate news sites and here on Wiki. As for deleting, THAT was an accident. I have a new phone and am not used to the speed yet of certain

999:

was low-rated, which presumably made it less desirable than other programming. But for DirecTV, which relies on subscribers rather than advertisers to make money, the show was actually a good opportunity. The number of viewers on network television still far outnumber DirecTV subscribers.

6660:

Hi. I have seen your great work on articles related to Game of Thrones including characters like Tyrion Lannister and Jon Snow. Most of the articles related to Game of Thrones are well written and sourced but actually some of articles about its characters really need improvement such as

5203:, which I have readily available. But I interpreted from PBS' comments asking "why they exist" that he believed they should not be standalone templates. I agree, as I hadn't realized until then that they we each only used in one article. To that end I was being bold and merging them. 2881: 5590:

I am the webmaster of erikaslezak.com as well as Ms. Slezak's fan club president. I recently asked Erika to review her wikipedia page and she requested that this entry be removed. Ms. Slezak has never appeared on the TV series Special Unit 2. Please contact me with any questions:

2920:

students of Islam understand his intentions better, when he speaks about religion and Muad'Dib specifically. Some say that the ambiguous vocabulary was intended to generate discussion; it is completely up to each individual reader to interpret. Go figure it ;) 10x for discussion.

3225:

1. I don't mind tagging Bahayeldin, I already mentioned my concerns. Though it looks good to me because of translations, I did not tag it in the List article. I strongly disagree about tagging other sources, especially during AfD. As far as I know Google scholar & books are

2978:

My whole point about the article is just that "Muad'Dib" is not the right article name/location for this topic. I still don't know what you think the article should become, but assuming you're thinking of an analysis of Paul as a messianic character, I believe the character's

667:

OK, I'm with Flyer. The Michael Corinthos artcle now has a subsection callled "Notes" that states all of the chracter's previous ages. Plus, Is'nt the Infobox used to supposed to contain character information and age is information, not trivia. I'm petioning to put it back.

4124:(my apologies, I should have been upfront), you changed File:XXX.jpg to a ]. In addition, size is now a new parameter. Looking through your history, you've been doing the right thing it seems on everything else (and not modifying the caption as you did these two either). 260:

it feel like editor extrapolation even if it's not exactly. I hadn't recalled the exact nature of the age change, and as nothing was in the source, it smacked of the kind of unsourced "fans hated the recast and so the actor was let go" POV we see all the time around here.—

3954:

and changed my table to written prose form. I didn't know Knowledge changed the "International Broadcast" tables, especially since I still see those tables on some television show's pages. I hope this change is correct. If not, then it can be deleted. Please let me know.

1078:

commissioning more scripts would prevent new episodes from being shot when the current run of shows have been completed (and shutting down or holding a crew for weeks costs more money than just buying some scripts that may never be produced). You are basically violating

6121:

even less or non notable characters can be included in a list article for the show. By this sentence "Thus, an article should be created about a soap opera character only if the character is notable within the series and has been the subject of third-party discussions.

3911:

so I updated it. There would be no need to start changing references everywhere, but the as far as I can tell the purpose is show where you got the information, not necessarily everywhere it's available. But I have no objection to King Features being noted obviously. —

3527:"Hi, thanks for your contributions but I've I've reverted your changes to List of Dynasty episodes. Do you have a source for the dates you added? The existing original air dates are backed up by the packaging of the DVD releases.— TAnthonyTalk 02:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)" 6482:

Now all the infobox images show up fine. As it was rather randomly selected images that did not show, I did not think it was firefox on my computer. It would have blocked all or none, right? Well, the problem, whatever it was, is cleared up now. Sorry for the bother.

181:

out, but the way you have it right now is incorrect since you left in the original 16 for Kendall's age took out how the writers changed her age to 23. I know that might sound trivial, but I think it's important because the viewer response is what caused the change.

5010:, which tree will be more useful for readers? Which sections of the tree are more likely to be correct? A trick question because unless you are an expert on the Houston family you can not know if the sections without citations are correct without a lot more research. 5261:

What I've seen done was to do a history merge. This was a few year ago when I tried copying a template into an article and got my hand slapped. Best to ask at the technical pump or wherever... as soon as you have one rule down, two more have been changed around

5438:

around the template containing the tree, it and it appear to work just fine set to a width of 70%. You have several choices. You can copy the tree to the article location and then change the links to link to that section. Or you could modify the template to use

6146:

of just about everyone who has ever been on the show already exists at IMDb, and there's a reason we include external links rather than duplicate those exhaustive lists here in full. But obviously you really want to put her down on the Cast list so have fun. —

6050:

for example (and probably not even complete), and I don't see the value of this at all. It's just this kind of thing that seems interesting to soap fans but gets targeted when an article is being assessed for Good status or similar. I'm a longtime editor with

2068:

Ah, that makes sense. And thanks for the compliment; it's still somewhat thin because the storyline is in its infancy, but it's a nice article to work on because he isn't a widely known/popular character and it has yet to be discovered by the trivia nuts ;) —

498:

Accept that you will probably have to remove some or all current contract players from the list and restore their individual articles to appease the community. You may want to restore some of them pre-emptively or as soon as you're challenged as a good faith

3077:

article, and all that info collected under MuadDib. It is the same fictional character, and thus the same topic. The discussion of the term MuadDib having other implications should be featured in that same article. Create a second topic doesn't make sense.—

3580:

episode list predates the DVDs anyway so I'm wondering where the info came from in the first place, it was pretty much all there when I started editing here in 2006. I haven't monitored it consistently so I don't quite know how accurate it all is. Ideas?—

4833:

I responded to that person so you were incorrect to say "Undo/Unexplained mass changes to family tree templates, no response on talk page". If you had waited for me to make another edit before you started to revert my changes I would have pointed you to

4941:

I am not going to be pedantic over whether they are navigation templates or not, because they often use navigation boxes. If the function of a tree was solely for navigation then instead of a tree a simple alphabetic list would suffice. See for example

4819:

and don't need citations. If you are challenging this practice, you should start a discussion before you tag every such template on Knowledge. If there has been some discussion on this topic, you should have noted it when making such sweeping changes.—

6924:

I didn't actually write the article or read the book, I just made a small template fix recently. I just now cleaned up the plot summary and will also do the same for the character list. If you'd like to suggest some text, you can type it up here or at

5641:

can't. Either way, don't worry, you're not going to see me on 'Wayward Pines' etc. again. One more thing, if you are planning to answer, answer here because it is very annoying that people are posting on my own talk page, when I can't write there.

742:

Well he went on another birthday spree. His calculations have Jason as 27, Michael as 11, and Carly as 37. I guess that means that Jason and Carly first had sex when he was 15 and she was 26. Scandalous. I'll get working on the report soon enough.

2054:

03:45, 25 July 2009 for me. You are using the time offset function in your user preferences. I think we're generally supposed to go by UTC time (the server default) for "official" times. I'd also like to echo Flyer's comment. It's a great read.

5934: 4538:

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

3270:

and it had generally positive effect. I also appreciate your constructive editing approach. I guess more eyeballs - better. There could be 2nd and 3rd nominations, still the article is safe for now ;). Totally off topic and in the area of or,

7015:

I see you did a lot of work on Advise and Consent. I am Al's nephew and had an old interview that could be referenced, so I filled in some details. But the page was very nice;all I had to do was add.How did you get interested in Al's work?

6427: 1130:

I know that even if the topic of a redirect is only discussed in one section, it is often not appropriate to redirect to the section as section redirects can be disorienting, landing a reader in the middle of a page. Do you understand

5057:

other than it is usually it is a dam sight easier to source trees about fictional characters. But for readers the affect is the same, for non-fiction and fiction, family trees with citations are more trustworthy than those without. --

2130:

Oooh, look below on your talk page, LOL; Oliver Fish made it to DYK (not that you do not already know)... Um...told you so. It does not matter that just a little earlier I thought it was over for that article making it. I was right,

5939:

Okay, I concede that my citation did have problems. However, Tyler seems to have removed his claim from his blog (the link currently cited encounters a 404 Error) and so, I'm going to remove this from the page; hope that's fine.

4814:

Someone else actually asked you about it on April 19, and other editors have begun reverting you in the same manner. In any case, family tree templates for fictional characters are treated as navigation templates, which are for

491:(and don't forget to change the redirects). This way you're not saying the characters are unimportant, it's just about the fact that the material isn't substantial enough for individual articles. I made the name name change for 817:

No doubts here. Looking through some of the socks you're going to find some really bad page moves, some of which seem to be designed to piss you off. Remember the Dynasty names debacle? Also, BreakingDawn 90210 made edits to

3978:(literary horror written by a gay author fits into three categories). I wasn't sure the best way to approach that but I think I'll just duplicate what is on their website and have a title listed more than once if necessary. 5206:

As far as the discussion itself, I was challenging PBS and now I'm not, so assuming I either tag the trees as unreferenced or reference them, the discussion is over and I'm cooperating no matter where I put them. Right? —

6610:

AWB guidelines clearly say you have the responsibility for every semi-automated edit you make. Please take that responsibility serious. And I do apologize for being condescending. It is one of my worse character traits.

1747:

and its kin that mark a redirect as unprintworthy, I had not imagined this sort of tagging. I've no problem with it, but I don't want to advocate (on the basis of a misunderstanding) for something that nobody wants. --

1942:(and, I think, the country the show is from). When you list it there, there will be people coming up with suggestions they view as better if they are not really for your hook. Then you will compromise for the best hook. 6404:

and used AWB to recategorize the articles. I left four in the main American miniseries category, one from the 40s, one from the 50s and two from the 60s (there should not be separate categories for one or two items).—

3690:

That is a great improvement, I think you have the idea! Every character article will be a little different based on notability, appearances and available external material but I think you've got a great start going.—

4542:

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

3119:, Anthony. I'm not sure if you aware, but discussing personal motives in Knowledge disputes is inappropriate generally. I would also appreciate if you take AfD unrelated arguments out of discussion. Let's observe 334:

the show, the age that used to be in the article wouldn't be accurate, neither would the occupations or the residence. In other words, it pinpoints now as the present and the rest of the storyline is in the past.

6842:

Hi there. Thank you for your reviews on wiki. I just read The Lotus Eaters. Wondering if I might help you with the many spelling and grammatical errors in it? Could do this privately and you just update it. :-)

6436:

by Agatha Christie. Something must be wrong with the file name, but I cannot see what the problem is to fix it. There is an image at the link, but no image showing in the infobox. Maybe you can see the problem?

5136:-related articles and was being bold because, frankly, they don't need to be standalone templates. I really don't think that has anything to do with any ongoing discussion on family tree formats or referencing.— 4674:

Yes- Gregory does mention the Melusine claim, it was from her work that I got the information and traced back the lineage myself, as you could by clicking the link to the Melusine page that I linked/cited in the

5646: 1082:

by extrapolating what the source says to the next "logical" step. When and if these episodes are produced, some source will exist to confirm it, and it is not detrimental to the article to leave the "19" out.—

4998:, like all text the second tree can be trusted to be reliable in a way that the first one can not because the reader can easily check the sources. Over the last couple of hours I have been adding citations to 3659:

Anyway, I don't have a lot of time right now to research but if you can find some stuff on Ned I can help you incorporate it. Actually some of the articles I've cited in Tyrion and Jon may have good quotes. —

1783:, depending on how the topic should be handled." Clearly the differentiation is being made between topics with potential and those without. This doesn't explicitly contradict your idea of the proper usage for 5726:. WikiProject Film requests that articles be in the parent category as well as in the subcategories. I don't know how long the rule's been in force, but it's been a good while...several years at least. -- 4790:

at 14:00, 21 April 2015 and others like it shortly afterwards with the comment "Undo/Unexplained mass changes to family tree templates, no response on talk page" yet there is no question about the edit on

649:

Sigh, removing the age from the infobox is clearly not going to keep IPs and editors from playing with the age in other ways within these articles. Will it cut down on this "play"? That remains to be seen.

390:

certain points in each book and Erica doesn't have one diffinitive age for for on year at a time (ex. in 1970 she begins the show as 15, then graduates high school that same year and starts going to PVU.)

3670:

So I followed your advice, I dramatically pared back the plot details (though that could still use a bit of trimming) and started incorporating more analysis and background into the character's creation.

3600:. My first article submission was for Eddard Stark. I submitted it for review to be published, but I would like some help trimming the article. The Ned Stark article I created is currently located in 1793:, but it doesn't take into account topics which are unlikely to deserve expansion but may not have a precise section dedicated to them at the logical target article (and are unlikely to). The history of 4726:

Actually, I was unaware of the RfD discussion, and have no problem with keeping the redirects; I just think that the terms are neologisms that shouldn't be used in articles as unexplained descriptions.

2731:(it is in footnote #2, which will not display on the revision history screen at this point but you can obviously see it when you view the source code). It seems to have been introduced to that template 5959: 5587:

In looking at the history and if I'm understanding it correctly, the entry I removed is still there with TAnthony associated with it. As I am new to editing on Knowledge, am I doing this correctly?

435: 5073:

as I do "standard" navboxes. But you make a very good point (among others) that by definition the tree presents information above and beyond what the equivalent navbox would. So I can get on board.—

1673:

is fine, except that I don't believe any of the redirects above are topics worthy of expansion (and the template description suggests that they should be). That said, it's probably the closest fit.—

5216:

Sooo, I'm not really sure why you reverted everything rather than just clean up the template programming, but if you really love them as standalone templates I don't care enough to argue about it.—

5980: 5677:

BTW, I read what you had written on my talk page before I posted this second post and I could comment quite a few things, but I just really don't feel like it, because it is irrelevant now anyway.

3869:

How important is it to change Cindy Elavsky's publisher to Times-Herald Newspapers? I've never taken the time to find out just what that is, but I checked and made sure she is still distributed by

945:-related edit(s), I believe my point was that it was OK to note that NBC continued to host the official site after the move to DirecTV, but not OK to make unsourced assumptions about why. Thanks.— 6916:

For e.g. the second definition down if you google "define smooted" :'( It's okay... you would have been in a hurry when you wrote it. Thought you may have been from Asia. Good article otherwise!

6772: 6632:

I'm sorry that in my haste I ended up making an unnecessary edit, and I take full responsibility should the very foundation and structure of Knowledge come crashing down around us because of it.

2350: 5132:

trees in my responses to PBS because I had not realized that they were only in use in the family articles until he/she pointed that out. I'm very familiar with the editor who created them and

6446: 5767:

Any time. If I'm missing something, please do let me know, but I'm pretty sure the rule is still in force...I asked about it a few months ago and have seen nothing indicating a change since.

3418:

in detail, but we might talk about particular items which sparked notable lawsuits, were worn by the President during a state of the union speech, sold some record-breaking amount, etc etc.—

632:: Exactly what I feared...has now started, and one day after I stated it would -- people finding other ways to add the age but not in an encyclopedic, or rather not in the best, way, as seen 177:

It might have been nice if we'd discussed, then come to a consensus about the changes that needed to be made in Erica Kane before you went ahead and did it, but I guess we can do that now.

4072:

I've actually been updating the image parameter formats, but when I've come across captions like that I've sometimes trimmed them, why have the wordier "of the" when it can be simplified.—

5700: 2837:

I'm still completely not understanding what you see as the purpose for this "article." All it does is go into too much detail about plot and etymology. And pointing out which Arabic words

1190:

that the redirect goes directly there (though in most cases, I'd agree with you). That said, if you have objections, by all means use a different redirect template. What are you thinking,

531:) and collect some of those into this article. It'll be a lot less controversial, and you'd be doing a much-needed service for Knowledge. When you're done with that, there are tons of old 510:, and I like it. Plus, you're not losing the date info and such from existing articles, which adds some real-world context. In cases where the infobox is longer than the article text, use 6452:

Lots, but not all, the articles I have looked at in the last hour have images that do not appear. Others do appear as usual. Perhaps this is an issue of larger scope than one article. --

3619:

Hey there! Yeah I could easily help you tighten up the text but the biggest problem you have is that it's all plot. Some character articles get left unnoticed like that on Knowledge but

710:

I've had it up to here with this guy. He's once again added Carly's "birthday" with a year plucked out of a hat. Between the comments you pointed out on his page and his interactions at

4982: 4839: 1813:

is convoluted and spread out, so I don't know what the timeline of merging, splitting, moving or renaming these templates might have been. But of the over 500 redirects which still use

848:

LOL, all I meant was that I totally missed the original Randy drama and only know of him through some subsequent socks (and not much at that), while you seem to have witnessed it all.—

6322: 6287: 6252: 3576:

OK, assuming you are correct about the DVDs, we still have a problem, because IMDb and blogs are not reliable sources either, as they are user-updated with no real fact-checking. The

3272: 2378: 585:

disruptive and destructive, and someone usually figures out he's back because he falls into the same behavior with the same articles. One of his issues was an obsession with certain

319:

I am quite familiar with that Jennifer Hayward source, as witnessed by my work on the Todd Manning article. I also went to a library one day to read it. Good source indeed, Rocksey.

3178:). It looks like the AfD I've initiated may fail, and of course I'm not going to go against whatever the consensus there is, but in the meantime I am allowed to argue my position.— 1023:

I am so sorry I took so long to reply to what you said about DirecTV buying a license fee to air Passions from NBC Universal. Been busy and didn't have the time to read the reply.

7067: 5035: 1219:

and many other articles where, for similar reasons, a redirect to the section itself is clearly undesirable, despite the topic of the redirect being discussed in only one section.

6175: 5265:

When TAnthony does copy the template over, tell me and I can get rid off all the template programming crap. Then you know what to remove from the rest of the copied templates.

475:

your side (even if your actions are correct). I'm interested to see the outcome of this and may get involved in some of the discussions, but I've been frustrated lately with the

6304: 6269: 6234: 5154: 4889: 6314: 6279: 6244: 2102:

more hours to reach dick mode, though I'd given up diplomacy several days ago. I should take your advice and take these articles off my watchlist, but... too. damn. stubborn.

1871:

as described above) may have to go hand-in-hand with providing an alternative for these redirects with little potential. Perhaps just a recreation of {tl|R from subtopic}}? —

6786: 5674:

And just for future reference - if you find source unreliable, only source, not the content - you should use the "citation needed" tag, not delete the information as a whole.

4699: 2571: 6689:. I think you have enough knowledge about this show (or maybe book series) to change these articles' material and improve them. Please do it every time you can. Thank you. 5749:, primarily because that policy is there for a reason, and also because editors like you trying to implement this are going to be continually opposed and reverted. Silly.— 5167:

My main reason for the message was to point out how you did it wrong... Templates should not be redirected to articles and you left in template programming in the article.

1925:

LOL, I always go for sensationalism when suggesting hooks at DYK. I would go along the lines of your suggestion...but tweak it to "...that an upcoming gay storyline on the

1267:

which covers the subject." This is, or course, just one edit away from reading "... to an article with a section ...", so I need to discover what the current consensus is.

1035:

Anyhow thanks for providing me the inside info. Since the Passions site is still on NBC.com, I wish they would make the DirecTV season available for free viewing one day.

6799: 5371:

as it does not seem to be a problem to me? If you still think it is, then try placing the shield on the left and setting the width of the tree's box to about width=70% --

3945: 715: 5797: 4678:

As for the rest, especially the parts about my assertions, I will be sure to cite them from the paper I wrote on Jacquetta that will be published at some point this year.

6157: 5531: 5026: 3701: 2367: 1186:

being a little strict about the necessity of a # in the redirect, because I think the more important point is that the redirected topic is covered within a section, not

349: 137: 6201:

I wasn't aware a complete publisher's bibliography was against Wiki rules. I was simply mimicking pages of other publishing houses (Arkham House, as a single example).

5661: 2862:? It is available via Google books. Maybe you can spare some time looking into it. You might be surprised, the relation is clearly noticed and classified in context of 6955: 6898: 6854: 6167: 5642: 5415:

would close the gap with all else being the same, then great. Otherwise it's fine, and I don't want to move the images (I already reduced their size a bit). Thanks, —

4026: 1851:

as it its written. In any case, someone other than me has clearly thought about the potential expansion of redirected topics, and advocating your "stricter" usage of

469:

even though each one is for a different character, they appear like an "image gallery," and the next member of what I like to call the "image police" will strip them.

5813: 464:

editors for some of your choices. For example, the Patrick and Claudia articles were definitely lacking in references and real-world context, but I would guess most

6746:

which also include information about minor characters needs to get expanded and more sources are needed for it, for example most of the family trees are unsourced.

5650: 5405:, there is a little too much space (at least the way I'm viewing the page) because there is not a lot of opening text. But it's not a huge deal. I just thought, if 4972: 2743:. I quote the 300px size myself, I'd be interested to know the origins of it, but it seems like too moot of a point to bother asking the editor who introduced it.— 2596: 6500: 6334: 6299: 6264: 2627: 1167:

in particular, but it seems as though this situation doesn't exactly have a perfect solution. First of all, I didn't technically merge any of the content from the

4371:, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See 6782: 5817: 3964: 2639: 2518:

I was very prepared to help before I went to sleep tonight, but those who have just returned from Parisian vacations get no sympathy from me. No blocks for you!

2509:

The tool confirmed that up to 32768 users would be blocked if we went with a range based on her historical IPs; this is probably unacceptable! How frustrating.—

6189: 5254:

Whether to put the template in the article or let be stand alone, I leave that decision to you. You know more about this than I do and defer to your judgement.

3723: 2004:

curiosity has since gotten the better of me. The article's history shows you to have created it on the 25th, but I take it that this was simply Knowledge time?

1911:

Thanks ... I hadn't thought to do that, hmmm, what would be a good hook? Perhaps "... that an upcoming gay storyline featuring sexually confused police officer

1339:, or more specifically, with articles that link to sections and thus need extra vigilance for broken links as editors change section titles. I do believe that 1009:, but some articles have suggested that they didn't hit their target or at least didn't think continuing the show would be valuable for them in the long-term.— 6943:

Oh I'm terribly sorry of course you didn't (you did say you were keen on grammar!). Looks great now. Still too new to this. Thanks for being patient with me!

6926: 6339: 5832: 5449:

the problem with that is you lose the ability to edit it from within the article. Or there my be another solution which I am not able to see at the moment. --

1951:

As for the peer review, if I have anything valuable to say, I will weigh in on it. Right now, I do not see much of any criticism on my part about the article.

1686:

The more I look, the less I'm sure about everything. I'm about to broach the subject in a larger forum, so I wanted you to confirm that if it is decided that

4178:

OK, I'll take those out then. The template docs ought to be updated. (I am now fixing a bunch of infoboxes that I created using the old template.) Thanks.

7023: 6951: 6894: 6005:

an extremely reasonable compromise, and if I can get 10 committed supporters, I'm ready to start lobbying previous !voters (not a violation of WP:CANVASS).

3556: 3368:

hi TAnthony, i'm curious to understand why my edit of the Dune cultural influences page is considered advertising yet the game and music references are not?

2587:

to which you can best answer. I'm also mildly interested in the answer so, I thought I'd better speed up the communication. Would you please kindly respond?

636:

This will probably start to happen to a few prime time drama character articles that are using the soap opera character infobox as well, such as ones of the

5762: 5686: 3604:. I really do need some help cutting the article down to size, and there are still some sections I haven't even created yet. Could you lend a quick hand? 4179: 4139: 4125: 4086: 4058: 3348: 6540: 5835:

that makes it obvious that a redirect is present in a navbox/sidebar/some hat templates (unfortunate in the last case but I think it serves the purpose).

5789: 5753: 4636:

if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the

3805:

if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the

103:

all that). Each time it changes, a sentence of explanation is needed, and that doesn't fit well in an infobox, but it does in the body of the article. -

6400:

Thanks! I thought they would be useful too, but they will definitely be deleted. In any case, I took the suggestion and created decade subcategories for

6194: 5599: 4683: 1498: 1032:

that is where it mentions about all production costs absorbed by DirecTV and I assumed that NBC Universal didn't have to pay a penny to the productions.

405:

point. But I am all for you taking your concerns to other editors of either aspect of the Wiki television project and seeing what they think about this.

372:, it lists her age in three different time periods. Her age does not even have to be sourced in reference format...because the books are the references. 6379: 6210: 4613: 3410:

First of all, blogs are not acceptable sources (and they are indeed selling the shirt there), but even the site was OK, it's not the notability of the

3397: 3369: 2453:

making our way through "Twin Peaks" and he keeps asking me questions I can't answer. I can't wait until we watch "Blue Velvet" and "Mulholland Drive".

1875: 1752: 1677: 1399: 1312: 1291: 1204: 450: 6202: 5402: 4501: 3984: 488: 434: 6492: 6461: 5973: 4430:

for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can

3284: 153: 131: 5153:

stated, he sees no difference in non-fiction and fiction family trees. He mentions one of these trees above ("why translucence templates such as

4400: 4341: 2630:

but I would like the answers to why the 300px size was chosen because I quote it as a guideline size which other have questioned the limit. Thanks

623: 167: 7055: 6906: 6877: 5610:

isn't cited with a reliable source, and we have to be especially diligent with biographical articles for living people that everything is cited.—

3695: 3664: 3585: 3513: 659: 495:, because people would complain about current contract players being there, even though they were new or there wasn't a lot to be said about them. 7001: 5979: 5425: 5398: 5368: 5343: 4454: 4395: 4187: 4173: 4147: 4133: 4111: 4094: 4076: 3344: 2678: 1637: 1145: 6477: 5994: 5776:

I tend to be of two minds about it myself...but since it's in place I figure it should be honored as far as possible, for consistency's sake. --

4107:

Um, the template documentation clearly says to use the bare filename, and not doing so puts the article into a hidden category for correction.—

3321: 3261: 3211: 3201: 3140: 3082: 3040: 2986: 2956: 2930: 2911: 2893: 2875: 2845: 2747: 6792: 6151: 6111: 6068: 5678: 5595: 5557: 5527: 5308: 5266: 5231: 5168: 5114: 4554: 4535: 4336: 4286: 3916: 3782: 3422: 3405: 3388: 771: 695: 612: 594: 546: 6419: 6409: 6228: 4278: 4259: 4237: 4003: 787: 677: 6620: 6601: 5199: 2649:

Yes, I did create that page but I did not create its contents! You see, the documentations were originally non-transcluded integral parts of

2393: 2079:

year the Guiding Light articles will be massacred, though considering the quality of most soap articles, that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

1013: 949: 293:

As for Kendall's current age being okay to note because it is likely true, that is the same way I feel about Erica Kane's current age of 47.

7132: 7111: 7093: 6831: 6762: 6729: 6711: 5783: 5733: 5629: 5614: 5484: 5354: 5220: 5211: 5176: 5140: 4835: 3472: 3458: 3120: 2557: 2548: 2535: 2526: 2513: 2504: 2444: 2427: 2230: 2110: 2096: 2087: 2073: 2063: 2049: 2036: 2023: 1991: 1977: 1960: 1920: 852: 843: 830: 812: 751: 737: 356: 264: 231: 205: 5494:

now documents a recent change to chart/start that allows you to pass "center" in as a parameter. This does away with the need for the now

4995: 4716: 4066: 2181: 2125: 803: 414: 399: 381: 343: 328: 302: 244: 6721:

that you have collected research to improve those articles. And I think you have made a good choice for your next work, Daenerys I mean.

6195: 5712: 4750: 4623: 3707: 3568: 2473:

These sock reports are becoming a regular thing. Does he usually hit the same articles? Perhaps rather than filing reports some extended

2381:

that I uploaded an image I got from the MSN group. I made no claims that I owned the image or screencapped it myself. You suggest rudely

1246:). My interest in this is that it marks redirects that are sensitive to section title changes, and I think the current documentation of 1141:

as appropriate for redirects whose subject is discussed in only one section but which do not target the section in the redirect link? --

280:

created by Erica having a 16-year-old daughter as the product of a 24-year-old rape prompted the series to adjust her child's age to 23."

6014: 5928: 5919: 4769: 3706:

I took your suggestion and went looking for GA-rated articles that addressed chapter information in television adaptations. I prepared

3123:. Your central points were explicitly refuted by multiple angles. Do you think it is possible to reach some kind of consensus? And last 3023:

fact, no one does. However in this particular paper, "Muad'Dib" means any ideology/ism used as excuse for violence. The author compares

122:

No, thanks for commenting, obviously I noticed it was gone from a few templates and was wondering if it was a trend (I stopped watching

5739: 5520: 5467: 5458: 5419: 5380: 5077: 5067: 4936: 4855: 4824: 7019:

Oh, I see, you were editing. The section on characters in Advise and Consent is in the new edition so I just need to find the pages.

5565: 5316: 5274: 4799:

on my talk page at 13:57, 21 April 2015. Do you really think that giving someone 3 minutes to respond to a question is reasonable? --

4691: 6743: 6697: 6520: 6359: 4896:. It seems like a level of complexity that is unneeded as it make it difficult for inexperienced editors to make changes to the tree. 4524: 3792: 3597: 2540:

Hell no. We hosted Thanksgiving for 12. You don't know tired. However, since I'm a much better person than you, I've blocked the IP.

561:

article. It's highly highly appreciated. Do you have any info on this randy person and how Animate believes there's a connection: -->

503: 4783: 3501: 2740: 7071: 7031: 4660: 2760: 2481:. I haven't the foggiest idea how to implement one, but if there isn't too much collateral damage, it could be effective. Here's a 1027: 507: 4910: 3824: 3684: 3613: 3220: 3217: 875: 220: 116: 6401: 6394: 5230:

Yes I do think that if there is only one use of the template the content should be moved into article space. The problem we have

2374: 6707:

articles but it's a time consuming challenge and I haven't been able to commit myself to it! I think Daenerys is next through.—

4316:

This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

2771: 2736: 2584: 937:) under "Open 4 Business Productions," both wholly-owned NBCU subsidiary "companies." I don't know the technicalities regarding 6975:

You forgot the Ann-Margret Julie Andrews vehicle Our Sons. As a long term survivor I remember this film was ahead of its time

6061: 5694: 4792: 3903:

I did that automatically while doing general cleanup, technically King Features is fine but the actual citation added was from

2345: 2315:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 1243: 571: 149: 112: 4991: 4431: 3160:

Can you explain what you mean when you suggest I've "discussed personal motives"? I believe all comments I have made here, at

2841:

have inspired Herbert isn't appropriate if a reliable source isn't connecting this etymology specifically to Herbert's work.—

2478: 1388: 6963: 6858: 6516: 6513:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 6355: 6352:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 5635: 5347: 3992: 3857: 3230:

by definition. You are welcome to ask RS noticeboard on each specific source of cause if you want to be sure. And agree last

2605: 2327:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

1287:

could apply if my "gotta-have-a-#" interpretation doesn't hold) and where it is only mentioned in passing in the section. --

629: 6473:, the image displays fine for me, perhaps there was a stewed issue previously, or you're having a temporary browser issue?— 5592: 4493: 4217: 2382: 1503: 6959: 6902: 6850: 5909: 5603: 5307:

Ooops, I started writing the above before you posted this. Looks perfect, but the attribution is not in the edit history.

5149:

I only saw these articles later because you edited these pages a few hours before you last message in this discussion. As

4022: 3564: 3493: 3448: 2732: 524: 4138:

Ooops, I can't read diffs. You fixed the file part (and I self-reverted that part and put the image size in separately).

2941:

This reliable sources, independent of the subject, defines Muad'Dib as democracy and speculates about Herbert's intentions

6982: 6590: 6563: 6142:

Are you a friend of Holly Lewis? LOL. I don't know that I've seen a lot of one-episode appearances put on a cast list. A

5828: 5809: 5516:

Yes thanks, I noticed your edit and made the change in the other templates in the same category as the one you updated.—

4697: 2811: 2797: 1239: 1127:

it while merging a stub. This strikes me as an error, but I wanted to check with you before correcting it (and others).

1095: 642:(most of which are already in bad shape). This IP is doing this to other articles. But, for the record, he or she may be 219:

by Jennifer Hayward does mention it. My scan of the page is barely readable so here's a link to the page on google books

194: 6990: 6650: 4575: 1696:

should only be used in the strict sense, then you feel that there needs to be a template to replace it in cases such as

6933: 6751: 6655: 6318: 6283: 6248: 6171: 5999: 5682: 4960: 4417: 4358: 4052: 3897: 3266:

Anthony, I voted keep on AfD, so I'm glad that it is over as keep. The process attracted editors attention towards the

2493: 6136: 6084: 6034: 4736: 4046: 3744: 2831: 581:

for some of it. He is an editor that has been blocked forever, but returns occasionally under different names. He was

7082: 6820: 6778: 4843: 4787: 4633: 4270:

By the way, what area of tv production are you involved in? Big studio, smaller production company, writing, Post? --

3934: 3891: 3802: 2711: 2654: 2612: 2298: 2277: 2013: 1905: 1117:

I see that you have added this template to several redirects that do not specifically target a section, such as with

6777:

How can the name of the writer of the Introduction, H. C. Koenig, be linked to the Knowledge entry covering Koenig?

5501:

that some user who like to keep up to date with technical changes loose sleep over its use with these templates. --

4038:

establishes that it is based on a medieval practice in which gentlemen were named Knights of the Bath, and there is

3675:

is what I have so far. It is still about 75% plot related stuff, but I think it is moving in the right direction.

3314:

just because they're in Google scholar, no one is actually vetting them. There are old discussions about this, like

2485:

to see how many editors could potentially be affected. Hope everything is well and you're not stressed over turkey.

1557: 6345: 6184: 5128:

First of all I kind of figured this discussion was over since no one else was chiming in. But I never included the

5122: 4559: 4227:

franchise is so popular and sprawling that the articles get out of hand fast, and as you know, several sections of

3519: 3216:

I appreciate your approach and glad that you feel like that. However I have concerns with those two recent edits:

2657:. I just created the documentation pages to separate the documentations from the templates. (Reasons are numerous). 2461: 2417: 1824: 1387:

is correct) is just to remove that template (unless it appears that a section redirect is called for, such with as

236:

Rocksey, this is excellent. This is exactly the kind of sourcing that is needed to make a character's age notable.

6578: 4765:

and have tried to find positive comments, but in most reviews the minimal praise is overwhelmed by the negative.—

3541: 3535: 3377: 3356: 3182: 1110:? I read is a being for those redirects that specifically target a section, that is, the template is appropriate 1087: 6747: 6636: 4758: 4665: 2725: 2691: 1896:? I could nominate it if you want. Of course...that would mean me coming up with a hook, unless you suggest one. 1055: 1051: 981: 977: 924: 920: 123: 6573:

You were right. I actually happen to be in the habit of making condescending edits like this to editors who use

3878:

questioned as a reliable source. Doing it your way consistently could involve changing hundreds of references.—

1455: 5579:

She later played Nick O'Malley's mother in a 2001 episode the TV series Special Unit 2 (Episode: "The Years").'

5547: 5510: 5301: 5248: 5018: 4946: 4808: 4656: 3352: 2936: 2755: 2665: 2622:. Where did that figure come from, was there a consensus for it and if so where is that discussion? Since then 5239:). So how do you suggest that we tackle that problem, if "Templates should not be redirected to articles"? -- 3710:

based on my findings. Your input would be welcome. There have been false springs before, but your suggestion

3315: 1539: 1124: 882: 726: 6866: 6505:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

6344:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

6095: 6047: 3596:

So I have been working on A Song of Ice and Fire character pages for a bit, trying to do something about the

2718: 1865: 1845: 1807: 1769: 1722: 1667: 835:

Ugh. I was irritated that you called me a "Randy expert" up above, but I just realized I totally am. So sad.

6107:

pages. Unless we can establish that she had some significant contribution to a story or something perhaps.—

5350:

is being pushed past the image? I'm not sure how to test/implement it with the current template language. —

1425: 6384: 5823: 4999: 3728: 2701: 2650: 1493: 633: 89: 81: 76: 64: 59: 6124:

Otherwise, the character should simply be included in a "List of characters" for that particular program."

5051: 5003: 1775:

explicitly state that "Conversely, if the topic is not susceptible to a major expansion, tag instead with

6816:

No problem. Let me know if you ever have any reliable web sources with good info to add to the article.—

6091: 5777: 5727: 4796: 4459: 4039: 3829: 3672: 3601: 3480: 2282: 1741: 2092:

Sometimes I'm diplomatic, sometimes I'm a dick ;) BTW, why are you up this late too?? Wiki nerds. LOL —

7007: 6551: 5955: 4637: 4619: 3806: 3788: 2328: 2318: 2042: 1893: 1828: 145: 108: 38: 5039: 4987: 4057:

Why the change from "Cover of the 1st edition" to "1st edition cover"? Did I miss the memo, or what?

3414:

but the notability of the actual shirt. We wouldn't talk about every article of clothing derived from

5571: 5013:

As for non-fiction family trees and fiction ones, I do not see any difference with a family tree for

4528: 3591: 3434: 2784: 1392: 552: 5047: 4209:

years. Its good to see another person with inside industry knowledge editing on WP. Best regards, --

1892:

I just wanted to say awesome new article. You did excellent work with this. Mind if it is listed at

1704: 1431: 7027: 6870: 5487: 5031: 3969: 3839: 3680: 3609: 3560: 3497: 2899: 2776: 2674: 2474: 2432:

Two things. I found my old copy of The Secret Diary of Laura Palmer. I am officially a nerd. Also,

2256:

Just dropping by to state that part of the controversy surrounding this character was discussed on

1835: 1817: 1797: 1780: 1749: 1712: 1657: 1634: 1627: 1396: 1288: 1142: 776: 1982:

No problem. I am certain the article will be included on the main page. It really is a good read.

1256:

supports the "gotta-have-a-#" idea by saying, "This is a redirect from a topic, name or term that

1238:

is overly strict is what I am trying to determine. I will bring the subject up in another forum (

733:

be fun, probably one of the rare times CheckUser actually proves that two editors are unrelated.—

6986: 5723: 4402: 4343: 4288: 4223:

And thank you for the contribution, I hope it didn't seem like we were jumping all over you. The

4203: 4183: 4143: 4129: 4090: 4062: 4042:. I included a Google Books link to Anstis' book in the article where he describes this ritual.— 3637: 3530:

There are sources of changes I made on a list of Dynasty episodes: Changes in season 3: sources:

3273:

this book ties together desert Muad'Dib tradition, jerboa and Dune, though no relation to Herbert

97: 1028:

http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=print_story&articleid=VR1117963754&categoryid=14

6545: 6488: 6457: 6442: 6221: 5717: 4712: 4687: 4606: 4247: 3280: 3257: 3197: 3136: 3036: 2952: 2926: 2889: 2871: 2827: 2592: 1617: 578: 6428:

Lord Edgware Dies, cover illustration no longer shows in article since image parameter updated

5292:

in place of the template header. We can use this as a working example for this discussion. --

4868:

Once you have had a chance to read those posting please explain why you think that templates:

4568: 3838:, which specifically says not to just list every place that a show appears. As that goes into 3737: 3069:

Are you suggesting we build a WP topic around a metaphor made in one paper? If everyone loves

2404:

Thank god I decided to click through your edits. Over a decade (!) ago, I lost my VHS copy of

2291: 6597:

but other experienced editors honestly don't need you formally notifying us of the obvious.—

6568: 6132: 6080: 6030: 6010: 5951: 4580: 4427: 4372: 4082: 3928: 3885: 3820: 3749: 3509:

that "it's old" doesn't make sense to me. And obviously I'm not alone in feeling that way. —

3401: 3373: 3031:

ref by US government during 2003 Iraq War. Not really a common name reference in this case.

3020: 3016: 3015:, by content and style and also because it came from Google scholar. To me the paper appears 2979: 2466: 2303: 1855: 1787: 1776: 1690: 1647: 1415: 1381: 1343: 1333: 1281: 1250: 1232: 1194: 1175: 1155: 1135: 1104: 767: 673: 608: 567: 446: 141: 104: 5197:

trees should be cited, and my next step after moving them into the articles was to cite the

762:

I got the shit idea from Clau5dia8. And again, blocking threats and obscession with Carly.--

6978: 6947: 6890: 6846: 6837: 6506: 6206: 5805: 5022: 4732: 4274: 4255: 4213: 4081:

Then I'm reverting. As it is, you're also incorrectly munged up the image parameter. See

4018: 3988: 3960: 3835: 3719: 3629: 3552: 3489: 3340: 2257: 1579: 1573: 1039: 965: 908: 6041:

does not belong. This negatively impacts article quality. Specifically in this case, both

3245:

context. It is just the way it is. So should we as Knowledge. Dialog is informational in

1607: 1591: 1481: 1200:? In cases where nothing has been merged, I'd think that might also seem like an error. — 479:

articles, and honestly they're low enough on my "importance meter" that it's not worth it!

8: 6616: 6586: 6330: 6295: 6260: 6220:

or others yet, but I have certainly seen other such lists greatly reduced or deleted per

6127:

include Lewis and other guest stars that's not notable in any other section of the show.

6046:

single cast member already listed will be dead. There is a huge list of deceased cast at

5043: 4928: 4879: 4595: 4121: 4009: 3764: 3676: 3605: 3531: 2660:

As for the number to which you are referring, it was in the template documentations when

2635: 2363: 2341: 2028:

I actually see the 25th as well. Are you using the time offset in your user preferences?

1885: 1643:

I have no objection to your changing them, as I do see your point/the advantage in using

1602: 1533: 1487: 1449: 1047: 973: 916: 792: 711: 502:

I would actually consider copying the infoboxes in the article too; I didn't use them in

136:

It sounds like people watching this talk page may have an interest, so please comment at

6143: 5986:

Would you be interested in helping me expand this article, I've added about 25 sources.

4233:

have been split out into their own articles to accommodate the material. Thanks again!—

1521: 1509: 1437: 7061: 7047: 6804: 6559: 5708: 5491: 5443: 5432: 5409: 5336: 5287: 4741: 4650: 2324: 1698: 1585: 1527: 1119: 878:

may turn out to be one of the most amusing comments I've made, I crack myself up. ;) —

808:

WOW is right!! I now officially love CheckUser. But do you really think it's Randy?? —

47: 17: 4616:. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page 3785:. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page 2916:

All right, I'm not sure what Herbert's intentions were, though no doubt, according to

1597: 1563: 1551: 6536: 6527:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

6484: 6468: 6453: 6438: 6433: 6375: 6366:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

5561: 5312: 5270: 5172: 5118: 4775: 4721: 4708: 4117: 4035: 3862: 3852: 3775: 3468: 3444: 3276: 3253: 3193: 3132: 3032: 2948: 2940: 2922: 2885: 2867: 2823: 2764: 2670: 2588: 2541: 2519: 2486: 2454: 2399: 2273: 2177: 2121: 2009: 1987: 1956: 1901: 1443: 1079: 655: 558: 410: 395: 377: 364: 339: 324: 298: 227: 190: 163: 5745:

Thanks I didn't know that ... but I have a problem with a WikiProject going against

3396:

sited on the entire internet (alexa=25,787), I assumed that to be enough notability?

2668:) I have no idea where the numbers have come from. You may like to contact TAnthony. 1737:

I ask because I am new to the whole redirect template scene, and while I understand

1545: 217:

Consuming Pleasures: Active Audiences and Serial Fictions from Dickens to Soap Opera

6970: 6674: 6550:

This is a neutral notice that a dormant discussion with which you were involved at

6128: 6076: 6026: 6019: 6006: 4883: 4776: 4600: 4587: 4491: 4482: 4450: 4413: 4406: 4391: 4354: 4347: 4332: 4299: 4292: 3951: 3922: 3879: 3816: 3625: 2807: 2793: 2777: 2739:

on February 23, 2008, and that same day the specific 300px restriction was removed

2735:

on May 16, 2007. It remained there until the notes were moved to the documentation

2261: 1933: 1475: 1465: 763: 669: 604: 563: 442: 4627: 1973:

Ah yes, meant to include the show name ... OK, just did it, thanks for the idea!—

1841:, because obviously those redirects don't exactly fit cleanly within the scope of 6678: 6416: 6391: 6179: 6052: 5943:

On a related note, what is the procedure on Knowledge for dubious claims made by

5281: 5098: 4893: 4728: 4307: 4271: 4252: 4229: 4210: 3956: 3715: 2816: 2620:

The rule of thumb for raster images is no more than 300 pixels in width or height

1357: 1182: 1062: 350:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Television#Age fields in fictional character infoboxes

138:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Television#Age fields in fictional character infoboxes

46:

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

6682: 6612: 6582: 6326: 6291: 6256: 5905: 4975: 4754: 4519: 4503: 4368: 3542:

http://lbcolby.blogspot.cz/2011/04/dynasty-abc-episode-guide-season-2-1981.html

3536:

http://lbcolby.blogspot.cz/2011/04/dynasty-abc-episode-guide-season-3-1982.html

3189: 3161: 2631: 2580: 2433: 2359: 2337: 1515: 1470: 1181:

probably didn't feel right. That novel is noted in the "Novels" section of the

1151:

I think you're more or less correct about your understanding of the purpose of

1043: 969: 912: 3796: 3164:, and at the AfD are in direct relation to my belief that all the material in 527:, find stubs or short articles for old characters no longer on the show (like 7126: 7105: 7090: 7076: 7052: 6998: 6930: 6874: 6828: 6827:

I've never actually seen it so I'm not equipped to add plot info either ;) —

6817: 6809:

Thank you for creating the Anacostia wiki page! It's greatly appreciated.

6796: 6756: 6723: 6708: 6691: 6686: 6662: 6647: 6598: 6574: 6555: 6474: 6406: 6225: 6148: 6108: 6065: 6057: 5970: 5925: 5916: 5759: 5750: 5746: 5704: 5658: 5626: 5611: 5543: 5517: 5506: 5464: 5454: 5416: 5376: 5351: 5297: 5244: 5236: 5217: 5208: 5137: 5110: 5074: 5063: 4967: 4953: 4933: 4906: 4851: 4821: 4804: 4766: 4646: 4550: 4234: 4170: 4108: 4073: 4043: 4000: 3913: 3870: 3692: 3661: 3582: 3510: 3455: 3419: 3385: 3318: 3208: 3179: 3175: 3079: 3074: 2983: 2908: 2842: 2744: 2661: 2554: 2532: 2510: 2501: 2467: 2424: 2390: 2265: 2227: 2093: 2070: 2046: 2020: 1974: 1926: 1917: 1872: 1674: 1568: 1460: 1352: 1309: 1215: 1201: 1163: 1084: 1010: 946: 887: 879: 849: 809: 734: 692: 643: 591: 543: 528: 460:) but I know from experience that you will get some complaints from die-hard 353: 261: 202: 128: 5935:

Added citations to accusation of Tyler's "plagiarism" from Dune Encyclopedia

3714:

be about to resolve a content dispute that's been going on for four months.

6532: 6528: 6371: 6367: 6217: 6118: 5102: 5094: 4437: 4378: 4319: 4303: 3843: 3769: 3756: 3464: 3440: 3363: 3311: 3227: 3124: 3012: 2859: 2482: 2437: 2410: 2269: 2173: 2117: 2103: 2080: 2056: 2029: 2005: 1983: 1952: 1897: 836: 823: 796: 780: 744: 719: 705: 651: 406: 391: 373: 335: 320: 294: 237: 223: 186: 159: 7124:

Also if you agree or disagree with what I said above, please let me know.

4298:

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

1360:

were the two who were active today, so I dropped notes on your talk pages.

7042: 6886:

Yes the novel by Soli.. sorry this is the first time I've been on wiki.

6666: 6042: 6025:

that lists deceased cast members no matter how big or small the role was

5987: 5535: 5106: 4875: 4486: 4446: 4441: 4387: 4382: 4328: 4323: 3548:

but they are different than on official USA DVD release! LukeFuller1985

3439:

Always good to see you around; your user page popped up on my watchlist.

3192:. My additions usually should be reviewed ;) Anyway, 10x for discussion. 2803: 2789: 2788:

renominate it, that way you can get some more fresh eyes on the article.

2310: 1938: 1912: 1886: 1831:. I'd love to read the discussion that resulted in the merge/redirect of 1623:

is inappropriate and agree on an appropriate replacement template. Does

870: 4842:, and in response to user "— Maile"'s similar question on my talk page: 6670: 5495: 3645: 2623: 1929: 514: 369: 5007: 4468: 4422: 5901: 5758:

But thanks again for pointing that out, I'm going to look into it! —

5576:

Dear TAnthony, On May 1, I tried to edit/remove the following data: '

4592:, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was 3863: 3761:, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was 3267: 3165: 3116: 3070: 2944: 2903: 6577:

in ways that the instructions clearly tell you not to use them. See

6812:

V/r Wil Lash (William Lash aka Onix) Actor / Producer - Anacostia

6510: 5553: 5539: 5502: 5450: 5372: 5327: 5293: 5240: 5235:

behind is in part to satisfy Knowledge copyright restrictions (see

5150: 5059: 4902: 4847: 4800: 4545: 2436:

actually was on the show today. I'm guessing you weren't watching.

638: 2858:

by Istvan Csicsery-Ronay, Jr., Istvan Csicsery-Ronay (Jr.) book a

1100:

Hello TAnthony, what is your understanding of the proper usage of

5900:

emitted a class or something else easily manipulated by CSS... --

2863: 1304:

What is it you strongly disagree with? And how would you fix the

6773:

THE HOUSE ON THE BORDERLAND AND OTHER NOVELS (ARKHAM HOUSE BOOK)

5021:, but if it is turned into a family tree of Norse gods ...) and 4956:-- not an accusation on can lay against an alphabetic list like 2045:

comes up for me as: Revision as of 20:45, July 24, 2009. You? —

2019:

That's funny, when I look at the history it says the 24th ... —

6349: 3950:

Hi, thanks for informing me about the broadcast format. I read

2268:. I am not sure why they are just now reporting on it, though. 4363: 3999:

reprint dates would help navigation and make it more useful.—

1613:

I'd be happy to fix them, if you'd like, if we determine that

1213:

I strongly agree with your a) and b) points as they applie to

6742:

Also except the articles about the major characters, I think

6703:

Thanks. I've collected research to improve several character

2982:

is Paul Atreides, and that's where the work should be done.—

2386:

grabbed it so everyone here will know how great you are. LOL.

2351:

Don't you dare insult me and think you will get away with it.

185:

against WP: TENSE the same both residence and occupation do.

4312: 1356:. Four editors account for 80% of these edits, and you and 5014: 6119:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Soap_Operas

4892:

exist when they are only used in one article in this case

2783:

I have finished my GA review of the article. Please visit

2664:

first created the templates in 1 November 2007. (Refer to

348:

This is so well-put, have to glanced at the discussion at

6323:

the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page

6288:

the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page

6253:

the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page

6176:

the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page

5403:

List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters#House Lannister

4990:

you will see that it is fully cited. If you look compare

1350:

template while not targeting a section, an example being

520:

after the text to push the next section past the infobox.

2902:. This is a fine reference for suggesting that the word 2618:

in which you wrote, in the "low resolution" field that:

1633:

catch the sense of what you are trying to designate? --

6509:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 6348:, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 6305:

Nomination for deletion of Template:1990s US miniseries

6270:

Nomination for deletion of Template:1980s US miniseries

6235:

Nomination for deletion of Template:1970s US miniseries

5158:

putting the templates into the articles as a good idea.

4517:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

3873:, which is what I have been using. I don't bother with 3834:

Umm.....yea..LOL. It violates WP:FLAG, and it violates

2907:

don't see how it's useful in regard to this article.—

2898:

Thanks, I read the passage when you first cited it in

2687:

Ah, 2007 is a lifetime ago, eh? I used the ubiquitous

2572:

A question regarding Non-free rationale documentation

2389:

Spell? Proper grammar? What are you talking about?? —

7066:

Hello. I realized that you have reverted my edits on

6432:

I noticed that the cover image no longer appears for

6103:

is notable on her page, but she isn't notable on any

5428:. As a temporary measure I have wrapped the template 5426:

List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters#House Arryn

5399:

List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters#House Arryn

5369:

List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters#House Stark

5344:

List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters#House Stark

4871:

Ought not to be directly editable from within a page.

3532:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081856/episodes?season=3

1228:

Whether or not my "gotta-have-a-#" interpretation of

577:

Randy is a long and complicated story, but check out

5193:

I sort of misspoke above: I do now agree that these

4996:

Henry Percy, 3rd Earl of Northumberland (April 2015)

4992:

Henry Percy, 3rd Earl of Northumberland (April 2014)

4612:

The nomination discussion and review may be seen at

4523:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge according to

3781:

The nomination discussion and review may be seen at

3237:

2. Sources sometimes discuss Muad'Dib in context of

2477:

would keep things calm. You should also ask about a

779:

I'm considering changing my username to Unholy Fag.

6158:

Nomination for deletion of Template:LGBT web series

5798:

who put my picture on my uncle's page a month ago

5017:(at the moment there is just a navigation template 3702:

Game of Thrones chapter information and GA articles

2531:LOL, would it help if I said I was really tired?!— 1499:

How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life

6321:. You are invited to comment on the discussion at 6286:. You are invited to comment on the discussion at 6251:. You are invited to comment on the discussion at 6174:. You are invited to comment on the discussion at 4614:Template:Did you know nominations/Tyrion Lannister 1504:How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild and Got a Life 456:I'm OK with the concept (I did the same thing for 7041:years ago and did some work more recently on the 5915:Great thanks I've added this to my vector file.— 3524:Hi, I respond to the following massage of yours: 3019:. Don't get me wrong, I don't argue about Paul's 1916:get some feedback from the community at large. — 1411:Here are all 33 of the redirects that you tagged 822:a truly awful sitcom that Randy loved. It's him. 489:List of General Hospital miscellaneous characters 6501:Disambiguation link notification for September 1 5802:My pix was posted as. Sincerely, Frank Pacelli 5657:learned from it, but I'm now having my doubts.— 1377:What I would like to do (if my understanding of 1161:... I don't recall my thinking when redirecting 1026:anyhow, I found that research from Variety.com. 4536:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/WordFire Press 2943:. Does it belong to the topic? Could it fit in 2935:Maybe this might be interesting, in context of 535:characters that could use collecting as well ;) 6639:so it wasn't actually a "rather useless" edit. 6340:Disambiguation link notification for August 15 5621:By the way, several online sources, including 3783:Template:Did you know nominations/Eddard Stark 3234:source was wacky with Imperialism and stuff ;) 2822:continue to gather sources if you don't mind. 6791:I can't seem to find a Knowledge article for 3384:assert notability. Thanks for checking in! — 2802:Did you have any questions about the review? 6997:When you say "I forgot", what do you mean?— 4707:appropriately established this way. Best, -- 3779:because he knew readers would not expect it? 3174:(as you may notice in the work I'm doing at 2947:article, in your opinion? If yes then how ? 1114:there is a "#" in the redirect target link. 441:Do you like the article and the function? -- 222:. So I guess we can use this as the source. 6196:List of works published by Valancourt Books 5965:Thanks, I'm gong to comment on this as the 3121:File:Graham's_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg 1937:featuring sexually confused police officer 1718:without the baggage of being a redirect to 1663:seems right, but it doesn't exactly exist. 901:please reply back at your convenient time. 4169:and you want to force a particular size.— 3946:Outlander (TV series) "Broadcasts" section 2041:As far as I can tell, it's set for LA ... 1558:Princess Mary Tudor (The Tudors) character 1421:but don't actually redirect to a section. 7051:articles because they were a mess haha.— 6744:List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters 4584:was updated with a fact from the article 3753:was updated with a fact from the article 2307:was updated with a fact from the article 542:Good luck, I'll try to keep an eye out.— 504:One Life to Live miscellaneous characters 436:List of General Hospital minor characters 158:Yeah, I'll go and respond quickly there. 7072:Template:Family tree of Maekar Targaryen 5190:programming, I should have noticed that. 4836:Template talk:Nerva–Antonine family tree 4670:To respond to your comments/criticisms: 4375:for things which need to be addressed. 3463:Thanks. I hope that you are doing well. 624:It has started: Character age mess again 508:General Hospital: Night Shift characters 386:TAnthony, I'll check outthat discussion. 6402:Category:American television miniseries 5981:Organizations in A Song of Ice and Fire 2604:Back in February this year you created 1073:reboot, the sources note that six more 14: 6062:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Soap Operas 4793:Template talk:Harry Potter family tree 4367:. The article is close to meeting the 4040:an entire section of the article on it 1456:Charles Brandon (The Tudors character) 1244:Knowledge:Village pump (miscellaneous) 557:Thanks for cleaning up and fixing the 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 6637:Knowledge:Manual of Style#US and U.S. 5348:Template:Family tree of Rickard Stark 3454:Yes indeed! Great to hear from you.— 2856:The seven beauties of science fiction 1823:, most seem to be along the lines of 630:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Television 5924:Dude that is VERY cool! Thx again.— 5643:2001:41D0:2:37CE:59B6:BAF2:29A9:1F3E 4888:why translucence templates such as 4563: 3732: 2666:the first revision for verification. 2226:Yes, thank you for the suggestion!— 1540:Lady Rochford (The Tudors character) 525:Category:General Hospital characters 484:I do have a few suggestions though: 25: 6635:The use of "USA" is deprecated per 5699:I would like your opinion on this 4525:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 3624:noticed what I've done lately with 1240:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Redirect 23: 6752:List of Game of Thrones characters 3190:I'm glad you are watching the page 3011:I'm pretty sure that the paper is 1426:Anne Boleyn (The Tudors character) 1242:initially, with perhaps a note at 646:, as accused of being so by you. 24: 7148: 4983:Template talk:Kennedy family tree 4844:Template talk:Houston family tree 4840:Template talk:Kennedy family tree 4788:Template:Harry Potter family tree 4604:as his favorite character in his 4534:The article will be discussed at 3642:: Analysis of Eddard "Ned" Stark" 3127:brings Herbert view on so called 2655:Template:Non-free image rationale 1861:(and thereby adjust the usage of 1494:Henry VIII (The Tudors character) 6346:The Most Popular Girls in School 6309: 6274: 6239: 6162: 5530:I have re-copied the content of 5367:Do you still want me to look at 4567: 4510: 4467: 4421: 4362: 4311: 4116:In the two instances I noticed, 4085:, the format has been updated. 3736: 2379:File:Joey-NathanFillion-1995.jpg 2290: 1825:South Koreans in the Philippines 1708:-- something along the lines of 29: 6748:World of A Song of Ice and Fire 6216:Yes I think no one has noticed 5342:help with the display issue at 5093:I reverted the changes made to 4246:No worries, since I patrol the 3073:so much, there should not be a 2721:the 300px language was part of 124:Template talk:Infobox character 7068:Family tree of House Targaryen 6800:20:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 6787:19:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 6763:10:41, 28 September 2015 (UTC) 6730:19:52, 27 September 2015 (UTC) 6712:14:14, 27 September 2015 (UTC) 6698:09:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC) 6651:03:35, 13 September 2015 (UTC) 6621:01:59, 13 September 2015 (UTC) 6602:22:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC) 6591:22:31, 12 September 2015 (UTC) 6117:Well, from what I can read of 5722:See the hatnote at the top of 5695:Discussion that needs answers. 5019:Template:Norse paganism topics 4988:Charles II of England#Ancestry 4971:against reliable sources (see 4004:19:46, 27 September 2014 (UTC) 3993:19:25, 27 September 2014 (UTC) 3389:20:13, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 3378:16:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 3322:21:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC) 3285:19:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC) 3262:18:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC) 3212:17:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC) 3202:17:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC) 3183:17:14, 22 September 2010 (UTC) 3141:08:36, 22 September 2010 (UTC) 3083:21:08, 20 September 2010 (UTC) 3041:06:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC) 2987:20:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2957:06:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2931:21:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC) 2912:18:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC) 2894:18:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC) 2876:18:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC) 2846:17:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC) 2832:17:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC) 2697:as a starting point to create 2278:02:24, 16 September 2009 (UTC) 2172:Anyway, congratulations, man. 1876:07:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC) 1753:04:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC) 1678:15:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC) 1638:14:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC) 1400:07:04, 13 September 2009 (UTC) 1313:06:20, 13 September 2009 (UTC) 1292:05:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC) 1205:04:08, 13 September 2009 (UTC) 1146:01:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC) 13: 1: 6867:Lotus-eaters (disambiguation) 6564:21:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC) 6541:09:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC) 6096:List of Passions cast members 6048:General Hospital cast members 5636:Stop posting on my talk page? 5463:OK thanks I'll take a look.— 5155:Template:Buchanan family tree 4890:Template:Buchanan family tree 4661:00:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC) 4555:04:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC) 4494:07:56, 16 February 2015 (UTC) 4481:For your efforts in bringing 4455:20:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC) 4279:18:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC) 4260:17:55, 12 November 2014 (UTC) 4238:17:40, 12 November 2014 (UTC) 4218:17:30, 12 November 2014 (UTC) 4015:12:41, 8 October 2014 (UTC) 3965:20:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC) 3917:15:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC) 3898:15:26, 8 September 2014 (UTC) 3540:Changes in season 2: source: 3514:17:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC) 3502:06:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC) 3188:Anthony, I already told you, 3027:ref by Qizarate priests with 2772:05:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC) 2494:05:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC) 2462:08:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC) 2423:LOL, glad to be of service!— 1653:in a straightforward manner. 1258:does not have its own article 7133:14:41, 29 October 2015 (UTC) 7112:07:03, 28 October 2015 (UTC) 7094:22:56, 27 October 2015 (UTC) 7083:19:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC) 7056:19:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC) 7037:Hi nice to meet you, I read 7032:18:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC) 7002:23:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC) 6991:22:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC) 6964:23:51, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 6934:20:50, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 6907:20:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 6878:20:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 6859:20:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 6832:20:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC) 6821:20:55, 14 October 2015 (UTC) 6315:Template:1990s US miniseries 6280:Template:1980s US miniseries 6245:Template:1970s US miniseries 5000:Template:Houston family tree 4682:Thanks for your critiques, 4396:16:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC) 4337:22:21, 6 February 2015 (UTC) 4188:00:01, 3 November 2014 (UTC) 4174:23:54, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 4148:23:39, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 4134:23:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 4112:23:33, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 4095:23:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 4077:23:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 4067:23:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC) 3357:18:43, 28 January 2012 (UTC) 2651:Template:Non-free image data 2558:06:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 2549:06:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 2536:06:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 2527:06:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 2514:06:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 2505:06:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 2445:07:25, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 2428:06:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 2418:01:43, 21 October 2009 (UTC) 2394:00:05, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 2368:21:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC) 1056:12:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC) 7: 6629:Dude. I know the AWB rules. 6493:23:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC) 6478:12:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC) 6462:11:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC) 6447:11:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC) 6420:18:27, 16 August 2015 (UTC) 6410:17:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC) 6395:13:10, 16 August 2015 (UTC) 6380:09:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC) 6092:List of Passions characters 5594:. Sincerely, Walter Miller 5200:The Soap Opera Encyclopedia 4700:Book:A Song of Ice and Fire 4434:to appear in Did you know. 4047:14:49, 8 October 2014 (UTC) 3858:04:10, 27 August 2014 (UTC) 3825:12:40, 23 August 2014 (UTC) 3724:23:41, 22 August 2014 (UTC) 3696:01:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC) 3685:01:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC) 3665:23:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC) 3614:22:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC) 3423:23:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 3406:12:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 2854:I've just noticed AfD . Is 2748:16:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC) 2679:06:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC) 2640:03:23, 20 August 2010 (UTC) 2597:06:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC) 1096:R_to_section template usage 1088:23:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC) 1014:04:41, 25 August 2009 (UTC) 982:01:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC) 950:02:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC) 925:01:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC) 883:06:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC) 853:03:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 844:03:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 831:03:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 813:02:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 804:00:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 788:23:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 772:15:11, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 752:05:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 738:04:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 727:02:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 10: 7153: 6656:Game of Thrones characters 6552:Help talk:Citation Style 1 6335:10:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC) 6300:10:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC) 6265:10:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC) 6000:RfC: red links in navboxes 5566:22:35, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5548:02:52, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5521:02:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5511:01:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5468:14:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5459:03:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5420:02:15, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5381:01:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 5355:23:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5317:22:57, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5302:22:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5275:22:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5249:22:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5221:22:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5212:21:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5177:21:38, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5141:12:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5123:08:16, 22 April 2015 (UTC) 5078:21:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 5068:19:32, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4937:16:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4911:16:00, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4856:15:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4825:15:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4809:15:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4770:23:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4759:23:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC) 4737:00:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC) 4717:18:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC) 4053:Book cover caption changes 3486:shows have an IMDb link. 3252:Hope you see what I mean. 2798:18:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC) 2346:14:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2264:'s dismassal as character 2231:16:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 2182:03:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 2126:10:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2111:07:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2097:07:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2088:07:21, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2074:07:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2064:07:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2050:07:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2037:07:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2024:06:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 2014:06:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 1894:Template talk:Did you know 1829:Koreans in the Philippines 1705:Around the World Submerged 1432:Around the World Submerged 716:User talk:TAnthony AniMate 696:18:07, 9 August 2009 (UTC) 678:16:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC) 660:11:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC) 613:20:07, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 595:03:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 572:01:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 6229:17:29, 31 July 2015 (UTC) 6211:16:43, 31 July 2015 (UTC) 6190:21:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC) 6015:00:12, 26 June 2015 (UTC) 5995:22:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC) 5974:14:25, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 5960:05:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 5929:02:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC) 5920:23:36, 17 June 2015 (UTC) 5910:23:33, 17 June 2015 (UTC) 5818:00:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC) 5790:14:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 5763:14:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 5754:14:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 5740:14:41, 12 June 2015 (UTC) 5532:Template:Lord family tree 5284:tree as an example using 5027:Template:Thor family tree 4961:World War II city bombing 4692:01:18, 9 April 2015 (UTC) 4632:, and it may be added to 4466: 4306:-status according to the 3801:, and it may be added to 3017:secondary reliable source 2812:22:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC) 2785:Talk:Dune (franchise)/GA1 1992:01:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC) 1978:01:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC) 1961:00:56, 26 July 2009 (UTC) 1921:23:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC) 1906:21:27, 25 July 2009 (UTC) 1393:Klick (fictional species) 1277:section (where you think 547:00:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC) 451:23:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC) 415:22:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC) 400:18:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC) 382:22:57, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 357:23:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 344:21:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 329:21:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 303:20:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 265:19:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 245:19:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 232:19:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 206:18:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 195:17:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 168:08:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 154:05:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 132:05:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 117:04:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC) 6871:The Lotus Eaters (novel) 6168:Template:LGBT web series 6152:00:44, 8 July 2015 (UTC) 6137:00:29, 8 July 2015 (UTC) 6112:22:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC) 6085:21:10, 7 July 2015 (UTC) 6069:19:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC) 6035:18:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC) 5837: 5713:03:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC) 5687:19:37, 7 June 2015 (UTC) 5679:2001:41D0:8:BB58:0:0:0:0 5662:19:08, 7 June 2015 (UTC) 5651:19:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC) 5630:15:46, 31 May 2015 (UTC) 5615:15:35, 31 May 2015 (UTC) 5604:14:56, 31 May 2015 (UTC) 5488:Template:Chart/start/doc 4560:DYK for Tyrion Lannister 4527:or whether it should be 4361:has been placed on hold 4034:Hi, the 2nd sentence of 3586:14:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC) 3569:14:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC) 3520:Dynasty (serial) episode 3473:04:44, 23 May 2013 (UTC) 3459:04:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC) 3449:04:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 3115:Thank you for reviewing 2900:List of Dune terminology 2712:Non-free image rationale 2613:Non-free image rationale 2377:in the FUR template for 1781:Template:R to list entry 487:Change the list name to 6869:are you talking about, 5724:Category:American films 4666:Jacquetta of Luxembourg 3767:killed off protagonist 2329:Did you know? talk page 933:banner, and some (like 6319:nominated for deletion 6284:nominated for deletion 6249:nominated for deletion 6172:nominated for deletion 5779:Ser Amantio di Nicolao 5729:Ser Amantio di Nicolao 5483:Please have a look at 4638:Did you know talk page 4607:A Song of Ice and Fire 4248:Special:PendingChanges 3905:Downriver Sunday Times 3875:Downriver Sunday Times 3807:Did you know talk page 3598:bloated character list 3305:Yeah, I'm obviously a 2756:Best edit summary ever 2726:Non-free use rationale 2692:Non-free use rationale 2583:has raised a question 1329:My issue is only with 935:Parks & Recreation 579:User talk:Randy Jaiyan 6056:up for discussion at 4966:. However let us put 4947:Norse paganism topics 4436:Message delivered by 4428:Talk:Tyrion Lannister 4377:Message delivered by 4373:Talk:Tyrion Lannister 4369:good article criteria 4318:Message delivered by 4083:Template:infobox book 3275:. Hope you enjoy it. 3241:and not strictly in 3239:Politics and Religion 1777:Template:R to section 1765:The instructions for 820:What I Like About You 42:of past discussions. 6927:User:TAnthony/Drafts 6554:has been revived. -- 6529:opt-out instructions 6507:Robert III of Artois 6385:Miniseries templates 6368:opt-out instructions 5824:FYI navbox redirects 5023:Thor (Marvel Comics) 4927:So you are invoking 4878:policy specifically 4874:Are immune from the 3729:DYK for Eddard Stark 2882:link to Dune chapter 2626:has changed it with 1866:R with possibilities 1846:R with possibilities 1808:R with possibilities 1770:R with possibilities 1723:R with possibilities 1668:R with possibilities 5829:Regards this change 4634:the statistics page 4596:George R. R. Martin 4460:A barnstar for you! 4416:you nominated as a 4357:you nominated as a 3830:Pretty Little Liars 3803:the statistics page 3765:George R. R. Martin 3481:Removing dead links 2702:Non-free image data 2283:DYK for Oliver Fish 2258:The O'Reilly Factor 1603:Tanuja Desai Hidier 712:User talk:Clau5dia8 7048:Advise and Consent 7039:Advise and Consent 7008:Advise and Consent 6519:• Join us at the 6358:• Join us at the 5785:Lo dicono a Signa. 5735:Lo dicono a Signa. 5492:Template:chart/doc 5280:I have redone the 4594:... that novelist 4302:you nominated for 4122:A Smuggler's Bible 3836:WP:MOSTV#Broadcast 3773:in his 1996 novel 3207:forever. Thanks!— 2918:The seven beauties 1742:R from misspelling 506:but I put them in 18:User talk:TAnthony 7022:Kenneth Killiany 6993: 6981:comment added by 6967: 6950:comment added by 6910: 6893:comment added by 6865:Which article at 6861: 6849:comment added by 6524: 6434:Lord Edgware Dies 6390:luck with these. 6363: 5833:little bit of CSS 5820: 5808:comment added by 5623:Soap Opera Digest 5572:Erika Slezak page 4795:, and you placed 4644: 4643: 4631: 4499: 4498: 4444: 4385: 4326: 4118:A Political Fable 4036:Order of the Bath 4021:comment added by 3855: 3850: 3840:WP:INDISCRIMINATE 3813: 3812: 3800: 3776:A Game of Thrones 3640:A Game of Thrones 3592:Help with editing 3572: 3555:comment added by 3492:comment added by 3435:Long time, no see 3360: 3343:comment added by 3232:consensus reality 3131:, hope it helps. 3129:consensus reality 2646:Hello, Ww2censor. 2608:for the template 2606:the documentation 2579:Hello, TAnthony. 2443: 2416: 2335: 2334: 2109: 2086: 2062: 2035: 1580:Sigma draconis IV 1574:Sigma Draconis IV 1059: 1042:comment added by 985: 968:comment added by 928: 911:comment added by 842: 829: 802: 786: 777:Best insult ever. 750: 725: 559:Claudia Corinthos 553:Roak-here: Thanks 243: 95: 94: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 7144: 7131: 7129: 7110: 7108: 7081: 7079: 6976: 6966: 6944: 6909: 6887: 6844: 6761: 6759: 6728: 6726: 6696: 6694: 6675:Cersei Lannister 6642:We're done here. 6514: 6472: 6353: 6313: 6312: 6278: 6277: 6243: 6242: 6166: 6165: 5992: 5952:Shankarsivarajan 5895: 5892: 5889: 5886: 5883: 5880: 5877: 5874: 5871: 5868: 5865: 5862: 5859: 5856: 5853: 5850: 5847: 5844: 5841: 5803: 5780: 5730: 5556:Yes, look good. 5500: 5448: 5442: 5437: 5431: 5414: 5408: 5341: 5335: 5331: 5291: 5056: 5055: 4965: 4959: 4951: 4945: 4617: 4601:Tyrion Lannister 4588:Tyrion Lannister 4576:22 February 2015 4571: 4564: 4514: 4513: 4489: 4485:to GA status! — 4483:Tyrion Lannister 4471: 4464: 4463: 4435: 4425: 4414:Tyrion Lannister 4407:Tyrion Lannister 4376: 4366: 4355:Tyrion Lannister 4348:Tyrion Lannister 4317: 4315: 4300:Tyrion Lannister 4293:Tyrion Lannister 4030: 3970:Valancourt Books 3937: 3931: 3925: 3894: 3888: 3882: 3853: 3848: 3844: 3786: 3763:... that author 3740: 3733: 3656: 3654: 3652: 3626:Tyrion Lannister 3571: 3549: 3504: 3359: 3337: 2778:Dune (franchise) 2769: 2768: 2730: 2724: 2716: 2710: 2706: 2700: 2696: 2690: 2617: 2611: 2546: 2545: 2524: 2523: 2491: 2490: 2459: 2458: 2442: 2440: 2415: 2413: 2373:I make it clear 2294: 2287: 2286: 2262:Patricia Mauceri 2108: 2106: 2085: 2083: 2061: 2059: 2034: 2032: 1934:One Life to Live 1870: 1864: 1860: 1854: 1850: 1844: 1840: 1834: 1822: 1816: 1812: 1806: 1802: 1796: 1792: 1786: 1774: 1768: 1746: 1740: 1727: 1721: 1717: 1711: 1707: 1701: 1695: 1689: 1672: 1666: 1662: 1656: 1652: 1646: 1632: 1626: 1622: 1616: 1610: 1608:Ursula Blackwell 1600: 1594: 1592:Stella Lipschitz 1588: 1582: 1576: 1566: 1560: 1554: 1548: 1542: 1536: 1530: 1524: 1518: 1512: 1506: 1496: 1490: 1484: 1482:Garrett Boydston 1478: 1468: 1458: 1452: 1446: 1440: 1434: 1428: 1420: 1414: 1386: 1380: 1348: 1342: 1338: 1332: 1286: 1280: 1255: 1249: 1237: 1231: 1199: 1193: 1180: 1174: 1160: 1154: 1140: 1134: 1122: 1109: 1103: 1058: 1036: 984: 962: 927: 905: 841: 839: 828: 826: 801: 799: 785: 783: 749: 747: 724: 722: 519: 513: 458:One Life to Live 242: 240: 142:Peregrine Fisher 105:Peregrine Fisher 73: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 7152: 7151: 7147: 7146: 7145: 7143: 7142: 7141: 7127: 7125: 7106: 7104: 7077: 7075: 7064: 7010: 6973: 6945: 6888: 6840: 6807: 6775: 6757: 6755: 6724: 6722: 6692: 6690: 6679:Jaime Lannister 6658: 6571: 6548: 6521:DPL WikiProject 6503: 6466: 6430: 6387: 6360:DPL WikiProject 6342: 6310: 6307: 6275: 6272: 6240: 6237: 6222:WP:NOTDIRECTORY 6199: 6187: 6163: 6160: 6144:scary long list 6022: 6002: 5988: 5984: 5937: 5897: 5896: 5893: 5890: 5887: 5884: 5881: 5878: 5875: 5872: 5869: 5866: 5863: 5860: 5858:vertical-navbox 5857: 5854: 5851: 5848: 5845: 5842: 5839: 5826: 5800: 5788: 5778: 5738: 5728: 5720: 5697: 5638: 5574: 5499:<center: --> 5498: 5446: 5440: 5435: 5429: 5412: 5406: 5397:If you look at 5339: 5333: 5325: 5285: 5282:Buchanan family 5099:Buchanan family 5029: 5025: 4963: 4957: 4949: 4943: 4894:Buchanan family 4780: 4746: 4724: 4704: 4668: 4562: 4515: 4511: 4508: 4487: 4462: 4440:, on behalf of 4410: 4381:, on behalf of 4351: 4322:, on behalf of 4296: 4230:Game of Thrones 4206: 4204:Game of Thrones 4055: 4016: 4012: 3972: 3948: 3935: 3929: 3923: 3892: 3886: 3880: 3867: 3846: 3832: 3731: 3704: 3650: 3648: 3636: 3594: 3550: 3522: 3487: 3483: 3437: 3366: 3338: 2884:. For clarity. 2819: 2781: 2766: 2765: 2758: 2728: 2722: 2714: 2708: 2704: 2698: 2694: 2688: 2615: 2609: 2585:in my talk page 2574: 2543: 2542: 2521: 2520: 2488: 2487: 2475:semi protection 2471: 2456: 2455: 2438: 2411: 2402: 2353: 2322: 2285: 2260:. Well, mainly 2104: 2081: 2057: 2030: 1890: 1868: 1862: 1858: 1852: 1848: 1842: 1838: 1836:R from subtopic 1832: 1827:redirecting to 1820: 1818:R from subtopic 1814: 1810: 1804: 1800: 1798:R from subtopic 1794: 1790: 1784: 1772: 1766: 1744: 1738: 1725: 1719: 1715: 1713:R from subtopic 1709: 1703: 1697: 1693: 1687: 1670: 1664: 1660: 1658:R from subtopic 1654: 1650: 1644: 1630: 1628:R from subtopic 1624: 1620: 1614: 1606: 1596: 1590: 1584: 1578: 1572: 1562: 1556: 1550: 1544: 1538: 1534:LGBT characters 1532: 1526: 1520: 1514: 1508: 1502: 1492: 1488:Handlers (Dune) 1486: 1480: 1474: 1464: 1454: 1450:Chalice Corrino 1448: 1442: 1436: 1430: 1424: 1418: 1412: 1384: 1378: 1346: 1340: 1336: 1330: 1284: 1278: 1253: 1247: 1235: 1229: 1197: 1191: 1183:Jessica Darling 1178: 1172: 1158: 1152: 1138: 1132: 1118: 1107: 1101: 1098: 1067: 1037: 963: 906: 892: 873: 837: 824: 797: 781: 745: 720: 708: 628:As I stated at 626: 555: 523:Take a look at 517: 511: 439: 238: 100: 98:Other infoboxes 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 7150: 7140: 7139: 7138: 7137: 7136: 7135: 7117: 7116: 7115: 7114: 7097: 7096: 7063: 7060: 7059: 7058: 7024:Amindthatsuits 7009: 7006: 7005: 7004: 6972: 6969: 6952:Designeyecandy 6941: 6940: 6939: 6938: 6937: 6936: 6914: 6913: 6912: 6911: 6895:Designeyecandy 6881: 6880: 6851:119.224.11.234 6839: 6836: 6835: 6834: 6824: 6823: 6806: 6803: 6774: 6771: 6770: 6769: 6768: 6767: 6766: 6765: 6735: 6734: 6733: 6732: 6715: 6714: 6683:Davos Seaworth 6657: 6654: 6644: 6643: 6640: 6633: 6630: 6626: 6625: 6624: 6623: 6605: 6604: 6570: 6567: 6547: 6546:Neutral notice 6544: 6502: 6499: 6498: 6497: 6496: 6495: 6480: 6429: 6426: 6425: 6424: 6423: 6422: 6386: 6383: 6341: 6338: 6306: 6303: 6271: 6268: 6236: 6233: 6232: 6231: 6198: 6193: 6183: 6159: 6156: 6155: 6154: 6115: 6114: 6072: 6071: 6021: 6018: 6001: 5998: 5983: 5978: 5977: 5976: 5936: 5933: 5932: 5931: 5922: 5838: 5825: 5822: 5799: 5796: 5795: 5794: 5793: 5792: 5782: 5771: 5770: 5769: 5768: 5756: 5732: 5719: 5718:American films 5716: 5696: 5693: 5692: 5691: 5690: 5689: 5675: 5672: 5665: 5664: 5637: 5634: 5633: 5632: 5618: 5617: 5573: 5570: 5569: 5568: 5524: 5523: 5481: 5480: 5479: 5478: 5477: 5476: 5475: 5474: 5473: 5472: 5471: 5470: 5388: 5387: 5386: 5385: 5384: 5383: 5360: 5359: 5358: 5357: 5320: 5319: 5278: 5277: 5263: 5259: 5255: 5228: 5227: 5226: 5225: 5224: 5223: 5214: 5204: 5191: 5182: 5181: 5180: 5179: 5162: 5161: 5160: 5159: 5144: 5143: 5091: 5090: 5089: 5088: 5087: 5086: 5085: 5084: 5083: 5082: 5081: 5080: 5011: 4986:trees such as 4979: 4918: 4917: 4916: 4915: 4914: 4913: 4899: 4898: 4897: 4886: 4872: 4861: 4860: 4859: 4858: 4828: 4827: 4779: 4774: 4773: 4772: 4749:keys...lol :( 4745: 4740: 4723: 4720: 4703: 4696: 4680: 4679: 4676: 4667: 4664: 4642: 4641: 4572: 4561: 4558: 4520:WordFire Press 4509: 4507: 4504:WordFire Press 4502:Nomination of 4500: 4497: 4496: 4478: 4477: 4472: 4461: 4458: 4409: 4405:nomination of 4399: 4350: 4346:nomination of 4340: 4295: 4291:nomination of 4285: 4284: 4283: 4282: 4281: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4241: 4240: 4205: 4202: 4201: 4200: 4199: 4198: 4197: 4196: 4195: 4194: 4193: 4192: 4191: 4190: 4157: 4156: 4155: 4154: 4153: 4152: 4151: 4150: 4136: 4100: 4099: 4098: 4097: 4054: 4051: 4050: 4049: 4023:59.167.172.168 4011: 4008: 4007: 4006: 3971: 3968: 3947: 3944: 3943: 3942: 3941: 3940: 3866: 3861: 3831: 3828: 3811: 3810: 3745:23 August 2014 3741: 3730: 3727: 3703: 3700: 3699: 3698: 3677:Eric the fever 3668: 3667: 3657: 3633: 3606:Eric the fever 3593: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3557:LukeFuller1985 3521: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3494:107.202.209.88 3482: 3479: 3478: 3477: 3476: 3475: 3436: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3430: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3426: 3425: 3365: 3362: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3324: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3250: 3235: 3223: 3158: 3157: 3156: 3155: 3154: 3153: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3147: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3043: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2989: 2966: 2965: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2959: 2933: 2878: 2849: 2848: 2818: 2815: 2780: 2775: 2757: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2682: 2681: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2573: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2507: 2470: 2465: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2434:Kevin Buchanan 2401: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2387: 2352: 2349: 2333: 2332: 2323:and add it to 2316: 2299:August 3, 2009 2295: 2284: 2281: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2234: 2233: 2203: 2202: 2201: 2200: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2151: 2150: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2142: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1889: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1732: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1681: 1680: 1522:Josifa Corrino 1510:Isabella Santi 1471:Ernesto Rivera 1438:Aurelia Rivera 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1268: 1262:to an article 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1208: 1207: 1112:if and only if 1097: 1094: 1092: 1069:Regarding the 1066: 1061: 1019: 1017: 1016: 953: 952: 891: 886: 872: 869: 868: 867: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 860: 859: 858: 857: 856: 855: 833: 757: 756: 755: 754: 707: 704: 703: 702: 701: 700: 699: 698: 683: 682: 681: 680: 625: 622: 620: 618: 617: 616: 615: 603:Thanks Bro.,-- 598: 597: 554: 551: 550: 549: 539: 538: 537: 536: 521: 500: 496: 481: 480: 471: 470: 438: 433: 432: 431: 430: 429: 428: 427: 426: 425: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 418: 417: 387: 359: 310: 309: 308: 307: 306: 305: 286: 285: 284: 283: 282: 281: 272: 271: 270: 269: 268: 267: 252: 251: 250: 249: 248: 247: 209: 208: 175: 174: 173: 172: 171: 170: 99: 96: 93: 92: 87: 84: 79: 74: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 7149: 7134: 7130: 7123: 7122: 7121: 7120: 7119: 7118: 7113: 7109: 7101: 7100: 7099: 7098: 7095: 7092: 7087: 7086: 7085: 7084: 7080: 7073: 7069: 7057: 7054: 7050: 7049: 7044: 7040: 7036: 7035: 7034: 7033: 7029: 7025: 7020: 7017: 7013: 7003: 7000: 6996: 6995: 6994: 6992: 6988: 6984: 6983:209.52.88.241 6980: 6968: 6965: 6961: 6957: 6953: 6949: 6935: 6932: 6928: 6923: 6922: 6921: 6920: 6919: 6918: 6917: 6908: 6904: 6900: 6896: 6892: 6885: 6884: 6883: 6882: 6879: 6876: 6872: 6868: 6864: 6863: 6862: 6860: 6856: 6852: 6848: 6833: 6830: 6826: 6825: 6822: 6819: 6815: 6814: 6813: 6810: 6802: 6801: 6798: 6794: 6789: 6788: 6784: 6780: 6764: 6760: 6753: 6749: 6745: 6741: 6740: 6739: 6738: 6737: 6736: 6731: 6727: 6719: 6718: 6717: 6716: 6713: 6710: 6706: 6702: 6701: 6700: 6699: 6695: 6688: 6687:Petyr Baelish 6684: 6680: 6676: 6672: 6668: 6664: 6663:Catelyn Stark 6653: 6652: 6649: 6641: 6638: 6634: 6631: 6628: 6627: 6622: 6618: 6614: 6609: 6608: 6607: 6606: 6603: 6600: 6595: 6594: 6593: 6592: 6588: 6584: 6580: 6579:rule number 4 6576: 6569:Condescending 6566: 6565: 6561: 6557: 6553: 6543: 6542: 6538: 6534: 6530: 6525: 6522: 6518: 6512: 6508: 6494: 6490: 6486: 6481: 6479: 6476: 6470: 6465: 6464: 6463: 6459: 6455: 6451: 6450: 6449: 6448: 6444: 6440: 6435: 6421: 6418: 6413: 6412: 6411: 6408: 6403: 6399: 6398: 6397: 6396: 6393: 6382: 6381: 6377: 6373: 6369: 6364: 6361: 6357: 6351: 6347: 6337: 6336: 6332: 6328: 6324: 6320: 6316: 6302: 6301: 6297: 6293: 6289: 6285: 6281: 6267: 6266: 6262: 6258: 6254: 6250: 6246: 6230: 6227: 6223: 6219: 6215: 6214: 6213: 6212: 6208: 6204: 6197: 6192: 6191: 6186: 6181: 6177: 6173: 6169: 6153: 6150: 6145: 6141: 6140: 6139: 6138: 6134: 6130: 6125: 6120: 6113: 6110: 6106: 6102: 6097: 6093: 6089: 6088: 6087: 6086: 6082: 6078: 6070: 6067: 6063: 6059: 6058:Talk:Passions 6054: 6049: 6044: 6039: 6038: 6037: 6036: 6032: 6028: 6017: 6016: 6012: 6008: 5997: 5996: 5993: 5991: 5982: 5975: 5972: 5968: 5964: 5963: 5962: 5961: 5957: 5953: 5949: 5946: 5941: 5930: 5927: 5923: 5921: 5918: 5914: 5913: 5912: 5911: 5907: 5903: 5836: 5834: 5830: 5821: 5819: 5815: 5811: 5810:68.26.181.161 5807: 5791: 5787: 5786: 5781: 5775: 5774: 5773: 5772: 5766: 5765: 5764: 5761: 5757: 5755: 5752: 5748: 5744: 5743: 5742: 5741: 5737: 5736: 5731: 5725: 5715: 5714: 5710: 5706: 5703:. Thank you. 5702: 5688: 5684: 5680: 5676: 5673: 5669: 5668: 5667: 5666: 5663: 5660: 5655: 5654: 5653: 5652: 5648: 5644: 5631: 5628: 5624: 5620: 5619: 5616: 5613: 5608: 5607: 5606: 5605: 5601: 5597: 5593: 5588: 5585: 5584: 5581: 5580: 5567: 5563: 5559: 5555: 5552: 5551: 5550: 5549: 5545: 5541: 5537: 5533: 5529: 5522: 5519: 5515: 5514: 5513: 5512: 5508: 5504: 5497: 5493: 5489: 5486: 5469: 5466: 5462: 5461: 5460: 5456: 5452: 5445: 5434: 5427: 5423: 5422: 5421: 5418: 5411: 5404: 5400: 5396: 5395: 5394: 5393: 5392: 5391: 5390: 5389: 5382: 5378: 5374: 5370: 5366: 5365: 5364: 5363: 5362: 5361: 5356: 5353: 5349: 5345: 5338: 5329: 5324: 5323: 5322: 5321: 5318: 5314: 5310: 5306: 5305: 5304: 5303: 5299: 5295: 5289: 5283: 5276: 5272: 5268: 5264: 5260: 5256: 5253: 5252: 5251: 5250: 5246: 5242: 5238: 5233: 5222: 5219: 5215: 5213: 5210: 5205: 5202: 5201: 5196: 5192: 5188: 5187: 5186: 5185: 5184: 5183: 5178: 5174: 5170: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5156: 5152: 5148: 5147: 5146: 5145: 5142: 5139: 5135: 5131: 5127: 5126: 5125: 5124: 5120: 5116: 5112: 5111:Cramer family 5108: 5104: 5100: 5096: 5079: 5076: 5071: 5070: 5069: 5065: 5061: 5053: 5049: 5045: 5041: 5037: 5033: 5028: 5024: 5020: 5016: 5012: 5009: 5005: 5001: 4997: 4993: 4989: 4984: 4980: 4977: 4974: 4969: 4962: 4955: 4948: 4940: 4939: 4938: 4935: 4930: 4926: 4925: 4924: 4923: 4922: 4921: 4920: 4919: 4912: 4908: 4904: 4900: 4895: 4891: 4887: 4885: 4881: 4877: 4873: 4870: 4869: 4867: 4866: 4865: 4864: 4863: 4862: 4857: 4853: 4849: 4845: 4841: 4837: 4832: 4831: 4830: 4829: 4826: 4823: 4818: 4813: 4812: 4811: 4810: 4806: 4802: 4798: 4794: 4789: 4785: 4778: 4771: 4768: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4756: 4752: 4744: 4739: 4738: 4734: 4730: 4719: 4718: 4714: 4710: 4702: 4701: 4695: 4694:MedievalBabe 4693: 4689: 4685: 4677: 4673: 4672: 4671: 4663: 4662: 4658: 4655: 4652: 4648: 4639: 4635: 4629: 4625: 4621: 4615: 4611: 4608: 4605: 4603: 4602: 4597: 4591: 4590: 4589: 4583: 4582: 4577: 4573: 4570: 4566: 4565: 4557: 4556: 4552: 4548: 4547: 4540: 4537: 4532: 4530: 4526: 4522: 4521: 4505: 4495: 4492: 4490: 4484: 4480: 4479: 4476: 4473: 4470: 4465: 4457: 4456: 4452: 4448: 4443: 4439: 4433: 4429: 4424: 4419: 4415: 4408: 4404: 4398: 4397: 4393: 4389: 4384: 4380: 4374: 4370: 4365: 4360: 4356: 4349: 4345: 4339: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4325: 4321: 4314: 4309: 4305: 4301: 4294: 4290: 4280: 4276: 4273: 4269: 4268: 4267: 4266: 4261: 4257: 4254: 4249: 4245: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4239: 4236: 4232: 4231: 4226: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4215: 4212: 4189: 4185: 4181: 4180:Choor monster 4177: 4176: 4175: 4172: 4167: 4166: 4165: 4164: 4163: 4162: 4161: 4160: 4159: 4158: 4149: 4145: 4141: 4140:Choor monster 4137: 4135: 4131: 4127: 4126:Choor monster 4123: 4119: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4110: 4106: 4105: 4104: 4103: 4102: 4101: 4096: 4092: 4088: 4087:Choor monster 4084: 4080: 4079: 4078: 4075: 4071: 4070: 4069: 4068: 4064: 4060: 4059:Choor monster 4048: 4045: 4041: 4037: 4033: 4032: 4031: 4028: 4024: 4020: 4005: 4002: 3997: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3990: 3986: 3982: 3979: 3975: 3974:Hi TAnthony, 3967: 3966: 3962: 3958: 3953: 3938: 3936:contributions 3932: 3926: 3920: 3919: 3918: 3915: 3910: 3906: 3902: 3901: 3900: 3899: 3895: 3893:contributions 3889: 3883: 3876: 3872: 3871:King Features 3865: 3860: 3859: 3856: 3851: 3849: 3841: 3837: 3827: 3826: 3822: 3818: 3808: 3804: 3798: 3794: 3790: 3784: 3780: 3777: 3774: 3772: 3771: 3766: 3760: 3759: 3758: 3752: 3751: 3746: 3742: 3739: 3735: 3734: 3726: 3725: 3721: 3717: 3713: 3709: 3697: 3694: 3689: 3688: 3687: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3666: 3663: 3658: 3647: 3643: 3641: 3634: 3631: 3627: 3622: 3618: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3611: 3607: 3603: 3599: 3587: 3584: 3579: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3570: 3566: 3562: 3558: 3554: 3545: 3543: 3538: 3537: 3533: 3528: 3525: 3515: 3512: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3491: 3474: 3470: 3466: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3457: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3446: 3442: 3424: 3421: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3403: 3399: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3387: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3375: 3371: 3361: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3346: 3342: 3323: 3320: 3316: 3313: 3308: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3286: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3269: 3265: 3264: 3263: 3259: 3255: 3251: 3248: 3247:Paul Muad'Dib 3244: 3243:Paul Muad'Dib 3240: 3236: 3233: 3229: 3224: 3222: 3219: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3210: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3181: 3177: 3176:Paul Atreides 3172: 3167: 3163: 3162:Talk:Muad'Dib 3142: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3126: 3122: 3118: 3114: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3100: 3099: 3084: 3081: 3076: 3075:Paul Atreides 3072: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3042: 3038: 3034: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3018: 3014: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2999: 2988: 2985: 2981: 2976: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2958: 2954: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2938: 2934: 2932: 2928: 2924: 2919: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2910: 2905: 2901: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2879: 2877: 2873: 2869: 2865: 2861: 2857: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2847: 2844: 2840: 2836: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2829: 2825: 2814: 2813: 2809: 2805: 2800: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2786: 2779: 2774: 2773: 2770: 2762: 2749: 2746: 2742: 2738: 2734: 2727: 2720: 2713: 2703: 2693: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2683: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2671:Fleet Command 2669: 2667: 2663: 2658: 2656: 2652: 2647: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2637: 2633: 2629: 2625: 2621: 2614: 2607: 2598: 2594: 2590: 2589:Fleet Command 2586: 2582: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2559: 2556: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2547: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2534: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2525: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2512: 2508: 2506: 2503: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2492: 2484: 2480: 2476: 2469: 2468:User:Montaj13 2464: 2463: 2460: 2446: 2441: 2435: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2426: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2414: 2407: 2395: 2392: 2388: 2384: 2380: 2376: 2372: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2365: 2361: 2357: 2348: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2330: 2326: 2320: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2306: 2305: 2304:Did you know? 2300: 2296: 2293: 2289: 2288: 2280: 2279: 2275: 2271: 2267: 2266:Carlotta Vega 2263: 2259: 2232: 2229: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2183: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2107: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2095: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2084: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2072: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2060: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2048: 2044: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2033: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2022: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2011: 2007: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1976: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1940: 1936: 1935: 1931: 1930:daytime drama 1928: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1919: 1914: 1910: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1888: 1877: 1874: 1867: 1857: 1847: 1837: 1830: 1826: 1819: 1809: 1799: 1789: 1782: 1778: 1771: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1754: 1751: 1743: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1724: 1714: 1706: 1700: 1699:Sloppy Firsts 1692: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1679: 1676: 1669: 1659: 1649: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1636: 1629: 1619: 1618:R to template 1611: 1609: 1604: 1599: 1593: 1587: 1586:Sloppy Firsts 1581: 1575: 1570: 1569:Shvaughn Erin 1565: 1559: 1553: 1547: 1541: 1535: 1529: 1528:Keri Reynolds 1523: 1517: 1511: 1505: 1500: 1495: 1489: 1483: 1477: 1472: 1467: 1462: 1461:Cindy Brennan 1457: 1451: 1445: 1439: 1433: 1427: 1422: 1417: 1401: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1383: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1359: 1355: 1354: 1353:Sloppy Firsts 1345: 1335: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1314: 1311: 1307: 1306:Sloppy Firsts 1303: 1302: 1301: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1293: 1290: 1283: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1266: 1265: 1259: 1252: 1245: 1241: 1234: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1218: 1217: 1216:Sloppy Firsts 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1206: 1203: 1196: 1189: 1184: 1177: 1170: 1169:Sloppy Firsts 1166: 1165: 1164:Sloppy Firsts 1157: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1144: 1137: 1128: 1126: 1121: 1120:Sloppy Firsts 1115: 1113: 1106: 1093: 1090: 1089: 1086: 1081: 1076: 1072: 1065: 1060: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1033: 1030: 1029: 1024: 1021: 1020:Hi TAnthony. 1015: 1012: 1008: 1003: 998: 993: 988: 987: 986: 983: 979: 975: 971: 967: 960: 957: 951: 948: 944: 940: 936: 931: 930: 929: 926: 922: 918: 914: 910: 902: 899: 895: 890: 885: 884: 881: 877: 854: 851: 847: 846: 845: 840: 834: 832: 827: 821: 816: 815: 814: 811: 807: 806: 805: 800: 794: 791: 790: 789: 784: 778: 775: 774: 773: 769: 765: 761: 760: 759: 758: 753: 748: 741: 740: 739: 736: 731: 730: 729: 728: 723: 717: 713: 697: 694: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 679: 675: 671: 666: 665: 664: 663: 662: 661: 657: 653: 647: 645: 644:User:Nk3play2 641: 640: 635: 634:in this link. 631: 621: 614: 610: 606: 602: 601: 600: 599: 596: 593: 588: 584: 580: 576: 575: 574: 573: 569: 565: 560: 548: 545: 541: 540: 534: 530: 529:Ruby Anderson 526: 522: 516: 509: 505: 501: 497: 494: 490: 486: 485: 483: 482: 478: 473: 472: 467: 463: 459: 455: 454: 453: 452: 448: 444: 437: 416: 412: 408: 403: 402: 401: 397: 393: 388: 385: 384: 383: 379: 375: 371: 367: 366: 360: 358: 355: 351: 347: 346: 345: 341: 337: 332: 331: 330: 326: 322: 318: 317: 316: 315: 314: 313: 312: 311: 304: 300: 296: 292: 291: 290: 289: 288: 287: 278: 277: 276: 275: 274: 273: 266: 263: 258: 257: 256: 255: 254: 253: 246: 241: 235: 234: 233: 229: 225: 221: 218: 213: 212: 211: 210: 207: 204: 199: 198: 197: 196: 192: 188: 182: 178: 169: 165: 161: 157: 156: 155: 151: 147: 143: 139: 135: 134: 133: 130: 125: 121: 120: 119: 118: 114: 110: 106: 91: 88: 85: 83: 80: 78: 75: 72: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 7065: 7046: 7038: 7021: 7018: 7014: 7012:Hey, there: 7011: 6977:— Preceding 6974: 6946:— Preceding 6942: 6915: 6889:— Preceding 6845:— Preceding 6841: 6838:Lotus eaters 6811: 6808: 6793:H. C. Koenig 6790: 6776: 6704: 6659: 6645: 6572: 6549: 6526: 6504: 6485:Prairieplant 6469:Prairieplant 6454:Prairieplant 6439:Prairieplant 6431: 6388: 6365: 6343: 6308: 6273: 6238: 6218:Arkham House 6200: 6161: 6123: 6116: 6104: 6100: 6073: 6064:. Thanks! — 6023: 6003: 5989: 5985: 5966: 5950: 5944: 5942: 5938: 5898: 5827: 5804:— Preceding 5801: 5784: 5734: 5721: 5698: 5639: 5622: 5589: 5586: 5582: 5578: 5577: 5575: 5525: 5482: 5279: 5229: 5198: 5194: 5133: 5129: 5103:Riley family 5095:Wolek family 5092: 4981:If you read 4978:discussion). 4929:WP:CHALLENGE 4880:WP:CHALLENGE 4816: 4781: 4747: 4742: 4725: 4709:Discographer 4705: 4698: 4684:MedievalBabe 4681: 4669: 4653: 4645: 4628:daily totals 4609: 4599: 4598:singled out 4593: 4586: 4585: 4581:Did you know 4579: 4544: 4541: 4533: 4518: 4516: 4506:for deletion 4474: 4418:good article 4412:The article 4411: 4359:good article 4353:The article 4352: 4297: 4228: 4224: 4207: 4056: 4017:— Preceding 4013: 3983: 3980: 3976: 3973: 3949: 3909:Times-Herald 3908: 3904: 3874: 3868: 3854:(Contact me) 3845: 3833: 3814: 3797:daily totals 3778: 3770:Eddard Stark 3768: 3762: 3757:Eddard Stark 3755: 3754: 3750:Did you know 3748: 3711: 3705: 3669: 3649:. Retrieved 3639: 3620: 3595: 3577: 3551:— Preceding 3546: 3539: 3529: 3526: 3523: 3488:— Preceding 3484: 3438: 3415: 3411: 3367: 3339:— Preceding 3334: 3306: 3277:AgadaUrbanit 3254:AgadaUrbanit 3246: 3242: 3238: 3231: 3194:AgadaUrbanit 3170: 3159: 3133:AgadaUrbanit 3128: 3033:AgadaUrbanit 3028: 3024: 2949:AgadaUrbanit 2923:AgadaUrbanit 2917: 2886:AgadaUrbanit 2868:AgadaUrbanit 2855: 2838: 2824:AgadaUrbanit 2820: 2801: 2782: 2759: 2719:at that time 2659: 2648: 2645: 2619: 2603: 2472: 2451: 2405: 2403: 2358: 2354: 2336: 2309: 2308: 2302: 2255: 2002: 1932: 1891: 1856:R to section 1788:R to section 1691:R to section 1648:R to section 1612: 1598:Tanner Woods 1564:Rugi Corrino 1552:Phil Brennan 1423: 1416:R to section 1410: 1382:R to section 1351: 1344:R to section 1334:R to section 1308:redirect? — 1305: 1282:R to section 1263: 1261: 1257: 1251:R to section 1233:R to section 1214: 1195:R from merge 1187: 1176:R from merge 1168: 1162: 1156:R to section 1136:R to section 1129: 1123:, where you 1116: 1111: 1105:R to section 1099: 1091: 1074: 1070: 1068: 1063: 1034: 1031: 1025: 1022: 1018: 1006: 1001: 996: 991: 961: 958: 954: 942: 938: 934: 904:Thank you. 903: 900: 896: 894:Hi TAnthony 893: 888: 874: 819: 709: 648: 637: 627: 619: 586: 582: 556: 532: 492: 476: 465: 461: 457: 440: 363: 216: 183: 179: 176: 101: 70: 43: 37: 7043:Allen Drury 6929:. Thanks.— 6779:108.5.35.63 6667:Sansa Stark 6129:DrKilleMoff 6077:DrKilleMoff 6043:Holly Lewis 6027:DrKilleMoff 6007:Dirtlawyer1 5864:mw-redirect 5849:mw-redirect 5831:, I have a 5701:here please 5536:Lord family 5107:Lord family 4973:this recent 4475:The GA star 4432:nominate it 4420:has passed 4251:article. -- 4010:Richard III 3924:Vchimpanzee 3881:Vchimpanzee 3817:Crisco 1492 3635:Like this: 3398:Zoltancsaki 3370:Zoltancsaki 3021:common name 2980:common name 2937:litmus test 2479:range block 2311:Oliver Fish 1939:Oliver Fish 1913:Oliver Fish 1887:Oliver Fish 1444:Brady Lloyd 1188:necessarily 1038:—Preceding 964:—Preceding 907:—Preceding 764:Leslie Roak 670:Leslie Roak 605:Leslie Roak 564:Leslie Roak 443:Leslie Roak 36:This is an 7062:Targaryens 6805:Thank you! 6671:Arya Stark 6531:. Thanks, 6417:Randy Kryn 6392:Randy Kryn 6370:. Thanks, 6327:Rob Sinden 6292:Rob Sinden 6257:Rob Sinden 6203:Glen arvon 6090:Well both 5969:article.— 5870:font-style 5496:deprecated 5346:where the 4817:navigation 4797:a question 4743:The Royals 4729:Trivialist 4675:statement. 4624:live views 4620:here's how 4272:SCalhotrod 4253:SCalhotrod 4211:SCalhotrod 3985:Glen arvon 3957:Sue Kastle 3793:live views 3789:here's how 3716:Darkfrog24 3708:a proposal 3646:SparkNotes 3602:my sandbox 2553:Thanks!!— 2406:Twin Peaks 2319:here's how 1546:Opal Mehta 1080:WP:CRYSTAL 959:Cantai101 370:Bella Swan 368:character 6613:Debresser 6583:Debresser 6515:Read the 6354:Read the 6317:has been 6282:has been 6247:has been 6170:has been 5583:Bold text 5534:into the 5485:this edit 5444:chart top 5433:chart top 5410:chart top 5337:chart top 5288:chart top 4884:WP:BURDEN 4784:this edit 4782:You made 4777:WP:PROVIT 4722:Interquel 4647:Cas Liber 3952:WP:TVINTL 3921:Thanks.— 3864:Outlander 3842:as well. 3651:August 4, 3416:Star Wars 3029:democracy 2632:ww2censor 2628:this edit 2581:Ww2censor 2400:Bless you 2360:Carmaker1 2338:BorgQueen 1476:Foldspace 1466:ET on MTV 1389:this edit 1171:stub, so 1044:Cantai101 970:Cantai101 913:Cantai101 90:Archive 7 82:Archive 5 77:Archive 4 71:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 7128:Keivan.f 7107:Keivan.f 7091:TAnthony 7078:Keivan.f 7053:TAnthony 6999:TAnthony 6979:unsigned 6971:Our Sons 6960:contribs 6948:unsigned 6931:TAnthony 6903:contribs 6891:unsigned 6875:TAnthony 6847:unsigned 6829:TAnthony 6818:TAnthony 6797:TAnthony 6758:Keivan.f 6725:Keivan.f 6709:TAnthony 6693:Keivan.f 6648:TAnthony 6599:TAnthony 6556:Tenebrae 6511:Domfront 6475:TAnthony 6407:TAnthony 6226:TAnthony 6185:contribs 6149:TAnthony 6109:TAnthony 6105:Passions 6101:Passions 6066:TAnthony 6053:WP:SOAPS 6020:Passions 5971:TAnthony 5945:reliable 5926:TAnthony 5917:TAnthony 5806:unsigned 5760:TAnthony 5751:TAnthony 5705:Jester66 5659:TAnthony 5627:TAnthony 5612:TAnthony 5518:TAnthony 5465:TAnthony 5417:TAnthony 5352:TAnthony 5332:, would 5258:history. 5218:TAnthony 5209:TAnthony 5138:TAnthony 5075:TAnthony 4934:TAnthony 4822:TAnthony 4767:TAnthony 4657:contribs 4308:criteria 4235:TAnthony 4171:TAnthony 4109:TAnthony 4074:TAnthony 4044:TAnthony 4019:unsigned 4001:TAnthony 3981:Thanks, 3914:TAnthony 3847:BIGNOLE 3693:TAnthony 3662:TAnthony 3630:Jon Snow 3583:TAnthony 3565:contribs 3553:unsigned 3511:TAnthony 3490:unsigned 3456:TAnthony 3420:TAnthony 3386:TAnthony 3353:contribs 3345:PalodOro 3341:unsigned 3319:TAnthony 3249:context. 3209:TAnthony 3180:TAnthony 3166:Muad'Dib 3117:Muad'Dib 3080:TAnthony 3071:Muad'Dib 3025:Muad'Dib 2984:TAnthony 2945:Muad'Dib 2909:TAnthony 2904:Muad'Dib 2880:This is 2843:TAnthony 2745:TAnthony 2662:TAnthony 2555:TAnthony 2533:TAnthony 2511:TAnthony 2502:TAnthony 2425:TAnthony 2391:TAnthony 2325:DYKSTATS 2228:TAnthony 2094:TAnthony 2071:TAnthony 2047:TAnthony 2021:TAnthony 1975:TAnthony 1927:American 1918:TAnthony 1873:TAnthony 1675:TAnthony 1310:TAnthony 1202:TAnthony 1085:TAnthony 1052:contribs 1040:unsigned 1011:TAnthony 1007:Passions 1002:Passions 997:Passions 992:Passions 978:contribs 966:unsigned 947:TAnthony 943:Passions 921:contribs 909:unsigned 880:TAnthony 850:TAnthony 810:TAnthony 735:TAnthony 693:TAnthony 639:The O.C. 592:TAnthony 544:TAnthony 499:gesture. 365:Twilight 354:TAnthony 262:TAnthony 203:TAnthony 150:contribs 129:TAnthony 113:contribs 6533:DPL bot 6372:DPL bot 6350:Q&A 6060:and/or 5596:Wmjr555 5558:Bgwhite 5528:Bgwhite 5309:Bgwhite 5267:Bgwhite 5232:Bgwhite 5169:Bgwhite 5115:Bgwhite 5040:history 5004:before 4976:WP:RS/N 4610:series? 4529:deleted 4438:Legobot 4379:Legobot 4320:Legobot 3578:Dynasty 3465:Flyer22 3441:Flyer22 3336:time. 3268:article 2864:neology 2817:tagging 2767:AniMate 2544:AniMate 2522:AniMate 2489:AniMate 2457:AniMate 2439:AniMate 2412:AniMate 2270:Flyer22 2174:Flyer22 2118:Flyer22 2105:AniMate 2082:AniMate 2058:AniMate 2031:AniMate 2006:Flyer22 1984:Flyer22 1953:Flyer22 1898:Flyer22 1264:section 1075:scripts 1071:Melrose 1064:Melrose 838:AniMate 825:AniMate 798:AniMate 782:AniMate 746:AniMate 721:AniMate 652:Flyer22 407:Flyer22 392:Rocksey 374:Flyer22 352:yet? — 336:Rocksey 321:Flyer22 295:Flyer22 239:AniMate 224:Rocksey 187:Rocksey 160:Flyer22 39:archive 6575:WP:AWB 5990:Valoem 5876:italic 5843:navbox 5747:WP:CAT 5237:WP:RUD 4968:WP:SYN 4954:WP:SYN 4488:Ssven2 4447:Jaguar 4442:Jaguar 4426:; see 4388:Jaguar 4383:Jaguar 4329:Jaguar 4324:Jaguar 4275:(Talk) 4256:(Talk) 4214:(Talk) 3412:source 2804:Sadads 2790:Sadads 1125:tagged 6180:torri 5882:color 5262:here. 5048:watch 5044:links 5008:after 4994:with 4551:talk 4401:Your 4342:Your 4287:Your 3712:might 3312:WP:RS 3228:WP:RS 3125:WP:RS 3013:WP:RS 2860:WP:RS 2624:Masem 1779:, or 1516:Jipol 1358:G.A.S 939:Maury 889:Maury 16:< 7070:and 7045:and 7028:talk 6987:talk 6956:talk 6899:talk 6873:? — 6855:talk 6783:talk 6750:and 6685:and 6617:talk 6587:talk 6560:talk 6537:talk 6489:talk 6458:talk 6443:talk 6376:talk 6331:talk 6296:talk 6261:talk 6207:talk 6133:talk 6094:and 6081:talk 6031:talk 6011:talk 5956:talk 5948:it. 5906:talk 5902:Izno 5814:talk 5709:talk 5683:talk 5647:talk 5600:talk 5562:talk 5544:talk 5507:talk 5490:and 5455:talk 5424:See 5401:and 5377:talk 5313:talk 5298:talk 5271:talk 5245:talk 5195:OLTL 5173:talk 5134:OLTL 5130:OLTL 5119:talk 5109:and 5064:talk 5052:logs 5036:talk 5032:edit 5015:Thor 5006:and 4907:talk 4882:and 4876:WP:V 4852:talk 4805:talk 4755:talk 4751:Cw84 4733:talk 4713:talk 4688:talk 4651:talk 4451:talk 4392:talk 4333:talk 4277:☮ღ☺ 4258:☮ღ☺ 4216:☮ღ☺ 4184:talk 4144:talk 4130:talk 4120:and 4091:talk 4063:talk 4027:talk 3989:talk 3961:talk 3930:talk 3887:talk 3821:talk 3720:talk 3681:talk 3673:This 3653:2014 3628:and 3610:talk 3561:talk 3534:AND 3498:talk 3469:talk 3445:talk 3402:talk 3374:talk 3364:dune 3349:talk 3307:Dune 3281:talk 3258:talk 3198:talk 3171:Dune 3137:talk 3037:talk 2953:talk 2927:talk 2890:talk 2872:talk 2828:talk 2808:talk 2794:talk 2761:Nice 2741:here 2737:here 2733:here 2707:and 2675:talk 2653:and 2636:talk 2593:talk 2483:tool 2383:here 2375:here 2364:talk 2342:talk 2274:talk 2178:talk 2131:LOL. 2122:talk 2043:this 2010:talk 1988:talk 1957:talk 1902:talk 1803:vs. 1702:and 1048:talk 974:talk 917:talk 876:This 768:talk 714:and 706:Roak 674:talk 656:talk 609:talk 583:very 568:talk 562:? -- 533:Days 493:OLTL 447:talk 411:talk 396:talk 378:talk 340:talk 325:talk 299:talk 228:talk 191:talk 164:talk 146:talk 140:. - 109:talk 6795:.— 6705:GoT 6517:FAQ 6356:FAQ 5967:CoD 5888:red 5554:PBS 5540:PBS 5503:PBS 5451:PBS 5373:PBS 5328:PBS 5294:PBS 5241:PBS 5151:PBS 5060:PBS 4903:PBS 4901:-- 4848:PBS 4846:-- 4801:PBS 4786:to 4574:On 4546:DGG 4445:-- 4386:-- 4327:-- 4225:GoT 3896:• 3743:On 3621:GoT 2839:may 2297:On 1750:ToE 1635:ToE 1605:-- 1601:-- 1595:-- 1589:-- 1583:-- 1577:-- 1571:-- 1567:-- 1561:-- 1555:-- 1549:-- 1543:-- 1537:-- 1531:-- 1525:-- 1519:-- 1513:-- 1507:-- 1501:-- 1497:-- 1491:-- 1485:-- 1479:-- 1473:-- 1469:-- 1463:-- 1459:-- 1453:-- 1447:-- 1441:-- 1435:-- 1429:-- 1397:ToE 1391:to 1289:ToE 1143:ToE 871:LOL 793:Wow 148:) ( 111:) ( 7030:) 6989:) 6962:) 6958:• 6905:) 6901:• 6857:) 6785:) 6681:, 6677:, 6673:, 6669:, 6665:, 6646:— 6619:) 6589:) 6581:. 6562:) 6539:) 6491:) 6483:-- 6460:) 6445:) 6437:-- 6378:) 6333:) 6325:. 6298:) 6290:. 6263:) 6255:. 6209:) 6188:) 6182:(/ 6178:. 6135:) 6083:) 6033:) 6013:) 5958:) 5908:) 5816:) 5711:) 5685:) 5649:) 5602:) 5564:) 5546:) 5509:) 5457:) 5447:}} 5441:{{ 5436:}} 5430:{{ 5413:}} 5407:{{ 5379:) 5340:}} 5334:{{ 5315:) 5300:) 5290:}} 5286:{{ 5273:) 5247:) 5175:) 5121:) 5105:, 5101:, 5097:, 5066:) 5050:| 5046:| 5042:| 5038:| 5034:| 5002:, 4964:}} 4958:{{ 4950:}} 4944:{{ 4909:) 4854:) 4838:, 4807:) 4757:) 4735:) 4715:) 4690:) 4659:) 4626:, 4622:, 4578:, 4553:) 4531:. 4453:) 4403:GA 4394:) 4344:GA 4335:) 4310:. 4304:GA 4289:GA 4186:) 4146:) 4132:) 4093:) 4065:) 4029:) 3991:) 3963:) 3933:• 3927:• 3890:• 3884:• 3823:) 3815:— 3795:, 3791:, 3747:, 3722:) 3683:) 3644:. 3612:) 3567:) 3563:• 3544:. 3500:) 3471:) 3447:) 3404:) 3376:) 3355:) 3351:• 3283:) 3260:) 3200:) 3139:) 3039:) 2955:) 2939:. 2929:) 2892:) 2874:) 2866:. 2830:) 2810:) 2796:) 2763:. 2729:}} 2723:{{ 2717:; 2715:}} 2709:{{ 2705:}} 2699:{{ 2695:}} 2689:{{ 2677:) 2638:) 2616:}} 2610:{{ 2595:) 2366:) 2344:) 2331:. 2301:, 2276:) 2180:) 2124:) 2012:) 1990:) 1959:) 1904:) 1869:}} 1863:{{ 1859:}} 1853:{{ 1849:}} 1843:{{ 1839:}} 1833:{{ 1821:}} 1815:{{ 1811:}} 1805:{{ 1801:}} 1795:{{ 1791:}} 1785:{{ 1773:}} 1767:{{ 1745:}} 1739:{{ 1726:}} 1720:{{ 1716:}} 1710:{{ 1694:}} 1688:{{ 1671:}} 1665:{{ 1661:}} 1655:{{ 1651:}} 1645:{{ 1631:}} 1625:{{ 1621:}} 1615:{{ 1419:}} 1413:{{ 1385:}} 1379:{{ 1347:}} 1341:{{ 1337:}} 1331:{{ 1285:}} 1279:{{ 1260:, 1254:}} 1248:{{ 1236:}} 1230:{{ 1198:}} 1192:{{ 1179:}} 1173:{{ 1159:}} 1153:{{ 1139:}} 1133:{{ 1108:}} 1102:{{ 1054:) 1050:• 980:) 976:• 923:) 919:• 795:. 770:) 676:) 668:-- 658:) 611:) 587:GH 570:) 518:}} 512:{{ 477:GH 466:GH 462:GH 449:) 413:) 398:) 380:) 342:) 327:) 301:) 230:) 193:) 166:) 152:) 115:) 86:→ 7026:( 6985:( 6954:( 6897:( 6853:( 6781:( 6615:( 6585:( 6558:( 6535:( 6523:. 6487:( 6471:: 6467:@ 6456:( 6441:( 6374:( 6362:. 6329:( 6294:( 6259:( 6205:( 6131:( 6079:( 6029:( 6009:( 5954:( 5904:( 5894:} 5891:; 5885:: 5879:; 5873:: 5867:{ 5861:. 5855:. 5852:, 5846:. 5840:. 5812:( 5707:( 5681:( 5645:( 5598:( 5560:( 5542:( 5526:@ 5505:( 5453:( 5375:( 5330:: 5326:@ 5311:( 5296:( 5269:( 5243:( 5171:( 5117:( 5062:( 5054:) 5030:( 4905:( 4850:( 4803:( 4753:( 4731:( 4711:( 4686:( 4654:· 4649:( 4640:. 4630:) 4618:( 4549:( 4449:( 4390:( 4331:( 4182:( 4142:( 4128:( 4089:( 4061:( 4025:( 3987:( 3959:( 3939:• 3907:/ 3819:( 3809:. 3799:) 3787:( 3718:( 3679:( 3655:. 3638:" 3608:( 3559:( 3496:( 3467:( 3443:( 3400:( 3372:( 3347:( 3279:( 3256:( 3221:2 3218:1 3196:( 3135:( 3035:( 2951:( 2925:( 2888:( 2870:( 2826:( 2806:( 2792:( 2673:( 2634:( 2591:( 2362:( 2340:( 2321:) 2317:( 2272:( 2176:( 2120:( 2008:( 1986:( 1955:( 1900:( 1728:. 1046:( 972:( 915:( 766:( 672:( 654:( 607:( 566:( 515:- 445:( 409:( 394:( 376:( 338:( 323:( 297:( 226:( 189:( 162:( 144:( 107:( 50:.

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

Index