User talk:TTN/Archive 6

1853:

pointless stubs littering up Knowledge, the episode pages amongst them. The problem is, most editors wade in and create/develop articles based on what they see around them rather than guidelines. They're not always easy to find when you are new to Knowledge, and some people don't even think of looking for them. Then, when articles are deleted they think 'Who's done that? Who cares about a guideline no one's even heard of?' etc etc. I acknowledge that you've been trying to remove the cruft, and are finding that people either ignore you completely (as they've forgotten the articles they once created in a short-lived burst of enthusiasm) or start shouting without actually engaging with the issue. Enough to drive anyone to despair, so I don't blame you if your responses became a bit short-tempered at times. However, I have said before, (and I don't plan to say it again after this) that I do consider that

515:, most were stubs, containing little or no info (which, again, I wouldn’t bother creating in such a state), but the concept of the pages existing (in full form) is a good one. They are all feature-length, complex, enjoyed by many, and as worthy of comment as any cinema-released feature film (and sequels). I did hesitate before restoring the stubs, I admit, but decided that interested parties are more likely to contribute to an existing page than create one (which last is still more likely than them hunting through a redirect history). Secondly, I canvassed for opinion not because I have anything against you, but because interested projects should reach some consensus about when episode pages are appropriate. Perhaps everyone will agree with you. Good, then you'll have help. Perhaps people won't... in which case, you'd do best to avoid your redirecting practice. 1873:, which is funny really, since a while back I was expanding some of the parent page, and witnessed someone coming in all enthusiastic about episode pages, rattling them all off, creating a heap of half-empty templates, then disappearing, leaving them sitting there uselessly. I plugged in a few names, weeded out some stuff from the main page, played with a plot summary (more an exercise in deciding what I think of them...I'm inclined to think they serve little purpose on their own: no interest to those who have not watched the programme, little use to those who have) and generally wondered what the point of them was! If you'd stuck a merge tag on them, I'd have done it; redirecting them without salvaging what was there just made me cross. As you might have seen, I've retrieved them, and now merged them. Might be inspired to improve them too, one day! 2654:

not worth it, or because they are irrelevant. First of all, many of the articles are just entertainment tv, so really you cannot ask for a freudian-marxist philosophical analysis. Anyway, many of those tv series have been widely popular, so many people like to browse wikipedia to read about these articles, remember how much they enjoyed that specificic episode, laugh with that catchphrase, etc. I also think that TTN is wrong with his attitude of "first erase, then discuss". If the article is erased, is going to be difficult for new users to join the discussion since they will not find it. If TTN does think that an article is not good enough, he should tag it and encourage writers to improve as much as possible, because since I said before, everything can be improved.

731:

certain time frame then you need to redirect it back to the parent article", or something like that. I don't know, because we have a guideline that already says not to create them just to create them, and to work on expanding episode lists and season pages first. We need something that says "do not ignore this, episodes that have been in existence for ______ months, and have yet to fulfill the criteria established by WP:EPISODE are subject to be merged and redirected without notice". People want us to baby them and give them more time to expand. You've had as long as the article has existed. There are 40+

31: 887:

policies that don't actually support your views. i intend to do my best to improve the scrubs articles, as i have been doing for some time and suggest that you find a subject that you are knowledgeable about, and try and improve it, rather than simply going around undoing other peoples hard work. no doubt you will not listen to this and simply keep doing your redirects, but i no longer care, as regardless of your opinion, i will not allow scrubs episodes articles to fall into oblivion--

1904:, developing fair use rationales for screen shots, insisting on reliable sources, discouaging original research etc. Anyway, I hope we can move on constructively, and that your drive to improve Knowledge is not blunted by the hassle and grief you have been getting! Also, I guess we must thank you for bringing matters to a head... probably nothing would have happened if you had simply tiptoed around from the beginning. Perhaps ends do justify means???!! 2494:? I still subscribe to the "hard drives are cheap" theory and believe that Knowledge benefits from having episode articles, as long as they are not just plot summaries. I think we would be better served trying to improve the borderline articles (episode articles with more than a plot summary and a source that is more than a transcript) rather than wholesale deletion of every episode article that doesn't surpass some unresonably high standard. 1256:

much time to work on these right now as they'd like. I'm studying for my finals this week so I'm on very little and I don't have time to go through all the episode pages I edit and improve them. Instead of waging war against TV articles you don't see fit to have pages, why not work on them so that they pass what ever you believe they failed on the guidelines. Why not just tag these articles with appropriate clean-up tags. --Malevious

2456:

seems so unecessary. I suppose different editors have different approaches, but I try to stick to subjects that I have researched, I care about, or I know something about. The one time I challenged the notability of an article that I knew nothing about, I was shown that the subject had people that were passionately interested in the subject. I guess I am just trying to see what your thinking is on this subject.

1811:

none of your article edits or merges violates any Knowledge policies. There, however, IS grounds on both sides for concern (which I've attempted to guide the topic regarding). I'm concerned about the personal attacks that were levelled at people during this dispute. Hopefully your input will help guide people away from trying to misuse the ANI forum. It's not supposed to be a place where people argue about content!

1614:. Some of these articles probably don't need to be around, I'll admit that. But, for the same reason we have AfDs for hoaxes and other nonsense, there should be consensus and discussion prior to a major change. Additionally, if you open a discussion on the List of pages, I think you'll find far less opposition when you actually turn the pages into redirects. I hope that clarifies matters. Cheers. -- 583:. I'll repeat the quote here: "So, whatever you do, try to preserve information If, in your considered judgment, a page simply needs to be rewritten or changed substantially, go ahead and do that." Please don't delete pages out of sheer bloody-mindedness: you are upsetting a lot of editors, and obviously have scant regard for their contributions, some of them constituting many months' work. 2875:, you can go ahead and redirect episodes. Unfortunately I nolonger have the DVD set in my posession so am not able to use the commentaries to expand production and broadcast notes for each episode. Also despite our discussion being visible on the episode list page, and a posting of a guide to improve episode articles in the task force, nobody else has done any expansion. 647:

can finish the first season in my sandbox. Then I'm redirecting all on the bases that there was only 1 clear objection to the merge. So far, I've had to actual objections to (in the least) the new format I designed for the season pages. Here's to one day not having to worry about over eager editors that create an article for the slightest thing.

3370:

many topics are worth being here, but not all of them should be covered here (at least fully). Wanting to keep everything or destroy everything isn't helpful. It's good to find a balance. I give all topics a fighting chance also. I don't expect them to become better right away. Something just needs to show that it is possible.

1880:, but to be frank, I think the discussion will once again sink back down to nursery level; as you've said before, most people don't discuss, they just offer an opinion. You need some intelligent input from a smaller number of people to achieve anything constructive: perhaps a task force which could include such people as 496:. A lot of people can't find the histories on redirect pages if they do want to work on an article, or only contribute to existing articles. Merges might be more sensible, but I realise that takes more time. But there is no rush, and you might find other people come on board with you, rather than getting angry. Get 3399:

Thanks for your reply. I suppose we will have to "agree to disagree." In fact, I think we would probably agree with a lot. I too think a balance between "keep everything or destroy everything" is necessary. I simply choose to err on the side of inclusion as "hard drives are cheap." What I saw as

2653:

When TTN replies Andrew pmk to define "reasonably well written", he should also define "reasonably well written". Everything, everything, everything can get improved. There is no such think as a "perfect article". What TTN cannot do is arbitrarily erase or destroy tv episode articles because they are

1836:

Pretty much going to second the above post - I may not entirely agree with how things were done but totally agree that it had to happen sometime (on the basis of WP:RS mainly) and that most of the stuff coming or likely to come in your direction would have been energy better spent improving articles.

1574:

Hello. I've reverted your edits to this list and the specific articles. There's obviously no consensus right now for the change. A centralized discussion will need to occur before edits this drastic can occur. Please do not change the specific episode pages back to redirects without prior discussion.

1229:

TTN, you need to back off and rethink your approach to episode articles. Your attitude is extremely confrontational, and is only going to create massive divisions within the Wiki community. You have no right to single-handedly march in and destroy work like this. Please reconsider your actions before

600:

Episode) and yet people ignore it. If someone creates 150 episode articles for one series, with nothing but plots, despite the fact that they disregarded the guidelines for establishing these pages, the most we can do is propose merges for all of them. I think things can be done to improve them, I've

552:

episode articles, while you may think they are "mediocre", I was awarded a Barnstar for my efforts, if that says anything. I'm sorry if it appears that not many others have edited them, but have you considered (and this isn't blowing my own trumpet) that others have read them and have been happy with

500:

behind you, and a decent consensus about when episode pages are appropriate. The fact is, whatever any style guide says, most people don't get all the resources and support together before writing an article. Most start as stubs and are eventually improved. Understanding of the programmes involved

2729:

The decision is not up to TTN and Angie alone, so 3rd opinion doesn't matter in this case. The consensus on Knowledge is that we don't give every episode an article. The only thing that might need discussing is the behavior of users in this situation, and in that regard I agree with TTN; Angie needs

1825:

You're getting a fair amount of stick lately for your mass deletion and other stuff (some of which I agree with). Nevertheless, despite my disagreements with your edits, I would still like to commend you for your hard work for the wikipedia community so far. If there is criticising and name-calling,

1759:

If the argument is based on the fact that there are only three articles for three episodes, then I would be more than willing to create articles for the rest (this time I will follow the WP:Episode guidelines). Do note that when I first created the articles that are currently available, the show was

1255:

Indeed. Removing an episode which actually has sources because you think they are "pathetic" is the wrong way to go about things. People are currently working on these articles. Many people who work on TV articles are teenagers, and many, especially in the US, have finals coming up and don't have as

646:

create anymore articles for those episodes, someone went in and created another seasons worth. I finally got tired of it and decided to clean them all up myself, starting with the season pages. I've gotten like 5 responses (only 1 real oppose). So, I'm going to give it another week or so, or until I

412:

episodes without even the courtesy of a note on the talk page. Admittedly, most were stubs, but others were being worked on. You are destroying hours of work by many conscientious contributors without even engaging with them about the rationale, or discussing your actions with the wikiproject most

127:

Most will not have a problem with it, so it is easier to bother discussing after it happens. There is no way that I can improve them because there is no way to do it. There are no detailed sources available, and you need to have sources before creating the articles. Hopefully, you can prove me wrong

3423:

The amount of space that articles take up doesn't matter; it's all about relevance and being encyclopedic. We don't cover subjects for the sake of covering them. If they cannot be written about past themselves, they don't need to be covered. That is why less than a thousand episodes need any real

2238:

justified is your own opinion. TTN has justified his actions nonetheless, and he didn't do it to intentionally disrupt. Anyhow, I'm not very interested in moving the argument on the ANI to TTN's talk page, as it's been going on long enough. You should know what's happened as it looked like you read

1857:

of your edits were hasty, and others would have caused less heartache if the editors had felt they were informed rather than ridden over rough-shod. Perhaps you got into a routine, perhaps you were so used to removing unwanted and unnoticed pages it became second-nature to revert them all, I don't

1654:

It seems after five days of time for discussion, no one cared or commented. I've reverted myself. I know you're taking a beating for these redirects; I still think communication and a forum for discussion (even if no one comments) will make your workload much lighter because you will be able to say

1627:

to discuss the articles being changed to a redirect. Not every editor gets on Knowledge every day. However, if the discussion is left open for a couple of days, more people can have the opportunity to discuss the matter. Consensus and discussion are major aspects on Knowledge, as I'm sure you know.

1038:

But I'll have no choice but to deal with it if it means providing extensive info on the characters and all. Power Instinct is a VERY looked down upon and cast-away game. It's only fair that people get the lowdown on it and see it as more than just some "Street Fighter 'clone' ", but that is just me

137:

What do you mean by that; "there is no way to improve them"? This is Knowledge, all articles (save perhaps for the featured articles) can be improved in some way. If there are not suffcient sources available for episode articles, then perhaps there are enough sources for season articles. That's why

3369:

I am making this a better site by removing unencyclopedic information. I have no point to make in my actions. The point is already set: topics that cannot meet this sites standards are merged or deleted. Being a "mergist"/"weak deletionist" is the best thing to be on this site. You understand that

1919:

rather than as a series-by-series battle will help to ease concerns over what is happening. The AN/I report began, as I've stated elsewhere, not out of an attempt to have you censured or blocked, but to get you to stop and discuss the matter before you alienated a sizable portion of the community.

1810:

Hi TTN. Just thought I'd let you know I added a blurb to the discussion trying to get it on track. Some users have been attempting to use that forum for purposes other than what it was for. Meaning that they're trying to use ANI to dispute the content of your edits. Look, I'll be frank about this-

1694:

You are just getting eviscerated out there. Don't you ever get frustrated or annoyed by people whose content you remove? I mean, some of your edits/merges are far more controversial than others, and you're following the guidelines, but how do you keep up and not get bogged down with people calling

1392:

It's people like you who piss off the whole wiki community by deleting things as you see fit. What benefit is it to you to delete TV show articles? None. Then the people who have a use for those articles no longer are able to access them. So how bout you retype all the Entourage synopsises and all

735:

articles, and only 1 meets the criteria for WP:EPISODE, and that's the pilot...and even that only recently met it because I personally expanded it. The rest of been existing for over an entire year and have not even tried to meet the criteria. We need to establish it to say "do it by this time, or

491:

Thankyou for your reply and the link to current discussion. I understand what you're doing, and possibly agree with some of your problems with individual pages, but I think wholesale redirects are happening too quickly and just winding everyone up. Perhaps a warning on each page that they do not

1413:

cease and desist your actions, since if you check the noticeboard the debate is getting pretty debated and it wouldn't be wise to alienate more people, when already numerous editors are already against your actions. As I expressed this before I am willing to come up with a fair compromise since a

1173:

Also, why is this not happening to the Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat articles? And all the others the same? As such, go do something about them, if you want to enforce this policy so badly. If I can't get a site for these articles, then you're going to have to do something to convince the same

829:

You still are not persuading me of anything on my talk page discussion. So, I've moved our discussion to the article's talk page (please reply further there if you have anything new to add) and will refrain from restoring or editing the article until I see what others have to say as well. Best,

2455:

Knowledge? I mean, it seems like you could ignore the articles as you have admitted that you have no interest in the programmes themselves and you have not seen most of them. Alternatively, you could work to improve the articles or encourage editors that actually care to improve them. It just

1852:

I want to make clear to you where I stand in this whole sorry saga, for I would hate you to think I am in the anti-TTN camp who are causing you so much grief, even if I have raised my voice against you from time to time. Basically, I think your motivations are right: there is too much cruft and

1593:, however, as that page clearly states, that means not being reckless. The pages that are being turned into redirects contain a lot of good information. If there are citation issues, we have templates for that. But before we throw the baby out with the bath water, let's see how the discussion on 1271:

Those aren't sources; they're trivial reviews (two don't even work). If the article had real sources, it would be different. Nobody is working on it that well. In the month since I last viewed it, it has gained a trivia section and unreferenced reception material. Nobody is ever going to improve

886:

second of all, you keep talking about sources. the source is the episode itself. if you watched it you would see the info is correct. thirdly, i have not finished with them yet. i propose a mutual compromise, and you just yet again refuse to accept another persons views, basing your arguments on

613:

that would help curve this need to create these individuals episode articles. Though our methods differ (more so probably because I think you finally got fed up with the "it will be improved" responses), I appreciate what you are trying to do... which (as I see it) is make the system of articles

445:

I stand by my comments above. If the articles are insufficient in your view, then let them be improved by others. You can't just delete episode articles wholesale and expect the people who create/maintain them to accept it without question. How many other shows' episode articles do you intend to

3540:

I'm completely astounded that you've merged so many episode summaries, specifically ones that in fact had much use. Instead of redirecting nearly all of the Invader Zim episode summaries, couldn't you have just removed the irrelevant data and kept the plot points? Many of them were excellent,

3555:

Good idea..saves duplicating effort, keeps track of any that get untagged etc. I've seen a few that only have season pages. I'll make a note of those... they'll probably need reviewing at some point, but we haven't yet worked out what to do with those yet. Let's get the episodes done first.

730:

I don't know. We have several episodes that have followed that guideline to a "T", and you know where they are? In featured article status. The guideline works, they just don't like it. We need to work on a system that says "if you cannot expand an article to follow the EPISODE guidelines by a

557:

article, you will see that each episode of the series was specifically written to satirise/explain an aspect of the way that the UK is governed. In that respect, it could be argued that the episode articles need no further commentary: their content speaks for itself. I found this definition of

3353:

standards. Please do not take this as me being uncivil. I have a strong, opposing point of view regarding this project and I am not sure how (or if) I could persuade you to see things differently, so I chose to respond on your talk page. Respond if you like. Delete this if you like. I'll

1531:

TTN: I'm sorry to say that I have found it necessary to file a complaint about your actions on the AN/I board. As I mentioned earlier, your methodology in achieving your goal is divisive and disruptive. I really hope that you find it within yourself to reconsider the manner in which you are

283:

I honestly don't see anything wrong with the redirects. If it were something akin to Brollli or Brollllli redirecting to Broly (something I've actually dealt with before, believe it or not), they should be deleted. Minor capitalization such as this doesn't pose much of a problem IMHO. //

1191:

I also noticed that Shoryuken Wiki is not the suitable place for them. That place is a strategy wiki, not an info wiki. My advice is that you please make sure you examine a wiki's contents more closely next time before you give links to them. Otherwise you make yourself look foolish. =P

1555:

It's a flaw in how Knowledge works, that you get used to having or making episode articles only to have someone come along and tell you no. Sorry it sucks, but that's how it is, and hopefully we'll get people to understand this better in the future. TTN isn't doing anything wrong. --

680:

states: "If you think merging something improves the encyclopedia, you can be bold and perform the merge, as described below. Because of this, it makes little sense to object to a merge purely on procedural grounds, e.g. "you can't do that without discussion" is not a good argument."

2468:

It seems to me that "real world relevance" is in the eye of the beholder. Using the argument of notability, wouldn't we have to get rid of 90% of all television articles? What is the "real world relevance" of cartoons? If the series passes the test, why don't the episodes?

2975:

Episode articles don't get the liberty of sitting around forever. Most will never improve, so they need sources to continue to exist. Plus, nobody actually will want to bring them up to standards. Bill up there is the only person that has done a thing beyond basic cleanup.

1795:

then you should have simply cut down those parts of the articles. As a result, I am restoring all the articles. If you wish to discuss this further, reply at my talk page. However, until then please do not redirect the articles again. Thanks for your understanding.

3211:

You said that I could "redirect it without a hitch" and it almost happened, but one user has been following me around and opposing me on everything. Since I am cooperating with you on your attempts at merging character pages, it would be nice if you would respond

1791:. In fact, according to the Content section of that article, a plot summary and information on an episode's significance to the overall plot SHOULD be included in the article. If you feel that the articles contained too much plot summary as to be a violation of 1363:

It may be notable in a way, but it still fails for not having the needed content. Nothing shows that development or other reception sources can be found. The award doesn't justify a full article. A reception section in the main article can cover things like that.

1988:

Keep on editing, GL in your journies you should propably get the flame police or whoever because it seems that angie is leading an anit- TNN campaign (i looked at somepages and they have all these links and ppl on disscusion rapid posting its like a war GO TNN

2987:

Angie, These articles have already been redirected. If you're interested in doing some editing then you can add broadcast, production or reception details to them one by one. Otherwise they should remain as redirects until somebody else adds that information.

1950:

My small opinion is that the extended argument over content doesn't have a place at ANI at all, but that the violations of Knowledge's rules over civility and admin conduct DO. Drop and eliminate all (or most) of the stuff about the merge and focus on that...

511:: an iconic programme that served as a commentary on British politics and the civil service. Some of the storylines are so classic (and 'true' in the sense they reflect reality) that they influence politics today, or are referred to by the public. As for 1914:

I will add to this by saying that I, too, respect the fact that you have stopped for now, and that you are participating in the discussion to resolve this matter. I don't expect that it will be a quick resolution - but the fact that we are hashing it out

1968:

This discussion has been a bit illuminating in that it has grown so large. So, I've said my five hundred and thrity five or so cents worth and am exhuasted, so good luck to everyone else in finding a solution and have a wonderful weekend! :) Sincerely,

1408:

Well I do have to agree (after I had time to think about it personally) that you are on the right idea that there are too many unworthy episode articles that need to be redirected to an episode list etc. However, a suggestion I have to make is that you

112:

I've noticed you redirected the episode articles on Teen Titans. I see you have done this with many other episode articles from other series as well. How come you don't take this up on the Lists' talk page? I am aware that the articles does not follow

2939:

You do realise that PeaceNT isn't out to get me, right? He just didn't like that I didn't bother with a single message on every single series. He has just told you to take part in discussion. He isn't going to try to stop me from doing something.

1272:

them, and they cannot be improved. I will never entertain this notion that more than a thousand episode articles will ever need coverage here. That certainly isn't one of them. Editing them and placing tags can only work if they can be improved.

2949:

Your comment indicates that you have not read the Invader Zim discussion. Do not make any further hostile (and baseless) comments directed at TTN, as you already have made enough to earn you a block. Be grateful that this hasn't happened yet. -

3096:

Hello, nothing but I say that to you translating the articles of the episodes of SpongeBob SquarePants of english to spanish. Also, not because to make the redirections. As it wants I am going to see files and I already leave it as you want.

3270:

Oh, they violate it. All of the keeps in that are baseless (in fact, two of them are by people who completely disregard WP:EPISODE as "just a guideline"). They should just be redirected. I just didn't bother because of that annoying anon.

3045:

PS: On the basis that Mr. Satan is notable for being particularly well-liked by the series' creator (more so than major characters such as Goku and Gohan), I disagree with merging quite yet. Same with Bulma and Roshi. Uub's fine, though.

1826:

I still hope that you will not get bogged down or annoyed as many editors in the past have. On the whole, I know you're doing a good job but I also hope that you learn to be a little more open after this saga transpires. Have a nice day.

871:

i disagree with your idea of redirecting these eps, therefore i propose that out of your list of list article to work through, you leave this one till last, allowing me time to improve them, as i have already done improvements of season

840:

I checked out the Final Fantasy X article and see that they have a separate article on list of characters. Thus, if you would like to create a separate list of OCean Hunter characters article, I'd be happy to help flesh it in. Best,

597:

I don't get much of a response. I think the only time anyone actually cares what happens to most of these articles is when someone either deletes them or redirects them. I find it funny that WP:TV even has as system (Series article -:

2166:

need to chill out. What you're doing is unagreeable in many people's views. Please stop or strict consequences will result. I am saying this for your own good. I call your attention to a guideline of MY own choosing, and that is

528:

Same with me on the Cosby Show episodes. If you are going to do something so drastic, at least have the common courtesy to mention this on the talk page in advance so, if it can be improved, someone can make the improvements.

3041:

My sincerest apologies, but I vehemently oppose any such merging of these articles. They may just be video game species, but there some of the most notable examples of a video game villain species in the history of gaming.

1338:

You have a link to one single award, nothing else. Add that to a general reception section for the actual series. An award on its own is not enough to give the articles content. It would only work along with real content.

2757:

episodes shouldn't be listed unless they have spefic importance such as beginning, end, movie or such importance if anyone wants to know about the series go buy it wiki shouldnt be revealing everything of all the show

2311:

as the precedent? Only Bulma and Roshi were really decided to stay, not those two. If you do this, make sure you include a small entry for them, or let me know and I can take over for that. Keep up the good work!

948:

But you're going to do it anyways, because you are lucky I am not intelligent enough to defend the article. I can only fight and revert and readd, and you and your people will ban me for it as unjustly as can be.

1628:

There are clearly objections to your actions, as witnessed on the Incidents noticeboard. However, there's a simple solution: give warning and the opportunity to discuss the changes before making them. Cheers. --

501:

is also imortant. Soaps, sitcoms etc etc are hardly worthy of invidual episode pages, I agree (and I wonder why people bother writing them, but that’s up to them), but there are many programmes out there that

236: 232: 1414:

simple revert won't solve this problem and I am preferring to think with my brain rather than to act on simple emotions. Of course you don't have to follow my suggestion but at least take it under advisement. -

574:

is regarded by many as a classic series. How can those of today's generation who are interested in such things find out anything about them if you continue with this crusade? If you have read my latest post to

3004:

She is just using this as yet another forum to complain. This is all part of a big crusade to "stop me" because of her favorite series being redirected. She doesn't actually care about these or many others.

2428: 3408:", I get the impression that you have a strong bias against articles about specific television episodes. First, I think a statistic like 90% is ludacris. 90% is based on what formula? Second, if you or 2308: 2239:

the ANI post, and you even agreed that it should stop, yet I see you continuing elsewhere. What's more important is to discuss the policy itself, not to continue pestering the person who followed it. -

592:

I would personally like to commend you for taking a stand on this issue. Though I personally would not have just gone out and redirected everything without asking everyone else first, I have found that

1139:

That is if I DO find a suitable place. Wikia seems to want wikis on things that will spread all over people's interests. I say, fuck them. Power Instinct is often forgotten. I will NOT let that happen.

3321:

Feel free to delete this. I just feel a need to vent my spleen and since we can still post comments to your talk page without it meeting some type of notability standard, I will. I have tried to

3337:-like collection of articles that must pass some editorial policeman's personal standard? Is there not another way you could contribute to Knowledge rather than be the Wikipolice enforcing your 955:

Sorry if I sound like such a jerk and a stubborn mule, but Knowledge is just turning into a horrible place for extensive information on such subjects these days. It's terrible. Just terrible. --

2798: 882:

firstly, i have done more than just cleanup. if you actually look, you will see that every s1 ep contains an ep synopsis, guest stars, featured music, and external links (not all done by me)

1674: 228: 224: 2341:

Notice how the main villains get to have their own headers; the henchmen, who are really minour junk, don't even get a subheader with the exception of the henchmen title. Understandable?

2003:, Agent. And although I'm not as exuberant as the above poster, you've earned my support in this. And actually, I would like to discuss with you how to possibly create a properly-sourced 854:

Tell you what, I'll hold off on Knowledge for a couple of days and see where the discussion goes from there. I've said my peace for now. So, have a nice few days or so! Sincerely, --

706:

I've seen. If they can't attack you they'll attack the guideline (which they are doing on that page). It seems they'd rather it said "you just need a plot and you can have an article".

307:

It's just rather pointless to have redirects that won't be used. Nobody is going to try randomly capitalizing a word. I don't feel like putting them up, though. Someone else can do it.

2181:

I don't follow. How is he harassing? I mean, on a stretch you could call it minor disruption, but TTN has justified the actions quite well. You should know, since you read the ANI. -

3022:

Sorry TTN, I can't merge Mr. Satan and Uub. Just, I have no motivation — If you merge it for me, I will provide the section entry and all. Until then, I'm unanimated about doing so.

3541:

neutral, and had sources, but now all of them have to be written out AGAIN, thanks to your shortsightedness. There was no need to delete them all, you've erased a lot of hard work.

610: 1478:

considered reliable sources? I can see that if the link was to a die-hard fan of any cast member on the show, or merely in the episode, but not for general sites like IMDb. ----

361:

You should have at least discussed the merging on the seperate episode talk pages before merging. Although judging by comments by other users you don't seem to know how. --: -->

261: 220: 3054: 2048: 2271:

I'm not the one who made him break the 3RR nor am I the one that reported him for it. Please stop trying to cause trouble (especially seeing as that was a proposed merger).

142:, fortunately, there seem to be plenty of reviews and facts conserning the two seasons of the series. In my opinion, there are no Knowledge articles that cannot be improved. 138:

you should take this up on the articles' talk page, to discuss how to improve articles instead of just deleting them. I am working on writing articles on the two seasons of

3496:

It appears you are tagging every episode of every television episode you see on the encyclopedia for notability concerns. This could be considered disruptive and making a

3333:, but as they say, "I don't think it means what you think it means." What is the use of having a 💕 that anyone can edit on the Internet if it is just a stubby, limited, 1645:

and let it sit for a few days. If no one responds, I'll revert myself. But discussion and consensus are important, as is the opportunity for those two things. Cheers. --

2849:. I don't know how you can add to it, but we can't really forget about it and try to ignore it. I've been the only one trying, so I need at least some moral support. - 2965:

I'm just saying that you should probably let these articles alone. If a person wants to improve them, they can do so on their own time. They don't have to be merged.

1526: 2846: 2119:

There were never any discussions regarding the MMZ characters you merged into the list article, stop saying you merged them "per the discussion" because thats a lie.

1072:

Alright then. If I can find a suitable place for them where they won't come into any serious changes, then I will let you do as you like to the articles. Fair's fair.

117:(I wrote some of Teen Titans articles), but why don't help out in finding relevant information for the articles and then edit them, instead of just redirecting them? 3051: 2759: 2282: 2045: 1990: 1805: 3091: 2219: 1029:

On the record, as far as making a wiki for it of it's own, I'm not the best at web programming or something, so, really, setting up a wiki... that's gonna be hard.

2065: 1744:

I personally put in a lot of effort into those articles and the information present there is certainly a lot more than that available for most other shows (see

3231: 3098: 1970: 433: 3101: 3452: 1815: 492:

reach wikipedia standards would be sufficient. You can't just delete pages because they are unsourced, badly written, or lack as much information as they

404:

Why this project of yours to remove episode pages? Many are works in progress, and a note on the talk page to suggest they should be improved according to

1348:

I believe winning an award makes the episode notable. If it won an award there must be sources out there. Article just needs to be fixed up. --Malevious

3132: 2147:

TTN allowed sufficient time to discuss his proposal to merge, but nothing happened. No reply = no objections. You should have no reason to object now. -

2138:

My god, you're just obsessed with me, aren't you? Merging lesser topics into larger ones is a natural function of this site. Please get over it already.

2520:

I do not think that you should remove episode articles. If they are reasonably well written and they are episodes of notable series, they should stay.

1496: 3316: 1549: 1193: 1086: 1040: 992: 956: 576: 3157:. I was wondering if there was some discussion about it not being encyclopedic or something. I didn't see anything on the Talk Page. Thank you! 3050:

PPS: Thanks for pointing out the possible impostor, although I don't know how to approach this, since he doesn't seem to be vandalizing anything. -

1865:; it was just an example of a parent page that was well-sourced, episode pages that had dedicated editors who would be likely to come on board with 389:

When I bother to post messages for episodes, they're replied to one out of thirty times. It is much easier to do it and discuss certain ones after.

858: 845: 171: 2199:

justified, though. He did this with little warning, no consensus. He caused hard feelings. But I do agree that he is also causing disruption, yes.

1841: 301: 254:

Would you kindly tag the ones you believe should now be deleted with db, reason: superfluous? If it's not too much trouble for you, I have to go.

3363: 2108: 1973: 340:

Whatever, if people find pointless redirects fine, I don't really care. It's just sort of pointless to have random redirects all over the place.

3387:

get to you. I think that merging is more useful anyway, one could keep better track of articles if they were integrated into a list or section.

919:

Who agrees with you? Nobody. Frankly I feel sorry for you. Oh, and I consider notability inherited (and FYI: not interested in reading essays).

3451:

your redirects were inappropriate. The redirect reduced the quality of the target article and more sources are also available. Change it back!

2816: 2703:

There is no third opinion needed. Angie just needs to stop stalking me. That requires administrative attention more than that of another user.

2745: 2011: 1760:

on hiatus and hence I was not certain if it was going to be finished and hence unsure of continuing to create articles for a defunct series.

609:

into better shape, but you won't find that much information for every episode of a series... probably not even half that. I even came up with

1920:

Again, seeing as how you have, I would be willing to drop the AN/I proceeding if you can agree to hold off until we reach a consensus on the

1830: 3542: 2776: 2693:. This whole thing is unconstructive, and it looks bad on Wiki as a whole for those involved. I'll post this on Angie's talk page as well. 2528: 2503: 2473: 2460: 1579: 1566: 1212: 1105: 1059: 1011: 2734: 2620: 320: 3520: 2767: 2442: 1659: 1649: 1632: 1618: 1601: 476:(to name just a few) all have them, and most follow a similar format. Supposing someone wanted to add the extra info you describe to the 334:

took care of it — TTN, you were the only one who originally disagreed with it. Me, that user and Poetic Decay are alright with the caps.

199: 3244: 3170: 3111: 2716:

about whether TV shows should have pages about their episodes. Please be civil about it and don't use language like "stop stalking me".

1955: 3514: 3465: 3198: 3180: 2959: 2248: 2190: 2156: 1800: 1514: 932: 802:. Generic doesn't necessarily mean just "the same" and it isn't the difference that you pointed on my talk page. Just to let you know. 3428:

is not a reason to keep junk. An article on myself wouldn't hurt anybody, but I doubt anyone would find it to be worthy of inclusion.

2212: 1820: 1418: 633: 393: 311: 3131:

and any other applicable policies? Your work is controversial, but these policies are here for a reason. Keep up the good work. --

2995: 2808: 2762: 1869:

and didn't qualify for redirection under the Episode guidelines (which encourages such pages be worked on). I also got cross about

1560: 1266: 923: 755: 725: 666: 587: 519: 486: 440: 436:. Are you making this a personal vendetta against all TV series on Knowledge? It's downright disrespectful to the efforts of others. 405: 3374: 3057: 2786: 2724: 2587: 2553: 2081: 533: 383: 132: 121: 1770: 1368: 1358: 1276: 986:

I wasn't expecting that. But some admin or something's gonna do it anyway. I'll have to make backup copies for such an emergency...

172: 2980: 2944: 2858: 2275: 2142: 1941: 1877: 834: 2840: 2354:

So then it shall be that way, I'll do it later when I return though. Can you at least provide the section entries after I do it?

2348:

Isn't the limit of images on a list like 1-2 at the most, regardless of how big the list is? I am sure I've seen that somewhere.

1495:

As a note, I've created this for a discussion about the merges (as I didn't see any very active ones, except for Petey Piranha):

1482: 1458: 3220: 3009: 2908: 1503: 2707: 1725:, I request all of you to not edit the S60 episode articles without first establishing a constructive dialogue. I see that per 1343: 1333: 1311: 1294: 1285: 317: 2437: 2403:"Those should probably be put up for deletion. They don't seem to assert any real notability (other than internet fan sites). 2376:

from your "to-do" list. I will be taking on responsibility for those two series, in conjunction with their regular editors. --

1703: 1684: 3527: 3432: 3298: 3141: 2878:

However, I have managed to expand some episodes with a few out of universe sources, which shouldn't be redirected. These are

1320: 1156:

I will let you know if I do so you may do whatever you like. But until then, you must not touch them. These things take time.

891: 876: 344: 249: 214: 3420:! Again, "your mileage may vary" so you keep on doing what you think is best. I really do appreciate your civil response. 2319:

I don't see what you mean about the headers/sub-headers — here is how the guidelines hint it to be and here is this example:

1763:

At the very least, please comment on the talk pages of the aforementioned articles before needlessly starting an edit war.

356: 188:

reason being "superfluous" and that caused a bunch of redirects to be deleted or marked for deletion. Why was this exactly?

3504: 1788: 1775: 105: 2969: 2933: 2061:

Just a heads up make sure you don't make any double redirects when redirecting Dragon Ball Z isn't Dragonball Z just FYI.

2891: 1689: 323: 2898: 2697: 2417: 2051: 2040:

So I have a COI because I'm arguing with people in WPDB and thusly must be making these edits to be vindictive. Riiight.

1610:). Open a discussion there and let people weigh in. If there aren't responses, then you can feel free to redirect them. 3263:

as you thought. I fixed up two of them, but I need your opinion on the rest. Should there be another afd regarding it?

2071: 2034: 1490: 2096: 1993: 952:

That is why I intend to set up a wiki of Power Instinct's own eventually to protect it from you people, but whatever.

3275: 3234: 3086: 3074: 2872: 2304: 1401: 2413:

Why not look for them in Chinese, TTN? They ARE originally from China. They may be more well known in that country.

3545: 3448: 3388: 3304: 3289: 3264: 3067:

Hi, Sorry I did not know the situation, I was just cleaning up articles with the cleanup tag and came to this one.

3030: 3023: 2690: 2355: 2349: 2342: 2313: 1908: 497: 335: 326: 265: 255: 240: 205: 189: 2285: 1436:? And for the record, as I recall, the discussion on whether to delete, keep, or merge all these episodes reached 945:

I highly disagree with your so-called decision to merge everything into one big ugly article. I'm sorry, but no.

700: 1444: 1355: 1263: 1247: 866: 580: 417: 3455: 3135: 3029:

Dammit, I had to do it. Can you at least fix up their entries? I really, really had to force myself to do this.

2407: 3206: 2830: 1708: 1611: 913: 824: 3560: 166: 2825: 2676: 2128:

I agree with you strongly, Vilerocks. We can't let you keep doing this, TTN. First episodes, now characters?

1784: 1521: 677: 594: 1281:

Wait one second, here. I added a source for one of the episodes I revived, and you deleted it anyway!! ----

991:

But what did you mean "if need be, you'll copy the articles yourself?" I just want to know the specifics. --

975: 3477: 3250: 3036: 2866: 2393: 1696: 1673: 768:

Sorry about that – I feel like a right idiot now. However, in that instance it may have been better to use

106: 1174:

should apply to everything else. This is not a dare, just that I won't allow it unless everyone else does.

819: 793: 3510:

I'm tagging episodes that don't meet the guideline, and I'm opening the door for discussion. That is it.

2386: 2123: 1934: 1642: 1542: 1240: 482:

articles? Are you really suggesting they should start from the ground up and recreate them from scratch?

3284:, who continues to avoid his ban. Aside from that, should there be another afd? Honestly, I don't think 2265: 2257:

I really don't like people who do this to me for personal amusement. Vilerocks 04:20, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

2226: 2175: 2132: 3213: 2422: 1792: 210:

Why bother? It's just a capitalized word. You may as well just recreate the others and leave that one.

38: 2295:

I think you're doing a good job with the merging of uneeded "crufty" articles. Would you kindly merge

1290:

Can you link it? If it was a legitimate source, I apologize, but it may have just been a trivial one.

3480:

page from getting too long. If you'd like, you can sort the enemies from the mini-bosses and bosses.

3476:

I would, but with some of them being playable characters, they should remain separate to prevent the

570:

episode articles (and indeed those of any other TV show) are "many aspects" of their parent subject.

905:. Perhaps you should read the above and the guidelines themselves. Oh, and one could believe you're 3535: 3491: 97: 2261:

Proof of your misconduct right HERE! I saw that he was blocked, when he didn't do anything wrong!

154: 3192: 3164: 2686: 2398: 2056: 1847: 1468: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 3185:

Alright! Thanks! I'm still pretty new to WP and feeling myself around. Thanks for the help!

2578:

See above (articles with more than a plot summary and a source that is more than a transcript).

2027: 1838: 1568: 1224: 285: 3256: 2772:

Which user are you talking about? If it's me, then I'm afraid you must have misinterpreted me.

1780:

I accidentally posted this message to the wrong user yesterday. Here is what I meant to say:

3294:

AfDs aren't good in this situation. If you feel like it, just bring it up at the task force.

3176:

A list of tracks is game guide information. Game guide information is removed from the site.

2845:

A relevant subject I haven't brought up, but I've been trying to get a community ban on him.

1749: 1326: 399: 245:

The two with caps should probably be removed, but the others seem like legitimate redirects.

3107:

Just copy and paste the information from the history. Don't bring the actual articles back.

2092:

I just wanted to let you know I support your descision to delete seperate episode articles.

1329:), and some of the other episodes that were revived had links and further details too. ---- 559: 3359: 3083: 3071: 2879: 2721: 2616:

You'll need more than that, you'll need to assert the episode's notability in some way. --

2583: 2525: 2499: 2448: 2087: 2068: 1827: 1767: 1454:

sources? That doesn't make a lick of sense to me, as long as those links informative. ----

1207: 1100: 1054: 1006: 970: 602: 8: 2742: 2432: 2105: 2026:

issues here, if you or any other member of said project changes it back I won't revert. -

1738: 1586: 1352: 1260: 855: 842: 831: 162: 3550: 3501: 3187: 3159: 3124: 3123:

When you get a chance could you check out the individual episode articles for the show

2955: 2854: 2792: 2244: 2186: 2152: 1797: 896: 642:

pages. It's always "well, others are like this". Even when we had a clear consensus to

606: 331: 2801:(since he'd probably go bat shit crazy on me again…and I don't mean a tantrum, I mean 3330: 3260: 3225: 3217: 3128: 2926: 2821: 2655: 2300: 2093: 1952: 1921: 1893: 1866: 1812: 1753: 1726: 1681: 1518: 811: 785: 749: 719: 694: 660: 627: 460: 362: 114: 3153:? I ask because I was going to use the same format to add the track information to 2712:

I put the dispute on third opinion because this is really a dispute between you and

2044:

Also, thank you TTN, for not assuming that I'm attempting to vandalize Knowledge. -

3485: 3481: 3425: 3062: 2414: 2363: 2203: 2168: 2017: 1425: 448: 3346: 2491: 763: 3497: 3409: 3384: 3355: 3326: 2773: 2717: 2579: 2521: 2495: 2470: 2457: 2384: 2062: 1932: 1540: 1238: 906: 148: 118: 3350: 3342: 2797:

I didn't want to say something like "omfg don't do this again" to BassxForte on

1606:

All of these individual episode articles have a "mother" article (i.e., List of

46:

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

3117: 2731: 2617: 2120: 1983: 1889: 1656: 1646: 1629: 1615: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1576: 1557: 1398: 1349: 1257: 929: 158: 195:

It wasn't me. I would guess that someone thought it was a worthless redirect.

3442: 3322: 3154: 3150: 3143: 2966: 2951: 2930: 2850: 2713: 2682: 2262: 2240: 2223: 2182: 2172: 2148: 2129: 2023: 1901: 1500: 888: 873: 584: 483: 437: 47: 17: 3281: 2915: 2887: 2847:

Knowledge:Community_sanction_noticeboard#User:Vilerocks_and_User:BassxForte

2431:

for improving at least some of the SpongeBob SquarePants episode articles.

2208: 1885: 1870: 1862: 1020:

Only if by "moving" you mean moving them to the Shoryuken Wiki or whatever.

940: 920: 910: 803: 777: 738: 708: 683: 649: 616: 548: 530: 512: 507: 478: 454: 425: 409: 139: 3557: 2989: 2895: 1905: 1508: 1415: 1327:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=A_Goat%27s_Tale&oldid=135433182

516: 414: 182: 3338: 2694: 2378: 2114: 2008: 1926: 1897: 1881: 1700: 1534: 1479: 1455: 1441: 1330: 1308: 1282: 1232: 472: 638:

I completely understand. I've battled the same group of people on the

408:

guidelines would be more constructive. I note you redirected all the

2803: 2296: 1745: 466: 3216:

so I can say that there is consensus to merge. Thanks for the time,

2836:

I know... (sadly). This is like the fifth time I've dealt with him.

3524: 3511: 3462: 3429: 3371: 3325:, but I feel your actions show you are more interested in making a 3295: 3272: 3241: 3177: 3108: 3006: 2977: 2941: 2905: 2837: 2783: 2704: 2550: 2487: 2404: 2272: 2139: 2078: 1365: 1340: 1317: 1291: 1273: 799: 676:

I stumbled across something, and don't recall it being brought up.

577:

Knowledge:Village pump (policy)#Using Knowledge:Television episodes

390: 341: 308: 246: 211: 196: 129: 3461:

Show the sources and they can be brought back. It is that simple.

2685:, and I think that it's time to move beyond negotiation and get a 2883: 2004: 1861:

As to the specifics of my involvement: I don't really care about

1734: 1718: 1655:

that no one made any comment or cared after five days. Cheers. --

204:

Ok, I'll simply have it recreated. Uh, any thoughts before I do?

2451:) how this program to get rid of all episode articles works to 1858:

know. Thankyou for stopping, and allowing people to cool off.

1722: 1589:

before there are major changes to an article. I'm a big fan of

1472: 1397:

Don't let them keep ya down, TNN. You're doing a great job! --

2922:

allow you to do that. They can be fixed to look good for your

2782:

It is sort of hard to misinterpret "Go ahead and merge Ciel."

2022:

I really don't care if they are reassesed, but there might be

1039:

and my jerkwad opinion, so, bear with me on my saying that. --

3354:

continue to work to make this project better in my own way.

3017: 1497:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Mario_character_merges

3471: 3303:

Let Recoome have his fun for now. Doesn't bug me that much.

1585:

I've reverted the pages on the principal that there should

3416:

To me, it simply does not effect the encyclopedia user in

3404:. Perhaps that is a faulty perception, but when you say " 2290: 1766:

Do get back to me and leave me a message on my talk page.

3424:

coverage. The rest have no relevance or information. And

2894:. (note, they still need cleanup and further expansion) ● 1714: 3406:

90% of television series episodes do not need an article

3149:

Just curious, why didja delete the tracks sections from

153:

If you were not already aware, you may be interested in

1695:

for your head? By the way, what is the redesign of the

3288:

needs episode articles, least not those sloppy ones.

553:

them as they are? If you'd bothered to read the main

2077:

Oops, I just copied what the the article was using.

1680:

Hi, thought you might be interested in this afd. --

1085:

Request it by Wikia, huh. I'll see what I can do. --

3240:The article was deleted, so those will be deleted. 1532:

proceeding, before things go too far. Thank you. --

423:Agreed. I put a great deal of work into making the 1527:AN/I report filed with regards to episode deletion 928:I agree with him. Want me to find more people? -- 2681:I've been following the "debate" between you and 1806:I added a small section about the episodes to ANI 3092:Information of Episodes of SpongeBob SquarePants 1741:edit and hence not in the spirit of wikipedia. 3412:do not feel like wading through these articles 3230:Shouldn't it be moved to the redirect first? -- 1303:the show the award that I mentioned, so yes it 981:Have I read that right? You're... backing down? 901:You're the only one who is believing they fail 237:List of other Extraterrestrials in Dragon Ball 233:List of other extraterrestrials in Dragon Ball 1878:Knowledge talk:Television episodes#A proposal 3402:articles about cartoons are not encyclopedic 3383:you in every way TTN. Don't let people like 1424:Okay, another question: What was wrong with 3521:Knowledge:Television article review process 3323:assume you want to improve the encyclopedia 2807:), but just so you know, he has a bit of a 1787:to justify your redirecting all of them to 178:TTN, you (or someone else) tagged the page 2447:Could you explain to me (maybe even on my 3317:Who died and made you the Knowledge Czar? 2739:Hehe. Wish I'd had the balls to say that. 406:Knowledge:WikiProject Television/Episodes 3449:WP:EPISODE#Dealing_with_problem_articles 3280:That "annoying anon" is none other than 3259:? I guess those episodes didn't violate 1393:the music was on the show. You dipshit. 173:List of Extraterrestrials in Dragon Ball 14: 2873:List of Invader Zim episodes talk page 2162:TTN, whomever you THINK you are, you 581:Knowledge:Editing policy#Major changes 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2799:Talk:List of Mega Man Zero characters 1892:etc. I'd also suggest speaking with 1900:to bring episode pages in line with 1896:, who has been encouraging those at 1789:List of Fullmetal Alchemist episodes 1699:page you mentioned a few days back? 1316:Can you give a link to the episode? 907:disrupting Knowledge to make a point 562:: " information on many subjects or 546:With regard to your comments on the 25: 2892:Battle of the Planets (Invader Zim) 2443:Campaign to Remove Episode Articles 1876:I've thrown down a few thoughts at 229:List of other Aliens in Dragon Ball 225:List of other aliens in Dragon Ball 23: 2549:Define "reasonably well written." 2218:That said, TTN needs to also read 24: 3571: 3329:. I understand the guideline on 2281:I wounder who is harrassing who? 1299:It was the agency that actually 29: 2490:, would you say you are not an 1821:Whatever happens, don't give up 3070:Sorry For The Inconvinience -- 2427:I'd like you to comment on my 1924:process. What do you think? -- 1499:. Feel free to comment there. 564:on many aspects of one subject 13: 1: 1793:Knowledge's fair use policies 1785:Knowledge:Television episodes 678:Help:Merging and moving pages 611:a new format for season pages 579:, you'll have seen a link to 262:List of Aliens in Dragon Ball 239:be marked for deletion also? 221:List of aliens in Dragon Ball 3478:List of Mario series enemies 1776:Fullmetal Alchemist episodes 1697:List of Mario series enemies 1623:It's about giving people an 260:I just missed sampling one: 107:List of Teen Titans episodes 7: 3500:. Why are you doing this? - 3488:) 1:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3079:Hi, Redirected it for you. 2914:I'm sorry, but I am afraid 1690:Some Small Sympathy For You 1643:Talk:List of Weeds episodes 1513:You may wish to respond to 155:WP:ANI#User:TTN redirecting 10: 3576: 3426:because people aren't hurt 3410:"Lord Almighty" Sesshomaru 2871:Per our discussion on the 2202:Angie, don't forget about 2007:article. Talk to me, TTN. 1491:Mario character discussion 1450:What makes external links 798:Nope, they're pretty much 357:Garth Marenghi's Darkplace 3561:15:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3546:07:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3528:00:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3515:00:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3505:00:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 3466:14:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3456:10:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3433:15:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 3375:14:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3364:07:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3299:00:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3276:23:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC) 3245:00:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC) 3235:00:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC) 3221:01:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC) 3199:21:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 3181:21:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 3171:21:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 3136:07:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 3112:19:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC) 3102:19:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC) 3087:19:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC) 3075:19:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC) 3058:09:33, 16 June 2007 (UTC) 3010:14:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 2996:14:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 2981:14:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 2970:13:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC) 2960:14:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC) 2945:14:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC) 2934:11:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC) 2909:22:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 2899:22:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 2859:03:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2841:00:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2831:00:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2787:19:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2777:19:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2768:"User has agreed to wait" 2763:03:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2746:00:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2735:21:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2725:21:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2708:03:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2698:03:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2621:08:12, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2588:08:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2554:21:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2529:21:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2504:08:08, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2474:03:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2461:03:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2438:01:58, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2418:01:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2408:01:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 2394:20:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2286:02:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2276:19:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2266:18:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2249:10:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2227:10:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2213:17:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2191:05:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2176:04:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2157:02:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2143:02:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2133:02:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2124:00:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 2109:08:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 1660:03:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 1307:a legitmate source. ---- 601:personally worked to get 595:in my attempts to do that 2730:to calm the f- down. -- 2097:13:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC) 2082:02:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC) 2072:02:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC) 2052:02:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC) 2035:23:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC) 2012:04:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC) 1994:22:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1974:22:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1956:19:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1942:18:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1909:10:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1842:10:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1831:01:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 1816:19:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1801:16:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1771:16:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1704:06:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1685:03:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1650:02:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1633:02:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1619:02:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1602:01:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1580:01:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1561:05:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1550:08:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1522:08:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1504:06:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1483:02:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1459:02:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1445:00:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 1419:20:57, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1402:06:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1369:02:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1359:02:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1344:02:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1334:02:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1321:01:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1312:01:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1295:01:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1286:01:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1277:01:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1267:01:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 1248:04:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 1213:04:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 1122:Oh yes, I forgot to add. 1106:03:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 1060:03:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 1012:03:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 976:03:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 933:02:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 924:02:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 914:02:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 892:22:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 877:21:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 859:21:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC) 846:00:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 835:18:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 820:18:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 794:18:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 756:20:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 726:20:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 701:18:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 667:21:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 634:20:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 588:17:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 534:15:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 520:13:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 487:12:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 441:09:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 418:06:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC) 394:20:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 384:20:05, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 345:16:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 312:00:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 302:00:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 250:00:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 215:00:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC) 200:20:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC) 167:17:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC) 133:15:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC) 122:13:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC) 2338:3.1 Freeza's henchmen 2326:1.1 Bojack's henchmen 1469:Internet Movie Database 867:list of scrubs episodes 3127:to see if they follow 2332:2.1 Coola's henchmen 1709:Request for a dialogue 1641:. Put one of those on 1569:List of Weeds episodes 825:Game guide information 566:" (italics mine). The 498:Wikiproject television 2677:Third Opinion Needed? 1750:How I Met Your Mother 1733:be redirected but as 1637:Those paragraphs are 1597:turns out. Cheers. -- 1230:this goes too far. -- 736:merge and redirect". 42:of past discussions. 3251:Dragon Ball episodes 3207:Springfield Isotopes 3037:Goomba, Koopa Troopa 2880:The Nightmare Begins 2867:Invader Zim episodes 1783:There is nothing at 1675:Springfield Isotopes 1612:There is no deadline 603:Aquaman (TV program) 3331:television episodes 2368:FYI, please remove 1756:and many others). 614:better as a whole. 431:Yes, Prime Minister 3052:A Link to the Past 2760:Agentheartlesspain 2658:7:36, 23 june 2007 2423:SpongeBob episodes 2283:Agentheartlesspain 2234:Whether or not it 2046:A Link to the Past 1991:Agentheartlesspain 1737:states, this is a 909:the way you edit. 607:Pilot (Smallville) 558:'encyclopedia' on 128:and provide some. 3362: 2829: 2586: 2502: 2391: 2301:Uub (Dragon Ball) 1939: 1547: 1245: 1211: 1104: 1058: 1010: 974: 752: 745: 722: 715: 697: 690: 663: 656: 630: 623: 560:the OED's website 380: 366: 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3567: 3536:Repeated Merging 3492:Tagging articles 3358: 3197: 3195: 3190: 3169: 3167: 3162: 3142:Cut Tracks From 2819: 2582: 2498: 2435: 2383: 1931: 1539: 1440:consensus. ---- 1237: 1205: 1098: 1052: 1004: 968: 815: 808: 789: 782: 754: 750: 747: 743: 739: 724: 720: 717: 713: 709: 699: 695: 692: 688: 684: 665: 661: 658: 654: 650: 632: 628: 625: 621: 617: 381: 374: 364: 299: 292: 219:Oh? Then should 187: 181: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3575: 3574: 3570: 3569: 3568: 3566: 3565: 3564: 3553: 3538: 3494: 3474: 3445: 3414:DON'T GO THERE! 3400:your point was 3389:Lord Sesshomaru 3319: 3305:Lord Sesshomaru 3290:Lord Sesshomaru 3265:Lord Sesshomaru 3253: 3228: 3209: 3193: 3188: 3186: 3165: 3160: 3158: 3147: 3120: 3094: 3084:The-G-Unit-Boss 3072:The-G-Unit-Boss 3065: 3039: 3031:Lord Sesshomaru 3024:Lord Sesshomaru 3020: 2958: 2869: 2857: 2795: 2770: 2679: 2445: 2433: 2425: 2401: 2399:Chinese pirates 2389: 2366: 2356:Lord Sesshomaru 2350:Lord Sesshomaru 2343:Lord Sesshomaru 2314:Lord Sesshomaru 2309:this discussion 2293: 2247: 2189: 2155: 2117: 2090: 2059: 2057:Double redirect 2032: 2020: 1986: 1937: 1850: 1848:An olive branch 1828:Zuracech lordum 1823: 1808: 1778: 1768:Zuracech lordum 1729:, the articles 1711: 1692: 1678: 1572: 1545: 1529: 1511: 1493: 1434:Goin' Hollywood 1430:Country Cousins 1426:That's So Raven 1243: 1227: 943: 899: 869: 827: 818: 813: 804: 792: 787: 778: 766: 748: 741: 737: 718: 711: 707: 693: 686: 682: 659: 652: 648: 626: 619: 615: 402: 371: 363: 359: 336:Lord Sesshomaru 327:Lord Sesshomaru 293: 286: 266:Lord Sesshomaru 256:Lord Sesshomaru 241:Lord Sesshomaru 206:Lord Sesshomaru 190:Lord Sesshomaru 185: 179: 176: 151: 110: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3573: 3552: 3549: 3537: 3534: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3493: 3490: 3473: 3470: 3469: 3468: 3444: 3441: 3440: 3439: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3318: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3252: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3232:200.96.163.249 3227: 3224: 3208: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3189:DangerousNerd 3161:DangerousNerd 3146: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3119: 3116: 3115: 3114: 3099:189.154.38.127 3093: 3090: 3064: 3061: 3049: 3038: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3019: 3016: 3015: 3014: 3013: 3012: 2999: 2998: 2984: 2983: 2963: 2962: 2954: 2947: 2912: 2911: 2868: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2853: 2813:being stubborn 2794: 2791: 2790: 2789: 2769: 2766: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2743:Seraphim Whipp 2740: 2678: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2636: 2635: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2476: 2444: 2441: 2424: 2421: 2400: 2397: 2387: 2365: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2321: 2320: 2305:Earthling list 2292: 2289: 2279: 2278: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2243: 2216: 2215: 2200: 2193: 2185: 2160: 2159: 2151: 2145: 2116: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2106:Seraphim Whipp 2103: 2089: 2086: 2085: 2084: 2058: 2055: 2042: 2041: 2028: 2019: 2016: 2015: 2014: 1985: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1971:164.107.222.23 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1945: 1944: 1935: 1849: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1822: 1819: 1807: 1804: 1777: 1774: 1739:non-consensual 1710: 1707: 1691: 1688: 1677: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1571: 1567:Your edits to 1565: 1564: 1563: 1543: 1528: 1525: 1510: 1507: 1492: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1462: 1461: 1422: 1421: 1405: 1404: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1314: 1241: 1226: 1225:Your behaviour 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1140: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1015: 1014: 988: 987: 983: 982: 942: 939: 938: 937: 936: 935: 898: 895: 884: 883: 868: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 856:24.154.173.243 849: 848: 843:24.154.173.243 832:24.154.173.243 826: 823: 810: 784: 765: 762: 761: 760: 759: 758: 674: 673: 672: 671: 670: 669: 544: 543: 542: 541: 540: 539: 538: 537: 536: 505:worthy. Take 443: 401: 398: 397: 396: 369: 358: 355: 354: 353: 352: 351: 350: 349: 348: 347: 281: 280: 279: 278: 277: 276: 275: 274: 273: 272: 271: 270: 269: 268: 175: 170: 150: 147: 146: 145: 144: 143: 109: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3572: 3563: 3562: 3559: 3548: 3547: 3544: 3529: 3526: 3522: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3513: 3509: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3503: 3499: 3489: 3487: 3483: 3479: 3467: 3464: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3454: 3453:195.218.15.60 3450: 3434: 3431: 3427: 3422: 3421: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3398: 3397: 3396: 3395: 3390: 3386: 3382: 3378: 3377: 3376: 3373: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3361: 3357: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3340: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3324: 3306: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3297: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3279: 3278: 3277: 3274: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3246: 3243: 3239: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3233: 3223: 3222: 3219: 3215: 3200: 3196: 3191: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3179: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3168: 3163: 3156: 3155:Mario Kart 64 3152: 3151:Mario Kart DS 3145: 3144:Mario Kart DS 3137: 3134: 3130: 3126: 3122: 3121: 3113: 3110: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3100: 3089: 3088: 3085: 3080: 3077: 3076: 3073: 3068: 3060: 3059: 3056: 3053: 3047: 3043: 3032: 3028: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3011: 3008: 3003: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2997: 2994: 2992: 2986: 2985: 2982: 2979: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2968: 2961: 2957: 2953: 2948: 2946: 2943: 2938: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2932: 2928: 2925: 2921: 2917: 2910: 2907: 2904:OK, will do. 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2897: 2893: 2889: 2885: 2881: 2876: 2874: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2839: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2827: 2823: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2806: 2805: 2800: 2788: 2785: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2775: 2765: 2764: 2761: 2747: 2744: 2741: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2733: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2723: 2719: 2715: 2714:User:Angie Y. 2711: 2710: 2709: 2706: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2687:third opinion 2684: 2683:User:Angie Y. 2657: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2638: 2637: 2622: 2619: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2607: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2555: 2552: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2530: 2527: 2523: 2519: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2512: 2505: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2489: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2475: 2472: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2459: 2454: 2450: 2440: 2439: 2436: 2430: 2429:proposed plan 2420: 2419: 2416: 2411: 2409: 2406: 2396: 2395: 2392: 2390: 2385: 2381: 2380: 2375: 2371: 2357: 2353: 2352: 2351: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2339: 2336: 2333: 2330: 2327: 2324: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2310: 2306: 2302: 2298: 2288: 2287: 2284: 2277: 2274: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2264: 2259: 2258: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2237: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2225: 2221: 2214: 2211: 2210: 2205: 2201: 2198: 2194: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2174: 2170: 2165: 2158: 2154: 2150: 2146: 2144: 2141: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2131: 2126: 2125: 2122: 2110: 2107: 2104: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2095: 2083: 2080: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2070: 2067: 2064: 2054: 2053: 2050: 2047: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2033: 2031: 2025: 2013: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1992: 1975: 1972: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1957: 1954: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1943: 1940: 1938: 1933: 1929: 1928: 1923: 1918: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1910: 1907: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1874: 1872: 1868: 1864: 1859: 1856: 1843: 1840: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1829: 1818: 1817: 1814: 1803: 1802: 1799: 1798:Fullmetal2887 1794: 1790: 1786: 1781: 1773: 1772: 1769: 1764: 1761: 1757: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1742: 1740: 1736: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1706: 1705: 1702: 1698: 1687: 1686: 1683: 1676: 1661: 1658: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1631: 1626: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1617: 1613: 1609: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1600: 1596: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1578: 1570: 1562: 1559: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1548: 1546: 1541: 1537: 1536: 1524: 1523: 1520: 1516: 1506: 1505: 1502: 1498: 1484: 1481: 1477: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1460: 1457: 1453: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1443: 1439: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1420: 1417: 1412: 1407: 1406: 1403: 1400: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1370: 1367: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1357: 1356:Contributions 1354: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1342: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1332: 1328: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1319: 1315: 1313: 1310: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1293: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1284: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1275: 1270: 1269: 1268: 1265: 1264:Contributions 1262: 1259: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1246: 1244: 1239: 1235: 1234: 1214: 1209: 1204: 1203: 1201: 1197: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1138: 1137: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1107: 1102: 1097: 1096: 1094: 1090: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1061: 1056: 1051: 1050: 1048: 1044: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1013: 1008: 1003: 1002: 1000: 996: 990: 989: 985: 984: 980: 979: 978: 977: 972: 967: 966: 964: 960: 953: 950: 946: 934: 931: 927: 926: 925: 922: 918: 917: 916: 915: 912: 908: 904: 894: 893: 890: 881: 880: 879: 878: 875: 860: 857: 853: 852: 851: 850: 847: 844: 839: 838: 837: 836: 833: 822: 821: 817: 816: 809: 807: 801: 796: 795: 791: 790: 783: 781: 775: 771: 757: 753: 746: 744: 734: 729: 728: 727: 723: 716: 714: 705: 704: 703: 702: 698: 691: 689: 679: 668: 664: 657: 655: 645: 641: 637: 636: 635: 631: 624: 622: 612: 608: 604: 599:Season -: --> 596: 591: 590: 589: 586: 582: 578: 573: 569: 565: 561: 556: 551: 550: 545: 535: 532: 527: 526: 525: 524: 523: 522: 521: 518: 514: 510: 509: 504: 499: 495: 490: 489: 488: 485: 481: 480: 475: 474: 469: 468: 463: 462: 457: 456: 451: 450: 444: 442: 439: 435: 432: 428: 427: 422: 421: 420: 419: 416: 411: 407: 400:Episode pages 395: 392: 388: 387: 386: 385: 382: 379: 378: 373: 372: 346: 343: 339: 338: 337: 333: 332:Pascal.Tesson 330: 329: 328: 324: 321: 318: 315: 314: 313: 310: 306: 305: 304: 303: 300: 298: 297: 291: 290: 267: 263: 259: 258: 257: 253: 252: 251: 248: 244: 243: 242: 238: 234: 230: 226: 222: 218: 217: 216: 213: 209: 208: 207: 203: 202: 201: 198: 194: 193: 192: 191: 184: 174: 169: 168: 164: 160: 156: 141: 136: 135: 134: 131: 126: 125: 124: 123: 120: 116: 108: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 18:User talk:TTN 3554: 3539: 3495: 3475: 3446: 3417: 3413: 3405: 3401: 3380: 3347:exclusionist 3334: 3320: 3285: 3255:Did you see 3254: 3229: 3210: 3148: 3133:4.78.189.130 3095: 3081: 3078: 3069: 3066: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3021: 2990: 2964: 2923: 2919: 2916:User:PeaceNT 2913: 2888:Game Slave 2 2877: 2870: 2812: 2802: 2796: 2771: 2756: 2680: 2656:Fernandogonz 2492:inclusionist 2452: 2446: 2426: 2412: 2402: 2382: 2377: 2373: 2369: 2367: 2340: 2337: 2334: 2331: 2328: 2325: 2322: 2294: 2280: 2260: 2256: 2255: 2235: 2217: 2207: 2196: 2163: 2161: 2127: 2118: 2094:Codelyoko193 2091: 2088:Codelyoko193 2060: 2043: 2029: 2021: 2000: 1987: 1953:76.28.138.83 1930: 1925: 1917:as a concept 1916: 1894:Tony Sidaway 1875: 1863:Yes Minister 1860: 1854: 1851: 1839:Orderinchaos 1824: 1813:76.28.138.83 1809: 1782: 1779: 1765: 1762: 1758: 1743: 1730: 1712: 1693: 1679: 1638: 1624: 1607: 1573: 1538: 1533: 1530: 1519:Fredrick day 1517:ANI post. -- 1512: 1494: 1475: 1451: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1423: 1410: 1391: 1304: 1300: 1236: 1231: 1228: 1199: 1195: 1194: 1092: 1088: 1087: 1046: 1042: 1041: 998: 994: 993: 962: 958: 957: 954: 951: 947: 944: 902: 900: 885: 870: 828: 812: 805: 797: 786: 779: 773: 769: 767: 751:(Contact me) 740: 732: 721:(Contact me) 710: 696:(Contact me) 685: 675: 662:(Contact me) 651: 643: 639: 629:(Contact me) 618: 571: 567: 563: 554: 549:Yes Minister 547: 508:Yes Minister 506: 502: 493: 479:Yes Minister 477: 471: 465: 459: 455:The Sopranos 453: 447: 446:obliterate? 430: 426:Yes Minister 424: 403: 377: 376: 368: 367: 360: 295: 294: 288: 287: 282: 177: 152: 140:Black Lagoon 111: 78: 43: 37: 3351:immediatist 3343:deletionist 3286:Dragon Ball 2929:guideline! 2415:WhisperToMe 2195:It doesn't 1871:Foyle's War 1625:opportunity 1411:temporarily 1353:•Talk Page• 1261:•Talk Page• 772:instead of 513:Foyle's War 410:Foyle's War 289:Decaimiento 36:This is an 3551:Categories 3385:Ursasapien 3356:Ursasapien 3261:WP:EPISODE 3129:WP:EPISODE 2927:WP:EPISODE 2793:BassxForte 2774:KrytenKoro 2718:Andrew_pmk 2580:Ursasapien 2522:Andrew_pmk 2496:Ursasapien 2471:Ursasapien 2458:Ursasapien 2335:3 Freeza 2220:WP:DISRUPT 1922:WP:EPISODE 1898:Doctor Who 1867:WP:EPISODE 1727:WP:EPISODE 1591:being bold 1575:Thanks. -- 903:guidelines 897:Guidelines 733:Smallville 640:Smallville 473:Doctor Who 413:concerned. 119:Michae2109 115:WP:EPISODE 98:Archive 10 3519:Also see 3472:Merge Tag 3226:Redirects 3082:Thanks -- 2924:confusing 2811:with the 2809:"history" 2732:Ned Scott 2618:Ned Scott 2449:talk page 2374:Red Dwarf 2329:2 Coola 2323:1 Bojack 2297:Mr. Satan 2204:WP:KETTLE 2169:WP:HARASS 2121:Vilerocks 1890:Ned Scott 1746:West Wing 1657:MZMcBride 1647:MZMcBride 1630:MZMcBride 1616:MZMcBride 1599:MZMcBride 1587:consensus 1577:MZMcBride 1558:Ned Scott 1428:episodes 1399:Ned Scott 930:Ned Scott 467:Star Trek 159:Kralizec! 90:Archive 8 85:Archive 7 79:Archive 6 73:Archive 5 68:Archive 4 60:Archive 1 3556:Thanks. 3498:WP:POINT 3218:Scorpion 3063:Re:Merge 2967:Angie Y. 2952:Zero1328 2931:Angie Y. 2851:Zero1328 2826:contribs 2817:Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ 2691:mediator 2364:Episodes 2291:Good job 2263:Angie Y. 2241:Zero1328 2224:Angie Y. 2183:Zero1328 2173:Angie Y. 2149:Zero1328 2130:Angie Y. 2102:So do I. 2018:Re:ALTTP 1682:Scorpion 1608:whatever 1501:RobJ1981 1350:Userpage 1258:Userpage 889:Jac16888 874:Jac16888 800:synonyms 742:BIGNOLE 712:BIGNOLE 687:BIGNOLE 653:BIGNOLE 620:BIGNOLE 585:Chris 42 484:Chris 42 438:Chris 42 316:Finito! 3447:As per 3418:any way 3381:support 3339:mergist 3335:Encarta 3282:Recoome 3018:I can't 2884:NanoZIM 2453:improve 2303:to the 2005:Waluigi 1999:That's 1886:Bignole 1754:Friends 1735:Matthew 1719:Matthew 1639:perfect 1595:WP:AN/I 1467:So the 921:Matthew 911:Matthew 806:Ashnard 780:Ashnard 774:general 770:generic 531:WAVY 10 296:Poético 149:FYI ANI 39:archive 3558:Gwinva 3486:Rtkat3 3482:Rtkat3 3360:(talk) 3349:, and 3125:Heroes 3118:Heroes 3055:(talk) 2920:cannot 2918:and I 2896:BillPP 2890:, and 2584:(talk) 2500:(talk) 2370:Scrubs 2307:using 2164:really 2049:(talk) 2024:WP:COI 1984:Go TNN 1906:Gwinva 1902:WP:WAF 1723:Calton 1476:aren't 1473:TV.com 1471:& 1416:Adv193 517:Gwinva 415:Gwinva 3543:Mahou 3443:Weeds 3327:point 2956:Talk? 2855:Talk? 2804:crazy 2695:Suigi 2689:or a 2434:Pants 2379:Ckatz 2245:Talk? 2236:looks 2187:Talk? 2153:Talk? 2063:Whisp 2009:Suigi 1927:Ckatz 1882:Ckatz 1701:Suigi 1535:Ckatz 1480:DanTD 1456:DanTD 1442:DanTD 1331:DanTD 1325:Here( 1309:DanTD 1283:DanTD 1233:Ckatz 1208:Annoy 1101:Annoy 1055:Annoy 1007:Annoy 971:Annoy 764:D'oh! 494:might 461:House 434:pages 157:. -- 16:< 3257:this 3214:here 3194:talk 3166:talk 2991:Bill 2822:talk 2722:Talk 2526:Talk 2372:and 2299:and 2209:Will 2197:look 2069:ring 1855:some 1721:and 1515:this 1432:and 1301:gave 1202:oire 1198:alf 1095:oire 1091:alf 1049:oire 1045:alf 1001:oire 997:alf 965:oire 961:alf 941:Ahem 814:Talk 788:Talk 605:and 470:and 449:Lost 235:and 163:talk 3525:TTN 3512:TTN 3463:TTN 3430:TTN 3372:TTN 3296:TTN 3273:TTN 3242:TTN 3178:TTN 3109:TTN 3007:TTN 2978:TTN 2942:TTN 2906:TTN 2838:TTN 2784:TTN 2705:TTN 2551:TTN 2488:TTN 2486:So 2405:TTN 2388:spy 2273:TTN 2140:TTN 2079:TTN 2001:TTN 1936:spy 1731:may 1715:TTN 1713:To 1544:spy 1509:ANI 1452:not 1366:TTN 1341:TTN 1318:TTN 1305:was 1292:TTN 1274:TTN 1242:spy 872:1-- 644:not 598:--> 503:are 391:TTN 342:TTN 309:TTN 247:TTN 212:TTN 197:TTN 130:TTN 3523:. 3379:I 3345:, 3341:, 2993:PP 2886:, 2882:, 2824:• 2815:.— 2720:| 2524:| 2410:" 2222:. 2206:. 2171:. 2115:No 1969:-- 1888:, 1884:, 1752:, 1748:, 1717:, 1438:NO 1192:-- 841:-- 830:-- 776:. 572:YM 568:YM 555:YM 464:, 458:, 452:, 325:. 322:, 319:, 264:. 231:, 227:, 223:, 186:}} 183:db 180:{{ 165:) 94:→ 64:← 3502:N 3484:( 2988:● 2828:) 2820:( 2066:e 2030:凶 1210:) 1206:( 1200:L 1196:R 1103:) 1099:( 1093:L 1089:R 1057:) 1053:( 1047:L 1043:R 1009:) 1005:( 999:L 995:R 973:) 969:( 963:L 959:R 429:/ 375:1 370:+ 365:7 161:( 50:.

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

Index