Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Whpq

5911:

be involuntarily desysoped by the Arbitration Committee (or bureaucrats under specific circumstances). However, I will be readily accountable to the community, answering questions on my talk page and participating in discussions about my actions in other locations, as it is required per WP:ADMINACCT. If an editor is concerned about my conduct, I would encourage them to message me on my talk page or send an email. After a discussion, if there is still a major disagreement about my conduct, I would encourage them to open a thread on WP:XRV, WP:ANI, or wherever would be most appropriate for the concern (and if I think my action/conduct needs a wider community discussion, I would open it myself). I would refrain from acting in the affected area while the thread was ongoing. If the community endorsed an ArbCom case, I would actively participate in the case and answer any questions. If the community changed the desysop procedure, I would fully adhere to it. If the community decided to put in a grandfather clause for older admin, I would refuse it as I would want to be held to the same standards as incoming admin.

625:

text as well as copy-paste-change-some-words-style close paraphrasing of cited sources. There is good reason to suspect that most, if not all, of the contributor's articles contain potential copyvio of this sort, and the sources that can be checked easily have consistently borne out this suspicion. But as a practical matter, it's not possible to check all of the contributor's articles against their cited sources. And again, some sources might be in the public domain. In your opinion, what is the best course of action to move forward with cleaning up the contributor's articles? For example, is something like pre-emptive article deletion a sensible approach in such a case? (I have seen similar scenarios happen multiple times in reality, with responses ranging from "delete everything" to "give the editor a chance to fix their issues" to "leave it there until someone gets around to checking them all", so I am interested in how you think about this scenario from a copyright standpoint.)

3743:

unwilling to commit to a recall procedure. I simply do not consider this a valid reason to oppose, and here is why: I have been an active editor for over 13 years, almost 2/3 of the history of this encyclopedia. As far as I know, there has never been an actual recall process actually carried out, successful or failed, in that time. If one happened before the summer of 2009, I would like to know about it. Yes, there was lots of discussion about recall but the practical result of all that debate has been nothing. It is not as if we have gotten rid of a bunch of bad administrators who previously agreed to a recall procedure, but failed to remove bad administrators only because they failed to agree to a recall procedure. When we get rid of bad adminstrators, which has happened many times, the recall "process", if you can call it that, has played no role. In other words, recall is not really a thing on Knowledge. I would like to address the oppose comment

4511:. No skeletons that I can see, and solid content work and knowledge of life at the coal face seems to be present. And an editor who has beaten my ten years between joining the project and getting the mop by seven! Re the opposes below, I say the opposite. Congratulations on being honest about not being open to recall - having a voluntary scheme of that nature is largely pointless IMHO and you seem sensible enough to not get into situations where a desysop might be on the cards anyway. I think it might almost be worth banning that question at RFA, as it's largely meaningless since nothing said here is a binding promise, and it causes needless friction. Good luck, and welcome to the corps. — 3756:

discussed in such conversations. In conclusion, I am an administrator who is proud of the trust that the Knowledge community has placed in me. I am also 70 years old and have seen in stark terms what aging can do to people's good judgmement. I have known people who declined rapidly in their 70s and other people who were lucid and perceptive at age 95. I hope that I am in the second group, but if it turns out that I am in the first group, I will not need a formal recall process to force me to retire. I would simply step aside as other administrators have done, when the community started concluding that my reasoning was no longer consistently sound.

572:. At the time, he had only one notable work, and we didn't even have an article on it. As an author with only one book to his name of any note, I felt there was a real possibility that article would not be kept. The novel was clearly (to me) notable, so I created the article to ensure that there was a valid merge target in case the AFD for the author did not head to a keep. See also my answer to Q2. I am not an inclusionist by any means. There's lots of stuff that doesn't belong and needs to go. But there's also stuff that should be kept, and I will work hard to keep it. -- 562:", most nominations are for deletion of the files. And these nominations are done after due consideration by the nominators that the file should be deleted. If I didn't close FFDs as "delete" often, there would be huge issue of poor nominations that would need to be addressed. If this question is a feeler about my bias towards deletion, and how it will affect my actions if I were and admin, then I will say that I will try to implement decisions based on relevant policy and guidelines. If you are trying to evaluate my bias, full stop; then perhaps the reason why I created 4754:. Long experience, including content creation. Calm and respectful demeanour. Thoughtful and well-articulated responses to questions. For the avoidance of doubt, for me that includes the recall question. I understand why some, singed by cliques and factionalism, see his "No" answer there as elitism. I take a glass-half-full approach and note his declaration he would step aside if requested, just on the basis of personal feedback by respected users rather than after a drama filled "trial" of some sort. I think that is an eminently defensible position to take. 4445:. I appreciate that criticisms about lack of content are about looking for people who empathize with the work it takes to make excellent articles, but I don't agree with making that a binary position. I also appreciate the frustation about the current removal processes, but I'd rather see someone say right now that they will not engage in a voluntary recall process, rather than having a change of heart later. Given the whole picture, I see an editor who would add to the project, not to the drama in the project pages. However, the frequency with which 3677:

their favor, even though I don't personally think that not having such experience should automatically disqualify one from becoming an admin. Finally, it might not mean as much to some others perhaps, but someone who has been around since 2005 and who's never been blocked indicates, at least to me, that they have to ability to edit colaboratively and maintain their cool when dealing with others. I like the answer they gave to Q3 and think such an approach has served them well over the years. --

336:

promise of accountability. A recall process which in which the rules for recall are made up, not uniform, can be changed at any time, and then are also non-binding anyways is just window dressing. I'm not signing up for window dressing. The question is also being used as a bulwark against insufficient procedures for desysop. I can understand that position. But the answer is to get a uniform process that is binding, and applies to all admins.

5834:

regardless of what toothless pledges they made in an RfA; when the room is telling them they're not suitable for adminship anymore? I do think there are more mellow examples of successful voluntary admin recall, but the extreme cases of uber-assholes remain squarely the responsibility of the community/arbcom enforcement, not some duct-taped pseudo legal process. 16:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC) ~ 🦝

5436:

editors I respect ask me to resign, I will". Admins "open to recall" can change the terms of their own "recall" system at any time, and they can always ignore it without penalty even if someone does try to invoke it. For these reasons, the recall process is never actually used in practice. I think the candidate's answer here is entirely reasonable—it reminds me of Q17 from

1387:- This user nominated some of the images I uploaded on commons sometime ago for deletion due to copyright issues that I wasn't aware of and I think some of the files I uploaded here on en.wiki too. At first I was so unhappy and felt very bad, but as time goes on, I'm happy they did what they did. I'm sure they'll perform well as an administrator. Goodluck to them. 5572:. What being open to recall does, though, is send a clear message that you are open to and appreciate the opportunity to be held accountable for your mistakes by the broader community. I unfortunately do not see that reflected in a vague deference to "editors I trust and respect." Again, no real judgement against Whpq as an editor here - It's just my criteria. 5124:. I like that he has been involved in and understaffed part of the project, and I'm eager to support candidates with some proficiency in such areas. I like to see familiarity with content creation and Whpq passes my (low) bar. I've seen multiple ArbCom desysops this year and am not concerned about add-on avenues for pulling the mop. 5643:, not open to recall or the nature that their actions can impact community trust. Entrenched admin with zero respect (Refraining from naming a few because it's old potatoes) for community input is something I dislike seeing. The potential leads me to oppose. Likely it is just a footnote when the supports are so heavily in favor. 5195:- Already thought they were an admin, Experienced and trusted editor who will make a great admin!, The opposes are laughable and should be ignored in their entirety (RECALL should be down to the individual and imho shouldn't really be asked at RFAs as it's sort of irrelevant in some ways), Anyway easy support. No red flags. – 2239:(at least ideally) depend on the closing admin in question, so "will you close as 'delete' often" strikes me as a rather useless and unduly tricky question. The steelman for it that I can see is that Whpq might be overly aggressive in deletionism, but I feel like better questions could be formulated to address that. – 5789:

annoying burden than anything". OK, but I mean name me another non-profit that is like "These are our volunteer event coordinators. They can't be removed from their positions for anything short of skinning cats alive". That would be silly. No organization on the planet would do that. Oh, I mean except this one.

5936:. While recall is (and should be) optional, I am concerned that this users sees accountability as drama. I am aware that the user's statement has a second part where they say they would resign if editors whom they respect call for it, but the answer to "Who does the calling?" would be subjective. Thanks, 5910:

I anticipated getting this question, and gave this a lot of thought. The short answer is no. My view is that the community should decide the desysop procedure and I do not want to add additional rules or mechanisms that have not been community approved. This means that, at the time of this RfA, I can

3755:

on adminstrator accountability. The large majority of good adminstrators respond to good faith concerns about their administrative actions promptly. If the administrator has screwed up, that is pointed out by newer editors, more experienced editors and fellow adminstrators. But recall almost never is

2485:

Moved from neutral. No opposition for lack of GAs from me, either (hey, I've none) — though, raise the double standard. Anyway, as I noted in my neutral comment (eventually), RfA participants like FASTILY represent the worst of the RfA ecosystem. They provide blasé and aspersion-laden (and heartless)

367:

As an admin, it's often expected or requested to help other editors especially new users, by dealing with disputes, either resolving them or pointing the participants to proper venues for resolution and also editors who requests some permissions outside RFP(Rollback,IPBE etc). How do you see yourself

157:

I am glad to accept the nomination. I have never edited for pay, nor have I edited under any other accounts. Prior to registering an account, I did make some edits as an IP editor. I do not remember what those edits are, but I can assure you that the edits were not vandalism, and alas, not sourced.

5866:

was elected in 2015 after he campaigned that he was going to fix the insecurities ravaging some parts of Nigeria and was going to fight corruption to the fullest. Hehehe, remember I said he said he was going to fix insecurities ravaging some parts of the country, now insecurity is everywhere, it has

5522:

I'm not going to respond to the questions/comments about whether recall is a successful or even consistent process because it's beside the point. My point was that admin candidates should be open to whatever communication avenues the community has, and saying they'll only listen to a few "respected"

5478:

happen" grounds, so system did not work. (There were several cases where the reconfirmation process was begun and the admin resigned right off, sometimes because the figured the would lose, so system worked there.) Anyway, there's no enforcement process, and it's exactly those admins who most should

513:

Ultimately, blocking is used to prevent further copyright violations, so it really boils down to determining how likely is it that the editor will continue making copyright violations. Do they have a history of copyright violations? Have they been previously blocked for copyright violations? What

427:

confirmation of a free license, or a file aging into the public domain on a file that was originally uploaded as non-free content. The tool transferring the file to Commons includes the contrribution log from enwp which is sufficient for attribution, and the local file can be deleted. A local file

335:

What I have promised looks very close to criteria that many might use when saying yes to recall. But I am not saying yes to recall. The recall question is being used as some sort of promise of accountability from the candidate. The fact that I, or any other candidate has stepped up to an RFA is a

222:

project is a high point. As a bit of background, in 2010, there was a very real possibility that all unreferenced biographies of living people would be deleted as a matter of policy compliance in a mass deletion. This project took on the task of clearing the huge backlog of unreferenced articles.

5871:

that he appointed and was not confirmed by the Senate(due to reports they have about him) was removed due to corruption allegations, after he has served as the longest acting chairman. Same person who said his government was going to fight corruption, gave presidential pardon to 2 former governor's

5809:

the admins? They'd be smarter than the community at that, right? Quite possibly. But we don't work like that. This a community organization. Lots of things the community does are wrong. We sometimes make silly rules and stuff. So? Apparently the whole thing is holding together so far. If we want to

5435:

I can think of no successful case in recent memory. Being "open to recall" is a toothless and vague commitment—it certainly doesn't allow open input "from the entire community". As a matter of fact, the recall system that most administrators implement is precisely something along the lines of "if X

5228:

Admittedly, I'm not too familiar with this candidate, but they appear to have all the necessary qualifications, and given that this is one of the least convincing RfA oppose sections in recent memory, I see no reason to deny Whpq the extra buttons in their interface. Q4 was merely about whether the

5161:

per excellent answer to Q4. I'm thrilled that the candidate has stood up to the borderline bullying of candidates over recall, and that this RFA has made it abundantly clear that recall is in no way, shape, or form a requirement for new admins going forward. Hopedully those that keep trying to make

659:

Knowledge takes copyright very seriously. Few other large web sites take copyright seriously, and many web sites essentially ignore copyright. Much of the work of copyright admins seems to be due to good-faith users who are clueless that Knowledge respects and enforces copyright. Do you have any

5800:

Yeah I know the argument that "Well an admin can piss off a tag team of bad editors and get required to reconfirm". For one thing, yeah, lots of things can happen, but this won't. I don't think. Maybe rarely. If it does, well, the admin will sail thru the reconfirmation process and hardly needs to

5788:

their admins on a regular rotating basis. Heck, ArbCom members have to be re-elected periodically. That is true of most positions of any kind anywhere in any organization. Yes I get that a cogent point is "Well but we're volunteers at a non-profit, it's not a 'job for life' cos it's more an unpaid

5237:

resign if they felt that they lost the confidence of the community. Editors in the oppose section are tunnel-visioning on the phrase "editors I trust and respect" and interpreting it to mean that they would ignore the views of people not within that subset of the community, but that's not what the

761:

was mentioned. I must admit, my immediate reaction was "Well, F*** you too!". But that is obviously not the right thing to do. That sort of thing is not acceptable, but it is understandable. Editors can get upset when their work is deleted, and I try to understand that and respond to the issue

624:

Say a long-time contributor has written hundreds of articles, some of which refer to older sources that are difficult to access but may in some cases be in the public domain in the US. The problem is that someone has discovered that the contributor's articles include widespread blatant copy-pasted

524:

can be helpful to give new editors a more comprehensive notice about copyrights. I've taken to bolding the the particular bullet point that applies to their situation. Sometimes, it needs a simple blunt message to stop copying files from the Internet. Whether it be a standard message, or a more

379:

if they are looking for page protection if the request looks reasonable. If the request looks like a complete non-starter, such as page protection for a page that is stable, I would explain why their request is not a good idea, including directing them to the appropriate guidelines or policy. As

86:

39 articles, 2 DYKs, and made substantial contributions to dozens more. He's also one of the few editors on Knowledge who are *very* well versed in copyright and our media file policies, and in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he knew more than me on many of these concepts! Whpq frequently makes

5725:

when they're trying to get something they want, and some will. Donald Trump said he was going to release his taxes right soon. No one is like "Well, I if I'm elected, I'm going to be pretty corrupt, hypocritical, and generally hateful, to be candid", heh. The world doesn't work like that. It just

3676:

for pretty much many of the same reasons as given above by others. I've found Whpq to particularly helpful (and civil) when it comes to file related matters and think they will do an exceptional job in that area. In addition, their content creation and preservation work is also a huge positive in

2432:, never met the editor during my work in Knowledge, but becoming an admin should not be a big deal. As no cause of concern is voiced by other editors, I will support it. Furthermore, the editor seems to be VERY experienced in copyright issues, complex issues that is beyond my knowledge right now. 701:

which is useful for communicating to new editors. Just my observation, it seems copyright violations tend to be all files or all text, and it is not that common for an editor to be committing copyright violations in both text and files. As mentioned in my answer to Q8, I've taken to bolding the

631:

These types of hypotheticals are really hard to answer because each case of persistent copyright violations is going to be a bit different. Presumptive deletion (or reversion) is really a matter of last resort. Given the conditions you've laid out in your example, I would think that presumptive

476:

Because Fastily and Moneytrees asked me. Honestly, I have no burning desire to be an admin, but I do have a burning desire to ensure Knowledge remains a great 💕. Part of ensuring that happens is having admins deal with policies and procedures that keep things running smoothly. In the areas of

374:

As noted in my answer to question 1, my activity is going to be related to dealing with files, and copyright issues. I don't expect to be working in dispute resolution, or or requests for various permissions or protections. If an editor asks me about these, I will, of course, direct them to the

2490:

and go on like it's nothing. Zero consequences. No one even questions it. Last week was my first and only RfA nomination, which barely passed, and it'll certainly be my last. The reason it'll be my last are RfA participants like FASTILY, the nominator of this RfA. That said, this candidate seems

1285:

more than happy to vote early. Has written plenty of perfectly clean article to demonstrate he know all about content creation. New Page Patroller since 2016 and thoroughly 'all round', his vast and long experience obviates any further digging into his history (which would be too time consuming

5833:

couldn't an asshole voluntarily agree to an RfA recall process, and then quibble/change their mind afterwards? I am agreeing with the issue of difficulty in removing assholes, but asking assholes to enforce it seems even less likely to me, than someone of good faith like User:Whpq stepping down

5473:

In answer to the above question, I believe there have been two cases where a recall (I prefer "reconfirmation") process went all the way thru. In one, the process to recall was initiated, went thru to a full-dress discussion, the community decided that the admin should turn his talents to other

3742:

related to administrative work, and we should all be applauding the willingness of an editor with this track record to take on the burden and responsibility of serving this encyclopedia as an adminstrator. Now, to discuss the concerns of the editors who oppose on the basis that the candidate is

828:

A block is a technical restriction on editing placed against an account. A ban is a community sanction against an editor restricting their editing priveleges. A block may be used as a means to enforce a ban. Indefinite refers to the block or ban having no specific duration, and does noy mean

670:

Certainly the prevalence of "share" buttons on various social media sites have put many in the mindset that things posted through Instagram, Twitter, etc. are "free", so the challenge for us is to educate the editors that being able to be freely shared is not the same as the free licensing that

5804:

Yes I know about ArbCom. ArbCom can remove admins, and does. Since ArbCom removes admins, we can assume that admins need occasional removing to be true and that is good and healthy for the project. It's labor intensive, drama intensive, slow, the ArbCom is overburdened, and probably (IMO) they

422:

There are two components to copyright on files, the copyright on the file itself, and the copyright on the text description of the file. A log of the users contributing need to be maintained to satisfy any attribution requirements of the licensing. License changes on the file could be due to

4733:- First, the candidate is well-qualified in general. Second, we need more admins to work on copyright issues. Third, failure to answer yes on a question about an undefined recall procedure is not elitist or cavalier, but realistic. We should have another recall procedure for admins besides 129:

I'm proud to co-nominate Whpq for adminship. A veteran editor with over 100,000 contributions, Whpq has been a backbone in file deletion areas for several years and is highly active in tagging copyright violating files for speedy deletion. Whpq has demonstrated a high degree of knowledge in a

4639:, we always need admins willing to help with copyright. Recall should either be Total (i.e. mandatory for everyone) or not be asked from people who haven't got any experience as admins -- making up rules for a hypothetical situation that may or may not arise in the future just doesn't work. — 4914:-Editor understands copyright as much as anyone can in what is a complicated and contested area. I wouldn't have even gone so far as to say "Knowledge takes copyright very seriously" without qualification (as Robert McClenon did, not the candidate). FFD can use their talent and experience. 190:

The idea of a free user generated encyclopedia was an enticing idea that prompted me to create an account in 2005. That idea is still enticing to me, and it is obviously enticing to others as we have seen Knowledge grow enormously over the years. That growth needs to be supported with

191:

administrators to ensure policies and procedures are dealt with properly. Two areas that appear to need some more helping hands is dealing with files, and with copyright issues. These are areas I have experience with as an editor, and feel I can help with the administrative load. --

5479:

resign who are most likely to refuse to in the end. I've agitated for an enforceable process and made draft proposals, but it's clear that there never will or can be one. So in a way it's kind of kabuki. It's legit to oppose on those grounds, but it doesn't really mean anything IMO.

4880:- I've seen Whpq around forever, and consider them a valuable and devoted contributor to our project. Their skills in file copyright issues is key - this area of the encylopedia is confusing to a lot of users, and another admin with those skills would truly be a positive addition. 107:

when it comes to complex copyrights and/or media file policies. The way he adeptly handles such situations, always resolving them in a polite and amicable way, is very commendable. I'm confident that Whpq will be an excellent and much-needed addition to the admin corps. Cheers,

5872:

convicted by the EFCC for corruption while they were in government, even after all the stress EFCC went through to convict them. Everything the dude campaigned with has gone from bad to worse and more. If this fellow is being honest with us, I don't see anything wrong with it.

469:

First of all, I want to congratulate you for nearly two decades of active editing, especially for your work with file copyright, an important area of the Wiki that I feel is often overlooked. That being said, after 17 years as an editor, what inspired the jump to RfA?

3525:

appears to be respectful & knows what they are doing. Not convinced by the "open to recall" opposes - saying you are going to abide by some process that does not have community support & is unenforceable seems to me to be nothing more than virtue signalling.

5238:

candidate is saying. Determining whether you have lost the confidence of the community can be vague and subjective, but one big red flag is when editors you respect (e.g. perhaps because you have worked with them on projects in the past) are telling you to resign.

5796:

of a reconfirmation being initiated. If you're doing poor admin work and a bunch of people are telling you that, you can tell them to sod off, but if the possibility of a reconfirmation request is there, that might focus your attention a little more. That's human

5777:. Very few admins are going to be asked to reconfirm. This is for those that need it. So is this candidate going to be an outlier?. Well, very probably not. I trust him but I also like to cut the cards, and if he's going to be fine why is worried it? Supposing he 514:

actions have been taken in communicating to the editor that those types of contributions are not acceptable? Especially for new users, Knowledge can be confusing, and the standard notices about copyright violations may just look like a lot of "blah, blah blah".

321:, so it looks like you're saying yes. Being open to recall means that you'd be willing to resign without going through an avenue of drama such as ArbCom or ANI if editors you trust and respect say you should resign - and that's what you've said in your response. 223:

It was personally rewarding as the editing took me across a wide variety of subject areas, working with some very nice editors in a collaborative and fun environment. More importantly, Knowledge was able retain articles that otherwise would have disappeared. --

3314:

BTW, noting the first opposes, I read the "open to recall" question as "are you willing to be subjected to a particular drama fest just because one person asks for it and because you said "yes" in the RFA"?. And I think that their answer was a fine one.

4528:

When I applied for adminship I also did not agree to have a recall button, but said that I would resign if some editors I respected asked me to. Wny, because recall is not fit for purpose - it can be and is abused. This candidate is obviously like minded.

5737:

he said "My way of handling situations is to try and help" and "I believe in transparency - not only as an editor, but I would say even moreso as an admin" and so on. But he was lying. He turned out to be a blackguard. Maybe he meant to, but he probably

5213:

Seems to have the appropriate experience and temperament to make a good admin. If the biggest thing against him is that he won't do voluntary recall - when the community has rejected forcing recall on admin - that says there isn't much to argue against.

4569:

Whpq is extraordinarily well qualified. All but one of the current opposes are poorly thought-out, but at 98% support, it is not worth the time to engage with them, IMHO. (FWIW, the same is true of the occasional oppose I've seen because the candidate

5458:

open to community feedback than an admin should be. I know a lot of people who describe themselves as open to recall don't mean it that way, but honestly I think "willing to change my behaviour if people tell me I should" is the appropriate standard.

415:

If a file was uploaded appropriately onto enwp, but due to licensing expiration/changes it can be uploaded to Commons, how would you preserve the history of the local enwp file, and under what circumstances would you delete/preserve the file locally?

5801:

even engage. It's a nothingburger. Requestors need standing, and protection against harassing repeated requests can easily be put in -- once per year, or whatever -- or even assumed, and harassers get booted. It'll be fine. And of not, we adjust it.

5726:

doesn't. A good part of the reason people don't say that is, not that they're necessarily being consciously mendacious , but because people generally don't know themselves near as well as they think, and most people look pretty good in the mirror.

5718:. Goodness gracious, I think this is the first time I've seen a candidate flat out say "nope". Heh, I guess you have to give the candidate points for honesty anyway. But I mean, this shows a pretty dangerous turn of mind, and that's more important. 1343:

I don't know the nominee and I've never written a Good or Featured article in my life, I'm just happy to welcome people aboard who will shoulder a share of the administrative load in good spirits and be happy to serve our encyclopedic purposes. –

271: 250:

If I am feeling heated up, or stressed, I step away for a period to clam down. There is rarely any issue in editing that requires it to be dealt with right away, so using a little time to cool off can make a huge difference in stress levels. --

5972:, regretfully. The candidate's tenure is certainly something worthy of recognition, but the fact they have refused to be open to recall also worries me, given that I believe it is necessary in the interests of transparency and accountability. 5034:

I was a little hesitant because I feel some GA or FA are definitely desirable for an admin; but I feel the tremendous amount of good work in (tricky) areas outweighs these shortcomings. Has need for the tools, and will likely use them wisely.

5753:

horrid and toxic editor, blocking good long-term editors who hadn't done anything wrong because he felt like it, cursing at editors, and so on. A lot of people wanted him gone, I mean Jimbo said there was no way this guy should be an admin.

4693:. I'd have preferred the candidate have a less cavalier attitude to recall: such promises are non-binding, but breaking them would still lead to substantive loss of trust; so I do not see them as valueless. Nonetheless a clear net positive. 5814:

be a community organization so much, have the Foundation hire and pay admins, and make rules, fine, and maybe that'd be better and maybe it'll happen sooner or later. But til then, let's not insult the community and the idea of community.

4153:

I was gonna sit this one out as I didn't think my participation would change anything, but, in light of the Opposes over refusing a voluntary non-binding recall promise which we have no actual machinations for, I've decided to support. --

5602:

mention specific users and, when boiled down, essentially say "I respect these people's opinions and will resign at their request". "Recall" is such a broad term that I don't see how Whpq's pledge differs from these in anything but name.

5000:, a candidate cannot be faulted for refusing to go through a recall process that has never been granted consensus by the community, indeed I applaud their bravery in taking a principled stand on this matter, even if I disagree with it. 4309: 380:

for new users asking questions in the file or copyright area, I will answer and guide them as best I can. We have venues that can help new editors (and even experienced editors) on media and copyright, so I try to include a link to

2234:

Seems good to me; I also object to question 9 as possibly loaded; how an XfD is to be closed depends on rough consensus, which will likely vary between articles and with a variety of good arguments one way or the other, and does

5056:

Candidate clearly has sufficient experience, and good answers to questions. Despite no GAs or FAs, I believe the quantity of article creations is sufficient to show familiarity with content. Not really concerned about recall.

2776:- Copyright is a highly technical area and, from reviewing their contributions, I believe Whpq has both the expertise and experience to make a positive contribution in that (and other areas) as an administrator. Best wishes, 298:

No, not as such. The addition of more avenues for drama is not a good thing. Having said that, if editors I trust and respect are telling me I should not be an admin, then I would voluntarily resign as an administrator. --

5619:

The difference is exactly what you say - There are users specifically mentioned, which I view as inherently more transparent than "editors I trust and respect." I don't really think I need to elaborate on my vote past this.

4305: 82:) – Hi folks, I'm very pleased to be nominating Whpq for adminship today. He's had an account on Knowledge since 2005, been active editor for the entire time (17 years!), and amassed an incredible 129,000 edits. Whpq has 5660:- since not open to recall. Elitist attitude. Has to go through the "drama" of popular review to get the position, but after that, will only resign if close friends tell them to quit. Wants a life position, obviously. 1319:

Good-natured, very knowledgeable, and likely to be a huge net positive. I'd normally look more closely at content creation, but I think their work at FfD is so important that a lack of GAs wouldn't change my opinion.

5400:- Not open to recall. Admins should be open to input from the entire community, not just a few people they deem "respected". This response shows me an elitist attitude which is contrary to the needs of the position. 751:). As a follow-up to that question, were there any specific disputes or stressful situations that came to mind when you were answering this question? I'd be interested in learning more about a specific example. 4954:

I understand the "elitist attitude" issue that others have raised. I'm not thrilled by an admin refusing recall. That being said and carefully considered, Whpq becoming an admin is still a clear net positive.

1786:

Wikipedians from 2005 around today, much less someone of this caliber and with this much expertise. A gem we can't afford to lose. I think the "oppose" folks will be hard-pressed to find a reason to do so...

6072:

Not cool mate, seriously not cool. If you don't trust the nominator's judgment then please review the candidate's edits for the sort of thing that in another case you would take on trust from the nominator.

4206:

I wasn’t familiar with this candidate at first, so I did some poking around. No red flags found. His CSD log is almost completely red, which indicates that he has a deep understanding of the criteria. He’s

6103:

For the record, FfDs bus factor of 3 isn't that unusual; TfD has a bus factor of 4, CfD has a bus factor of 1 (!), MfD has a bus factor of 4. It's really only RfD and AfD that have broad bases of closers.

1865:

I have seen this editor around and, at the risk of sounding clichéd, was actually surprised that he wasn't an admin yet. Whpq has a clear need for the tools and has the right temperament for adminship. –

3622:

When I don't see any red flags, I'll almost always support an RFA candidate who wants to work with files and copyright issues which are areas that are chronically understaffed on this Knowledge project.

496: 131: 5499:

The phrase "the recall process" suggests that there is a Knowledge process for recalling administrators. Maybe there should be one, but the haphazard variety of self-written requirements is not that.

3385:

Clearly competent and experienced, and being open to a recall procedure is not compulsory (in any event admins who say they are open to a recall procedure can change their mind at any time). Cheers,

914: 702:

relevant bullet point in that warning. Perhaps separate warnings for text and files would allow for more specific information relevant to text, and files can be provided if split like this. Expand

908: 3479:

as per many. I am especially impressed by the honesty and good sense of the reply to somebody's question about being open to recall. Honesty is not always a virtue but good sense definitely is.

3125:

I don't believe I have ever interacted with him, but a view through his contribs shows that he is very experienced with copyright cleanup, something that is desperately needed by the community.

278:

per editor. Multi-part questions disguised as one question, with the intention of evading the limit, are disallowed. Follow-up questions relevant to questions you have already asked are allowed.

4304:

I wasn't planning to comment here but appreciate their honest and bold stance about not being open to the toothless recall process, unlike the empty pandering to voters we see in most RFAs.

2703:- I don't believe I've ever interacted with Whpq in any capacity, but from what I've looked into I don't see any reason to think that they would be anything short of a good administrator. - 4550:- we've got a content creator, an editor who is skilled in copyright, and we need to fill the areas where we are lacking. For me, it's a no-brainer. Does this comment make my S look big? 1547:

which is an area few editors understand or engage and where help is needed. As stated by the nominators, Whpq's contribs indicate calm interaction with other editors in a difficult area.

2495:

oppposes there were last week versus zero here (which, again, I hope it stays that way, as it is my view that that criteria is super-dumb). I don't think the candidate is a sock, either.

3560:

has been around a long time and managed to write some content. I always say that the job of an admin is to protect content and content creators. I feel that this candidate will do both.

4419:

is a rather meaningless promise and has never to my knowledge been used. There are better ways of desysopping. Aside from that point, candidate is easily qualified for the unpaid work.

130:

difficult area, and their talk pages archives are filled with calm and collegial interactions with new users. Whpq has also assisted with numerous cleanups over the years, such as the

6146:

The obvious solution is promoting more editors who are willing to work in FfD/TfD/CfD/MfD. A low bus factor for such important processes is unsustainable and a recipe for burnout. -

712:

to provide some more education for new editors perhaps. This is something that is definitely worthwhile digging into more but this is not really the place to further develop ideas.

5233:; it was not a question about whether the candidate would be open to feedback from the broader community about their administrative actions. In fact, they specifically stated they 5770:

before he was finally 86'd. How many hundreds of man hours wasted, and talk about drama. Compare that to a reconfirmation which is just basically an RfA. Much less wasted energy.

3145:

I have to see some pretty concerning behavior to oppose in general, but this candidate is quite the opposite. Looks well-rounded and unlikely to cause disruption with the tools.

4080:

18:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC) Strike first part. Recall is pointless if it cannot be enforced. Anyone with a sound heart and mind will step down if asked by their compatriots.

6280: 4804:- seems quite qualified. I don't much care about not being open to recall; we have, or ought to have, robust processes in place to deal with problematic behavior by admins. 3864: 632:

deletion is on the table. That action shouldn't be take lightly, and as such, I'd look to get opinions from others working in the copyright area to get a consensus. --

558:

I intend to only be closing FFDs. As for closing as "delete" often, that's going to be a yes, because that is the reality of FFD. Even though FFD stands for "Files for

4591:

good content creation, copyright expert, not seeing a reason to oppose. The recall system is controversial as currently set-up so not agreeing to that is reasonable imv

5862:

Sorry to interrupt, but this is a very long speech for an oppose. Don't you think it's good that they are honest to the community, rather than say what they'll not do?

3577:

as showing clear dedication in keeping this encyclopedia's content as free as possible. Also, additional administrators focusing on non-AfD XfDs is a welcome sight. —

244:

Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?

3023:

are a tad stubby (but then so are many of mine), and a couple of entries need updating as the candidate's articles have now moved and the link is now to a dab page.

762:

and not the insult. So I switch tabs on my browser to Youtube, watch some squirrels run a ninja obstacle course, and then I'm in a much better place to respond. --

2389: 5805:

probably don't produce better results than the community can. If ArbCom is better than the community at figuring out who should remain an admin, why are they not

5742:

believe the things he wrote. So, I mean, words can only go far. I'd like to see more than promises when we're dealing with running a huge organization like this.

4188:. I'd rather the candidate just be honest about not being open to recall (the process is a complete joke anyway), rather than just lying about it for the votes. 1414:

I'm surprised to realise that i don't recognise the candidate's name or signature at all ~ just shows how gnomic i am, i suppose ~ but a brief investigation,

3770: 2978: 477:

files, and copyrights, the number of admins that handle this is very small; too small in fact, so I am willing to help on some that administrative load. --

2751: 6187:

We already don't have enough people to help with splits or removing tags if no consensus or consensus against. That proposed splits are scattered between

5766:

he was dragged to ArbCom where he was able to wriggle off with very sincerely written promises to reform, and then he had to finally be dragged to ArbCom

1153:

Editor's experience, intentionality, and attested character suggest a suitable candidate for admin rights. Also, any fencer gets my support by default. ~

1028: 5166:

requirement can finally see that it very much is not and will stop pushing recall at every RFA. It's time to stop pretending we have a recall process. --

4978: 1023: 6132:

True, as does CfD (the one person I was referring to was a non-admin), so I may have underestimated a little, but that doesn't really change my point.

5317: 1638:

I trust that the nominators have trust in this candidate, and so by extension I'm happy to support. A quick review of this candidate looked good also.

814: 781: 720:, or any other interested editors, please drop by my talk page to further look at improvements for communicating copyright concerns to new editors. -- 597:

Maybe? But certainly not right now. Moving files wasn't a reason for stepping up for adminship, but if we ran short of file movers, then I would. --

6018: 2506: 1286:

anyway) and checking any other criteria on my 'laundry list'. It's about time he was an admin, and who am I to argue with such respected nominators?

103:

of three at the moment). I'm also routinely impressed by Whpq's remarkable degree of patience, calm disposition, and willingness to explain things,

5474:

tasks, the admin resigned, so system worked. In the other, same process, but the admin refused to resign, basically on "well, I didn't expect it to

3881:

I wasn't going to vote because the outcome is already clear but I wanted to help cancel out the current two opposes. I respect the straight answer.

884: 5579: 5078: 1362:

I don't have a problem supporting this nomination based on the above and nominator statements. Wishing you the best of luck with this application,

177:

Dear candidate, thank you for offering to serve Knowledge as an administrator. Please answer these questions to provide guidance for participants:

4449:

process is used to express frustration about other, failed processes is a big, red flag about how management of this site system works right now.

5145:, trusted contributor, no red lights. By the way, none of the opposes is based on the candidate's merits, while here it's merits that matter. — 6368: 3163: 591:

Also, will you ever rename files after becoming an admin? Note that you currently have AP, ECU, NPR, and PCR rights, but not FM (file mover).

5437: 6089: 5683: 5532: 5512: 6162:

Non-AfD XfDs (as well as RMs) are my lifeblood in Knowledge editing. The fact that these processes have poor bus factors hits me dearly. —

5523:

people and characterizing recall as a "drama fest" goes against what my idea is of a good admin who will listen to the concerns of others.

2689: 747:

Thanks for volunteering! I agree in full with your answer to Q3—we should all definitely take a step back whenever we're feeling stressed (

569: 564: 5891: 5745:

Candidate states "The addition of more avenues for drama is not a good thing". Well if you want to talk about drama, I mean, for instance

5627: 5614: 6274: 6220: 5734: 5560:

Since it's been brought up in at least one of the support votes, I don't read a question about an administrator being open to recall as "

2695: 2006: 6348:

I was just wondering how your username is pronounced? I've been saying it the way I would spell it (W-h-p-q), but I could be mistaken. ◇

6210: 3796: 3782: 6437: 6419: 5843: 6310: 3811: 2276: 5562:

are you willing to be subjected to a particular drama fest just because one person asks for it and because you said "yes" in the RFA"

5488: 5133: 4437: 2875:

It will be good to get an additional editor with that experience. The answer to the question by Indignant Flamingo seems reasonable.

6382: 6331: 5926: 5430: 5369:. I have run across Whpq's work here in the past, and I have no objections, despite what others may say about the response to Q4. -- 83: 6296: 5868: 5508: 4458: 3413: 1719: 3846:

Seems overwhelmingly qualified. And I respect his measured response to the "have you stopped beating your wife" recall question.

525:

tailored communication, if that stops the copyright violating activity, then no block is needed and would be the best outcome. --

6258: 5230: 4499: 838: 804: 771: 729: 641: 581: 534: 486: 451: 397: 308: 200: 6400: 6182: 5964: 2655: 1351: 5901: 4427: 1707: 6157: 5449: 2927:: This candidate has been around longer than I have, yet has never applied for adminship before now. This indicates a lack of 2672: 1442: 6254: 6206: 6031: 5468: 5066: 4223: 2685: 2519: 1835:– plenty of experience in a difficult area. I like how Whpq patiently explains our guidelines for non-free content even when 966: 345: 330: 5137: 4833:

as a matter of form, because (for the second time in a row) I find the opposition rationales to be completely unconvincing.

2745:

I never have previously heard of him, but a look at his contributions makes it look like he is a established user who has a

6141: 6127: 4462: 4357: 4135: 3956: 3419: 2388:: Whpq's knowledge and judgement of file policy (especially copyright/NFCC) is clear and trusted by many. Discussions like 2248: 2229: 2129: 2112: 1471: 1184:

I haven't much experience interacting with this editor, but I'd trust anyone recommended by both Fastily and Moneytrees. ––

757:

I don't really recall any incidents that upped the stress level too high. I just try to never let get that far. Earlier,

260: 5669: 4503: 4313: 3711:- seen them around.... a lot! Good stuff. Good answers to questions. Obviously has clue. Good temperament. Yes, please. 3039: 2261:. Unless we're talking about something that's truly evil, any editor may request that a soft deleted file be restored at 2125: 1583:

Another "Wait I thought they were an admin already!" nominations. Would easily be a positive addition to the admin group.

1415: 5553: 5017:

Wish the candidate was open to recall but given the fact that process doesn't formally exist its not a huge issue for me.

4378: 2340: 1765:

Can't say I've come across him, but if it reduces the level of talk page moaning about the lack of candidates... Per SG.

606: 381: 232: 96: 6113: 5009: 4746: 4408: 4227: 4095: 3552: 2901: 2191: 1960: 1793: 1592: 5960: 5945: 5564:. Realistically, it doesn't matter if an administrator is "open to recall" or not to be subjected to a "drama fest" at 4986: 4538: 4145: 3939: 2802: 2464: 2363: 2252: 2037: 1998: 1977: 1406: 5652: 4966: 4676:. I do not believe having a different wiki-philosophy to the opposers is any evidence of the candidate's suitability. 4037: 3979: 3605:, I see no reason to suspect that they would abuse the tools, and would be a real benefit to the project as an admin. 3488: 3471: 3457: 3117: 2948: 2848: 2768: 2562: 2346: 2212: 1379: 145: 6192: 5339: 5308: 4992: 4777: 4685: 4665: 4422: 3876: 3236: 2579: 2262: 2143: 2040: 2025: 1985: 1911: 1757: 1561: 871: 219: 99:

violations. Plus, we could really use his expertise at FfD, where there are few active admins (we have an effective

5978: 5325: 5048: 4860: 4796: 4704: 4600: 4583: 4296: 3893: 3668: 3505: 3441: 3343: 3095: 2965: 2405: 2172: 2078: 1892: 1647: 1277: 172: 6067: 6065: 6051: 5824: 5361: 5175: 4946: 4889: 4340: 4211:

in matters of copyright (especially images) and I think it’s important we have admins who specialise in this area.

4140: 4054: 3651: 3569: 3535: 3394: 3289: 3285: 3250: 3058: 2991: 2989: 2730: 2612: 1875: 1204: 1108: 748: 119: 33: 17: 5223: 5208: 5099: 5083: 4725: 4614: 4198: 4116: 3765: 3686: 3614: 3517: 3377: 3326: 3221: 3011: 2918: 2884: 2480: 2380: 2095: 1843: 1697: 1665: 1630: 1609: 1311: 1228: 1145: 6292: 5913:

The current RfA does not appear to be the first time a candidate has said no to a process that appears to ask an

5710: 5409: 5153: 4925: 4721: 4631: 4208: 4017: 3855: 3597: 3360: 3268: 3078: 3009: 2829: 2668: 2258: 1929: 1814: 1740: 1626: 1575: 1438: 1424: 5116: 4872: 4763: 4520: 4395: 4279: 3838: 3703: 3306: 3171: 2867: 2595: 2447: 2321: 2295: 2121: 1860: 1774: 1683: 1535: 1504: 1418:, and my respect for the noms leads me here. Plus, i really like the simple answer to Question 3. Happy days ~ 1295: 1176: 1162: 1096: 167: 6178: 5264: 5187: 5062: 4906: 4252: 4163: 4000: 3922: 3593: 3137: 2974: 2825: 2785: 2639: 2424: 1827: 1808: 1518: 1463:

Still full support after the candidate said no to that useless thing we for some reason bring up at every RfA.

1329: 1251: 92: 88: 58: 5292: 4825: 4648: 4564: 4479: 4180: 3730: 2712: 2545: 2155: 2057: 1458: 6188: 6011: 5956: 5730: 5694: 5587: 5385: 5129: 5026: 4842: 3834: 3200: 2499: 2257:

FfDs don't usually get a lot of participation, so it's standard practice to soft delete problematic files as

1128: 5867:

never been this way. The corruption in his government is the highest. Imagine the former acting chairman of

5247: 3905: 3634: 3154: 2163:. Established editor and the answer to question 7 from GhostRiver suggests the tools will be in good hands. 1018: 878: 5665: 5546:

with regret per OrgoneBox above. Being open to recall is my only hard requirement in adminship candidates.

5505: 4455: 4353: 4245: 3952: 3407: 3131: 2648: 2225: 2108: 6080: 5272:

as we need more copyright admins. I respect the right of other editors to oppose based on recall though.

4818: 4495: 3725: 3030: 2220:. Whpq seems to be competent, experienced, and low-drama—exactly the sort of admin that we need more of. 902: 6265:

We have 40 support votes but in the main RfA page only 33 votes. Is there any problems on the 34th one?

660:

ideas for how to communicate this 'difference' to new editors more effectively without coming across as

6418:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either

5378: 4371: 3193: 2664: 2371:

Long and distinguish tenure, expertise in critical area, tools would be useful in that area, no drama.

2180:

Long-term editor, adequate content contributions in the past, clearly very knowledgeable on copyright.

1434: 1433:. I've seen Whpq around quite often, particularly in file space; he always seems capable and reliable. 1124: 938: 864: 79: 507:, what are some criteria you use when deciding whether to block a user for file copyright violations? 6360: 6248: 6200: 5941: 5058: 5005: 4742: 4403: 4220: 4088: 4073: 3548: 3110: 2897: 2186: 1957: 1782:: I really don't see why this person shouldn't be an admin! I'm willing to bet that there are hardly 1588: 959: 706: 685: 518: 6097: 1990:

Also, that squirrel picture on user page is really cool, so count my !vote as Extra Strong Support.

6043:

I agree with El C about the poor choice of nominator, which leads me to want to abstain from this.

5882: 5648: 5125: 4534: 4130: 3935: 3778: 2798: 2460: 2244: 1397: 1054: 6394: 5661: 5502: 5042: 4961: 4561: 4452: 4349: 4032: 3973: 3948: 3484: 3466: 3453: 3435: 3403: 2944: 2558: 2487: 2336: 2221: 2208: 2104: 1064: 671:

Knowledge requires. For new editors who appear to be interested in contributing images, we have

616: 3543:

Qualified candidate with a history of cleaning up difficult topics and getting them into shape.

6306: 6075: 5622: 5593: 5574: 5548: 5335: 4982: 4771: 4682: 4661: 4489: 3872: 3233: 3050: 3025: 2726: 2575: 2455:- Normally, I'd like to see at least one GA, but good copyright-related work is very valuable. 2021: 2002: 1981: 1908: 1753: 1557: 675: 896: 5820: 5596: 5484: 5321: 4792: 4699: 4596: 4579: 4366: 4292: 3888: 3664: 3501: 3339: 3322: 3091: 2961: 2399: 2168: 2074: 1888: 1486: 1272: 695: 4933:- Seen this editor around Knowledge and I trust them to utilize administrator tools wisely. 3987:: no temperament concerns have been raised. Good content work and good use for the tools. — 992: 923: 6351: 6244: 6196: 6063: 6049: 5937: 5424: 5353: 5171: 5001: 4940: 4885: 4738: 4212: 4081: 4066: 4050: 3647: 3565: 3544: 3531: 3390: 3356: 3281: 2987: 2893: 2821: 2813: 2608: 2304: 2181: 1944: 1871: 1788: 1584: 1197: 1136:

seen them around and thought they were an admin already due to their competent candor ~ 🦝

1105: 952: 715: 651: 142: 4868:

Very qualified and seems to be a very good candidate particularly for working in copyvio.

4274: 3642:- No red flags and clear support from a number of highly trusted and experienced editors. 3274:

I checked a random sample of this candidate's contributions and found nothing of concern.—

2265:. So is the question loaded? Sort of. Could it have been phrased better? Absolutely. - 1013: 8: 6288: 6270: 5875: 5839: 5746: 5704: 5679: 5644: 5528: 5464: 5405: 5219: 5094: 4717: 4530: 4125: 4110: 3931: 3792: 3774: 3761: 3738:

Nobody has contested the candidate's copyright expertise, and this is a skillset that is

3682: 3610: 3373: 3215: 3007: 2914: 2880: 2794: 2456: 2376: 2356: 2240: 2091: 1715: 1693: 1661: 1622: 1605: 1390: 1348: 1141: 432: 359: 2856:. Somehow haven't come across him before, but seems like a great candidate all-round. – 2793:, noting that copyright in particular is a valuable area to have new admins working in. 1303:

More important than their edits is the amount of clean up they've done, which is a LOT.

1008: 6173: 6027: 5922: 5914: 5850: 5609: 5590: 5151: 4956: 4920: 4627: 4025: 4013: 3966: 3851: 3588: 3480: 3449: 3261: 3105: 3076: 2940: 2839: 2737: 2554: 2515: 2332: 2204: 1925: 1735: 1571: 1371: 1038: 934: 544: 385: 326: 3659:

Well qualified, with no red or yellow flags. The opposing comments are unpersuasive. -

3020: 2999:

enthusiastically. Trustworthy candidate who will make a terrific admin. Best of luck!

2491:

qualified and I'm sure they'll make a good fit. Though again, I'm puzzled by how many

317:. You foreground your response with a "No", then go on to outline your criteria for a 6328: 6302: 6147: 5973: 5697:

for being an admin. In addition, I agree that not being open to recall is a problem.

5599: 5331: 5301: 5285: 5112: 4812: 4759: 4678: 4657: 4516: 4391: 4268: 3868: 3830: 3699: 3302: 3230: 3167: 3067: 2862: 2761: 2591: 2571: 2440: 2316: 2291: 2266: 2138: 2034: 2017: 1991: 1970: 1902: 1856: 1770: 1749: 1548: 1544: 1531: 1500: 1291: 1158: 1086: 1033: 109: 5953:

per answer to 4, seeing accountability to the community as a mere avenue for drama.

2067:

did you know the Dutch word for squirrel, eekhoorn, sounds almost exactly like acorn

1851:– an excellent candidate; knowledgeable, polite, long-term committed Wikipedian. — 6388: 6136: 6108: 5897: 5863: 5857: 5830: 5816: 5584: 5480: 5260: 5036: 4902: 4853: 4786: 4695: 4608:

I see no reason to oppose. Clearly more than experienced enough to handle the bit.

4592: 4575: 4288: 4241: 4159: 3993: 3918: 3882: 3660: 3497: 3428: 3335: 3087: 2957: 2781: 2680:

Whpq's work cleaning up the fantasy online game show pages that were a scourge for

2419: 2393: 2164: 2070: 1884: 1822: 1703: 1639: 1516: 1482: 1325: 1260: 1246: 987: 890: 318: 218:

Best can be measured or considered in many different ways. For me, working on the

5984: 2065:, lovely squirrel on user page, has a clue and is friendly, so meets my criteria. 1076: 846: 64: 6316: 6058: 6044: 5419: 5348: 5277: 5167: 4935: 4881: 4673: 4644: 4558: 4475: 4328: 4046: 3721: 3643: 3561: 3527: 3386: 3275: 3245: 2982: 2722: 2708: 2604: 2541: 2053: 1867: 1185: 1102: 461: 284: 139: 5391: 3427:

doesn't seem to be any reason to oppose. Recall isn't really a thing after all.

6378: 6284: 6266: 6217: 6123: 5835: 5773:

OK, well but you can say Well DangerousPanda was an outlier. Yes of course but

5699: 5675: 5524: 5460: 5401: 5215: 5196: 5091: 5021: 4838: 4734: 4713: 4610: 4542: 4189: 4105: 3823:

Candidate with a clear expertise with little reason to decline being an admin.

3802: 3788: 3757: 3678: 3606: 3514: 3369: 3210: 3187: 3000: 2910: 2876: 2746: 2473: 2372: 2087: 1840: 1711: 1689: 1657: 1618: 1601: 1345: 1305: 1214: 1137: 1120: 858: 834: 800: 767: 725: 661: 637: 602: 577: 530: 482: 447: 407: 393: 341: 304: 256: 228: 196: 163: 73: 54: 6431: 6412:

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.

6168: 6023: 5918: 5604: 5569: 5565: 5454:

I always consider "open to recall" to be a standard of accountability that's

5445: 5414:

Quick question. How many times has the recall process been used successfully?

5243: 5146: 4915: 4623: 4009: 3847: 3583: 3352: 3150: 3071: 2928: 2817: 2511: 2200: 1920: 1836: 1802: 1730: 1567: 1420: 758: 442:

if somebody wanted to delete the file in spite of the keep local request. --

439: 424: 376: 322: 135: 6387:

Oh. So not with a weird swooshing and guttural sound...? Eh, fine with me. –

1512:—Knowledge would benefit tremendously from having Whpq as an administrator. 6320: 5108: 4869: 4755: 4512: 4387: 4261: 3825: 3806: 3695: 3298: 2857: 2587: 2433: 2308: 2287: 1852: 1766: 1678: 1527: 1496: 1287: 1171: 1154: 4737:, but that is a policy issue, not an issue for one or another candidate. 2956:: a good candidate and I see no reason not to give them the admin rights. 1059: 6133: 6105: 5256: 5184: 4898: 4236: 4155: 3988: 3914: 3126: 2777: 2621: 2414: 1819: 1513: 1321: 1237: 4365:

as I think they will do good for this website and willing to get muddy.

3258:- seems like an all around rockstar editor who would make a fine admin. 5905: 5273: 4806: 4640: 4551: 4471: 4172: 3712: 2704: 2530: 2152: 2049: 1710:

is now a serious avenue for giving serious feedback to administrators.

1702:

I support his non-validation of the non-consensus and troubled-history

1464: 1451: 552:

Will you be closing FfDs or other XfDs (e.g., AfDs) as "delete" often?

100: 1801:

per nominators and above. I trust him on a (somewhat cursory) review.

1688:

Have been seeing him for years, and always thought he was an admin. —

138:. A dedicated and thoughtful worker, Whpq will be an excellent admin. 6422:

or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.

6374: 6345: 6119: 6008: 5371: 5018: 4834: 3773:. 4 successful, 2 unsuccessful, and 1 incomplete request since 2010. 3180: 2684:

was absolutely invaluable, clearly has what it takes to be an admin.

2496: 2103:

with thanks for accepting the invitation to go through this process.

1365: 1116: 854: 830: 796: 763: 721: 633: 598: 573: 526: 504: 478: 443: 389: 337: 314: 300: 252: 224: 192: 159: 69: 2390:

Knowledge:Files for discussion/2022 August 5#File:Siniristi 1933.png

6279:

It looks like the 34th vote added a new line in the support above;

5917:

admin to serve as the judge, lawyer, and client in their own case.

5781:

get called to reconfirm. He'll pass easily, so where's the problem?

5441: 5239: 3902: 3625: 3146: 2620:– Good candidate, very experienced and competent. I see no issues. 937:. If you are unfamiliar with the nominee, please thoroughly review 739: 3402:: good edits, good behavior, I can't see any problems with them. — 1655:

as a good, competent and trusted user in file sector, have a : -->

944: 4386:

I think they will continue to do a great job for this project. --

45: 3066:

If Whpq doesn't fit the bill, then I don't know who does. Maybe

2838:

Thank you for working on Files for Discussion and on copyright!

795:

No, but they can contest it with a message on the talk page. --

3297:- Very experienced user in a difficult and much-needed area. -- 1952: 4656:. The user seems legit and has experience to become an admin. 3496:. Fully qualified candidate with important, useful expertise. 4323: 152:

Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here:

6239:

Apologies to the clerks, but this pun is too good for me to

3801:

Only two since 2013: one (self request) in 2015 and another

4063:

A little disappointed that they are not open to recall, but

568:

will give you a better idea. The Ransom Riggs article was

292:

Will you be open to recall? If so, under what conditions?

2892:– Has a clue. I see no reason not to give them a chance. 29:

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a

5674:

The "obviously" is really a nice touch here, well done.

4171:

Excellent candidate; qualified, clueful and willing. --

4065:

I've seen them around and trust that they will do good.

3745:

Admins should be open to input from the entire community

3368:

Excellent contribution. Trusted editor. All the best. --

3019:

per Ritchie333 and many others. Some of the articles in

2931:

that I would expect to see in any self-respecting admin.

789:

Can a user remove a CSD tag from a page he has created?

212:

What are your best contributions to Knowledge, and why?

4897:- No reason to think this user would abuse the tools -- 3787:

I stand corrected, but six in 12 years is pretty rare.

2307:– and there are no concerns from I can see. Best luck, 3771:

Knowledge:Administrators open to recall/Past requests

822:

What is the difference between a indef block and ban

681:

which provides some information in a welcoming way.

375:

appropriate venue for fulfilling the request such as

184:

Why are you interested in becoming an administrator?

158:

I've improved on that in the intervening years. --

6195:

instead of being centralized like RMs doesn't help.

5183:looks good, oppose reasons are unconvincing to me. 1656:15 years tenure and highly active for a long time. 2529:– We need more admins working in copyright areas. 2354:- Haven't seen any good reason not to support. — 270:You may ask optional questions below. There is a 6429: 5074:Experienced and has understanding in copyright. 3747:. This is a sentiment that I agree with, but in 6118:TFD does have the luxury of non-admin closers. 5756:But there was nothing anybody could do about it 4235:Long history of competent, drama free service. 3694:. Looks good to me, can you start right away?! 4124:Didn't know they weren't an admin already. -- 3465:no reason not to that I've ever run into... -- 3208:Trusted user with a clear need for the tools. 1481:No issues, has a clue, has a need. Good luck. 5438:Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Girth Summit 4850:Decent candidate who can do real work well. 960: 91:, has a keen eye for spotting (often subtle) 2016:No reason to think they'd misuse the tools. 6216:So article splits shouldn't be split? :) – 4327:(I didn't know they weren't admin either). 3930:I thought he already was an administrator! 2137:. A lot of wikipedia experience so why not. 565:Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children 53:Final: (213/9/0) - Closed as successful by 3751:, the widely varied recall processes have 967: 953: 5792:And I mean the main point here is so the 2199:Good contributions to file copyright and 1236:, I expect good things from this editor. 921:Edit summary usage for Whpq can be found 5869:Economic and Financial Crimes Commission 2329:I don't see why not. No obvious issues. 933:Please keep discussion constructive and 5347:If needed, there are ways to desysop.-- 14: 6430: 5904:, the recall question was answered by 5088:No concerns; opposition unconvincing. 3103:will be a net-positive to the project. 1708:Knowledge:Administrative action review 5784:I mean, I think the Swedes reconfirm 5733:full of high minded thoughts. In his 948: 497:2601:647:5800:4D2:8143:2CE2:510C:681C 5693:- no FA/GAs found, does not meet my 4103:- Great record and good judgement.-- 2086:, currently do not see any issues.-- 368:in these aspect of an Admin's role? 136:Contributor copyright investigations 5775:it is the outliers that this is for 3889: 2975:User talk:Whpq/Archive 11#Adminship 1941:More candidates like this, please. 1600:per noms, thanks for volunteering. 1526:Competent, experienced, no issues. 974: 749:shameless plug for my essay on this 438:but that would still be subject to 382:Knowledge:Media copyright questions 23: 4348:good answers, and this also to Q4. 2472:– Experienced; keeps a cool head. 428:would be preserved if tagged with 95:, and is an expert at identifying 24: 6449: 6438:Successful requests for adminship 6193:Knowledge:Proposed article splits 5762:could do about it. Finally after 1670:I'm very glad that you ran. Easy 4712:Excellent answers to questions. 4008:, no concerns. Great candidate! 2686:The Blade of the Northern Lights 691:is a kinder, gentler version of 18:Knowledge:Requests for adminship 6053:07:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5758:. Was there. There was nothing 5084:22:27, 30 September 2022‎ (UTC) 3901:Clearly qualified for the job. 6401:16:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 6383:20:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 6369:19:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 6332:20:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 6311:11:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 6297:16:04, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6275:15:59, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6259:02:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 6221:00:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 6211:20:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 6183:23:47, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 6158:18:39, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6142:17:05, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6128:16:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6114:15:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6090:11:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 6068:13:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 6032:16:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 6012:14:18, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 5979:22:45, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 5965:15:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 5946:05:15, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 5927:16:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5892:16:19, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5844:16:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5825:06:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5711:06:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5684:17:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5670:02:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 5653:18:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 5628:20:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5615:19:52, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5580:19:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5554:17:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5533:17:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 5513:18:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 5489:02:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 5469:22:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5450:20:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5431:19:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5410:16:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 5067:20:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 5049:16:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 5027:14:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 5010:12:40, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 4993:10:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 4967:05:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 4947:23:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4926:23:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4907:23:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4890:23:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4873:21:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4861:20:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4843:20:27, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4826:20:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4797:19:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4778:19:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4764:19:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4747:18:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4726:17:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4705:15:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4686:12:45, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4666:12:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4649:10:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4632:04:33, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 4615:23:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4601:21:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4584:18:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4565:17:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4539:16:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4521:16:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4504:14:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4480:14:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4463:13:59, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4438:10:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4409:09:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4396:05:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4379:05:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4358:05:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4341:04:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4314:04:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4297:02:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4280:01:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4260:will make an excellent admin. 4253:00:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4228:23:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4199:21:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4181:21:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4164:21:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4146:20:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4117:19:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4096:01:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 4055:17:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4038:17:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4018:17:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 4001:17:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3980:15:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3957:15:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3940:14:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3923:10:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3906:10:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3894:09:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3877:07:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3856:05:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3839:04:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3812:12:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3797:21:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3783:06:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3766:02:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3731:02:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3704:01:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3687:01:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3669:01:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3652:01:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3635:01:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3615:00:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3598:00:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3570:00:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3553:23:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3536:23:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3518:22:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3506:22:49, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3489:22:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3472:21:47, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3458:21:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3442:21:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3420:20:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3395:20:27, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3378:20:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3361:20:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3344:19:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3327:18:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3307:18:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3290:18:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3269:18:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3251:17:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3237:17:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3222:17:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3201:17:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3172:16:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3155:15:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3138:15:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3118:15:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3096:14:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3079:14:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3059:13:55, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3040:13:43, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 3012:13:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2992:13:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2966:11:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2949:11:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2919:11:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2902:10:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2885:10:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2868:09:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2849:09:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2830:08:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2803:07:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2786:05:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2769:04:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2731:04:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2713:03:46, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2696:02:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2673:01:29, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2663:, no concerns that I can see. 2656:01:09, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2640:00:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2613:00:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2596:23:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2580:23:26, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2563:23:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2546:22:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2520:09:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2500:22:34, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2481:22:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2465:22:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2448:21:41, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2425:21:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2406:20:41, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2381:20:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2364:20:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2347:19:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2322:19:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2296:19:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2277:20:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2253:19:29, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2230:19:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2213:19:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2192:19:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2173:18:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2156:18:53, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2144:18:53, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2130:18:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2113:18:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2096:18:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2079:18:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2058:18:04, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2041:17:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2026:17:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2007:19:42, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1986:17:41, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1961:16:57, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1930:16:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1912:16:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1893:16:28, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1876:16:05, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1861:15:54, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1844:15:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1828:15:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1815:14:53, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1794:14:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1775:14:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1758:14:02, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1741:13:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1720:01:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 1698:13:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1684:13:04, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1666:13:02, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1648:13:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1631:12:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1610:12:51, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1593:12:46, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1576:12:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1562:12:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1536:12:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1519:11:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1505:11:53, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1472:11:12, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 1459:10:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1443:08:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1425:08:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1407:07:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1380:06:34, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1352:06:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1330:05:24, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1312:05:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1296:05:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1278:05:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1259:, looks like a perfect fit. – 1252:05:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1229:05:05, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1205:05:03, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1177:05:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1163:04:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1146:04:24, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1129:04:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1109:04:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1097:04:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 772:17:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 730:17:49, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 642:01:27, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 607:01:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 582:01:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 535:00:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 487:16:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 452:15:51, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 398:15:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 346:01:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC) 331:22:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 313:Would you clarify this answer 309:15:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 261:01:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC) 233:01:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC) 201:01:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC) 168:04:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 146:02:00, 24 September 2022 (UTC) 134:cleanup and other image based 120:18:59, 23 September 2022 (UTC) 13: 1: 6189:Category:Articles to be split 1543:: long-time editor who is an 6002:per Moneytrees (good nom) = 5185:JesseW, the juggling janitor 4287:Vouched for by good people. 2603:Well qualified candidate. -- 7: 6164:Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung 5729:I mean DangerosPanda wrote 5386:03:20, 2 October 2022 (UTC) 5362:01:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC) 5340:23:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5326:21:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5309:21:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5293:20:26, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5265:20:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5248:18:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5229:candidate would be open to 5224:18:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5209:17:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5188:17:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5176:16:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5154:11:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5138:02:58, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5117:01:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 5100:01:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 3579:Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung 1545:expert at what they do best 1450:Good candidate. No issues. 839:13:05, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 805:13:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 173:Questions for the candidate 59:03:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC) 10: 6454: 3947:Easy choice. Thank you. -- 3021:user:Whpq#Articles started 2318:Do you have any questions? 1213:a veteran editor as well. 87:valuable contributions to 2909:: Trustworthy candidate. 1047: 1001: 980: 6415:Please do not modify it. 5957:Lollipoplollipoplollipop 5723:Anybody can say anything 5330:has a clue, not a jerk. 5316:- I like his user name. 3890:Penny for your thoughts? 543:Optional questions from 2651:Iamreallygoodatcheckers 813:Optional question from 780:Optional question from 738:Optional question from 650:Optional question from 615:Optional question from 495:Optional question from 460:Optional question from 406:Optional question from 358:Optional question from 283:Optional question from 220:Unreferenced BLP Rescue 38:Please do not modify it 5996:per FASTILY (bad nom) 5255:. No further comment. 5231:this archaic procedure 2647:- Experienced editor. 570:nominated for deletion 388:when appropriate. -- 132:WikiProject Gastropods 5991:First neutral, ever. 5107:Appears competent -- 2665:ScottishFinnishRadish 1435:Justlettersandnumbers 34:request for adminship 6017:Discussion moved to 5059:Trainsandotherthings 4977:- Yours Faithfully, 3468:SarekOfVulcan (talk) 3073:It's me... Sallicio! 2505:Discussion moved to 2392:aren't rare at all. 1617:looks good to me. — 1566:Trusted, competent. 1060:Global contributions 93:copyright violations 5877:Comr Melody Idoghor 5747:User:DangerousPanda 5126:Firefangledfeathers 4574:open to recall.) -- 1937:This one's a keeper 1392:Comr Melody Idoghor 1014:Non-automated edits 6006:. Stop protesting! 5662:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz 5374: 5076:from yours truly, 4350:Paradise Chronicle 4045:– Well qualified. 3949:Crystallizedcarbon 3404:Lights and freedom 2222:Extraordinary Writ 2122:Gråbergs Gråa Sång 2105:Indignant Flamingo 2048:, great candidate 993:Edit summary usage 941:before commenting. 617:Indignant Flamingo 386:Knowledge:Teahouse 39: 6261: 6223: 6057:moved to support 5854: 5623:ThadeusOfNazereth 5575:ThadeusOfNazereth 5549:ThadeusOfNazereth 5372: 5291: 5077: 5024: 4795: 4630: 4555: 4490:JackFromWisconsin 4434: 4375: 4306:ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ 4250: 4248:So let it be done 4243: 3513:and good luck! :) 3438: 3432: 3334:A net positive. - 3288: 3271: 3135: 3113: 3070:will apply here. 2866: 2832: 2816:comment added by 2810:I hope they win 2767: 2741: 2636: 2555:-- Deepfriedokra 2479: 2423: 2319: 2190: 2068: 1963: 1837:receiving insults 1813: 1073: 1072: 939:his contributions 37: 6445: 6417: 6397: 6391: 6366: 6363: 6357: 6354: 6327: 6323: 6238: 6215: 6155: 6154: 6151: 6098:General comments 6087: 6083: 6078: 5963: 5889: 5878: 5864:Mohammadu Buhari 5861: 5848: 5709: 5707: 5702: 5626: 5612: 5607: 5578: 5552: 5417: 5384: 5359: 5351: 5306: 5300:- Reliable user. 5289: 5281: 5206: 5201: 5149: 5098: 5075: 5045: 5039: 5022: 4991: 4964: 4959: 4945: 4943: 4938: 4923: 4918: 4858: 4856: 4824: 4791: 4789: 4776: 4703: 4626: 4622:, net positive. 4613: 4556: 4553: 4433:and the soapdish 4432: 4430: 4425: 4407: 4376: 4373: 4369: 4338: 4333: 4326: 4278: 4271: 4264: 4246: 4242: 4217: 4209:very well versed 4196: 4178: 4093: 4092: 4086: 4085: 4078: 4077: 4071: 4070: 4035: 4030: 3996: 3976: 3971: 3969: 3891: 3809: 3717: 3633: 3469: 3436: 3430: 3280: 3264: 3259: 3248: 3218: 3213: 3183: 3129: 3116: 3111: 3108: 3057: 3055: 3037: 3033: 3028: 3005: 2947: 2929:desire for power 2860: 2846: 2843: 2811: 2765: 2764:|ClydeFranklin}} 2757: 2735: 2692: 2637: 2630: 2628: 2553:– per all above, 2538: 2535: 2478: 2476: 2445: 2444: 2438: 2437: 2417: 2402: 2396: 2361: 2359: 2345: 2317: 2314: 2311: 2274: 2273: 2270: 2184: 2141: 2140:`~HelpingWorld~` 2066: 1994: 1973: 1959: 1955: 1947: 1928: 1905: 1805: 1791: 1738: 1733: 1682: 1554: 1469: 1456: 1404: 1393: 1377: 1374: 1369: 1308: 1275: 1270: 1265: 1244: 1226: 1221: 1202: 1195: 1194: 1174: 1094: 1093: 1090: 1009:Articles created 969: 962: 955: 946: 945: 926: 918: 877: 852:Links for Whpq: 719: 711: 707:uw-copyright-img 705: 700: 694: 690: 686:Uw-copyright-new 684: 680: 674: 523: 519:Uw-copyright-new 517: 437: 431: 279: 117: 116: 113: 6453: 6452: 6448: 6447: 6446: 6444: 6443: 6442: 6428: 6427: 6426: 6420:this nomination 6413: 6395: 6389: 6361: 6358: 6352: 6349: 6325: 6321: 6245:Rotideypoc41352 6197:Rotideypoc41352 6152: 6149: 6148: 6139: 6138:it has begun... 6111: 6110:it has begun... 6100: 6085: 6081: 6076: 5987: 5954: 5938:NotReallySoroka 5883: 5876: 5855: 5705: 5700: 5698: 5621: 5610: 5605: 5573: 5547: 5415: 5394: 5383: 5370: 5354: 5349: 5302: 5283: 5202: 5197: 5147: 5089: 5043: 5037: 5023:◊distænt write◊ 5002:Devonian Wombat 4975: 4963:how are things? 4962: 4957: 4941: 4936: 4934: 4921: 4916: 4854: 4852: 4805: 4787: 4769: 4739:Robert McClenon 4694: 4609: 4552: 4428: 4423: 4401: 4372: 4367: 4334: 4329: 4322: 4273: 4266: 4262: 4249: 4215:HelenDegenerate 4213: 4190: 4173: 4090: 4089: 4084:‡ Night Watch ω 4083: 4082: 4075: 4074: 4069:‡ Night Watch ω 4068: 4067: 4033: 4026: 3994: 3974: 3967: 3965: 3807: 3749:actual practice 3729: 3713: 3624: 3545:Molochmeditates 3467: 3262: 3246: 3229:- no concerns. 3216: 3211: 3181: 3134: 3107:« Gonzo fan2007 3106: 3104: 3051: 3048: 3035: 3031: 3026: 3001: 2938: 2894:Hey man im josh 2844: 2841: 2759: 2690: 2629: 2622: 2536: 2531: 2474: 2442: 2441: 2435: 2434: 2400: 2394: 2357: 2355: 2330: 2312: 2309: 2271: 2268: 2267: 2182:Espresso Addict 2139: 1992: 1971: 1953: 1945: 1924: 1903: 1825: 1824:it has begun... 1811: 1790:That Coptic Guy 1789: 1736: 1731: 1675: 1585:RickinBaltimore 1552: 1465: 1452: 1398: 1391: 1375: 1372: 1363: 1306: 1288:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง 1273: 1266: 1261: 1238: 1222: 1215: 1198: 1190: 1186: 1172: 1091: 1088: 1087: 1079: 1074: 1069: 1043: 997: 976: 975:RfA/RfB toolbox 973: 922: 870: 853: 849: 716:Robert McClenon 713: 709: 703: 698: 692: 688: 682: 678: 672: 652:Robert McClenon 521: 515: 435: 429: 269: 175: 114: 111: 110: 67: 50: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 6451: 6441: 6440: 6425: 6424: 6408: 6407: 6406: 6405: 6404: 6403: 6342: 6341: 6340: 6339: 6338: 6337: 6336: 6335: 6334: 6301:Oops. Thanks. 6262: 6237: 6236: 6235: 6234: 6233: 6232: 6231: 6230: 6229: 6228: 6227: 6226: 6225: 6224: 6137: 6109: 6099: 6096: 6095: 6094: 6093: 6092: 6036: 6035: 6034: 5986: 5983: 5982: 5981: 5967: 5948: 5931: 5930: 5929: 5894: 5846: 5803: 5802: 5799: 5798: 5791: 5790: 5783: 5782: 5772: 5771: 5744: 5743: 5728: 5727: 5721:I mean, look. 5720: 5719: 5713: 5688: 5687: 5686: 5655: 5645:Unbroken Chain 5638: 5637: 5636: 5635: 5634: 5633: 5632: 5631: 5630: 5597:well-respected 5541: 5540: 5539: 5538: 5537: 5536: 5535: 5497: 5496: 5495: 5494: 5493: 5492: 5491: 5393: 5390: 5389: 5388: 5377: 5364: 5342: 5328: 5311: 5295: 5267: 5250: 5226: 5211: 5190: 5178: 5156: 5140: 5119: 5102: 5086: 5081: 5069: 5051: 5029: 5012: 4995: 4974:Hakuna Matata 4969: 4949: 4928: 4909: 4892: 4875: 4863: 4845: 4828: 4799: 4780: 4766: 4749: 4728: 4707: 4688: 4668: 4651: 4634: 4617: 4603: 4586: 4567: 4545: 4531:LessHeard vanU 4523: 4506: 4482: 4465: 4440: 4417:Open to recall 4411: 4398: 4381: 4368:cookie monster 4360: 4343: 4324:King of Hearts 4316: 4299: 4282: 4255: 4247: 4230: 4201: 4183: 4166: 4148: 4119: 4098: 4057: 4040: 4020: 4003: 3982: 3959: 3942: 3932:Scorpions13256 3925: 3913:Looks good. ‐‐ 3908: 3896: 3879: 3858: 3841: 3818: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3799: 3775:Reaper Eternal 3753:no real impact 3733: 3719: 3706: 3689: 3671: 3654: 3637: 3617: 3600: 3572: 3555: 3538: 3520: 3508: 3491: 3474: 3460: 3444: 3422: 3397: 3380: 3363: 3346: 3329: 3309: 3292: 3272: 3253: 3239: 3224: 3203: 3174: 3162:Hey, why not? 3157: 3140: 3130: 3120: 3098: 3081: 3061: 3042: 3014: 2994: 2968: 2951: 2921: 2904: 2887: 2870: 2851: 2833: 2805: 2795:Cordless Larry 2788: 2771: 2733: 2717:Easy, per nom 2715: 2698: 2675: 2658: 2642: 2615: 2598: 2582: 2565: 2548: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2483: 2467: 2457:Reaper Eternal 2450: 2427: 2408: 2383: 2366: 2358:Rhododendrites 2349: 2324: 2298: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2241:John M Wolfson 2238: 2232: 2215: 2194: 2175: 2158: 2146: 2132: 2115: 2098: 2081: 2060: 2043: 2028: 2011: 2010: 2009: 1964: 1946:P.I. Ellsworth 1932: 1914: 1895: 1878: 1863: 1846: 1830: 1823: 1817: 1807: 1796: 1777: 1760: 1743: 1729:. No brainer. 1724: 1723: 1722: 1686: 1668: 1650: 1633: 1612: 1595: 1578: 1564: 1538: 1521: 1507: 1490: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1445: 1427: 1409: 1382: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1314: 1298: 1280: 1254: 1231: 1207: 1179: 1165: 1148: 1131: 1111: 1101:...As co-nom! 1099: 1078: 1075: 1071: 1070: 1068: 1067: 1062: 1057: 1051: 1049: 1045: 1044: 1042: 1041: 1036: 1031: 1026: 1021: 1016: 1011: 1005: 1003: 999: 998: 996: 995: 990: 984: 982: 978: 977: 972: 971: 964: 957: 949: 930: 929: 928: 919: 848: 845: 844: 843: 842: 841: 829:permanent. -- 817: 810: 809: 808: 807: 784: 777: 776: 775: 774: 742: 735: 734: 733: 732: 654: 647: 646: 645: 644: 619: 612: 611: 610: 609: 586: 585: 584: 547: 540: 539: 538: 537: 499: 492: 491: 490: 489: 464: 457: 456: 455: 454: 410: 403: 402: 401: 400: 362: 360:Idoghor Melody 355: 354: 353: 352: 351: 350: 349: 348: 287: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 238: 237: 236: 235: 206: 205: 204: 203: 174: 171: 155: 154: 127: 126: 66: 63: 49: 44: 43: 42: 25: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6450: 6439: 6436: 6435: 6433: 6423: 6421: 6416: 6410: 6409: 6402: 6398: 6392: 6386: 6385: 6384: 6380: 6376: 6372: 6371: 6370: 6365: 6364: 6356: 6355: 6347: 6344: 6343: 6333: 6330: 6324: 6319: 6318: 6314: 6313: 6312: 6308: 6304: 6300: 6299: 6298: 6294: 6290: 6286: 6282: 6278: 6277: 6276: 6272: 6268: 6264: 6263: 6260: 6256: 6253: 6250: 6246: 6242: 6222: 6219: 6214: 6213: 6212: 6208: 6205: 6202: 6198: 6194: 6190: 6186: 6185: 6184: 6180: 6176: 6175: 6171: 6170: 6165: 6161: 6160: 6159: 6156: 6145: 6144: 6143: 6140: 6135: 6131: 6130: 6129: 6125: 6121: 6117: 6116: 6115: 6112: 6107: 6102: 6101: 6091: 6088: 6084: 6079: 6071: 6070: 6069: 6066: 6064: 6062: 6061: 6056: 6052: 6050: 6048: 6047: 6042: 6041: 6037: 6033: 6029: 6025: 6021: 6020: 6019:the talk page 6015: 6014: 6013: 6010: 6007: 6005: 6001: 5995: 5994: 5989: 5988: 5980: 5977: 5976: 5971: 5968: 5966: 5962: 5958: 5952: 5949: 5947: 5943: 5939: 5935: 5932: 5928: 5924: 5920: 5916: 5912: 5907: 5903: 5899: 5895: 5893: 5890: 5888: 5887: 5881: 5880: 5879: 5870: 5865: 5859: 5852: 5851:edit conflict 5847: 5845: 5841: 5837: 5832: 5828: 5827: 5826: 5822: 5818: 5813: 5808: 5795: 5787: 5780: 5776: 5769: 5765: 5761: 5760:the community 5757: 5752: 5748: 5741: 5736: 5732: 5724: 5717: 5714: 5712: 5708: 5703: 5696: 5692: 5689: 5685: 5681: 5677: 5673: 5672: 5671: 5667: 5663: 5659: 5656: 5654: 5650: 5646: 5642: 5639: 5629: 5624: 5618: 5617: 5616: 5613: 5608: 5601: 5598: 5595: 5592: 5589: 5586: 5583: 5582: 5581: 5576: 5571: 5567: 5563: 5559: 5558: 5557: 5556: 5555: 5550: 5545: 5542: 5534: 5530: 5526: 5521: 5518: 5517: 5516: 5515: 5514: 5511: 5510: 5507: 5504: 5498: 5490: 5486: 5482: 5477: 5472: 5471: 5470: 5466: 5462: 5457: 5453: 5452: 5451: 5447: 5443: 5439: 5434: 5433: 5432: 5429: 5428: 5427: 5423: 5422: 5413: 5412: 5411: 5407: 5403: 5399: 5396: 5395: 5387: 5382: 5381: 5375: 5368: 5365: 5363: 5360: 5358: 5352: 5346: 5343: 5341: 5337: 5333: 5329: 5327: 5323: 5319: 5315: 5312: 5310: 5307: 5305: 5299: 5296: 5294: 5287: 5279: 5275: 5271: 5268: 5266: 5262: 5258: 5254: 5251: 5249: 5245: 5241: 5236: 5232: 5227: 5225: 5221: 5217: 5212: 5210: 5207: 5205: 5200: 5194: 5191: 5189: 5186: 5182: 5179: 5177: 5173: 5169: 5165: 5160: 5157: 5155: 5152: 5150: 5144: 5141: 5139: 5135: 5131: 5127: 5123: 5120: 5118: 5114: 5110: 5106: 5103: 5101: 5096: 5093: 5087: 5085: 5082: 5079: 5073: 5070: 5068: 5064: 5060: 5055: 5052: 5050: 5046: 5040: 5033: 5030: 5028: 5025: 5020: 5016: 5013: 5011: 5007: 5003: 4999: 4996: 4994: 4990: 4988: 4984: 4980: 4973: 4970: 4968: 4965: 4960: 4958:GrammarDamner 4953: 4950: 4948: 4944: 4939: 4932: 4929: 4927: 4924: 4919: 4913: 4910: 4908: 4904: 4900: 4896: 4893: 4891: 4887: 4883: 4879: 4876: 4874: 4871: 4867: 4864: 4862: 4859: 4857: 4849: 4846: 4844: 4840: 4836: 4832: 4829: 4827: 4822: 4821: 4816: 4815: 4810: 4809: 4803: 4800: 4798: 4794: 4790: 4785:No Big Deal. 4784: 4781: 4779: 4775: 4773: 4767: 4765: 4761: 4757: 4753: 4750: 4748: 4744: 4740: 4736: 4732: 4729: 4727: 4723: 4719: 4715: 4711: 4708: 4706: 4701: 4697: 4692: 4689: 4687: 4684: 4681: 4680: 4675: 4672: 4669: 4667: 4663: 4659: 4655: 4652: 4650: 4646: 4642: 4638: 4635: 4633: 4629: 4625: 4621: 4618: 4616: 4612: 4607: 4604: 4602: 4598: 4594: 4590: 4587: 4585: 4581: 4577: 4573: 4568: 4566: 4563: 4560: 4557: 4549: 4546: 4544: 4540: 4536: 4532: 4527: 4524: 4522: 4518: 4514: 4510: 4507: 4505: 4501: 4497: 4493: 4492: 4491: 4486: 4483: 4481: 4477: 4473: 4469: 4466: 4464: 4461: 4460: 4457: 4454: 4448: 4444: 4441: 4439: 4436: 4435: 4431: 4426: 4418: 4415: 4412: 4410: 4406: 4405: 4399: 4397: 4393: 4389: 4385: 4382: 4380: 4377: 4370: 4364: 4361: 4359: 4355: 4351: 4347: 4344: 4342: 4339: 4337: 4332: 4325: 4320: 4317: 4315: 4311: 4307: 4303: 4300: 4298: 4294: 4290: 4286: 4283: 4281: 4276: 4270: 4265: 4259: 4256: 4254: 4251: 4244: 4240: 4239: 4234: 4231: 4229: 4225: 4222: 4218: 4216: 4210: 4205: 4202: 4200: 4197: 4195: 4194: 4187: 4184: 4182: 4179: 4177: 4170: 4167: 4165: 4161: 4157: 4152: 4149: 4147: 4144: 4143: 4139: 4138: 4134: 4133: 4129: 4128: 4123: 4120: 4118: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4109: 4108: 4102: 4099: 4097: 4094: 4087: 4079: 4072: 4064: 4061: 4058: 4056: 4052: 4048: 4044: 4041: 4039: 4036: 4031: 4029: 4028:Rcsprinter123 4024: 4021: 4019: 4015: 4011: 4007: 4004: 4002: 3998: 3997: 3990: 3986: 3983: 3981: 3977: 3970: 3968:Victor Trevor 3963: 3960: 3958: 3954: 3950: 3946: 3943: 3941: 3937: 3933: 3929: 3926: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3909: 3907: 3904: 3900: 3897: 3895: 3892: 3886: 3885: 3880: 3878: 3874: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3859: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3842: 3840: 3836: 3832: 3828: 3827: 3822: 3819: 3813: 3810: 3804: 3800: 3798: 3794: 3790: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3780: 3776: 3772: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3763: 3759: 3754: 3750: 3746: 3741: 3737: 3734: 3732: 3727: 3723: 3718: 3716: 3710: 3707: 3705: 3701: 3697: 3693: 3690: 3688: 3684: 3680: 3675: 3672: 3670: 3666: 3662: 3658: 3655: 3653: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3638: 3636: 3632: 3630: 3629: 3621: 3618: 3616: 3612: 3608: 3604: 3601: 3599: 3595: 3591: 3590: 3586: 3585: 3580: 3576: 3573: 3571: 3567: 3563: 3559: 3556: 3554: 3550: 3546: 3542: 3539: 3537: 3533: 3529: 3524: 3521: 3519: 3516: 3512: 3509: 3507: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3492: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3481:HouseOfChange 3478: 3475: 3473: 3470: 3464: 3461: 3459: 3455: 3451: 3450:Pawnkingthree 3448: 3445: 3443: 3439: 3433: 3426: 3423: 3421: 3417: 3416: 3411: 3410: 3405: 3401: 3398: 3396: 3392: 3388: 3384: 3381: 3379: 3375: 3371: 3367: 3364: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3350: 3347: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3330: 3328: 3324: 3320: 3319: 3313: 3310: 3308: 3304: 3300: 3296: 3293: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3279: 3278: 3273: 3270: 3266: 3265: 3257: 3254: 3252: 3249: 3243: 3240: 3238: 3235: 3232: 3228: 3225: 3223: 3220: 3219: 3214: 3207: 3204: 3202: 3199: 3197: 3196: 3191: 3190: 3184: 3178: 3175: 3173: 3169: 3165: 3161: 3158: 3156: 3152: 3148: 3144: 3141: 3139: 3133: 3128: 3124: 3121: 3119: 3114: 3109: 3102: 3099: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3082: 3080: 3077: 3075: 3074: 3069: 3065: 3062: 3060: 3056: 3054: 3046: 3043: 3041: 3038: 3034: 3029: 3022: 3018: 3015: 3013: 3010: 3008: 3006: 3004: 2998: 2995: 2993: 2990: 2988: 2986: 2985: 2980: 2976: 2972: 2969: 2967: 2963: 2959: 2955: 2952: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2936: 2932: 2930: 2926: 2922: 2920: 2916: 2912: 2908: 2905: 2903: 2899: 2895: 2891: 2888: 2886: 2882: 2878: 2874: 2871: 2869: 2864: 2859: 2855: 2852: 2850: 2847: 2837: 2834: 2831: 2827: 2823: 2819: 2815: 2809: 2806: 2804: 2800: 2796: 2792: 2789: 2787: 2783: 2779: 2775: 2772: 2770: 2763: 2756: 2755: 2753: 2748: 2744: 2739: 2738:edit conflict 2734: 2732: 2728: 2724: 2720: 2716: 2714: 2710: 2706: 2702: 2699: 2697: 2693: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2676: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2662: 2659: 2657: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2646: 2643: 2641: 2638: 2635: 2634: 2627: 2626: 2619: 2616: 2614: 2610: 2606: 2602: 2599: 2597: 2593: 2589: 2586: 2583: 2581: 2578:• they/them) 2577: 2573: 2569: 2566: 2564: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2549: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2534: 2528: 2525: 2521: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2508: 2507:the talk page 2503: 2502: 2501: 2498: 2494: 2489: 2484: 2482: 2477: 2471: 2468: 2466: 2462: 2458: 2454: 2451: 2449: 2446: 2439: 2431: 2428: 2426: 2421: 2416: 2412: 2409: 2407: 2403: 2397: 2391: 2387: 2384: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2367: 2365: 2360: 2353: 2350: 2348: 2344: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2328: 2325: 2323: 2320: 2315: 2306: 2305:WP:NOTBIGDEAL 2302: 2299: 2297: 2293: 2289: 2285: 2282: 2278: 2275: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2236: 2233: 2231: 2227: 2223: 2219: 2216: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2205:GeoffreyT2000 2202: 2198: 2195: 2193: 2188: 2183: 2179: 2176: 2174: 2170: 2166: 2162: 2159: 2157: 2154: 2150: 2147: 2145: 2142: 2136: 2133: 2131: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2116: 2114: 2110: 2106: 2102: 2099: 2097: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2082: 2080: 2076: 2072: 2064: 2061: 2059: 2055: 2051: 2047: 2044: 2042: 2039: 2036: 2032: 2029: 2027: 2023: 2019: 2015: 2012: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1968: 1965: 1962: 1958: 1956: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1940: 1936: 1933: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1922: 1918: 1915: 1913: 1910: 1907: 1906: 1899: 1896: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1879: 1877: 1873: 1869: 1864: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1850: 1847: 1845: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1831: 1829: 1826: 1821: 1818: 1816: 1812: 1810: 1804: 1800: 1797: 1795: 1792: 1785: 1781: 1778: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1764: 1761: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1744: 1742: 1739: 1734: 1728: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1687: 1685: 1681: 1680: 1673: 1669: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1654: 1651: 1649: 1646: 1645: 1644: 1637: 1634: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1613: 1611: 1607: 1603: 1599: 1596: 1594: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1579: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1565: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1546: 1542: 1539: 1537: 1533: 1529: 1525: 1522: 1520: 1517: 1515: 1511: 1508: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1495:Good luck! -- 1494: 1491: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1477: 1473: 1470: 1468: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1457: 1455: 1449: 1446: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1426: 1423: 1422: 1417: 1413: 1410: 1408: 1405: 1403: 1402: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1386: 1383: 1381: 1378: 1367: 1361: 1358: 1354: 1353: 1350: 1347: 1342: 1338: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1327: 1323: 1318: 1315: 1313: 1310: 1309: 1302: 1299: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1284: 1281: 1279: 1276: 1271: 1269: 1264: 1258: 1255: 1253: 1250: 1249: 1245: 1243: 1242: 1235: 1232: 1230: 1227: 1225: 1220: 1219: 1212: 1208: 1206: 1203: 1201: 1196: 1193: 1189: 1183: 1180: 1178: 1175: 1169: 1166: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1149: 1147: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1132: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1115: 1112: 1110: 1107: 1104: 1103:Moneytrees🏝️ 1100: 1098: 1095: 1084: 1081: 1080: 1066: 1063: 1061: 1058: 1056: 1053: 1052: 1050: 1046: 1040: 1037: 1035: 1032: 1030: 1027: 1025: 1022: 1020: 1017: 1015: 1012: 1010: 1007: 1006: 1004: 1000: 994: 991: 989: 986: 985: 983: 979: 970: 965: 963: 958: 956: 951: 950: 947: 943: 942: 940: 936: 925: 920: 916: 913: 910: 907: 904: 901: 898: 895: 892: 889: 886: 883: 880: 876: 873: 869: 866: 863: 860: 856: 851: 850: 840: 836: 832: 827: 824: 823: 821: 818: 816: 812: 811: 806: 802: 798: 794: 791: 790: 788: 785: 783: 779: 778: 773: 769: 765: 760: 756: 753: 752: 750: 746: 743: 741: 737: 736: 731: 727: 723: 717: 708: 697: 687: 677: 676:Welcome-image 669: 666: 665: 663: 658: 655: 653: 649: 648: 643: 639: 635: 630: 627: 626: 623: 620: 618: 614: 613: 608: 604: 600: 596: 593: 592: 590: 587: 583: 579: 575: 571: 567: 566: 561: 557: 554: 553: 551: 548: 546: 545:GeoffreyT2000 542: 541: 536: 532: 528: 520: 512: 509: 508: 506: 503: 500: 498: 494: 493: 488: 484: 480: 475: 472: 471: 468: 465: 463: 459: 458: 453: 449: 445: 441: 434: 426: 421: 418: 417: 414: 411: 409: 405: 404: 399: 395: 391: 387: 383: 378: 373: 370: 369: 366: 363: 361: 357: 356: 347: 343: 339: 334: 333: 332: 328: 324: 320: 316: 312: 311: 310: 306: 302: 297: 294: 293: 291: 288: 286: 282: 281: 280: 277: 276:two questions 273: 262: 258: 254: 249: 246: 245: 243: 240: 239: 234: 230: 226: 221: 217: 214: 213: 211: 208: 207: 202: 198: 194: 189: 186: 185: 183: 180: 179: 178: 170: 169: 165: 161: 153: 150: 149: 148: 147: 144: 141: 140:Moneytrees🏝️ 137: 133: 125:Co-nomination 124: 123: 122: 121: 118: 106: 102: 98: 94: 90: 85: 81: 78: 75: 71: 62: 61: 60: 56: 48: 41: 35: 32: 27: 26: 19: 6414: 6411: 6359: 6350: 6315: 6303:Gog the Mild 6283:fixed it. — 6251: 6240: 6203: 6172: 6167: 6163: 6074: 6059: 6054: 6045: 6039: 6038: 6016: 6003: 5999: 5997: 5992: 5990: 5975:Patient Zero 5974: 5969: 5950: 5933: 5909: 5908:as follows: 5885: 5884: 5874: 5873: 5811: 5806: 5793: 5785: 5778: 5774: 5767: 5763: 5759: 5755: 5750: 5739: 5722: 5715: 5690: 5657: 5640: 5561: 5543: 5519: 5500: 5475: 5455: 5425: 5420: 5418: 5397: 5379: 5366: 5356: 5350:☾Loriendrew☽ 5344: 5332:TonyBallioni 5313: 5304:CAPTAIN RAJU 5303: 5297: 5282:(please use 5269: 5252: 5234: 5203: 5198: 5192: 5180: 5163: 5158: 5142: 5121: 5104: 5071: 5053: 5031: 5014: 4997: 4979:GA Melbourne 4976: 4971: 4951: 4930: 4911: 4894: 4877: 4865: 4851: 4847: 4830: 4819: 4813: 4807: 4801: 4782: 4772:Trey Maturin 4770: 4751: 4730: 4709: 4690: 4679:Usedtobecool 4677: 4670: 4658:Jehowahyereh 4653: 4636: 4619: 4605: 4588: 4571: 4547: 4525: 4508: 4488: 4487: 4484: 4467: 4450: 4446: 4442: 4421: 4420: 4416: 4413: 4402: 4383: 4362: 4345: 4335: 4330: 4318: 4301: 4284: 4257: 4237: 4232: 4214: 4203: 4192: 4191: 4185: 4175: 4168: 4150: 4141: 4136: 4131: 4126: 4121: 4111: 4106: 4104: 4100: 4062: 4059: 4042: 4027: 4022: 4005: 3992: 3984: 3961: 3944: 3927: 3910: 3898: 3883: 3869:Gerda Arendt 3860: 3843: 3824: 3820: 3752: 3748: 3744: 3739: 3735: 3714: 3708: 3691: 3673: 3656: 3639: 3627: 3626: 3619: 3602: 3587: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3557: 3540: 3522: 3510: 3493: 3476: 3462: 3446: 3424: 3414: 3408: 3399: 3382: 3365: 3348: 3331: 3317: 3316: 3311: 3294: 3276: 3260: 3255: 3241: 3226: 3209: 3205: 3194: 3188: 3185: 3176: 3159: 3142: 3122: 3100: 3083: 3072: 3063: 3052: 3047:Yes please. 3044: 3024: 3016: 3002: 2996: 2983: 2970: 2953: 2934: 2924: 2923: 2906: 2889: 2872: 2853: 2835: 2812:— Preceding 2807: 2790: 2773: 2758:(please use 2754: 2750: 2742: 2718: 2700: 2681: 2677: 2660: 2650: 2649: 2644: 2632: 2631: 2624: 2623: 2617: 2600: 2584: 2572:TheresNoTime 2567: 2550: 2532: 2526: 2504: 2493:only-two-GAs 2492: 2469: 2452: 2429: 2410: 2385: 2368: 2351: 2331: 2326: 2300: 2283: 2217: 2196: 2177: 2160: 2148: 2134: 2117: 2100: 2083: 2062: 2045: 2030: 2018:FeydHuxtable 2013: 1966: 1943: 1942: 1938: 1934: 1919: 1916: 1904:VersaceSpace 1901: 1897: 1880: 1848: 1832: 1806: 1798: 1783: 1779: 1762: 1750:Gog the Mild 1745: 1726: 1677: 1671: 1652: 1642: 1641: 1635: 1614: 1597: 1580: 1549: 1540: 1523: 1509: 1492: 1478: 1466: 1453: 1447: 1430: 1419: 1411: 1400: 1399: 1389: 1388: 1384: 1359: 1340: 1339: 1335: 1334: 1316: 1304: 1300: 1282: 1267: 1262: 1256: 1247: 1240: 1239: 1233: 1223: 1217: 1216: 1210: 1199: 1191: 1187: 1181: 1167: 1150: 1133: 1113: 1082: 932: 931: 911: 905: 899: 893: 887: 881: 874: 867: 861: 825: 819: 792: 786: 754: 744: 696:Uw-copyright 667: 656: 628: 621: 594: 588: 563: 559: 555: 549: 510: 501: 473: 466: 419: 412: 371: 364: 295: 289: 275: 268: 247: 241: 215: 209: 187: 181: 176: 156: 151: 128: 104: 76: 68: 52: 51: 46: 30: 28: 6390:LordPeterII 5934:Weak oppose 5900:, in their 5898:Herostratus 5858:Herostratus 5831:Herostratus 5817:Herostratus 5794:possibility 5764:great drama 5481:Herostratus 5357:(ring-ring) 5318:T. Mammothy 5038:LordPeterII 4937:Helloheart 4855:scope_creep 4788:PerryPerryD 4735:Arbitration 4593:Atlantic306 4576:Floquenbeam 4289:Daniel Case 3884:HJ Mitchell 3726:revolutions 3661:Ad Orientem 3515:— sparklism 3498:Newyorkbrad 3336:Kj cheetham 3088:Ozzie10aaaa 2958:Andrew Gray 2933:Seriously, 2436:✠ SunDawn ✠ 2395:Sennecaster 2286:, Why not? 2165:Coldupnorth 2071:Femke (alt) 2033:NOBIGDEAL. 1885:Drummingman 1483:KylieTastic 1065:User rights 1055:CentralAuth 815:Saturnrises 782:Saturnrises 6362:Degenerate 6134:* Pppery * 6106:* Pppery * 6060:Ritchie333 6046:Ritchie333 5902:recent RfA 5838:(he/him • 5807:appointing 5751:shockingly 5731:this essay 5168:Beeblebrox 4882:Netherzone 4793:Talk To Me 4774:has spoken 4174:Jezebel's 4047:EdJohnston 3805:related. — 3644:MaxnaCarta 3562:Lightburst 3528:Find bruce 3431:EPRICAVARK 3387:Chocmilk03 3277:S Marshall 3247:Guerillero 3244:why not -- 3136:(he/they) 3068:WP:SNOWPRO 2984:Ritchie333 2723:John Cline 2605:Malcolmxl5 2337:Howl at me 1883:--, LGTM, 1868:Epicgenius 1820:* Pppery * 1568:~ ToBeFree 1416:my default 1376:SandDoctor 1336:Withdrawn. 1140:(he/him • 1048:Cross-wiki 1029:AfD closes 847:Discussion 560:discussion 462:GhostRiver 433:Keep local 285:0xDeadbeef 105:especially 101:bus factor 65:Nomination 31:successful 6373:Correct. 6285:Ingenuity 6267:Thingofme 6243:respond. 6218:FlyingAce 5836:Shushugah 5701:GregJackP 5625:(he/they) 5591:processes 5577:(he/they) 5551:(he/they) 5525:OrgoneBox 5461:Guettarda 5402:OrgoneBox 5290:on reply) 5216:Barkeep49 5080:Harobouri 4922:(discuss) 4714:Clayoquot 4696:Vanamonde 4611:EggRoll97 4400:Trusted. 4193:Wizardman 4127:King of ♥ 3848:Dan Bloch 3789:Cullen328 3758:Cullen328 3740:obviously 3679:Marchjuly 3607:Guettarda 3370:Titodutta 3318:North8000 3003:SPF121188 2937:per nom. 2911:Dr.Pinsky 2877:Gusfriend 2766:on reply) 2475:Paul Erik 2443:(contact) 2373:Banks Irk 2263:WP:REFUND 2259:no quorum 2088:Ymblanter 1841:FlyingAce 1712:SmokeyJoe 1704:WP:RECALL 1690:SmokeyJoe 1658:Thingofme 1619:Ingenuity 1602:DanCherek 1346:Athaenara 1307:Dr vulpes 1138:Shushugah 1024:AfD votes 1019:BLP edits 897:block log 505:User:Whpq 408:Shushugah 319:WP:RECALL 55:Acalamari 6432:Category 6317:*Whack!* 6293:contribs 6255:contribs 6207:contribs 6086:Chequers 6024:Primefac 5919:Beccaynr 5915:involved 5695:criteria 5606:eviolite 5476:actually 5288:|Chess}} 5286:reply to 5164:de facto 5148:kashmīrī 5134:contribs 5095:a·po·des 4917:Hawkeye7 4722:contribs 4624:Dekimasu 4500:contribs 4034:(witter) 4010:Rollidan 3964:LGTM. -- 3865:precious 3835:Contribs 3415:contribs 3383:Support: 3366:Support: 3353:Muboshgu 3263:nableezy 3132:contribs 3053:Deadbeef 3036:Chequers 2826:contribs 2818:Jkus9061 2814:unsigned 2762:reply to 2743:Support. 2512:Primefac 2341:My hunts 2249:contribs 1935:4 Yeses! 1803:Eddie891 1627:contribs 1341:Support. 1209:Glad to 1125:contribs 1085:as nom - 1039:PROD log 1002:Analysis 981:Counters 865:contribs 323:SilkTork 80:contribs 6322:Panini! 6040:Neutral 6004:neutral 6000:support 5985:Neutral 5797:nature. 5706:Boomer! 5585:Several 5520:Comment 5367:Support 5345:Support 5314:Support 5298:Support 5270:Support 5253:Support 5193:Support 5181:Support 5162:this a 5159:Support 5143:Support 5122:Support 5109:Dolotta 5105:Support 5072:Support 5054:Support 5032:Support 5015:Support 4998:Support 4972:Support 4952:Support 4931:Support 4912:Support 4895:Support 4878:Support 4870:Duonaut 4866:Support 4848:Support 4831:Support 4802:Support 4783:Support 4756:Martinp 4752:Support 4731:Support 4710:Support 4691:Support 4671:Support 4654:Support 4637:Support 4620:Support 4606:Support 4589:Support 4548:Support 4543:WP:SNOW 4526:Support 4513:Amakuru 4509:Support 4485:Support 4468:Support 4443:Support 4424:Catfish 4414:Support 4388:Enos733 4384:Support 4363:Support 4346:Support 4331:Liliana 4319:Support 4302:Support 4285:Support 4258:Support 4233:Support 4204:Support 4186:Support 4169:Support 4151:Support 4122:Support 4101:Support 4060:Support 4043:Support 4023:Support 4006:Support 3985:Support 3962:Support 3945:Support 3928:Support 3911:Support 3899:Support 3861:Support 3844:Support 3826:JML1148 3821:Support 3808:Danre98 3803:WP:FRAM 3736:Support 3722:spin me 3709:Support 3696:Loopy30 3692:Support 3674:Support 3657:Support 3640:Support 3620:Support 3603:Support 3575:Support 3558:Support 3541:Support 3523:Support 3511:Support 3494:Support 3477:Support 3463:Support 3447:Support 3425:Support 3400:Support 3349:Support 3332:Support 3312:Support 3299:Fadesga 3295:Support 3256:Support 3242:Support 3234:Snowman 3227:Support 3212:Schwede 3206:Support 3177:Support 3164:Sarrail 3160:Support 3143:Support 3123:Support 3101:Support 3084:support 3064:Support 3045:Support 3017:Support 2997:Support 2971:Support 2954:Support 2935:Support 2907:Support 2890:Support 2873:Support 2854:Support 2842:Pacific 2836:Support 2808:Support 2791:Support 2774:Support 2747:WP:CLUE 2719:support 2701:Support 2678:Support 2661:Support 2645:Support 2618:Support 2601:Support 2588:Leijurv 2585:Support 2568:Support 2551:Support 2527:Support 2488:opposes 2470:Support 2453:Support 2430:Support 2411:Support 2386:Support 2369:Support 2352:Support 2327:Support 2301:Support 2288:Sea Cow 2284:Support 2218:Support 2197:Support 2178:Support 2161:Support 2149:Support 2135:Support 2118:Support 2101:Support 2084:Support 2063:Support 2046:Support 2038:Blaster 2031:Support 2014:Support 1967:Support 1917:Support 1898:Support 1881:Support 1853:Diannaa 1849:Support 1833:Support 1799:Support 1780:Support 1767:Johnbod 1763:Support 1746:Support 1727:Support 1679:CX Zoom 1672:support 1653:Support 1640:Dreamy 1636:Support 1615:Support 1598:Support 1581:Support 1553:Georgia 1541:Support 1528:Maproom 1524:Support 1510:Support 1497:Vacant0 1493:Support 1479:Support 1448:Support 1431:support 1429:Add my 1421:Lindsay 1412:Support 1385:Support 1360:Support 1317:Support 1301:Support 1283:Support 1268:Dameron 1257:Support 1234:Support 1211:support 1182:Support 1173:Minorax 1168:Support 1155:Pbritti 1151:Support 1134:Support 1114:Support 1083:Support 1077:Support 1034:CSD log 872:deleted 84:created 6153:ASTILY 5993:Oppose 5970:Oppose 5951:Oppose 5886:(talk) 5749:was a 5716:Oppose 5691:Oppose 5658:Oppose 5641:Oppose 5611:(talk) 5600:admins 5588:recall 5570:WP:ARB 5566:WP:ANI 5544:Oppose 5398:Oppose 5392:Oppose 5257:SWinxy 4942:(talk) 4899:rogerd 4404:Salvio 4238:Xymmax 4156:ferret 4091:(talk) 4076:(talk) 3989:Bilorv 3915:1997kB 3127:dudhhr 3112:(talk) 2925:Oppose 2845:Depths 2778:Mifter 2691:話して下さい 2415:Ferien 2333:NW1223 2310:Tymon. 2272:ASTILY 2201:WP:FFD 2120:Sure. 1737:plicit 1514:Kurtis 1467:~Styyx 1454:~Styyx 1401:(talk) 1322:Ovinus 1241:BD2412 1218:Volten 1200:(talk) 1188:Formal 1106:(Talk) 1092:ASTILY 988:XTools 384:, and 377:WP:RFP 143:(Talk) 115:ASTILY 6353:Helen 6169:mello 6082:Spiel 5906:Z1720 5768:again 5426:Stani 5421:Stani 5274:Chess 5235:would 5199:Davey 4808:L293D 4641:Kusma 4554:Atsme 4541:also 4472:hako9 4263:Gizza 4176:Ponyo 3715:78.26 3584:mello 3231:Giant 3195:edits 3032:Spiel 2941:Voice 2752:Clyde 2705:Aoidh 2682:years 2343:: --> 2153:MER-C 2050:DFlhb 2035:House 1921:Andre 1550:Sandy 935:civil 879:count 662:bitey 272:limit 16:< 6396:talk 6379:talk 6375:Whpq 6346:Whpq 6307:talk 6289:talk 6281:this 6271:talk 6249:talk 6201:talk 6191:and 6124:talk 6120:Izno 6077:Ϣere 6028:talk 6009:El_C 5961:talk 5942:talk 5923:talk 5840:talk 5821:talk 5779:does 5680:talk 5666:talk 5649:talk 5529:talk 5485:talk 5465:talk 5456:less 5446:talk 5406:talk 5373:Kinu 5336:talk 5322:talk 5278:talk 5261:talk 5244:talk 5220:talk 5204:2010 5172:talk 5130:talk 5113:talk 5092:Wug· 5063:talk 5044:talk 5019:L3X1 5006:talk 4903:talk 4886:talk 4839:talk 4835:Deor 4760:talk 4743:talk 4718:talk 4700:Talk 4662:talk 4645:talk 4597:talk 4580:talk 4535:talk 4517:talk 4496:talk 4476:talk 4447:this 4392:talk 4354:talk 4321:per 4310:talk 4293:talk 4269:talk 4160:talk 4051:talk 4014:talk 3995:talk 3975:talk 3953:talk 3936:talk 3919:talk 3873:talk 3852:talk 3831:Talk 3793:talk 3779:talk 3762:talk 3700:talk 3683:talk 3665:talk 3648:talk 3611:talk 3566:talk 3549:talk 3532:talk 3502:talk 3485:talk 3454:talk 3437:talk 3409:talk 3391:talk 3374:talk 3357:talk 3340:talk 3323:talk 3303:talk 3189:chat 3182:Alyo 3168:talk 3151:talk 3092:talk 3027:Ϣere 2979:this 2977:and 2973:per 2962:talk 2945:Clam 2915:talk 2898:talk 2881:talk 2863:talk 2822:talk 2799:talk 2782:talk 2727:talk 2709:talk 2669:talk 2633:1729 2609:talk 2592:talk 2576:talk 2559:talk 2542:talk 2516:talk 2497:El_C 2461:talk 2420:talk 2401:Chat 2377:talk 2335:< 2292:talk 2245:talk 2226:talk 2209:talk 2187:talk 2169:talk 2126:talk 2109:talk 2092:talk 2075:talk 2054:talk 2022:talk 1995:rado 1974:rado 1889:talk 1872:talk 1857:talk 1809:Work 1771:talk 1754:talk 1716:talk 1694:talk 1662:talk 1643:Jazz 1623:talk 1606:talk 1589:talk 1572:talk 1558:Talk 1532:talk 1501:talk 1487:talk 1439:talk 1370:! -- 1366:Whpq 1326:talk 1292:talk 1274:talk 1263:Popo 1192:Dude 1159:talk 1142:talk 1121:talk 1117:Elli 924:here 909:rfar 891:logs 859:talk 855:Whpq 835:talk 831:Whpq 801:talk 797:Whpq 768:talk 764:Whpq 759:this 726:talk 722:Whpq 638:talk 634:Whpq 603:talk 599:Whpq 578:talk 574:Whpq 531:talk 527:Whpq 483:talk 479:Whpq 448:talk 444:Whpq 394:talk 390:Whpq 342:talk 338:Whpq 327:talk 315:Whpq 305:talk 301:Whpq 257:talk 253:Whpq 229:talk 225:Whpq 197:talk 193:Whpq 164:talk 160:Whpq 97:NFCC 74:talk 70:Whpq 47:Whpq 6241:not 6174:hi! 6055:DUH 5812:not 5786:all 5740:did 5735:RfA 5676:JBL 5568:or 5442:Mz7 5240:Mz7 4674:nbd 4429:Jim 4374:755 4336:UwU 4275:voy 3903:jni 3589:hi! 3179:-- 3147:KoA 2943:of 2858:Joe 2721:.-- 2533:Yee 2362:\\ 2237:not 1954:ed. 1839:. – 1784:any 1706:. 1560:) 1373:The 1224:001 915:spi 885:AfD 820:15. 787:14. 745:13. 740:Mz7 657:12. 622:11. 589:10. 440:FFD 425:VRT 274:of 89:FfD 57:at 6434:: 6399:) 6381:) 6367:◆ 6329:🥪 6309:) 6295:) 6291:• 6273:) 6257:) 6209:) 6181:) 6179:投稿 6166:, 6126:) 6030:) 6022:. 5998:+ 5959::: 5955:// 5944:) 5925:) 5842:) 5823:) 5682:) 5668:) 5651:) 5594:of 5531:) 5487:) 5467:) 5448:) 5440:. 5408:) 5338:) 5324:) 5284:{{ 5280:) 5263:) 5246:) 5222:) 5174:) 5136:) 5132:/ 5115:) 5090:— 5065:) 5047:) 5008:) 4985:| 4981:( 4905:) 4888:) 4841:) 4817:• 4768:— 4762:) 4745:) 4724:) 4720:| 4683:☎️ 4664:) 4647:) 4628:よ! 4599:) 4582:) 4572:is 4562:📧 4559:💬 4537:) 4519:) 4502:) 4498:| 4478:) 4470:— 4394:) 4356:) 4312:) 4295:) 4272:• 4226:) 4224:📖 4221:💬 4162:) 4053:) 4016:) 3999:) 3978:) 3955:) 3938:) 3921:) 3887:| 3875:) 3867:-- 3863:, 3854:) 3837:) 3833:| 3795:) 3781:) 3764:) 3724:/ 3702:) 3685:) 3667:) 3650:) 3631:iz 3613:) 3596:) 3594:投稿 3581:, 3568:) 3551:) 3534:) 3526:-- 3504:) 3487:) 3456:) 3440:) 3418:) 3412:~ 3393:) 3376:) 3359:) 3351:– 3342:) 3325:) 3305:) 3267:- 3217:66 3170:) 3153:) 3115:@ 3094:) 3086:-- 3049:0x 2981:. 2964:) 2939:— 2917:) 2900:) 2883:) 2840:🌊 2828:) 2824:• 2801:) 2784:) 2760:{{ 2749:. 2729:) 2711:) 2694:) 2671:) 2625:DB 2611:) 2594:) 2570:— 2561:) 2544:) 2537:no 2518:) 2510:. 2463:) 2413:-- 2404:) 2379:) 2303:, 2294:) 2251:) 2247:• 2228:) 2211:) 2203:. 2171:) 2151:. 2128:) 2111:) 2094:) 2077:) 2069:. 2056:) 2024:) 2005:) 1993:a! 1984:) 1972:a! 1969:. 1951:, 1926:🚐 1909:🌃 1891:) 1874:) 1859:) 1773:) 1756:) 1748:. 1718:) 1696:) 1674:. 1664:) 1629:) 1625:• 1608:) 1591:) 1574:) 1534:) 1503:) 1441:) 1349:✉ 1328:) 1294:) 1170:-- 1161:) 1144:) 1127:) 1123:| 903:lu 837:) 826:A: 803:) 793:A: 770:) 755:A: 728:) 710:}} 704:{{ 699:}} 693:{{ 689:}} 683:{{ 679:}} 673:{{ 668:A: 664:? 640:) 629:A: 605:) 595:A: 580:) 556:A: 550:9. 533:) 522:}} 516:{{ 511:A: 502:8. 485:) 474:A: 467:7. 450:) 436:}} 430:{{ 420:A: 413:6. 396:) 372:A: 365:5. 344:) 329:) 307:) 296:A: 290:4. 259:) 248:A: 242:3. 231:) 216:A: 210:2. 199:) 188:A: 182:1. 166:) 36:. 6393:( 6377:( 6326:• 6305:( 6287:( 6269:( 6252:· 6247:( 6204:· 6199:( 6177:( 6150:F 6122:( 6026:( 5940:( 5921:( 5896:@ 5860:: 5856:@ 5853:) 5849:( 5829:@ 5819:( 5678:( 5664:( 5647:( 5527:( 5509:W 5506:P 5503:T 5501:~ 5483:( 5463:( 5444:( 5416:→ 5404:( 5380:c 5376:/ 5355:☏ 5334:( 5320:( 5276:( 5259:( 5242:( 5218:( 5170:( 5128:( 5111:( 5097: 5061:( 5041:( 5035:– 5004:( 4989:) 4987:C 4983:T 4901:( 4884:( 4837:( 4823:) 4820:✎ 4814:☎ 4811:( 4758:( 4741:( 4716:( 4702:) 4698:( 4660:( 4643:( 4595:( 4578:( 4533:( 4515:( 4494:( 4474:( 4459:W 4456:P 4453:T 4451:~ 4390:( 4352:( 4308:( 4291:( 4277:) 4267:( 4219:( 4158:( 4142:♠ 4137:♣ 4132:♦ 4112:Ø 4107:N 4049:( 4012:( 3991:( 3972:( 3951:( 3934:( 3917:( 3871:( 3850:( 3829:( 3791:( 3777:( 3760:( 3728:) 3720:( 3698:( 3681:( 3663:( 3646:( 3628:L 3609:( 3592:( 3564:( 3547:( 3530:( 3500:( 3483:( 3452:( 3434:( 3429:L 3406:( 3389:( 3372:( 3355:( 3338:( 3321:( 3301:( 3286:C 3284:/ 3282:T 3198:) 3192:· 3186:( 3166:( 3149:( 3090:( 2960:( 2913:( 2896:( 2879:( 2865:) 2861:( 2820:( 2797:( 2780:( 2740:) 2736:( 2725:( 2707:( 2688:( 2667:( 2607:( 2590:( 2574:( 2557:( 2540:( 2514:( 2459:( 2422:) 2418:( 2398:( 2375:( 2339:• 2313:r 2290:( 2269:F 2243:( 2224:( 2207:( 2189:) 2185:( 2167:( 2124:( 2107:( 2090:( 2073:( 2052:( 2020:( 2003:T 2001:✙ 1999:C 1997:( 1982:T 1980:✙ 1978:C 1976:( 1939:! 1900:— 1887:( 1870:( 1855:( 1769:( 1752:( 1732:✗ 1714:( 1692:( 1676:— 1660:( 1621:( 1604:( 1587:( 1570:( 1556:( 1530:( 1499:( 1489:) 1485:( 1437:( 1368:: 1364:@ 1324:( 1290:( 1248:T 1157:( 1119:( 1089:F 968:e 961:t 954:v 927:. 917:) 912:· 906:· 900:· 894:· 888:· 882:· 875:· 868:· 862:· 857:( 833:( 799:( 766:( 724:( 718:: 714:@ 636:( 601:( 576:( 529:( 481:( 446:( 392:( 340:( 325:( 303:( 255:( 227:( 195:( 162:( 112:F 77:· 72:( 40:.

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

Knowledge

:Requests for adminship/Whpq - Knowledge

Index