Talk:Barbara Boxer/Archive 2

500:

topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage." What Notability article were you reading? Also, Loonmonkey wrote: "it would have to be an integral part of her biography, the exclusion of which would give an incomplete picture." The BLP article says nothing of the kind. So you've both misrepresented (I'm sure unintentionally) two Knowledge (XXG) guidance articles. Which means you have yet to provide a valid reason why this isn't notable.--

1107:

humorous parody and satire. A political opponent sponsored an advertisement "comparing her to Dr. Evil from the “Austin Powers” movies complaining when people called him Mister." A humorous video was subsequently released, that is produced by David Zucker("Airplane"). The video depicts, in hyperbole, people of various employment reacting to her comments, also parodied, by demanding that others call them by their given title of employment. Capital Hill continues to make light of this incident, several months after the fact --

31: 139: 442:, you'll see just how fleshed out it is, not only with an explanation of what happened, but also the impact of what happened. In the case of this Boxer thing, I know the incident can be documented, but I don't know that there is any lasting impact that occurred afterwards that makes it notable, and Fiorina using it in campaign ads may be part of it, but in and of itself it's not enough. I think you should read over 357:

show 'lasting notability'? It seems like anything and everything in Boxer's article could be deleted because it doesn't have 'lasting notability'. How does one prove Boxer's appearance on the TV show 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' to be 'lasting notable'? Besides, the Walsh incident was included in the article until two weeks ago. Did something happen two weeks ago that suddenly made it no longer 'lasting notable'?

277: 204: 601:

lasting impact. There is nothing in the Notability article saying anything of the kind. P.S. What on EARTH does your opinion about whether she was justified or not have to do with ANYTHING??? Knowledge (XXG) explains controversies that occurred, whether one party was justified or not. Please, keep your pro-Boxer opinions out of the discussion. It's really quite inappropriate.--

467:. As for google, Muboshgu is correct, blog posts don't go away, you can always google them, even years later. But that doesn't mean that whatever some partisan blog was chattering about during a single news cycle several years ago has any lasting impact (particularly to a biography). The rules are very strict for any 534:

explain where exactly the BLP article says that "it would have to be an integral part of her biography, the exclusion of which would give an incomplete picture." Also waiting for Moguhsho to tell us where the Notability article says anything about "lasting impact." Please stop evading the questions. --

1957:

and you haven't found any support for your position, so in the absence of new information there's not a whole lot left to discuss. As editors move on from this discussion and there are fewer and fewer left to continue disagreeing with you, please don't confuse that with anything resembling agreement

1106:

In 2009, Senator Boxer importuned a general not to call her "ma'am", but to refer to her by her title. The dialogue occured during Brigadier General Michael Walsh's testimony regarding the Louisiana coastal restoration process in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. This conversation became the subject of

499:

Mobushgo wrote: "I don't know that there is any lasting impact . . . I think you should read over WP:N to get a better sense of notability." The Notability article doesn't say anything about "lasting impact." If anything, it specifically says that a lasting impact is NOT NECESSARY: Quote: "once a

533:

Many attempts have been made to provide the evidence but it's been rebuffed by you and Mobushgo, who --- as I've noted --- falsely claimed that guidance articles say something they don't say. So you have yet to explain how the evidence ALREADY provided wasn't sufficient. Still waiting for you to

356:

Come 'on guys! I have asked numerous times now, how does one 'show lasting notability'? Use Wilson's 'You lie' for example. If an editor opposed including that, how would you 'show lasting notability'. If an editor opposed including the 'potatoe' incident in Dan Qualye's article, how would one

2181:

Like you said, as mentioned above some arguments might not stand up to logic, as much as they represent opinions and a general feeling. But we can't let our feelings about someone deter us from doing what's right for the article, right? It needs to be balanced. You mentioned another problem, that

1510:

I'm not speaking for other editors as much as I'm speaking for the consensus that we together formed in May 2011. Dayewalker just reverted your edit today. If Tarc and Looneymonkey disagree with me, I will stand corrected, but I don't expect them to be on Knowledge (XXG) on a Saturday. Since they

600:

And you're summarizing the policy in a misleading way, Loonymonkey. That's the point. Your failure to point to anything in the BLP article backing up your claims is quite telling. Also, you keep mentioning "lasting impact", Mobushgu, and yet you can't demonstrate that the event has to have had

321:

Actually the general called Boxer 'Ma'am'. As I stated above under 'major rehaul', it is something she is remembered for, just as Joe Wilson is remembered for yelling 'You lie' at Obama. If you google the incident, you will find many web sites referring to it. It led to some interesting events

518:

notable and then asking others to prove the negative. That's not how it works. The burden of evidence lies with you, as the editor seeking to add material, to convince the Knowledge (XXG) community that this is somehow notable. To your quotes above, the key words are "significant coverage." This

2113:

Another problem is the fact that quality of arguments made here affect the level of agreement on this page. if a better quality argument is made by less people, it still balances out. My concern is that some editors are making arguments based on how they feel about things, as opposed to logical

1230:

It's more than "one editor". Your first edit was reverted by Dayewalker. Tarc and Looneymonkey have also been crystal clear in opposing this in any form, if you read the above discussion from two months ago. That's four, by my count. Nothing about this issue has changed in the past two months.

1903:

Several of your links are about the Boxer-Fiorina campaign and mention the "ma'am" thing in passing. Other than that, the coverage is routine election year coverage of something that one politicians tried to use against another politician. Once the election was over, no one talks about this

548:

Experienced editors often summarize policy, rather than just quoting blocks of text back and forth at each other. Your demands for more policy quotes are meaningless to this discussion because, as stated earlier, it's up to you to justify why this belongs in the article, and you haven't even

1332:

Your request regarding a majority view makes little sense. The thing is, this is just a minor, throwaway mini-"controversy" that saw some press when it happened, then faded into irrelevance. People have tried to make a beef in the Obama articles about teleprompters, fly-swatting incidents,

826:

While hardly a reliable source for new, the fact the incident was mocked (a year after the fact) in a spoof ad that went viral does show lasting noteability. (Take out the * to check out the site. Wikepedia spam filtered it out. I am not wanting to allow Wikepedia to use this web site for

1347:

Alright, let's be constructive then. Please provide reliable sources stating that this has become irrelevant. Anything that says that controversy took place that has since blown over would be fine. I'm agreeable to putting this in the article instead, with some context of course.

2245:

Exactly, our personal opinions don't matter. We need to focus on the policies, which are based on broad consensus, to decide whether this belongs here or not. We need to verify these sources, quote them properly, not in a biased way; not synthesize our own points of view into

422:

You can look the history of the Boxer article, and all articles before March 24 will have it included and documented. My question (AGAIN!) (Am I not being clear??) is how do you show notability? If you google 'Barbara Boxer Walsh' you will get scores of web sites.

471:. For this to be included, it would have to be related in some way to Boxer's notability, in other words, it would have to be an integral part of her biography, the exclusion of which would give an incomplete picture. That is clearly not the case here. -- 111:

Whether the other pic is a fake or not (I swear it's her face on a man's body, the hands are giving it away to me, plus the attributed source of the pic is questionable), this pic looks much better. I'm going to investigate that other pic this by tomorrow.

2252:

We still haven't gotten a straight answer about that. And I believe it's the main point being discussed here. Some are concerned that it isn't noteable, but can't really seem to show why. If someone could get that it could help support that argument here.

851:

The fact that unreliable tabloid rags...especially one that is so reviled as a source on the wikipedia that it's URL had to be blacklisted...are the only ones still talking about it kinda speaks for itself. There's really nothing else to discuss here.

2273:

You have been told on numerous occasions that the concern is giving undue weight to am election-year political squabble. Every single editor who has opposed this material has provided a rationale supported by Knowledge (XXG) guidelines and/or policy.

1680:

may refer only to article subject notability, however there are many other policy-based criteria to judge which events are noteworthy and encyclopedic. Just because something exists doesn't mean it belongs in an encyclopedia article about a subject.

1948:

and the material you've proposed to add doesn't have any biographical implications whatsoever. We don't include every minor barb leveled at a politician by their campaign opponents. If we did, every single political bio would be nothing but a

2453:

Saying that something doesn't need to be included in a section because it doesn't have any votes sounds like an opinion. This site is for facts. The fact is, Barbara Boxer Co-Sponsored PIPA. You can move this, but do not silence my voice.

882:

My reading glasses work quite well, my boy, but thanks. A blurb in a blog during the senate race doesn't amount to much either. You're not going to get this into the article, under any circumstances, so move on to other matters, please.

662:

Since the Walsh incident was included in the Bio before March 24 when Loonymonkey deleted it, it seems that the burden of proof lies with Loonymonkey to justify deleting it, rather than the editors trying to put it back into the article.

1307:

If I read you correctly, your main point was that the sources provided in the first account of this incident, were insufficient with regard to truth, and credibility. If I may ask, what is your contention with regard to the new sources I

1043:

include this material, which you attempted to violate by reverting the reversions of Dayewalker and myself. You still haven't indicated any reason to include this material, nothing that would undo the past consensus that was formed.

1311:

Regarding your point about weight, If my contribution represents too strong a minority view, please provide me with the majority view complete with reliable sources to back it up. We can then consider putting that into the article.

1904:

non-incident anymore. All in all, I find your arguments unconvincing, and do not plans to spend more time repeating myself. Try to add it, and it will get reverted by any one of a variety of editors. That, as they say, is that.

754:

Tarc, I would disagree that I am 'trying to make a point', but I do invite you (or others) to show me how 'notability' is shown. But to 'play according to the rules' I will remove a point which I do truly believe is not notable.

1407:

the way it works...at this stage or any other stage. This topic has been discussed for months on this talk page, and the simple fact of the matter is that it has not, at any time, gained consensus. So allow me to explain how it

462:

And the sourcing would have to change before we could even discuss it. In there previous edit, there were nothing but opinion pieces (by political opponents, no less) which are unacceptable for referencing factual material in a

922:

I've rewritten the section on the incident to remove pov and include three new tertiary reliable sources. It also deals with the public reaction to give a more accurate description of it. Most sources seem to find it humorous.

406:

My apologies, I said "diffs" above when I was asking for reliable sources showing the notability of the incident. Unless you show us some sources, we can't really say whether the incident is still notable enough for inclusion.

1038:

First of all, there is no NPOV violation on the talk page, so I don't know what you're talking about. Nobody is removing talk page content. Secondly, there isn't "no consensus" on this material. There is a CLEAR consensus to

952:, you were bold to reinsert this information, but after the revert, you insisted on readding it rather than waiting for consensus to support your edit in discussion. Stop readding this incident without gaining consensus. – 568: 1333:

inspector general firings, and whatnot. Politicians will routinely get criticized by their ideological opponents, though. Not all of it...really, very little of it...is worthy of mention in an encyclopedia bio.

1382:

That's the way it works at this stage. The edit is factually correct, and properly sourced. It represents the majority view until you can prove otherwise. The burden is now yours to prove that it doesn't belong.

2508:

Mrs Boxer is on a list that is circulating of American Senators (and others) with dual citizenship. It seems to me it might be important enough to be in this article if true. Does anyone know if it is true?

585:

She was within her right to ask the general to refer to her by the title "senator". This whole situation became a made-up "controversy" used by Republicans for political gain. There was no lasting impact.

2288:

Undue weight concerns fairly representing points of view about a particular facet of an article. A secondary concern is giving too much attention to part of the subject with the effect that it prevalence

1511:

were so clear on opposing this attempt to smear Boxer only two months ago, and nothing has changed regarding this incident, you need their consent before you can consider this material okay to include. –

2910: 2195:

You also indicated that the above discussion is simply too difficult to understand, let alone restate. Maybe we can do some cleanup with it. All in all I think we can all make this a better article. --

2149:

Your concerns are of no concern to me, quite honestly. You have made you point quite clear,but it has been rejected by a variety of editors. Creating yet another discussion sub-section is pointless.

230:; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. 306:

This is the incident where the general called Boxer "Miss" and she insisted on being referred to as "Senator". Can you please provide some evidence suggesting a lasting notability of this event? –

79: 1412:

works at this stage; if you add this content to the article again, without consensus here, it will be reverted. If you edit war to force it in, you will be taken to the appropriate venue, i.e.

789:

Given the fact this incident played a role in the past election, is still posted multiple times on You-Tube and sort of 'went virial' when it happened, that proves its note-worthiness.

438:

Notability is not simply determined by google hits, but also by impact. You've referenced Joe Wilson a couple times. If you see the section of his article that deals with this incident,

2135:

What makes you think you have "a better quality argument made by less people"? You've been told to move on in no uncertain terms, and seem to be misrepresenting the above discussion. –

633:

There's nothing to respond to, here. You're still just talking about other editors, but not giving any reasons (valid or otherwise) for why this material belongs in the article. --

1766:"Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Knowledge (XXG) editors or the general public." 1994:

I was giving due notice to someone who was a part of the conversation when it started, that is all. I'm not runnin' around talking to every soapboxer and halfwit on the site. --

97:

I assume it is legit, it has been up on the Commons since 2008. Is there somewhere online where official portraits can be found? I did not see anything at her senate website.

740:

Ok, well then I will remove the section on 'reproductive rights' because it is not 'notable', partially as a test case, to see how editors prove that it should be included.

1849: 2584: 2335:

Bean-counting the number of sources is not a credible argument. Last word; until you can gain a consensus here, re-add this to the article it will be reverted. Simple.

283:

A user has requested mediation on this issue. Can the user who requested mediation make sure that this template is placed above the section that requires mediation, then

1459:

Ah, a fresh round of Wikilawyering. How nice. How about rather than take this directly to Arbcom, you stop edit warring and find someone else who agrees with you first?

3133: 3129: 3115: 2980: 2976: 2962: 2782: 2778: 2764: 2654: 2650: 2636: 1801: 446:

to get a better sense of notability. Granted that's about stand alone articles, but it's a good place to start. Its lead links to articles about content of articles. –

2911:

https://web.archive.org/20070927033051/http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr010=ufev20xk71.app1b&abbr=press_&page=NewsArticle&id=7343

2914: 322:

during the campaign and became a bit of a 'campaign issue'. If that is not evidence enough, maybe you could show me proof of how Wilson's 'You lie' is notable.

1813: 823: 1865:"once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage." 2114:

reasoning. If you feel strongly about something, please make sure the arguments you make in your favor, are of a quality that can be supported by logic. --

2604: 549:

attempted to do that yet. If you have a valid reason for including this material, we're all ears. Otherwise, there's nothing really left to discuss. --

485:

And to go a little further, I'd say that the "You lie!" incident, at a major presidential address to Congress, is an integral part of Wilson's bio. –

1577:

Does that mean we can now ignore the silly crap he writes here and revert without comment any future attempts to add the material to the article? -

2163:

What happened to that old ANI thread on BETA? It's gone, and with his reinserting the info a second ago, I'm thinking we need to deal with BETA's

1093:

Since one editor is attempting to subvert consensus by preventing others from seeing the contribution, and making their own judgments here it is:

1790: 2594: 167:

A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (

1832: 725:

belongs with the editor adding the information. Poorly sourced or unduly weighted information should be removed and discussed before readding.

1785: 391:

I am not sure what you mean. It was included in the article before March 24 when Loonymonkey removed it. (Does that answer your question?)

836:

The fact that it is still being discussed and was included in the bio until one editor removed it a few months ago also shows noteability.

567:

given to a frivolous, trivial confrontation. You're trying to elevate it into some sort of -gatelike scandal but in reality it is down with

1823: 1157: 2533: 2489:

was reverted, claiming there's more data there that's being ignored. What parts is the cite sourcing that the new source fails to cover?

3079: 2110:

Someone keeps making major deletions to the article without discussing it on here, this is not helpful to the decision making process.

2585:

https://web.archive.org/20050912103225/http://www.visi.com:80/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newmemberbio.cgi?lang=&member=CAJR&site=ctc

1788: 2249:

I believe I put forth a general question earlier, can anyone tell me what policy describes what is noteworthy content, and what isn't?

1798: 2930: 1209: 2614: 1852: 774:. You've just said that you're making an edit simply to demonstrate a point about another edit. That's completely disruptive. -- 2900: 2402:

Since it was rejected by a wide range of editors, and mostly supported by Bentheadvocate, a now-banned editor, no you should not.

2182:

fact that some editors are being scared away from the article because of different edit wars and so on. That needs to be resolved.

1830: 1808: 1857: 291:

Under 'major rehaul' a discussion has been going on regarding the Walsh incident. I invite responses here in this new section.

257: 181: 2588: 1835: 1811: 2915:

http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr010=ufev20xk71.app1b&abbr=press_&page=NewsArticle&id=7343

2514: 2293:

is not accurately represented. When there are over 30 reliable sources spanning from coast to coast, the question is no longer

2231:

attacks on what you fantasize are the motivations of editors who disagree with you and focus more on the actual topic, please.

1276:

I certainly know they wouldn't appreciate the allegation of subverting consensus being passed on to them by your statements. --

2940: 2920: 2870: 2470: 1803: 1695:

So your saying that you believe this isn't noteworthy enough. Do you know the specific policy that backs up your opinion? --

824:

http://www.exam*iner.com/political-transcripts-in-national/zucker-s-anti-boxer-spoof-ad-climbing-to-viral-10-min-leaps-video

2890: 2227:

What "feelings" or "opinions" other editors may or may not hold is, quite frankly, none of your concern. Focus less on

1570: 519:

doesn't even come close. Brief coverage in a few partisan sources doesn't rise to the level of notability for a BLP. --

439: 59: 2605:

https://web.archive.org/20051022090817/http://imdiversity.com:80/villages/woman/politics_law/ong_barbara_boxer_0305.asp

1651:

3. Significant viewpoints of this incident, that have been published in reliable sources, have been fairly represented.

1525:

See, I wrote that before Tarc beat me to the punch reasserting the consensus. That's three opposed and one in favor. –

276: 1183: 253: 177: 3068: 2164: 1847: 1828: 2742: 1818: 210: 38: 2019: 2880: 2494: 2392: 2018:

who is obviously a complete non-starter. Editors who are interested in an article have it on their watchlist. No

1837: 1816: 3132:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2979:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2781:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2653:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2608: 2510: 2309: 2261: 2203: 2122: 2082: 2044: 2002: 1875: 1844: 1703: 1676:

You've said argument #1 several times now, that notability doesn't apply to article content. That's incorrect.

1663: 1445: 1391: 1356: 1320: 1284: 1262: 1115: 1074: 1018: 994: 931: 699: 2537: 2368:

Sorry, nobody is taking your bait. The subject has been discussed and consensus is against you. Move on. --

867:

Please re-read my previous note since you evidently failed to see I included a reference from politicsdaily.

2595:

https://web.archive.org/20120222061951/http://www.elks.org/lodges/LodgePages.cfm?LodgeNumber=1920&ID=1826

145: 1855: 1793: 2458: 1973: 1430:

How about we avoid this stage all together. Your removal of cited, balanced material has become disruptive.

2065: 2027: 2598: 901:

As predicted, this was all just trolling by yet another sockpuppet. Not for the last time, probably....

3171: 3151:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3139: 3018: 2998:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2986: 2820: 2800:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2788: 2692: 2672:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2660: 2373: 1985: 1963: 1806: 779: 638: 554: 524: 476: 1950: 1431: 3105: 3080:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080626015425/https://boxer.senate.gov/news/releases/record.cfm?id=299645

2490: 2388: 1796: 1686: 1599: 1464: 1135: 813: 730: 606: 539: 505: 412: 381: 346: 2321:

Where in policy does it state that every anecdote supported by reliable sources merits inclusion? –

1954: 2462: 2437: 2302: 2254: 2196: 2115: 2075: 2037: 1995: 1868: 1696: 1656: 1549: 1438: 1384: 1349: 1313: 1277: 1255: 1240: 1122: 1108: 1067: 1011: 987: 924: 692: 2931:

https://web.archive.org/20071013205122/http://boxer2008.com:80/blog/2005/10/17/boxer-petition-war/

718: 3083: 2615:

https://web.archive.org/20070926203222/http://boxer.senate.gov/news/releases/record.cfm?id=282354

2466: 2441: 2326: 2172: 2140: 1826: 1530: 1516: 1505: 1236: 1049: 957: 591: 490: 451: 311: 171:

has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

117: 87: 47: 17: 3136:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2983:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2785:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2657:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

2014:

You "gave due notice" solely to the one editor who might conceivably agree with you, apart from

1716: 945: 771: 616: 564: 3152: 2999: 2901:

https://web.archive.org/20100106104012/http://www.boxer.senate.gov/issues/environment/index.cfm

2801: 2673: 938: 3050: 2852: 2724: 2566: 2061: 2023: 872: 841: 794: 760: 745: 668: 428: 396: 362: 327: 296: 214: 149: 2618: 2589:

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newmemberbio.cgi?lang=&member=CAJR&site=ctc

1007: 971: 235: 3167: 3014: 2816: 2688: 2369: 1981: 1959: 1839: 1821: 1565: 1296:

Calling it "humorous and satirical" is just lipstick on the same ol pig. Not gonna happen.

830: 775: 634: 550: 520: 472: 3159: 3006: 2941:

https://web.archive.org/20090103014454/http://boxer.senate.gov:80/news/record.cfm?id=246228

2934: 2921:

https://web.archive.org/20090103024732/http://boxer.senate.gov:80/news/record.cfm?id=232056

2871:

https://web.archive.org/20091202233730/http://boxer.senate.gov:80/news/record.cfm?id=230450

2808: 2680: 2529: 1945: 1762: 1556: 1553: 1413: 949: 833:

shows again it left a significant impact on the campaign, once again showing noteability.

722: 468: 464: 242: 3058: 2860: 2732: 2574: 2015: 1682: 1595: 1582: 1460: 809: 726: 602: 535: 501: 408: 377: 342: 2525: 805: 338: 2426: 138: 3118:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 2965:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 2904: 2767:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 2639:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 2407: 2340: 2279: 2236: 2154: 1933: 1909: 1724: 1421: 1373: 1338: 1301: 888: 857: 624: 576: 168: 102: 3158:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

3125: 3005:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

2972: 2807:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

2774: 2679:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

2646: 1862: 1677: 688: 443: 341:

showing it has lasting notability. Just telling others to Google it isn't sufficient.

3040: 2891:

https://web.archive.org/20100106111420/http://www.boxer.senate.gov/issues/healthcare/

2842: 2714: 2556: 2322: 2168: 2136: 1526: 1512: 1232: 1045: 953: 587: 486: 447: 307: 113: 83: 2944: 2924: 2874: 3179: 3026: 2828: 2700: 2541: 2518: 2498: 2474: 2445: 2411: 2396: 2377: 2344: 2330: 2316: 2283: 2268: 2240: 2210: 2176: 2158: 2144: 2129: 2089: 2069: 2051: 2031: 2009: 1989: 1967: 1937: 1913: 1882: 1728: 1710: 1690: 1670: 1603: 1586: 1572: 1534: 1520: 1468: 1452: 1425: 1398: 1377: 1363: 1342: 1327: 1291: 1269: 1081: 1053: 1025: 1001: 961: 892: 876: 868: 861: 845: 837: 817: 798: 790: 783: 764: 756: 749: 741: 734: 706: 672: 664: 642: 628: 610: 595: 580: 558: 543: 528: 509: 494: 480: 455: 432: 424: 416: 400: 392: 385: 366: 358: 350: 331: 323: 315: 300: 292: 261: 238:

then you may need to upload it to Knowledge (XXG) (Commons does not allow fair use)

185: 121: 106: 91: 3069:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080518202057/http://www.kcbs.com:80/pages/2162712.php

1368:

You're asking people to prove a negative. Doesn't work that way. Anything else?

2743:

https://web.archive.org/20050825063823/http://boxer.senate.gov/issues/sstexas.cfm

1980:) is prohibited behavior and does not affect the outcome of this discussion. -- 1560: 1066:

the talk page. It's really about edits made in Article Space. Just a thought. --

46:

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

1841: 804:

Sorry, but none of those actually show notability. Notability is shown through

3124:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 2971:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 2881:

https://web.archive.org/20070228214749/http://boxer.senate.gov/issues/economy/

2773:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 2645:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 2228: 1578: 976:

Especially contentious text can be removed to the talk page if necessary, but

203: 2894: 2746: 2609:

http://imdiversity.com/villages/woman/politics_law/ong_barbara_boxer_0305.asp

1645:

1. Notability only applies to the existance of the article, not it's content.

2403: 2336: 2275: 2232: 2150: 1929: 1905: 1720: 1548:

Please be aware that there is an ongoing discussion on the editing style of

1417: 1369: 1334: 1297: 884: 853: 620: 572: 98: 808:, not merely YouTube posts and speculation about something "going viral." 2884: 691:

only applies to the creation of an article, not the content within it. --

3072: 3055:

after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add

2857:

after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add

2729:

after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add

2571:

after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add

1745:

If it's not notable, how could I find 30 major Secondary sources for it?

2599:

http://www.elks.org/lodges/LodgePages.cfm?LodgeNumber=1920&ID=1826

440:

Joe_Wilson_(U.S._politician)#Outburst_during_2009_Presidential_address

337:

If you'd like it to be considered for inclusion, please provide some

2036:

Isn't that cute, I've got a stalker/puppy dog. Here's a treat. • --

3063:

to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

2865:

to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

2737:

to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

2579:

to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

1648:

2. Reliable replacement sources have been acquired and uncontested

1591:

Not quite. It looks like we're in for a round of canvassing first

2431: 2425:(I'm new to this let me know if this is in the wrong place. . . 1928:

Recycling the same argument into a new topic does little good.

3084:

http://www.boxer.senate.gov/news/releases/record.cfm?id=299645

1254:

speaking for other editors, it's not your place. Thank You. --

25: 3089:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

2950:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

2752:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

2624:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

944:

It was determined by consensus here that this situation was

275: 80:

File:Barbara Boxer, official Senate photo portrait, 2007.jpg

1953:

of criticism. BETA, your argument has already gotten very

2619:

http://boxer.senate.gov/news/releases/record.cfm?id=282354

1621:

The following reasons have been given against inclusion:

831:

http://www.politicsdaily.com/tag/California+Senate+Races/

2935:

http://boxer2008.com/blog/2005/10/17/boxer-petition-war/

2713:

I have just added archive links to one external link on

1976:

editors who you believe will agree with you (as you did

1437:

take you to ArbCom. You might not like what they say. --

827:

references, but it is helpful for showing notability.

3044: 3039:

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on

2846: 2841:

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on

2718: 2560: 2555:

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on

2486: 2057: 1977: 1592: 284: 948:

and not helpful for this BLP. If you want to consider

2427:

http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:SN00968:@@@P

2301:

should it be presented to reflect that prevalence. --

1158:"Women's Fights Thrive in Politics: Margaret Carlson" 2905:

http://boxer.senate.gov/issues/environment/index.cfm

3128:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 2975:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 2777:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 2649:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 241:If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no 1861:Technically this could stand in it's own article, 2945:http://boxer.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=246228 2925:http://boxer.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=232056 2875:http://boxer.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=230450 1416:, where an administrator will decide the matter. 2022:. It's canvassing, pure and simple. Cut it out. 2524:A list? Circulating on the internet? Do go on. 195:File:RecentBoxer2011.jpg Nominated for Deletion 3114:This message was posted before February 2018. 2961:This message was posted before February 2018. 2763:This message was posted before February 2018. 2635:This message was posted before February 2018. 514:You're starting with the assumption that this 376:reliable sources. That would be a good start. 219:Media without a source as of 14 September 2011 2074:Which are better, the Ḳ•bbles or the B°ts? -- 8: 1136:"Sen. Boxer to officer: Don't call me ma'am" 130:File:BarbaraBoxer.png Nominated for Deletion 82:really looks like a bad photoshop to me. – 2895:http://boxer.senate.gov/issues/healthcare/ 2747:http://boxer.senate.gov/issues/sstexas.cfm 906:The following discussion has been closed. 897: 563:What I would cite in opposition is simple 2885:http://boxer.senate.gov/issues/economy/ 1719:being given to a non-notable incident. 1127: 687:, and just a friendly reminder to all, 2432:http://en.wikipedia.org/PROTECT_IP_Act 2106:Another Attempt At Reasonable Dialogue 250:This notification is provided by a Bot 174:This notification is provided by a Bot 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3101:to let others know (documentation at 3073:http://www.kcbs.com/pages/2162712.php 213:, has been nominated for deletion at 148:, has been nominated for deletion at 7: 2056:I suggest you lay in a supply given 1210:"Be Careful What You Call Your Boss" 1182:Malcolm, Andrew (October 25, 2010). 245:then it cannot be uploaded or used. 24: 3043:. Please take a moment to review 2845:. Please take a moment to review 2717:. Please take a moment to review 2559:. Please take a moment to review 1156:Carlson, Margaret (Jul 6, 2011). 2297:something should be there, it's 2165:inability to work with consensus 1641:Arguments Against those reasons 918:Major re-write to Ma'am incident 202: 137: 29: 2482:Regarding reference replacement 209:An image used in this article, 144:An image used in this article, 2387:Should I re-add info on this? 1138:. Washington Times. 2009-06-19 262:07:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC) 1: 3180:02:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC) 2519:03:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC) 2499:14:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 1208:Heil, Emily (June 29, 2011). 1101: 3027:21:16, 7 February 2016 (UTC) 2701:05:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 2542:20:43, 10 January 2015 (UTC) 2475:19:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC) 2446:05:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC) 2422:Barbara Boxer Supports PIPA 1634:Sources given are unreliable 2829:01:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC) 2412:01:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 2397:21:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 1433:if this behavior continues 217:in the following category: 154:Deletion requests July 2011 152:in the following category: 3195: 3145:(last update: 5 June 2024) 3061:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} 3036:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 2992:(last update: 5 June 2024) 2863:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} 2838:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 2794:(last update: 5 June 2024) 2735:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} 2710:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 2666:(last update: 5 June 2024) 2577:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} 2552:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1637:Feel free to add more here 806:reliable secondary sources 569:Obama's teleprompter usage 287:to fill in the case page. 92:03:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC) 2378:20:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2345:02:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC) 2331:02:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC) 2317:02:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC) 2284:21:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2269:20:16, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2241:19:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2211:19:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2177:19:44, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2159:19:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2145:19:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2130:19:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2090:02:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 2070:21:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 2052:21:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 2032:21:04, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 2010:18:05, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1990:17:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1968:17:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1938:13:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1914:16:45, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1883:15:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1729:14:04, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1711:13:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1691:09:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1671:09:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1618:Let's get back to basics 1604:09:07, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1587:03:52, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1573:23:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1535:19:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1521:19:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1469:15:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 1453:10:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC) 1426:01:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC) 1399:23:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1378:23:11, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1364:20:35, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1343:20:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1328:20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1292:19:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1270:19:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1241:19:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1123:19:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1097:Boxer In Humor and Satire 1082:20:09, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1054:19:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1026:19:44, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 1002:19:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 962:19:30, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 939:19:29, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 917: 707:07:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC) 495:15:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 481:15:26, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 456:13:01, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 433:05:24, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 417:05:14, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 401:05:05, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 386:04:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 367:04:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 351:03:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 332:03:24, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 316:03:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC) 301:01:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC) 186:22:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC) 122:01:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC) 107:13:06, 2 April 2011 (UTC) 2291:amongst reliable sources 1851:, The San Francisco Gate 1810:, San Francisco Examiner 1800:, Wall Street Journal #2 1631:Incident is undue weight 1628:Incident was not notable 1058:Actually it says "moved 909:Please do not modify it. 893:12:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC) 877:04:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC) 862:15:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC) 846:07:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC) 818:06:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC) 799:06:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC) 784:05:51, 17 May 2011 (UTC) 765:12:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 750:08:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 735:06:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 673:06:11, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 643:00:20, 13 May 2011 (UTC) 629:17:43, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 619:. read at your leisure. 611:17:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 596:15:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 581:15:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 559:16:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 544:14:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 529:05:38, 11 May 2011 (UTC) 510:03:18, 11 May 2011 (UTC) 372:Again, please show some 211:File:RecentBoxer2011.jpg 3032:External links modified 2834:External links modified 2706:External links modified 2548:External links modified 1825:, National Public Radio 1625:Incident is not notable 770:Seriously, please read 980:as a last resort, and 280: 254:CommonsNotificationBot 178:CommonsNotificationBot 2511:Richardson mcphillips 279: 146:File:BarbaraBoxer.png 42:of past discussions. 3126:regular verification 3047:. If necessary, add 2973:regular verification 2958:to let others know. 2849:. If necessary, add 2775:regular verification 2760:to let others know. 2721:. If necessary, add 2647:regular verification 2632:to let others know. 2563:. If necessary, add 1846:, The New York Times 1820:, The Sacramento Bee 1062:the talk page", not 3116:After February 2018 3093:parameter below to 2963:After February 2018 2954:parameter below to 2765:After February 2018 2756:parameter below to 2637:After February 2018 2628:parameter below to 1815:, Los Angeles Times 1792:, Los Angeles Times 1784:Wall Street Journal 1184:"Top of the Ticket" 1102:Don't Call Me Ma'am 75:Is this pic a fake? 3121:InternetArchiveBot 2968:InternetArchiveBot 2770:InternetArchiveBot 2642:InternetArchiveBot 1795:, Washington Times 982:never just deleted 281: 243:fair use rationale 169:commons:COM:SPEEDY 18:Talk:Barbara Boxer 3178: 3146: 3025: 2993: 2827: 2795: 2699: 2667: 2504:dual citizenship? 2478: 2461:comment added by 2449: 2385: 2384: 1958:or consensus. -- 1509: 1188:Los Angeles Times 268: 267: 223:What should I do? 215:Wikimedia Commons 192: 191: 158:What should I do? 150:Wikimedia Commons 72: 71: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3186: 3174: 3173:Talk to my owner 3169: 3144: 3143: 3122: 3110: 3104: 3062: 3054: 3021: 3020:Talk to my owner 3016: 2991: 2990: 2969: 2864: 2856: 2823: 2822:Talk to my owner 2818: 2793: 2792: 2771: 2736: 2728: 2695: 2694:Talk to my owner 2690: 2665: 2664: 2643: 2578: 2570: 2477: 2455: 2448: 2434: 2313: 2306: 2265: 2258: 2207: 2200: 2126: 2119: 2086: 2079: 2048: 2041: 2006: 1999: 1879: 1872: 1707: 1700: 1667: 1660: 1568: 1563: 1503: 1449: 1442: 1395: 1388: 1360: 1353: 1324: 1317: 1288: 1281: 1266: 1259: 1225: 1224: 1222: 1220: 1205: 1199: 1198: 1196: 1194: 1179: 1173: 1172: 1170: 1168: 1153: 1147: 1146: 1144: 1143: 1132: 1119: 1112: 1078: 1071: 1022: 1015: 998: 991: 935: 928: 911: 898: 703: 696: 339:reliable sources 234:If the image is 206: 199: 198: 141: 134: 133: 68: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3194: 3193: 3189: 3188: 3187: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3177: 3172: 3137: 3130:have permission 3120: 3108: 3102: 3056: 3048: 3034: 3024: 3019: 2984: 2977:have permission 2967: 2858: 2850: 2836: 2826: 2821: 2786: 2779:have permission 2769: 2730: 2722: 2708: 2698: 2693: 2658: 2651:have permission 2641: 2572: 2564: 2550: 2506: 2491:Thargor Orlando 2484: 2456: 2435: 2420: 2389:FreakyDaGeeky14 2311: 2304: 2263: 2256: 2205: 2198: 2124: 2117: 2108: 2084: 2077: 2046: 2039: 2004: 1997: 1877: 1870: 1705: 1698: 1665: 1658: 1616: 1566: 1561: 1447: 1440: 1403:Um no, that is 1393: 1386: 1358: 1351: 1322: 1315: 1286: 1279: 1264: 1257: 1228: 1218: 1216: 1207: 1206: 1202: 1192: 1190: 1181: 1180: 1176: 1166: 1164: 1155: 1154: 1150: 1141: 1139: 1134: 1133: 1129: 1117: 1110: 1104: 1099: 1076: 1069: 1020: 1013: 996: 989: 933: 926: 920: 907: 719:burden of proof 701: 694: 289: 273: 197: 132: 77: 64: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3192: 3190: 3170: 3164: 3163: 3156: 3087: 3086: 3078:Added archive 3076: 3067:Added archive 3033: 3030: 3017: 3011: 3010: 3003: 2948: 2947: 2939:Added archive 2937: 2929:Added archive 2927: 2919:Added archive 2917: 2909:Added archive 2907: 2899:Added archive 2897: 2889:Added archive 2887: 2879:Added archive 2877: 2869:Added archive 2835: 2832: 2819: 2813: 2812: 2805: 2750: 2749: 2741:Added archive 2707: 2704: 2691: 2685: 2684: 2677: 2622: 2621: 2613:Added archive 2611: 2603:Added archive 2601: 2593:Added archive 2591: 2583:Added archive 2549: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2534:74.197.242.103 2505: 2502: 2483: 2480: 2452: 2419: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2364: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2333: 2250: 2247: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2147: 2107: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2092: 1970: 1941: 1940: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1731: 1715:That would be 1653: 1652: 1649: 1646: 1639: 1638: 1635: 1632: 1629: 1626: 1615: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1523: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1309: 1273: 1272: 1227: 1226: 1200: 1174: 1148: 1126: 1103: 1100: 1098: 1095: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1004: 970:Remember what 965: 964: 919: 916: 913: 912: 903: 902: 896: 895: 865: 864: 821: 820: 787: 786: 738: 737: 715: 714: 713: 712: 711: 710: 709: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 649: 648: 647: 646: 645: 631: 583: 561: 459: 458: 420: 419: 389: 388: 354: 353: 319: 318: 274: 272: 271:Walsh Incident 269: 266: 265: 247: 246: 239: 225: 224: 207: 196: 193: 190: 189: 165: 162: 161: 160: 159: 142: 131: 128: 127: 126: 125: 124: 76: 73: 70: 69: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3191: 3182: 3181: 3175: 3168: 3161: 3157: 3154: 3150: 3149: 3148: 3141: 3135: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3117: 3112: 3107: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3085: 3081: 3077: 3074: 3070: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3060: 3052: 3046: 3042: 3041:Barbara Boxer 3037: 3031: 3029: 3028: 3022: 3015: 3008: 3004: 3001: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2988: 2982: 2978: 2974: 2970: 2964: 2959: 2957: 2953: 2946: 2942: 2938: 2936: 2932: 2928: 2926: 2922: 2918: 2916: 2912: 2908: 2906: 2902: 2898: 2896: 2892: 2888: 2886: 2882: 2878: 2876: 2872: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2862: 2854: 2848: 2844: 2843:Barbara Boxer 2839: 2833: 2831: 2830: 2824: 2817: 2810: 2806: 2803: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2790: 2784: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2766: 2761: 2759: 2755: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2734: 2726: 2720: 2716: 2715:Barbara Boxer 2711: 2705: 2703: 2702: 2696: 2689: 2682: 2678: 2675: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2662: 2656: 2652: 2648: 2644: 2638: 2633: 2631: 2627: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2610: 2606: 2602: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2590: 2586: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2576: 2568: 2562: 2558: 2557:Barbara Boxer 2553: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2520: 2516: 2512: 2503: 2501: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2488: 2481: 2479: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2450: 2447: 2443: 2439: 2433: 2429: 2428: 2423: 2417: 2413: 2409: 2405: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2346: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2319: 2318: 2315: 2314: 2308: 2307: 2300: 2296: 2292: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2281: 2277: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2267: 2266: 2260: 2259: 2251: 2248: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2238: 2234: 2230: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2212: 2209: 2208: 2202: 2201: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2166: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2146: 2142: 2138: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2128: 2127: 2121: 2120: 2111: 2105: 2091: 2088: 2087: 2081: 2080: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2067: 2063: 2059: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2050: 2049: 2043: 2042: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2021: 2020:wikilawyering 2017: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2008: 2007: 2001: 2000: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1971: 1969: 1965: 1961: 1956: 1952: 1947: 1943: 1942: 1939: 1935: 1931: 1927: 1926: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1884: 1881: 1880: 1874: 1873: 1866: 1864: 1858: 1856: 1853: 1850: 1848: 1845: 1842: 1840: 1838: 1836: 1833: 1831: 1829: 1827: 1824: 1822: 1819: 1817: 1814: 1812: 1809: 1807: 1804: 1802: 1799: 1797: 1794: 1791: 1789: 1786: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1767: 1764: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1709: 1708: 1702: 1701: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1679: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1669: 1668: 1662: 1661: 1650: 1647: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1636: 1633: 1630: 1627: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1619: 1613: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1571: 1569: 1564: 1558: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1544: 1543: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1507: 1506:edit conflict 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1470: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1451: 1450: 1444: 1443: 1436: 1432: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1406: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1397: 1396: 1390: 1389: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1362: 1361: 1355: 1354: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1326: 1325: 1319: 1318: 1310: 1306: 1305: 1303: 1299: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1290: 1289: 1283: 1282: 1275: 1274: 1271: 1268: 1267: 1261: 1260: 1253: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1215: 1211: 1204: 1201: 1189: 1185: 1178: 1175: 1163: 1159: 1152: 1149: 1137: 1131: 1128: 1125: 1124: 1121: 1120: 1114: 1113: 1096: 1094: 1083: 1080: 1079: 1073: 1072: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1042: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1027: 1024: 1023: 1017: 1016: 1009: 1005: 1003: 1000: 999: 993: 992: 985: 983: 979: 973: 969: 968: 967: 966: 963: 959: 955: 951: 947: 943: 942: 941: 940: 937: 936: 930: 929: 915: 914: 910: 905: 904: 900: 899: 894: 890: 886: 881: 880: 879: 878: 874: 870: 863: 859: 855: 850: 849: 848: 847: 843: 839: 834: 832: 828: 825: 819: 815: 811: 807: 803: 802: 801: 800: 796: 792: 785: 781: 777: 773: 769: 768: 767: 766: 762: 758: 752: 751: 747: 743: 736: 732: 728: 724: 720: 716: 708: 705: 704: 698: 697: 690: 686: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 675: 674: 670: 666: 644: 640: 636: 632: 630: 626: 622: 618: 614: 613: 612: 608: 604: 599: 598: 597: 593: 589: 584: 582: 578: 574: 570: 566: 562: 560: 556: 552: 547: 546: 545: 541: 537: 532: 531: 530: 526: 522: 517: 513: 512: 511: 507: 503: 498: 497: 496: 492: 488: 484: 483: 482: 478: 474: 470: 466: 461: 460: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 437: 436: 435: 434: 430: 426: 418: 414: 410: 405: 404: 403: 402: 398: 394: 387: 383: 379: 375: 371: 370: 369: 368: 364: 360: 352: 348: 344: 340: 336: 335: 334: 333: 329: 325: 317: 313: 309: 305: 304: 303: 302: 298: 294: 288: 286: 278: 270: 264: 263: 259: 255: 251: 244: 240: 237: 233: 232: 231: 229: 222: 221: 220: 216: 212: 208: 205: 201: 200: 194: 188: 187: 183: 179: 175: 170: 166: 164: 163: 157: 156: 155: 151: 147: 143: 140: 136: 135: 129: 123: 119: 115: 110: 109: 108: 104: 100: 96: 95: 94: 93: 89: 85: 81: 74: 67: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3165: 3140:source check 3119: 3113: 3098: 3094: 3090: 3088: 3038: 3035: 3012: 2987:source check 2966: 2960: 2955: 2951: 2949: 2840: 2837: 2814: 2789:source check 2768: 2762: 2757: 2753: 2751: 2712: 2709: 2686: 2661:source check 2640: 2634: 2629: 2625: 2623: 2554: 2551: 2507: 2485: 2457:— Preceding 2451: 2436:— Preceding 2430: 2424: 2421: 2386: 2363: 2310: 2303: 2298: 2294: 2290: 2262: 2255: 2204: 2197: 2123: 2116: 2112: 2109: 2083: 2076: 2062:Voceditenore 2045: 2038: 2024:Voceditenore 2003: 1996: 1876: 1869: 1860: 1765: 1763:Weight says: 1717:undue weight 1704: 1697: 1664: 1657: 1654: 1640: 1620: 1617: 1545: 1446: 1439: 1434: 1409: 1404: 1392: 1385: 1357: 1350: 1321: 1314: 1285: 1278: 1263: 1256: 1251: 1229: 1217:. Retrieved 1213: 1203: 1191:. Retrieved 1187: 1177: 1165:. Retrieved 1161: 1151: 1140:. Retrieved 1130: 1116: 1109: 1105: 1092: 1075: 1068: 1063: 1059: 1040: 1019: 1012: 995: 988: 981: 977: 975: 932: 925: 921: 908: 866: 835: 829: 822: 788: 753: 739: 700: 693: 684: 661: 617:undue weight 565:undue weight 515: 421: 390: 373: 355: 320: 290: 282: 249: 248: 227: 226: 218: 173: 172: 153: 78: 65: 43: 37: 3106:Sourcecheck 2370:Loonymonkey 1982:Loonymonkey 1960:Loonymonkey 1834:, Usa Today 1805:, ABC Local 776:Loonymonkey 635:Loonymonkey 551:Loonymonkey 521:Loonymonkey 473:Loonymonkey 228:Don't panic 36:This is an 2229:ad hominem 1974:canvassing 1944:This is a 1683:Dayewalker 1596:Dayewalker 1461:Dayewalker 1142:2010-05-25 810:Dayewalker 727:Dayewalker 717:Actually, 689:Notability 603:Carbonator 536:Carbonator 502:Carbonator 409:Dayewalker 378:Dayewalker 343:Dayewalker 285:click here 3160:this tool 3153:this tool 3007:this tool 3000:this tool 2809:this tool 2802:this tool 2687:Cheers. — 2681:this tool 2674:this tool 2487:This edit 1951:coat rack 1614:Reasoning 1308:provided. 1214:Roll Call 1162:Bloomberg 1006:Also see 66:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 3166:Cheers.— 3051:cbignore 3013:Cheers.— 2853:cbignore 2815:Cheers.— 2725:cbignore 2567:cbignore 2471:contribs 2463:Irievibe 2459:unsigned 2438:Irievibe 2323:Muboshgu 2169:Muboshgu 2137:Muboshgu 2016:this one 1854:, NBC #2 1527:Muboshgu 1513:Muboshgu 1410:actually 1233:Muboshgu 1046:Muboshgu 954:Muboshgu 946:WP:UNDUE 772:WP:POINT 588:Muboshgu 487:Muboshgu 448:Muboshgu 308:Muboshgu 236:non-free 114:Muboshgu 84:Muboshgu 3176::Online 3091:checked 3045:my edit 3023::Online 2952:checked 2847:my edit 2825::Online 2754:checked 2719:my edit 2697::Online 2626:checked 2561:my edit 1955:tedious 1863:because 1787:, MSNBC 1250:Please 1219:24 July 1193:23 July 1167:23 July 1008:WP:DRNC 869:Rodchen 838:Rodchen 791:Rodchen 757:Rodchen 742:Rodchen 665:Rodchen 615:Again, 425:Rodchen 393:Rodchen 359:Rodchen 324:Rodchen 293:Rodchen 39:archive 3099:failed 3059:nobots 2861:nobots 2733:nobots 2575:nobots 2530:WP:BLP 1972:Also, 1946:WP:BLP 1859:. :::: 1554:WP:ANI 1546:Note : 1435:I WILL 1414:WP:3RR 1010::o) -- 974:says: 950:WP:BRD 685:Agreed 469:WP:BLP 465:WP:BLP 3071:? to 2526:WP:RS 1843:, NBC 1579:Rrius 721:on a 374:diffs 16:< 3095:true 2956:true 2758:true 2630:true 2538:talk 2532:. - 2515:talk 2495:talk 2467:talk 2442:talk 2418:PIPA 2408:talk 2404:Tarc 2393:talk 2374:talk 2341:talk 2337:Tarc 2327:talk 2280:talk 2276:Tarc 2237:talk 2233:Tarc 2173:talk 2167:. – 2155:talk 2151:Tarc 2141:talk 2066:talk 2058:this 2028:talk 1986:talk 1978:here 1964:talk 1934:talk 1930:Tarc 1910:talk 1906:Tarc 1725:talk 1721:Tarc 1687:talk 1678:WP:N 1600:talk 1583:talk 1567:king 1557:here 1550:BETA 1531:talk 1517:talk 1465:talk 1422:talk 1418:Tarc 1374:talk 1370:Tarc 1339:talk 1335:Tarc 1302:talk 1298:Tarc 1252:Stop 1237:talk 1221:2011 1195:2011 1169:2011 1064:from 1050:talk 978:only 972:NPOV 958:talk 889:talk 885:Tarc 873:talk 858:talk 854:Tarc 842:talk 814:talk 795:talk 780:talk 761:talk 746:talk 731:talk 669:talk 639:talk 625:talk 621:Tarc 607:talk 592:talk 577:talk 573:Tarc 555:talk 540:talk 525:talk 506:talk 491:talk 477:talk 452:talk 444:WP:N 429:talk 413:talk 397:talk 382:talk 363:talk 347:talk 328:talk 312:talk 297:talk 258:talk 182:talk 118:talk 103:talk 99:Tarc 88:talk 3134:RfC 3111:). 3097:or 3082:to 2981:RfC 2943:to 2933:to 2923:to 2913:to 2903:to 2893:to 2883:to 2873:to 2783:RfC 2745:to 2655:RfC 2617:to 2607:to 2597:to 2587:to 2299:how 2246:it. 1552:at 1405:not 1041:not 723:BLP 3147:. 3142:}} 3138:{{ 3109:}} 3103:{{ 3057:{{ 3053:}} 3049:{{ 2994:. 2989:}} 2985:{{ 2859:{{ 2855:}} 2851:{{ 2796:. 2791:}} 2787:{{ 2731:{{ 2727:}} 2723:{{ 2668:. 2663:}} 2659:{{ 2573:{{ 2569:}} 2565:{{ 2540:) 2528:, 2517:) 2509:-- 2497:) 2473:) 2469:• 2444:) 2410:) 2395:) 2376:) 2343:) 2329:) 2312:TA 2305:BE 2295:IF 2282:) 2264:TA 2257:BE 2253:-- 2239:) 2206:TA 2199:BE 2175:) 2157:) 2143:) 2125:TA 2118:BE 2085:TA 2078:BE 2068:) 2060:. 2047:TA 2040:BE 2030:) 2005:TA 1998:BE 1988:) 1966:) 1936:) 1912:) 1878:TA 1871:BE 1867:-- 1727:) 1706:TA 1699:BE 1689:) 1666:TA 1659:BE 1655:-- 1602:) 1594:. 1585:) 1562:Mt 1559:. 1533:) 1519:) 1467:) 1448:TA 1441:BE 1424:) 1394:TA 1387:BE 1383:-- 1376:) 1359:TA 1352:BE 1348:-- 1341:) 1323:TA 1316:BE 1312:-- 1304:) 1287:TA 1280:BE 1265:TA 1258:BE 1239:) 1231:– 1212:. 1186:. 1160:. 1118:TA 1111:BE 1077:TA 1070:BE 1060:to 1052:) 1044:– 1021:TA 1014:BE 997:TA 990:BE 986:-- 960:) 934:TA 927:BE 923:-- 891:) 875:) 860:) 844:) 816:) 797:) 782:) 763:) 748:) 733:) 702:TA 695:BE 671:) 641:) 627:) 609:) 594:) 586:– 579:) 571:. 557:) 542:) 527:) 516:is 508:) 493:) 479:) 454:) 431:) 415:) 399:) 384:) 365:) 349:) 330:) 314:) 299:) 260:) 252:-- 184:) 176:-- 120:) 112:– 105:) 90:) 3162:. 3155:. 3075:? 3009:. 3002:. 2811:. 2804:. 2683:. 2676:. 2536:( 2513:( 2493:( 2465:( 2440:( 2406:( 2391:( 2372:( 2339:( 2325:( 2278:( 2235:( 2171:( 2153:( 2139:( 2064:( 2026:( 1984:( 1962:( 1932:( 1908:( 1723:( 1685:( 1598:( 1581:( 1529:( 1515:( 1508:) 1504:( 1463:( 1420:( 1372:( 1337:( 1300:( 1235:( 1223:. 1197:. 1171:. 1145:. 1048:( 984:. 956:( 887:( 871:( 856:( 840:( 812:( 793:( 778:( 759:( 744:( 729:( 667:( 637:( 623:( 605:( 590:( 575:( 553:( 538:( 523:( 504:( 489:( 475:( 450:( 427:( 411:( 395:( 380:( 361:( 345:( 326:( 310:( 295:( 256:( 180:( 116:( 101:( 86:( 50:.

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

Index