Talk:Big Bang Theory/Archive 1

212:. Merging the two dabs would mean that readers who are looking for something that could be titled "Big Bang Theory" have to sift through a much longer disambiguation page to find the sought article, a drawback that is not balanced by any improvement for any other reader. The problem is only in the reading of a navigational page's layout as if it were a value judgement on the destinations, like if one were looking at a map to drive from Atlanta to DC and got irritated that there were a bunch of less important cities along the way, when clearly DC is more important and should be reached first. (And the consensus was "proven" at 2014:. This is not the readers' fault: they searched the correct base name, capitalization and all. Even worse, they may leave Knowledge (XXG) after the first misdirect, thinking that an article about the album they were trying to find does not exist. And if they weren't looking for either of the albums, they would be one click away from the correct article. Note that page view statistics do not provide the full history of the user's activity. Page view statistics count both correct and incorrect arrivals. One desirable outcome of this discussion would be to minimize the percentage of incorrect arrivals. 1046:. I have no problem with grouping the non-primary topic entries (music, TV), but the list is really too short to break into sections. Since this is the combined disambiguation page for the two ambiguous titles "The Big Bang Theory" and "Big Bang Theory" (which share a single primary topic), all of the entries match one of the ambiguous titles, with the possible exception of the little-t theory. We could split the dab into two dabs, one with the "The" and one without, but that does not seem to gain anyone anything either. Or we could move this page to 31: 1302:. Additionally, I think the move request is irrelevant to the primary topic, as the article title would just have the paranthetical qualifier attached, leaving the title of the disambiguation page slightly modified. By the way, as a disclaimer for those claiming this is about a bunch of TV-biased editors, I don't watch the show or much TV at all, and I consider myself a science dork (mostly Earth science). Cheers! 204:

not navigate based on the origination of the topic they're looking for. "Big Bang theory" has a primary topic. "Big Bang theory" is not ambiguous -- there aren't other topics that would have articles titled that, so there is no disambiguation page to list it first on. "Big Bang" has a primary topic, the theory, and it's ambiguous with many things, so the primary topic is listed first on

1320:, a disambiguation page titled "Big Bang Theory (disambiguation)" should have a primary topic, but a disambiguation page located at the base name "Big Bang Theory" should not have a primary topic. This is why a move request is relevant to the current discussion about the primary topic. I'm not proposing a merge. Again, I apologize if you took the Wiki humor seriously. 692:

are still skeptics out there, and as a great wise man said, only one convincing experiment is sufficient to prove a theory wrong. 3) It is quite a shame that variations of big bang, big bang theory, the big bang theory redirect to the tv series without giving users a warning, or at least an unbiased choice. 76.70.89.12 (talk) 03:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

1290:

copies of the WP:MOS, to insist the primary topic is one that closest reflects the article's title? When you review all the discussions and ad hominem attacks, you'll notice the real issue was over the fact that a scientific theory was getting second billing to an American TV show that "stole" its name from the theory. If that were happening on

869:, and then the others). As I explained above, "Big Bang theory" isn't ambiguous, but "Big Bang Theory" is. The problem here so far has rested only with editors who view the arrangement as some sort of value judgment instead of a navigational aid. And also please note that prior to the discussion of October 2011, I was also defending 405:

page? I don't see a benefit to that arrangement, and I thought I explained it rather fully. Also remember that primary topic is not a measure of importance, but of (a) usage on the encyclopedia and (b) educational value. The cap-T topics are not much covered in academia, so usage does indicate the TV show pretty well. --

977:

of the editors who see value in the choice of primary topic. Are you saying that if the list is reformatted so that no article appears to be the primary topic (and, I assume, that the scientific theory is listed before the TV show) that the disruptions would end? Are the other number of editors in agreement? --

1739:. While each name in such a pair may already be precise and apt, a reader who enters one term might in fact be looking for the other; so use appropriate disambiguation techniques, such as hatnotes or disambiguation pages, to help readers find the article they want." And we have those hatnotes in place. -- 3973:, there is nothing anywhere that supports not bolding the primary topic. Whether a redirect is bolded (ala cosmonaut) or the full title (ala Mozart) is a matter for editorial discretion based on consensus. But there is not one shred of guidance in MOSDAB that supports leaving the primary topic unbolded. 1560:

Possibly the outcome or The Big Bang Theory is moved to The Big Bang Theory (TV series) entails also moving the disambiguation page to the "vacated" base name or retargetting the base name to the theory. That seems to be the goal of the anon's proposal, although it wasn't explicit. There is never any

1289:

disambiguation pages, one for Big Bang and one for Big Bang Theory. A merge has been discussed, and the outcome is to keep them separate. When we're discussing the primary topic for the disambiguation page titled Big Bang Theory and not Big Bang, how is it pedantic, i.e. grasping tightly to laminated

754:

should apply through inheritance: "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." In my opinion, the most reasonable thing to do would be to discuss whether an exception can be made for this

503:

Also, since I agreed the TV series should be considered the primary topic, as you have stressed quite often, it seems we are saying the same thing, only we are arriving at them from different directions. I actually agree with your logic for not merging, except I don't think the list is all that long,

128:

is the theory. "Big Bang theory" is not ambiguous (no other articles would be titled with a lower-case 't'), but it still makes sense to include the entry for the theory on this disambiguation page. Our tendency is indeed to reflect the current primary topic, recognizing that it can change over time.

93:

I'm not seeing a consensus there to have the TV show as the lead item on this page. That doesn't even make sense, given the nature of the scientific principle, and it is inconsistent with our tendency to avoid "in the moment" popularity. While the IP shouldn't revert repeatedly, I think their idea is

1021:

as the page title, wouldn't it be most precise for them to come first? I cannot possibly know for certain whether this proposal would end disruptive edits (I'm not a crystal ball) and I cannot speak for other editors. The only way to know would be to invite other editors to join the discussion about

976:

Describing the other side as an angry mob of gnomes grasping tightly their laminated copies of WP:MOS does little for community or cohesion. The edit history shows a number of editors who did not understand the disambiguation page formatting guidelines and would rather disrupt than discuss. I am one

838:

A primary topic is identified through consensus and applied if there are no major objections. From the edit history and current RM, it appears that the choice of primary topic is no longer undisputed. I was referring to neutrality in opinion among editors regarding the choice of primary topic, which

711:

Focus on content, not editors. Your precedents aren't analogous. Derivation isn't a criterion. All primary topics are "without warning". How are you going to prove your neutrality in the face of all the evidence for your ANTI-TV bias? There is obviously no consensus for your proposed move there. --

691:

Rationale: 1) Precedents: e.g. Glee_(TV_series), Once_Upon_a_Time_(TV_series), Lost_(TV_series) 2) Speaking of precedents, the show owes its name to its namesake, not to mention that the cosmological model should have historical precedence. This is at the very least, I think, because I am sure there

180:

However, the real solution should be to consider the reader: How do we best guide the reader to the desired topic page? I suggest merging the two disambiguation pages, as the topics of both originate from the cosmological theory. Both pages contain links to the Styx and Harem Scarem albums. Only Big

945:

I see community cohesion as the main improvement. As long as there is a primary topic, there will always be editors who disagree, resulting in numerous less than constructive edits and reverts. I can't see how anyone would disagree if there were no primary topic, although I suppose this may stir up

918:

I can't speak to what 76.70.89.12 expected here from the move there. The move there would involved the primary topicness for the title "The Big Bang Theory". There's no bias to be removed from this page; divesting language about "bias" or "neutrality" might help build consensus for an exception for

899:

proposed an unnecessary RM from "The Big Bang Theory" to "The Big Bang Theory (TV series)" if the goal were to remove bias from this disambiguation page. I'll wait for the current RM to finish before deciding whether to propose RM from "Big Bang Theory (disambiguation)" to "Big Bang Theory". Again,

2392:

Support move, though lukewarm. While I do agree that "The Big Bang Theory" (with title case and definite article) clearly refers to the popular tv show, "Big Bang Theory" is significantly less unambiguous. But either way it makes little difference as the use of hatnotes provides roughly equivalent

203:

Since the sets of articles that could have the ambiguous topics are distinct except for the primary topics (I missed the two albums when fixing the merge last year -- fixed now), keeping the disambiguation pages separate best guides the readers who reach the pages to the desired topics. Readers do

1249:) to determine which title should be used. If it's primary for any other titles, those redirect to the WP:NC-selected title, because it's primary. If any of the titles are ambiguous, the primary topic might be reached at the base-name article or through the base-name redirect. But we are agree, a 436:

as examples that do not use qualifiers. Those are pretty unambiguous. Should a music group record a song or album with any of those titles, I believe the qualifier would appropriate. Also, those three example don't have much chance of becoming ambiguous. Should we comb through Knowledge (XXG) and

419:

Not sure how I missed that link at the top. Sorry (actually, replacing the Knowledge (XXG) logo woould have been better). While 17 days between any comments, from 10 Oct to 27 Oct, was ample time to hear any objections, it looks like consensus changed after that. As for Flygongengar, the words "I

404:

the TV show is not the primary topic -- we don't put qualifiers on all titles just for consistency. I take it that you disagree with my reasoning against merging, and would rather compel readers looking for one of the things actually titled with "Theory" to wade through the longer disambiguation

3727:

episode, will see such results in Knowledge (XXG)'s dropdown suggestions as they type "Big Bang Theory" - and if not, they'll be able to navigate to the disambiguation page from the hatnote (which also includes a direct link to the theory's page, so the proposed move wouldn't help users seeking

2474:

mean different things, and on occasions we disambiguate just by case, and in some cases that's valid. But not in this one. Knowledge (XXG) is optimised for readers, not contributors, and the discrepancy between the significance of this sitcom and the theory after which it is named is just too

1199:

has a primary topic, even though it's ambiguous and the primary topic article is at a different title. "If a primary topic exists, then that term should be the title of the article on that topic (or should redirect to an article on that topic that uses a different, more appropriate title)."

2372:

I realize that you disagree, and I'm interested in your take on the Google search discussed above (in which mentions of the television program predominate, despite the fact that the results have been greatly skewed against it by the omission of all pages containing its actual title).

3094:

is full of holes, as one would expect when it leads to such a strange conclusion. 2. Readers searching for either are not going to distinguish between upper and lower case in their search terms. Note that Google does not, and nor under many circumstances does Knowledge (XXG) (type

2059:

for "big bang theory" with "the big bang theory" excluded, the television program dominates (with some hits relevant to the cosmological model mixed in, partially due to the case insensitivity). Apart from Knowledge (XXG)'s articles, neither album is mentioned until page 8 of the

1218:

That sounds like circular logic: "The Big Bang Theory" (in the most precise form of "Big Bang Theory") is primary on "Big Bang Theory (disambiguation)" because "The Big Bang Theory" is primary on "Big Bang Theory" (as a redirect). As the issue of primary topic is not isolated to

1715:, which acknowledges that a capital T on Theory (or M on Meat) is enough to disambiguate terms: "Titles of distinct articles may differ only in their detail. Many such differences involve capitalization, separation or non-separation of components, or pluralization: 1654:– Many users aren't aware that Knowledge (XXG) searching can be case sensitive, and a capital T on Theory isn't enough to disambiguate this term from the other options. "Big Bang Theory" should be a disambiguation page, or at least redirect to the same article as 294:

The problem with consensus is that it is truly rare. Take any congress/parliament or the UN, for example. Five links seem sufficient to warrant a separate disambiguation page. Since consensus on the primary topic is ellusive, here are some points to consider:

796:, I don't see how the exception would benefit anyone except editors who take umbrage that a TV show could possibly appear on a list above a scientific theory. Readers looking for either the theory or the TV show need never reach the disambiguation page. -- 420:

have to object" were reverted, but the wording "If anything the 'Big Bang Theory' disambig page should be merged into the 'Big Bang' disambig page," were written. Several days later, there were more objections. It's a pain, but that's the life of consensus.

2834:

At best, the ngram only shows that one form is more commonly than the other. If it were truly unusual, it would be closer to zero. And it is not like ngram is without problems. Previous discussions have raised significant questions about the measure.

2328:, but not if it might lead to confusion. A scientific theory is an example of something that someone might capitalize even though we don't do so here, so I consider the capitalization difference to be insufficient disambiguation for most readers. 2493:

that I was suggesting that the sitcom is more significant than the cosmological model is (which would, indeed, be ridiculous). By "the other works listed", I was referring to the music albums and cartoon episode linked from the disambiguation

2720:

A first look at the google results shows the science theory is not overwhelmed by the tv show. It is only by applying some additional not terribly intuitive manual filtering that the results are skewed towards the show. I remain unconvinced.

3723:) of the results." Users typing "Big Bang Theory" in full, with such capitalization, therefore are most likely looking for the television show's article. Users who are seeking articles about the two albums named "Big Bang Theory", or the 532:(primary topics are placed at the base name). Qualifiers are a technical restriction of Knowledge (XXG), because two articles cannot have the same title. Trying to over-qualify titles in the name of consistency is directly contrary to 2496:

2. By "evidence", I was referring to the Google search (in which mentions of the television program predominate, despite the fact that the results have been greatly skewed against it by the omission of all pages containing its full

1146:

Your "apology" said "if", which I clarified -- it wasn't the Gnome part that was contrary to your picture of community cohesion, but the other snarky (or "humorous") bits, but sure, you could let it go. It's most precise to place

995:: "This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Please do not take it seriously." I apologize if you took it seriously. There are multiple possibilities for the order of entries as outlined in 423:

Recall that I wrote that "five links seem sufficient to warrant a separate disambiguation page," so I'm no longer arguing for a merge. But I stll believe it would be better to add paranthetical disambiguation. You provided

2803:

The situation is not quite analogous. Red Meat in title case would be a rather unusual way to refer to the dietary/culinary sense. But it is hardly unusual to think that people might use title case to refer to the theory.

536:; that a good many happen to be qualified means that a good many aren't the primary topic for their titles, not that "all" should be qualified. Some more titles with a TV series at the base name and a disambiguation page: 684:

Dear User:JHunterJ, Prove your so-claimed neutrality, if wikipedia is to be a true reference tool, as you so claimed in your own words, then wikipedia should therefore strive to be accurate! support and execute the move!

839:

is different from the inherent systemic bias that comes with the identification of a primary topic. However, bias is exacerbated if a disambiguation page is designed solely based on page view statistics (convenience).

3518:

is sought. (For example, on the subject of abortion views, a Google search might show that the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice" predominate, but it can be argued that these are non-neutral. This is the subject of

1084:: "Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, rather than through tightly sticking to rules and procedures." This is a matter of precision rather than order inversion. It is most precise to place 208:. "Big Bang Theory" has a primary topic, the TV show. "Big Bang Theory" is ambiguous -- there are other topics that could have articles titled that, two albums and an episode, so the primary topic is listed first on 308:

Big Bang Theory (Styx album) (2005) - They've been together for 30 years, 40 if you count the 10 year break-up. The album reached #46 on the Billboard Top 200 Albums, and it was Styx's highest charting album in 14

363:

A non-consensus attempt at merging was attempted by Flygongengar and reverted. Some questions about how disambiguation pages illustrate primary topics came up and were answered in accordance with the consensus at

2565:, the science theory is at least as prominent as the tv show. Hardly evidence of a primary topic. But if you look a books, the science usage overwhelms. Google results are inconclusive as far as I can tell. 2523:

is a single click away, so its accessibility would remain the same (while readers seeking the TV show's article would need to pass through an additional step). "People can easily get to the page they want"

1366:. I think it would be fair to say that one issue under discussion is whether that should be the case. Unfortunately, this issue has not been very clearly articulated and is somewhat lost amongst walls of 2353:

appears to be significantly greater than that possibility and all others combined. Therefore, reassigning the title to a disambiguation page would inconvenience more readers than it would convenience.

2883:

only show how many times a page has been accessed. It gives no information about how the user arrived at the page, be it by searching the correct article name or through a redirect. The number of times

2212:

and follow the hatnote to the disambiguation page. That's how Knowledge (XXG) routinely handles secondary usages. It inconveniences as few readers as possible (because most seek the primary usage). —

642:

Big Bang Theory" and only shares that name with a TV episode, it's not a big deal. If and when a movie, novel, or another TV series comes out with an identical name, we can hash this out again. Cheers!

2337:

We're addressing two separate (but related) issues: "Is capitalization sufficient disambiguation in this instance?" and "Is the television program the primary usage of the phrase's capitalized form?".

2773:

Indications for a primary topic really should not entail such careful examination and selective filtering of evidence. IMO, the primary topic should be blindingly obvious to any reasonable person.

2499:

I'm absolutely not asserting that the sitcom is anywhere near as noteworthy as the scientific theory is. I'm asserting that most readers typing "Big Bang Theory" seek the article about the former.

954:. Objectively, a disambiguation page can be considered as merely a navigational aid, but the edit history shows a number of editors who see value in the choice of primary topic. An exception to 2871:

Only if one or more of the three other entertainment-related articles were widely sought (in comparison to the sitcom's article) would the move be helpful, and that obviously isn't the case. —

1132:

in a separate section titled "The Big Bang Theory". Of course precision is only one criteria, but this logic would be difficult to refute objectively without resorting to page view statistics.

257:

1. I disagree that consensus was ever reached. JHunterJ, Jnc, and Beefcake6412 saw it one way. Flygongengar, an unsigned user, and Incnis Mersi saw it yet another way. What number defines the

3728:

that). There's no reason to add an additional click for users looking for the TV show's article who type "Big Bang Theory", when clearly that's what most users arriving there intend to see. -

3520: 2971:

it) is one in which one or more of the three other entertainment-related articles are widely sought (in comparison to the sitcom's article). The evidence strongly suggests otherwise. —

853:

Several questions have arisen, sometimes along with bold edits, but no consensus on a new primary topic or on removing the primary topic entirely. To remove the primary topic entirely,

2644:

Well, of course. There obviously are far more books related to the scientific theory than books related to the sitcom. In this case, that doesn't tell us much about general usage. —

2818: 1151:

at the top, because it is the primary topic for this exact title "Big Bang Theory", and it leads to the TV series. No statistics needed, just a click through the base name link. --

3719:

Big Bang Theory" subtracted from the query, which put it at a distinct disadvantage), and "apart from Knowledge (XXG)'s articles, neither album is mentioned until page 8 (actually

2444:

Elegant: Because it looks like we know what we're doing. Functional: Because people can easily get to the page they want. Response: Much the same as to your assertion above that

759:. For now, I support the RM, but I'm willing to retract my vote if the interested parties were willing to begin a discussion regarding the possibility of making an exception to 2679:

I linked to that search to show that the television program comes out ahead despite being placed at a substantial disadvantage. (The alternative would place it at an unfair

2142:

Those are exactly the same as the top five results from my original search. The only relevant disparity is that the albums' first non-Knowledge (XXG) mention occurs on page

1383:

But I agree, a move request (if made) would be relevant, and I've pointed to that process before for editors who feel that there has been a change to "no primary topic". --

3349:(as it depends on the context), but your example ("Big bang Theory") contains arbitrary capitalization conveying no real-life linguistic distinction (so it's treated as " 730:

There will always be pro-TV readers/editors, anti-TV readers/editors, and readers/editors who just don't care. It's not so much an issue of accuracy as it is an issue of

1080:

and return to the topic at hand. This is not an attempt to "back-door a change". Please do not accuse me of not wanting to use the usual processes. Need I remind you of

167:, I would agree that the primary topic for the page currently in question refers to the TV show. Thus, JHunterJ is correct, though the "consensus" is yet to be proven. 315:"The Big Bang Theory" (Family Guy), a 2011 episode - Also a highly rated TV show, but how often do people go searching for a particular episode of any show by name? 3643:

MediaWiki ignores the first letter's capitalization, so from a functional standpoint, only the case of "m/"M" sets apart the two articles' titles. (A user typing

3606:

MediaWiki ignores the first letter's capitalization, so from a functional standpoint, only the case of "m/"M" sets apart the two articles' titles. (A user typing

2623:

1. You see as many hits pertaining to the theory as hits pertaining to the TV show (even after setting aside the instances containing a lowercase "t" in "theory")?

2460:) is now the primary meaning of the name? Ridiculous. If your figures tell you that, check your assumptions. There is something badly wrong. Aha, it's the capital 2711:(another of the aforementioned tools) under-represents the scientific theory (because articles about a weekly television show naturally arise more frequently). — 2339:

I believe that the available evidence answers both questions by showing that the TV series is the most common usage of "Big Bang Theory" by a substantial margin.

2489:

1. You clearly understood that I was referring specifically to the styling with an uppercase "T" (as indicated later in your reply), so there was no reason to

1050:. I do not see the point of trying to back-door a change to the primary topic by inverting the order here, rather than actually changing the primary topic at 3090:

above, the stringing is a little confused) 1. No straw man intended, do you intend to reply to the argument rather than just objecting to the phrasing? The

2653:

1) If it takes such steps to "correctly" interpret the results, I stand by my assertion that the results are inconclusive for determining a primary topic.

1891:

when the base name could serve as a disambiguation page for the two articles that share the exact base name. It is more likely that readers will look for

2753:

manually considering case, I just went through the first ten pages of results and counted 52 related to the television series and 40 for everything else

2656:

2) A books search is also one of the tools for determining primary topic. Why should it be ignored just because it offers results that are inconvenient?

824:

It is possible to identify a primary topic neutrally. As appears to be the case here. Neutrality does not prevent titles from having a primary topic. --

3327:

would be more functional "because people can easily get to the page they want". You then wrote of the likelihood, in your view, of readers seeking the

1165:

There is currently no article at "Big Bang Theory". It's merely a redirect (to an article of a different name). There are in fact two articles with the

268:, the article be renamed Big Bang Theory (TV Series). I have no statistics, but the majority of film, TV, fiction, and music articles tend to contain a 2671:

If it takes such steps to "correctly" interpret the results, I stand by my assertion that the results are inconclusive for determining a primary topic.

2695:

A books search is also one of the tools for determining primary topic. Why should it be ignored just because it offers results that are inconvenient?

2626:

2. Again, this search greatly under-reports the extent to which the television program is referred to as "Big Bang Theory"; every page on which it's

3852:

The cosmonaut example doesn't work here, because the TV series is a different title than the one being disambiguated. However, the Mozart one does.

2704:

be ignored. In this case, a Google Books search's outcome doesn't accurately reflect the big picture (because it inherently favors academic usage).

1688: 958:

for this page requires merely a discussion and consensus. No moves are required, and it can be easily reversed should the consensus change. After a

3225:

I also addressed your "because people can easily get to the page they want" argument by citing the Google search results and pointing out that the

3127:

I also addressed your "because people can easily get to the page they want" argument by citing the Google search results and pointing out that the

1816:

Exactly. If caps are enough to differentiate titles, then caps are enough to differentiate titles. Articles have titles. Redirects have titles. --

3634:

judging by your earlier comment). My point in simply that there is sufficient difference in the way the brain processes the two cases that it's

2435:

Why would that be more elegant and functional? What is your response to the evidence that the television program is the predominant target? —

3345:

Your point was that "under many circumstances", Knowledge (XXG) doesn't "distinguish between upper and lower case in search terms". This is

3772:

being bolded in the first sentence? It is a list entry. This page is for the disambiguation of the term "Big Bang Theory", hence the title.

3305:) is now the primary meaning of the name? Ridiculous. If your figures tell you that, check your assumptions. There is something badly wrong. 3284:

I don't think it did, it just accused me of dishonesty. But if you think you've answered the argument, let's just agree to disagree on that.

3220:

I don't think it did, it just accused me of dishonesty. But if you think you've answered the argument, let's just agree to disagree on that.

2153:

seeing mostly hits related to the television program on your end (despite the fact that all pages containing its full title are omitted)? —

3820:

with only one term in bold (the base name, i.e. the term being disambiguated) is the most clear. Furthermore, an illustrative example from

3442: 3390: 2205: 2174:

Furthermore, "Big Bang Theory" is the base name for the albums. What else are readers looking for either of the albums supposed to search?

2037: 2003: 1928: 1896: 1880: 1174: 1089: 1054:

if the primary topic has changed. And that does seem to be the crux here: what is the primary topic of "Big Bang Theory". We usually don't

1047: 865:. The disambiguation page is designed on the arrangement of the articles (which one is the primary topic, i.e., reached via the base name 3681:

There's no straw man, as I haven't ascribed that position to you. (I asked whether it was what you meant, which was a sincere question.)

2790:

is the primary topic for "Red Meat" is far from "blindingly obvious to any reasonable person", but it nonetheless is an example cited in

1358:

and with having separate disambiguation pages for both. It might not be the best possible arrangement, but it is in no way proscribed by

3165:

Readers searching for either are not going to distinguish between upper and lower case in their search terms. Note that Google does not,

1761:. We are discussing redirects, and disambiguation pages. The examples provided are article titles, not redirects. The "The" in front of 2967:

3. As discussed above, the only scenario in which the proposed move would "minimize the percentage of incorrect arrivals" (instead of

1695: 441:. Look at the links, and you'll find a good many have qualifers in their titles. Here's a slice for movie titles with common phrases: 1843:

heory". The other works listed are significantly less prominent, and the uppercase "T" in theory is sufficient differentiation from

895:

from "Big Bang Theory (disambiguation)" to "Big Bang Theory", which does not affect "The Big Bang Theory" at all, it would seem that

334:

With the Styx album coming a close second, I'd say the TV show has primacy. After all, it's not "The Dark Side of the Moon." Cheers!

999:

and the order should definitely form part of the discussion. Perhaps it may be logical to separate the entries into three sections:

896: 699: 258: 3686:

My point in simply that there is sufficient difference in the way the brain processes the two cases that it's not a good parallel.

777:

If you could demonstrate the convenience for the readers that that change would yield, we could discuss it. Given the hatnotes on

2592:

Google won't filter the results for the uppercase-T version; you have to filter them yourself. Google is one of the tools in the

2011: 1995: 1974: 1647: 1295: 1220: 1129: 1121: 1105: 1093: 858: 209: 160: 3466:. That situation varies significantly, as "Apple" is the natural title for both the fruit's article and the company's article. 3401:

is about the fruit. Google may not necessarily provide that strong an argument in primary topic discussions. Furthermore, from

3833:

or astronaut is a person trained by a human spaceflight program to command, pilot, or serve as a crew member of a spacecraft.

2093: 470: 1405:. Were that move to happen, the primary topic for the disamb would remain the same. How about a chart? They're always nice. 2290:

A quick look over the above comments will show that the TV series may no longer have the consensus as the primary target.

2994:

Sorry, I should have been clearer. In comparing the subjects' relative prominence, I was thinking of the Google search.

2532:

convenience (excepting that of readers seeking the articles about the aforementioned "other works", which obviously are

2201: 2033: 1999: 1937: 1892: 1876: 1170: 1085: 438: 3755:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

3715:, per evidence provided above. The television series clearly dominated the Google results for "Big Bang Theory" (with " 3301:(which I enjoy too) named after one of the most publicly discussed scientific theories of all time (second probably to 2456:(which I enjoy too) named after one of the most publicly discussed scientific theories of all time (second probably to 1622:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

763:

so that this page can have no primary topic. Convenience is a small price for some in order to eliminate bias for all.

104: 3537: 3418: 3310:

This misrepresents my position, as I've explained repeatedly. What "argument" do you believe I'm failing to address?

1994:

of readers who are misdirected by the current page layout, not just the total number of views each page receives. As

1343: 1081: 269: 3002: 2980:

If not by page view statistics, what measure are you using to gauge the concept of "widely sought"? Please clarify.

2363:

I disagree, I don't think we can make any concrete assumptions about which topic is intended by "Big Bang Theory".

155:

I sure do love me a spirited debate, especially when both sides are right. Two separate disambiguation pages exist:

2634:) is excluded. (Otherwise, instances of "The Big Bang Theory" would be counted as instances of "Big Bang Theory".) 2615: 2562: 2056: 38: 2734:...because you refuse to go beyond a "first look" to analyze the data in a meaningful manner. (Keep in mind that 2908:

because of the current redirect. I say again: "One desirable outcome of this discussion would be to minimize the

1291: 460: 205: 156: 3875: 3016: 2593: 1242: 1201: 1023: 901: 760: 747: 529: 385: 1402: 376:

process can indeed help, but TV shows, etc., that are the primary topic for their title do not use qualifiers (

275:

3. It appears Flygongengar suggested merging the two, thus you could say there is a growing consensus to merge.

1787:

In this context, no material distinction between article titles and redirects exists; the principles on which

1480:

Disamb is same as for Big Bang (disambiguation), leaving Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) superfluous. See #2.

1177:. Having a redirect at "Big Bang Theory" pointing to an article of a different name simply cannot be precise. 3514:

That advice is irrelevant to the matter at hand. It pertains to a situation in which a title compliant with

2304:

OTOH, my quick look over the above comments shows that there is no consensus to change the primary topic. --

250:

earlier, either here or at the editor assistance discussion, would have made the consensus issue less, well,

124:, we intro the dab for the ambiguous title with the primary topic for that ambiguous title. Primary topic of 3879: 3867: 3560:

article unquestionably pertains to the primary topic for that term, but this doesn't stop us from using the

3492:

article unquestionably pertains to the primary topic for that term, but this doesn't stop us from using the

444: 3795:

This recommendation does not seem to be compatible with the current page layout. If strict accordance with

695: 521: 381: 3009: 1699: 1551: 1307: 1100:

should follow because it only differs from the dab page's title by the capitalization of a single letter.

648: 509: 465: 339: 194: 129:

If their idea that the primary topic of "Big Bang Theory" is no longer the television show, discussion at

3529: 3410: 3115:

No straw man intended, do you intend to reply to the argument rather than just objecting to the phrasing?

2926:

1. In the above reply, I didn't mention (and wasn't referring to) Knowledge (XXG)'s page view statistics.

2791: 1191:

On the contrary, it can, and simply. That's how primary topics work. There is an article reached through

810:

Why is convenience valued over neutrality in this case? Convenience is a virtue, neutrality is a policy.

533: 525: 377: 369: 3931:

Note how the term in bold (the term being disambiguated) is used as a redirect to the primary topic per

703: 577: 429: 393: 528:(the title does not need the qualifier, since it would be the target of the unqualified redirect), and 2475:

overwhelming. Readers looking for the sitcom will know of the theory, but not necessarily vice versa.

1799:

to send readers to different pages (as the policy indicates), it's equally appropriate in the case of

588:. Finding the ones that are ambiguous but disambiguated with a hatnote on the base name is harder. -- 3244: 3185: 3152:

The conclusion that the television series is more significant than the scientific theory is? Again,

2929:

2. You're mistaken in your understanding of how the page view statistics are calculated. A visit to

2820:

with exceptions where "Big Bang Theory" is actually in a title (book title, chapter title, etc.). --

2096:. Here are the top 5 results from this non-personalized search, excluding image and YouTube results: 1051: 565: 357: 265: 247: 213: 130: 75: 47: 17: 2708: 3987: 3857: 3807: 3777: 3768: 2949: 2945: 2938: 2905: 2893: 2885: 2865: 2583: 2510: 2350: 2295: 2209: 2045: 2007: 1967: 1904: 1888: 1856: 1778: 1762: 1663: 1636: 1355: 1339: 1125: 1101: 924: 782: 298:

The Big Bang Theory (TV Series) - Currently one of the highlest rated TV show in the United States.

3932: 3905: 3821: 3796: 3502: 3402: 1359: 1347: 1317: 955: 920: 743: 365: 121: 3943:") is satisfied at the same time. There would be no confusion about what is being disambiguated. 3733: 2825: 2601: 2309: 2281: 2237: 1821: 1744: 1566: 1388: 1258: 1209: 1156: 1063: 982: 936: 882: 829: 801: 785:

that are already in place for the convenience of the readers, and the targeting of the redirects

717: 593: 457:- A redirect from the movie WarGames, which by your rationale should have its own disambiguation. 410: 221: 138: 83: 2067:

under-represents the commonness of referring to the TV series as "Big Bang Theory", as it omits

1765:

is enough to disambiguate for an article title, but a capital "T" is not enough for a redirect.

1077: 1073: 1043: 992: 947: 1285:

Might I direct attention to the discussion at the top of this page. Remember that big bang has

4004: 3978: 3948: 3891: 3843: 3661: 3586: 3426: 3273: 3147:

The evidence is full of holes, as one would expect when it leads to such a strange conclusion.

3104: 2985: 2917: 2840: 2809: 2778: 2726: 2661: 2570: 2509:

type "Big Bang Theory", he/she needn't even visit this disambiguation page. Upon arriving at

2480: 2426: 2398: 2179: 2121: 2019: 1547: 1375: 1325: 1303: 1232: 1182: 1137: 1031: 967: 962:

to the base name, it would likely require yet another RM to undo should the consensus change.

909: 844: 815: 768: 644: 553: 505: 335: 190: 3515: 3506: 3406: 1367: 731: 3882:

is so strong that "Mozart" is more like an abbreviation of "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" than a

3247:

exists (because that capitalization is random and arbitrary), so MediaWiki interprets it as

3188:

exists (because that capitalization is random and arbitrary), so MediaWiki interprets it as

1241:

That is indeed the logic, although it's not circular. For each title, there are guidelines (

561: 3533: 3414: 2880: 1401:

are getting volleyed back and forth. When I said a move was irrelevant, I was referring to

1363: 1055: 996: 951: 3992: 3921: 3692: 3615: 3546: 3478: 3474: 3362: 3358: 3350: 3324: 3260: 3252: 3248: 3230: 3205: 3201: 3193: 3189: 3136: 3030: 2972: 2961: 2957: 2953: 2930: 2901: 2889: 2872: 2853: 2795: 2765: 2735: 2712: 2645: 2537: 2436: 2374: 2355: 2250: 2213: 2154: 2076: 2049: 2041: 1960: 1912: 1908: 1900: 1884: 1860: 1844: 1808: 1804: 1800: 1770: 1766: 1677: 1655: 1651: 1351: 1346:, a primary topic may be a redirect to an article with a different title. On the basis of 1335: 1192: 1148: 1097: 870: 866: 862: 786: 125: 117: 102: 3746: 3389:. Regarding the significance of the Google search results, allow me to offer an example: 2273: 2092:

Please turn off Google's "personal search results" (by adding &pws=0 to the URL) and

1788: 1712: 1613: 1398: 1250: 1246: 1224: 959: 892: 854: 756: 735: 373: 185:

episode. As for the primary topic question, the search term "big bang theory" directs to

931:, what would be materially improved by varying from the usual primary topic linking? -- 437:

find all the titles that do have qualifiers and don't have qualifiers? Take a gander at

3853: 3773: 3441:

Regarding the significance of the Google search results, allow me to offer an example:

2579: 2291: 1774: 1659: 1632: 1500: 1488:

Make an exception and remove the primary topic from Big Bang Theory (dismab) altogether

569: 4008: 3981: 3952: 3895: 3861: 3847: 3781: 3737: 3695: 3665: 3618: 3590: 3549: 3430: 3365: 3277: 3208: 3108: 3033: 2989: 2975: 2921: 2875: 2843: 2829: 2812: 2798: 2781: 2768: 2729: 2715: 2664: 2648: 2605: 2587: 2573: 2540: 2484: 2439: 2430: 2401: 2377: 2367: 2358: 2332: 2313: 2299: 2285: 2272:

It's sufficient in Knowledge (XXG)'s consensus opinion, however, per the above-quoted

2267: 2253: 2244: 2216: 2183: 2157: 2125: 2079: 2023: 1863: 1825: 1811: 1782: 1748: 1703: 1667: 1640: 1570: 1555: 1392: 1378: 1329: 1311: 1262: 1245:) to determine which topic (if any) is primary. For each topic, there are guidelines ( 1236: 1213: 1186: 1160: 1141: 1067: 1035: 986: 971: 940: 913: 886: 877:

the theory, and if new consensus is formed, I will happily return to that as well. --

848: 833: 819: 805: 772: 751: 739: 721: 652: 597: 513: 504:

certainly not as long as the distance between D.C. and Atlanta. Cheers! (it's Friday)

414: 360:? (I suppose I could move it above the project tag.) Consensus was reached in October. 343: 225: 198: 142: 111: 87: 3729: 3463: 2821: 2597: 2364: 2329: 2305: 2277: 2264: 2249:

As you're citing Jusses2's rationale, I invite you to address my response thereto. —

2032:

On what do you base the assertion that "it is more likely that readers will look for

1817: 1740: 1562: 1384: 1254: 1205: 1152: 1059: 978: 932: 878: 825: 797: 713: 589: 585: 406: 217: 134: 79: 1998:

is an unlikely search term, it could be argued that many of the readers looking for

1092:

at the top because they both share the exact capitalization of the dab page's title

4000: 3974: 3944: 3887: 3839: 3657: 3582: 3422: 3269: 3100: 2981: 2913: 2836: 2805: 2774: 2722: 2657: 2566: 2476: 2422: 2394: 2233: 2175: 2117: 2015: 1371: 1321: 1228: 1178: 1133: 1027: 963: 905: 840: 811: 764: 537: 3215:

I did address that argument (by explaining that it refuted one that I never made).

3029:

episode (which isn't titled "Big Bang Theory") received the most views, by far. —

2786:

Fair enough, but that isn't the standard to which Knowledge (XXG) adheres. (That

1458:

Article name changes. No change to Big Bang Theory (dsiambiguation) primary topic

2200:

They're supposed to seek "Big Bang Theory" and either follow the direct link to

1732: 433: 397: 46:

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

3935:("the primary topic line normally uses the redirect to link to that article"). 2944:

A flaw to keep in mind is that the tool isn't case-sensitive. In other words,

2616:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22big+bang+theory%22+-%22the+big+bang+theory%22

2563:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22big+bang+theory%22+-%22the+big+bang+theory%22

1477:

Change primary topic of The Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) to Big Bang theory

1223:, I cannot see this discussion progressing any further without a discussion of 3936: 3912: 3790: 3787:

I didn't realize a discussion has been started already. From my edit summary:

3625:

Is your argument that two capitalization differences suffice, but one doesn't?

3446: 3394: 1773:

should no redirect to different pages, when neither target is the same title.

1504: 686: 581: 96: 2006:

by searching the base name are inconvenienced twice: first at the hatnote on

3829: 3302: 3124:

address that argument (by explaining that it refuted one that I never made).

2490: 2457: 1736: 545: 541: 425: 389: 2848:

I don't think that anyone dismisses the possibility of readers seeking the

1253:

is the way to go to change from the primary topic to no primary topic. --

900:

all this formal procedural action would be unnecessary if an exception to

368:. Consensus on Knowledge (XXG) is pretty common, though, since WP defines 312:

Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) (1998) - The group disbanded in 2008.

74:

The change in primary topic was discussed at the primary topic title. See

3648: 3644: 3611: 3607: 3577: 3571: 3561: 3557: 3493: 3489: 3470: 3328: 3256: 3226: 3197: 3128: 2857: 2849: 2787: 2760:

And I reiterate that this search excludes all pages on which the phrase "

2743: 2514: 2502: 2346: 2342: 2325: 1852: 1796: 1792: 1728: 1724: 1681: 1108:

are different from the dab page's title, so the proper place for them is

928: 793: 778: 573: 557: 454: 186: 3789:

If "The Big Bang Theory" is a significant variant of "Big Bang Theory",

2409:. By far the most elegant and functional solution is to have the DAB at 2341:

I agree that the likelihood of readers typing "Big Bang Theory" seeking

3409:

trumps popularity." Finally, a move to the base name is recommended by

549: 1058:

just to placate editors who don't want to use the usual processes. --

3298: 2700:

I didn't say that it should be ignored. I'm saying that the context

2453: 2345:

probably exceeds the likelihood of readers typing "Red Meat" seeking

2108:

Vatican astronomer says Big Bang theory in tune with creation history

449: 3477:" (which rightly redirects accordingly), we're discussing the title 2208:

appearing among the suggestions below the search field or arrive at

1499:

Everybody agrees to disagree and leaves both disambs alone, one for

2263:; the capitalization alone is not sufficient disambiguation, IMO. 520:

Adding a parenthetical qualifier to a primary topic is contrary to

3900:

If "Big Bang Theory" were to be considered as an abbreviation of "

3672:

No, that overgeneralises (and I guess you'd therefore see it as a

3630:

No, that overgeneralises (and I guess you'd therefore see it as a

3459: 3450: 3398: 3335:

is a single click away (just as it is on the disambiguation page).

3268:

Actually the capitalisation was carefully chosen to make a point.

2888:

has been viewed does not tell us how many times readers searching

2856:. But given the fact that the proposed move wouldn't improve the 2450:

heory". The other works listed are significantly less prominent...

1720: 1716: 3340:

Actually the capitalisation was carefully chosen to make a point.

2868:), I see no sense in setting the burden of proof especially high. 2349:, but the likelihood of readers typing "Big Bang Theory" seeking 1990:

When using page view statistics, it is important to consider the

189:, hence this would be the combined page's primary topic. Cheers! 3793:

recommends that both (in bold) be included in the lead sentence.

3469:

Conversely, the cosmological model's article occupies the title

3323:

You stated that having the disambiguation page occupy the title

2676:

I don't follow. Are you saying that it's not worth the trouble?

2393:

navigational capability to readers looking for other meanings.

1561:

need to redirect a title to the same title with a qualifier. --

1466:

The Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) is moved to Big Bang Theory

3995:

as a redirect. With the last proposal above, the primary topic

1791:

is based are equally applicable here. If it's appropriate for

1455:

The Big Bang Theory is moved to The Big Bang Theory (TV series)

1195:, and it's the primary topic for "Big Bang Theory". Similarly, 687:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:The_Big_Bang_Theory#Requested_move

2997:

The page view statistics are useful too. Here are February's:

1196: 25: 2618:, the science theory is at least as prominent as the tv show. 1344:

Knowledge (XXG):Disambiguation#Redirecting to a primary topic

3233:(so the proposed move wouldn't make it any more accessible). 3175:

and nor under many circumstances does Knowledge (XXG) (type

3139:(so the proposed move wouldn't make it any more accessible). 524:(the qualifier is not commonly used to refer to the topic), 2764:

Big Bang Theory" (the program's complete title) appears. —

301:

Big Bang theory (scientific theory) - the article title is

3315:

In turn, you're addressing a point I didn't actually make.

3238:

In turn, you're addressing a point I didn't actually make.

2686:

Even when numerous valid results are excluded, the sitcom

3473:, and while that subject is commonly referred to as the " 2513:, he/she is presented with a hatnote linking directly to 2446:

The television program is the primary usage of "Big Bang

1839:

The television program is the primary usage of "Big Bang

1042:

I see no mention of "angry mob" or "grasping tightly" on

681:

Can User:JHunterJ prove his words about big bang theory?

3799:

is desired, perhaps the following as the lead sentence:

2452:. I'm afraid I have difficulty taking that seriously! A 1612:

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a

3970: 3871: 3817: 1116: 1110: 789: 361: 163:. As the article for the cosmological theory is titled 3229:

article already is one click away for anyone visiting

2639:

But if you look a books, the science usage overwhelms.

2578:

Agreed, Google tells us COMMONNAME, not PRIMARYUSAGE.

2105:

Big Bang Theory (Styx album) - Knowledge (XXG), the 💕

1022:

the possibility of granting this page an exception to

923:

for this page. Given the hatnotes already in place at

133:

can determine if that's the new consensus. Cheers! --

3745:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a

1403:

The Big Bang Theory → The_Big Bang Theory (TV series)

264:

2. I suggest, and this really is better mentioned at

3251:. This proposal has no bearing on that redirect or 3192:. This proposal has no bearing on that redirect or 3528:Finally, a move to the base name is recommended by 3838:Note that the significant variant is not in bold. 3691:This is subjective, so let's agree to disagree. — 3331:article. But thanks to the hatnote, that article 3142:To what other argument are you asking me to reply? 2421:, as proposed. That plus hatnotes will work well. 2116:I'll let the search results speak for themselves. 400:. They get qualifiers when the title is ambiguous 120:is. The ambiguous title is "Big Bang Theory". Per 3926:is an American TV sitcom first broadcast in 2007. 3569:Not a good parallel. The article title is really 2466:! Now, of course we at Knowledge (XXG) know that 3811:, an American TV sitcom first broadcast in 2007. 1971:, an American TV sitcom first broadcast in 2007. 738:drama would not be necessary if an exception to 3295: 1002:Big Bang Theory: Styx album, Harem Scarem album 3458:Note that I've opposed the proposed move from 2817:I think it's unusual. Google Ngrams does too, 2075:Big Bang Theory" appears on the same page. — 1294:, well that would be rediculous, but this is 116:Consensus there is what the primary topic of 8: 3939:("The term being disambiguated should be in 2614:Errm, in the Google search you give above, 2561:Errm, in the Google search you give above, 950:grasping tightly their laminated copies of 1883:. I see no need to redirect the base name 1694:, since it is found capitalized that way. 1434: 305:, and it has it's own disambiguation page. 181:Bag (disambiguation) does not link to the 3991:is primary here because it is primary at 2690:predominates. What's unclear about this? 2111:ThinkGeek :: Interests :: Big Bang Theory 3599:capitalization differences suffice, but 2952:are treated as one and the same, as are 1871:There are already two articles with the 1334:There is at present a primary topic for 873:from undiscussed, non-consensus changes 3908:(both the "Linking to a primary topic" 2746:and isn't affected by this discussion.) 2099:Big Bang Theory: Fashion: Wmagazine.com 3874:. The difference is that the case for 3135:is one click away for anyone visiting 2324:be enough for disambiguation (as with 1963:, a cosmological model of the universe 1855:). A suitable hatnote is in place at 919:dab page linking to the primary topic 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1911:. I propose the following layout for 1676:"Big Bang Theory" should redirect to 1350:, there is nothing wrong with having 7: 3003:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 2206:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 2038:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 2004:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 1897:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 1881:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 1627:The result of the move request was: 1469:Disambiguation is literally deleted. 1175:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 1117:The Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1111:The Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1090:Big Bang Theory (Harem Scarem album) 1048:The Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 956:WP:MOSDAB#Linking to a primary topic 921:WP:MOSDAB#Linking to a primary topic 366:WP:MOSDAB#Linking to a primary topic 122:WP:MOSDAB#Linking to a primary topic 3904:", the following would comply with 3292:argument? You wrote the following: 3259:and will continue to do so). Only 3200:and will continue to do so). Only 2860:article's accessibility (and would 2528:, and the proposed move would only 1507:, each with their own primary topic 1005:Big Bang theory: cosmological model 742:could be made for this page. Since 3449:dominates the search results, but 3397:dominates the search results, but 2102:ScienceDaily: Big Bang Theory News 1851:(which appropriately redirects to 904:could be discussed for this page. 677:prove words about big bang theory? 439:List of American television series 24: 3676:judging by your earlier comment). 2320:Consensus is that capitalization 1981:, a 2011 episode of the TV series 1491:Disamb becomes pointless. See #2. 3532:if this discussion results in a 3413:if this discussion results in a 3099:in the search box for example). 3017:The Big Bang Theory (Family Guy) 2012:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1996:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1753:You have quoted Knowledge (XXG): 1648:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1221:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1130:The Big Bang Theory (Family Guy) 1122:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1106:The Big Bang Theory (Family Guy) 1094:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 1008:The Big Bang Theory: TV sitcom, 859:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 210:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 161:Big Bang Theory (disambiguation) 29: 3641: 3623: 3554: 3241: 3223: 3213: 3179:in the search box for example). 2630:referred to by its full title ( 2071:instances in which the phrase " 1689:R from alternate capitalization 750:, the disclaimer at the top of 2852:article arriving at the title 2238: 1124:, it is most precise to place 471:Ash Wednesday (disambiguation) 372:differently than Webster's. A 1: 3684: 3670: 3526: 3499: 3439: 3338: 3313: 3282: 3173: 3163: 3145: 3113: 2693: 2669: 2637: 2612: 2519:In other words, that article 2402:13:57, 28 February 2012 (UTC) 2378:07:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC) 2368:18:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC) 2359:04:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC) 2333:04:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC) 2314:12:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC) 2300:03:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC) 2286:18:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2268:16:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2254:14:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2245:14:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2217:04:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2184:03:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2158:04:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2126:03:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2080:02:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 2044:than for readers looking for 2024:00:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 1903:than for readers looking for 1864:03:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC) 1826:13:47, 23 February 2012 (UTC) 1812:03:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC) 1783:03:25, 23 February 2012 (UTC) 1749:12:38, 22 February 2012 (UTC) 1704:11:24, 22 February 2012 (UTC) 1668:05:32, 22 February 2012 (UTC) 1571:20:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1556:20:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1393:19:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1379:19:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1330:18:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1312:13:24, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1263:12:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 1237:04:53, 17 February 2012 (UTC) 1214:02:08, 15 February 2012 (UTC) 1187:22:28, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1169:base name "Big Bang Theory": 1161:20:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1142:20:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1068:19:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 1036:18:46, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 987:12:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC) 972:22:02, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 941:18:43, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 914:17:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 887:16:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 849:15:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 834:15:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 820:14:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 806:12:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 773:05:55, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 722:12:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC) 653:20:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 598:13:11, 11 February 2012 (UTC) 514:21:55, 10 February 2012 (UTC) 415:20:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC) 344:16:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC) 226:15:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC) 199:14:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC) 3010:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 2904:increases the view count of 2501:And if a reader seeking the 2202:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 2034:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 2000:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 1893:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 1877:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 1171:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 1086:Big Bang Theory (Styx album) 1072:I've already apologized for 638:Seeing that the article is " 356:would you suggest I link to 270:paranthetical disambiguation 143:17:22, 4 February 2012 (UTC) 112:07:37, 4 February 2012 (UTC) 88:03:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC) 2896:incorrectly. Remember that 1120:is currently redirected to 4033: 4009:13:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 3982:13:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 3953:12:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 3896:06:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 3862:05:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 3848:04:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 3782:03:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 1641:18:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC) 1631:due to lack of consensus. 3738:00:25, 5 March 2012 (UTC) 3696:00:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 3666:23:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3619:13:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3591:11:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3564:title for something else. 3550:07:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3496:title for something else. 3431:06:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3366:13:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3278:11:13, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3209:07:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3109:05:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 3034:06:03, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 2990:05:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 2976:04:47, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 2922:04:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 2876:03:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 2844:01:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC) 2830:19:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2813:18:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2799:14:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2782:13:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2769:05:43, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2730:04:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2716:04:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2665:04:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2649:04:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2606:03:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2588:03:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2574:03:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2541:03:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2485:03:02, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2440:02:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 2431:01:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 1915:as a disambiguation page: 1757:titles, with emphasis on 1397:Who's on first? Too many 1292:Big Bang (disambiguation) 1019:exact same capitalization 461:Daylight (disambiguation) 206:Big Bang (disambiguation) 157:Big Bang (disambiguation) 3752:Please do not modify it. 3545:No one disputes that. — 3170:This is discussed above. 2912:of incorrect arrivals." 1619:Please do not modify it. 353:the very first line here 3880:Mozart (disambiguation) 3505:: "On Knowledge (XXG), 3405:: "On Knowledge (XXG), 3255:(both of which lead to 3196:(both of which lead to 1975:"The Big Bang Theory" ( 1017:As the albums have the 445:Madman (disambiguation) 3870:example would support 3595:Is your argument that 3307: 3088:you clearly understood 2937:counted as a visit to 466:Arena (disambiguation) 350:How much earlier that 3575:, and contrasts with 2742:already redirects to 2417:, and the TV show at 2010:and a second time at 1955:(The) Big Bang Theory 891:If it's as simple as 578:Too Close for Comfort 430:3rd Rock from the Sun 394:3rd Rock from the Sun 42:of past discussions. 2881:Page view statistics 2709:a Google News search 1932:(Harem Scarem album) 1052:Talk:Big Bang Theory 566:Strangers with Candy 358:Talk:Big Bang Theory 266:Talk:Big Bang Theory 248:Talk:Big Bang Theory 214:Talk:Big Bang Theory 131:Talk:Big Bang Theory 76:Talk:Big Bang Theory 18:Talk:Big Bang Theory 3988:The Big Bang Theory 3902:The Big Bang Theory 3884:significant variant 3808:The Big Bang Theory 3769:The Big Bang Theory 3636:not a good parallel 3534:change of consensus 3509:trumps popularity." 3453:is about the fruit. 3415:change of consensus 3025:Interestingly, the 2950:The big bang theory 2946:The Big Bang Theory 2939:The Big Bang Theory 2906:The Big Bang Theory 2894:The Big Bang Theory 2886:The Big Bang Theory 2866:The Big Bang Theory 2632:The Big Bang Theory 2536:less prominent). — 2511:The Big Bang Theory 2419:The Big Bang Theory 2351:The Big Bang Theory 2210:The Big Bang Theory 2046:The Big Bang Theory 2008:The Big Bang Theory 1968:The Big Bang Theory 1957:may also refer to: 1905:The Big Bang Theory 1889:The Big Bang Theory 1857:The Big Bang Theory 1356:The Big Bang Theory 1340:The Big Bang Theory 1126:The Big Bang Theory 1102:The Big Bang Theory 925:The Big Bang Theory 783:The Big Bang Theory 746:is an extension of 246:Thanks! Linking to 3501:Furthermore, from 2146:instead of page 8. 1342:. As described at 1227:to the base name. 3357:distinguish from 3320:Please elaborate. 1517: 1516: 1082:WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY 698:comment added by 554:The Twilight Zone 259:broader community 109: 67: 66: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4024: 3969:With regards to 3754: 3688: 3678: 3653: 3627: 3566: 3542: 3538:no primary topic 3511: 3455: 3419:no primary topic 3342: 3317: 3286: 3265: 3235: 3217: 3181: 3167: 3149: 3117: 3022: 3019: 3012: 3005: 2697: 2673: 2641: 2620: 2413:, the theory at 2242: 1693: 1687: 1621: 1435: 1300:(disambiguation) 1119: 1113: 946:an angry mob of 707: 562:King of the Hill 101: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 4032: 4031: 4027: 4026: 4025: 4023: 4022: 4021: 3993:Big Bang Theory 3922:Big Bang Theory 3876:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 3816:In my opinion, 3803:Big Bang Theory 3764: 3759: 3750: 3647:arrives at the 3610:arrives at the 3475:Big Bang theory 3359:Big Bang Theory 3351:Big bang theory 3325:Big Bang Theory 3261:Big Bang Theory 3253:Big Bang theory 3249:Big bang theory 3245:Big bang Theory 3243:No page titled 3231:Big Bang Theory 3204:is affected. — 3202:Big Bang Theory 3194:Big Bang theory 3190:Big bang theory 3186:Big bang Theory 3184:No page titled 3177:Big bang Theory 3137:Big Bang Theory 3097:Big bang Theory 3015: 3008: 3001: 2998: 2962:Big bang theory 2958:Big Bang theory 2954:Big Bang Theory 2931:Big Bang Theory 2902:Big Bang Theory 2890:Big Bang Theory 2854:Big Bang Theory 2594:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 2472:Big Bang Theory 2468:Big Bang theory 2415:Big Bang theory 2411:Big Bang Theory 2057:a Google search 2050:Big Bang Theory 2042:Big Bang Theory 1961:Big Bang theory 1939:Big Bang Theory 1930:Big Bang Theory 1923:Big Bang Theory 1913:Big Bang Theory 1909:Big Bang Theory 1901:Big Bang Theory 1885:Big Bang Theory 1805:Big Bang Theory 1801:Big Bang theory 1771:Big Bang Theory 1767:Big Bang theory 1763:Big Bang Theory 1691: 1685: 1678:Big Bang theory 1656:Big Bang theory 1652:Big Bang Theory 1617: 1607: 1352:Big Bang Theory 1336:Big Bang Theory 1243:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1202:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1193:Big Bang Theory 1149:Big Bang Theory 1115: 1109: 1098:Big Bang theory 1024:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 902:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 871:Big Bang Theory 867:Big Bang Theory 863:Big Bang Theory 787:Big Bang theory 761:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 748:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 693: 679: 530:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 386:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 254:. Three things: 126:Big Bang theory 118:Big Bang Theory 107: 72: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4030: 4028: 4020: 4019: 4018: 4017: 4016: 4015: 4014: 4013: 4012: 4011: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3929: 3928: 3927: 3898: 3866:Actually, the 3836: 3835: 3834: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3763: 3760: 3758: 3757: 3747:requested move 3741: 3740: 3709: 3708: 3707: 3706: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3702: 3701: 3700: 3699: 3698: 3689: 3682: 3679: 3654: 3639: 3628: 3604: 3567: 3543: 3524: 3521:an ongoing RfC 3512: 3497: 3486: 3467: 3456: 3434: 3433: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3378: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3343: 3336: 3321: 3318: 3311: 3308: 3293: 3287: 3266: 3239: 3236: 3221: 3218: 3182: 3171: 3168: 3161: 3150: 3143: 3140: 3125: 3118: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3043: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3023: 3021: 3020: 3013: 3006: 2995: 2965: 2942: 2927: 2869: 2758: 2747: 2705: 2698: 2691: 2684: 2677: 2674: 2654: 2642: 2635: 2624: 2621: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2518: 2500: 2498: 2495: 2404: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2384: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2380: 2340: 2338: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2147: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2109: 2106: 2103: 2100: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2061: 2053: 2048:to search for 2027: 2026: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1972: 1964: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1935: 1925:may refer to: 1917: 1916: 1907:to search for 1866: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1706: 1646: 1644: 1625: 1624: 1614:requested move 1608: 1606: 1605:Requested move 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1515: 1514: 1511: 1510:We shake hands 1508: 1496: 1495: 1492: 1489: 1485: 1484: 1481: 1478: 1474: 1473: 1470: 1467: 1463: 1462: 1459: 1456: 1452: 1451: 1449:Encyclo's vote 1446: 1441: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1381: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1006: 1003: 725: 724: 678: 675: 674: 673: 672: 671: 670: 669: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 663: 662: 661: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 607: 606: 605: 604: 603: 602: 601: 600: 570:Princess Sarah 488: 487: 486: 485: 484: 483: 482: 481: 480: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 474: 473: 468: 463: 458: 452: 447: 421: 325: 324: 323: 322: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 313: 310: 306: 299: 285: 284: 283: 282: 281: 280: 279: 278: 277: 276: 273: 262: 255: 235: 234: 233: 232: 231: 230: 229: 228: 173: 172: 171: 170: 169: 168: 148: 147: 146: 145: 105: 71: 68: 65: 64: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4029: 4010: 4006: 4002: 3998: 3994: 3990: 3989: 3985: 3984: 3983: 3980: 3976: 3972: 3968: 3967: 3966: 3965: 3964: 3963: 3962: 3961: 3954: 3950: 3946: 3942: 3938: 3934: 3930: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3917: 3916: 3914: 3911: 3907: 3903: 3899: 3897: 3893: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3873: 3869: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3859: 3855: 3851: 3850: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3837: 3832: 3831: 3826: 3825: 3823: 3819: 3815: 3810: 3809: 3805:may refer to 3804: 3801: 3800: 3798: 3794: 3792: 3786: 3785: 3784: 3783: 3779: 3775: 3771: 3770: 3761: 3756: 3753: 3748: 3743: 3742: 3739: 3735: 3731: 3726: 3722: 3718: 3714: 3711: 3710: 3697: 3694: 3690: 3687: 3683: 3680: 3677: 3673: 3669: 3668: 3667: 3663: 3659: 3655: 3652: 3650: 3646: 3640: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3626: 3622: 3621: 3620: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3605: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3579: 3574: 3573: 3568: 3565: 3563: 3559: 3553: 3552: 3551: 3548: 3544: 3541: 3539: 3535: 3531: 3525: 3522: 3517: 3513: 3510: 3508: 3504: 3498: 3495: 3491: 3487: 3484: 3482: 3476: 3472: 3468: 3465: 3464:Apple (fruit) 3461: 3457: 3454: 3452: 3448: 3444: 3438: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3420: 3416: 3412: 3408: 3404: 3400: 3396: 3392: 3388: 3385: 3384: 3367: 3364: 3360: 3356: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3341: 3337: 3334: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3319: 3316: 3312: 3309: 3306: 3304: 3300: 3294: 3291: 3288: 3285: 3281: 3280: 3279: 3275: 3271: 3267: 3264: 3262: 3258: 3254: 3250: 3246: 3240: 3237: 3234: 3232: 3228: 3222: 3219: 3216: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3183: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3169: 3166: 3162: 3159: 3158:claiming that 3157: 3151: 3148: 3144: 3141: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3126: 3123: 3119: 3116: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3106: 3102: 3098: 3093: 3089: 3086:(replying to 3085: 3084: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3035: 3032: 3028: 3024: 3018: 3014: 3011: 3007: 3004: 3000: 2999: 2996: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2974: 2970: 2966: 2963: 2959: 2955: 2951: 2947: 2943: 2940: 2936: 2932: 2928: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2903: 2899: 2895: 2891: 2887: 2882: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2874: 2870: 2867: 2863: 2859: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2846: 2845: 2842: 2838: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2827: 2823: 2819: 2816: 2815: 2814: 2811: 2807: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2788:a comic strip 2785: 2784: 2783: 2780: 2776: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2756: 2752: 2748: 2745: 2741: 2739: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2728: 2724: 2719: 2718: 2717: 2714: 2710: 2706: 2703: 2699: 2696: 2692: 2689: 2685: 2682: 2678: 2675: 2672: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2663: 2659: 2655: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2647: 2643: 2640: 2636: 2633: 2629: 2625: 2622: 2619: 2617: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2590: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2542: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2522: 2516: 2512: 2508: 2504: 2492: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2473: 2469: 2465: 2464: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2449: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2438: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2428: 2424: 2420: 2416: 2412: 2408: 2405: 2403: 2400: 2396: 2391: 2379: 2376: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2366: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2357: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2331: 2327: 2323: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2297: 2293: 2289: 2288: 2287: 2283: 2279: 2275: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2266: 2262: 2259: 2255: 2252: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2243: 2241: 2240:ApprenticeFan 2235: 2231: 2228: 2227: 2218: 2215: 2211: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2159: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2145: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2115: 2110: 2107: 2104: 2101: 2098: 2097: 2095: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2081: 2078: 2074: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2051: 2047: 2043: 2040:by searching 2039: 2035: 2031: 2030: 2029: 2028: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2005: 2001: 1997: 1993: 1989: 1988: 1980: 1978: 1973: 1970: 1969: 1965: 1962: 1959: 1958: 1956: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1942: 1940: 1936: 1933: 1931: 1927: 1926: 1924: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1914: 1910: 1906: 1902: 1899:by searching 1898: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1878: 1874: 1870: 1867: 1865: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1850: 1848: 1842: 1838: 1835: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1810: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1785: 1784: 1780: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1764: 1760: 1756: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1746: 1742: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1707: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1690: 1683: 1679: 1675: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1643: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1623: 1620: 1615: 1610: 1609: 1604: 1572: 1568: 1564: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1512: 1509: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1497: 1493: 1490: 1487: 1486: 1482: 1479: 1476: 1475: 1471: 1468: 1465: 1464: 1460: 1457: 1454: 1453: 1450: 1447: 1445: 1442: 1440: 1437: 1436: 1404: 1400: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1380: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1327: 1323: 1319: 1316:According to 1315: 1314: 1313: 1309: 1305: 1301: 1299: 1293: 1288: 1284: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1244: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1222: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1203: 1198: 1194: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1168: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1139: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1118: 1112: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1020: 1016: 1011: 1007: 1004: 1001: 1000: 998: 994: 990: 989: 988: 984: 980: 975: 974: 973: 969: 965: 961: 957: 953: 949: 944: 943: 942: 938: 934: 930: 926: 922: 917: 916: 915: 911: 907: 903: 898: 894: 890: 889: 888: 884: 880: 876: 872: 868: 864: 860: 856: 852: 851: 850: 846: 842: 837: 836: 835: 831: 827: 823: 822: 821: 817: 813: 809: 808: 807: 803: 799: 795: 791: 788: 784: 780: 776: 775: 774: 770: 766: 762: 758: 753: 749: 745: 741: 737: 733: 729: 728: 727: 726: 723: 719: 715: 710: 709: 708: 705: 701: 697: 689: 688: 682: 676: 654: 650: 646: 641: 637: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 626: 625: 624: 623: 622: 621: 620: 619: 618: 599: 595: 591: 587: 586:Mine All Mine 583: 579: 575: 571: 567: 563: 559: 555: 551: 547: 543: 539: 535: 531: 527: 523: 522:WP:COMMONNAME 519: 518: 517: 516: 515: 511: 507: 502: 501: 500: 499: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 493: 492: 491: 490: 489: 472: 469: 467: 464: 462: 459: 456: 453: 451: 448: 446: 443: 442: 440: 435: 431: 427: 422: 418: 417: 416: 412: 408: 403: 399: 395: 391: 387: 383: 382:WP:COMMONNAME 379: 375: 371: 367: 362: 359: 355: 354: 349: 348: 347: 346: 345: 341: 337: 333: 332: 331: 330: 329: 328: 327: 326: 314: 311: 307: 304: 300: 297: 296: 293: 292: 291: 290: 289: 288: 287: 286: 274: 271: 267: 263: 260: 256: 253: 249: 245: 244: 243: 242: 241: 240: 239: 238: 237: 236: 227: 223: 219: 215: 211: 207: 202: 201: 200: 196: 192: 188: 184: 179: 178: 177: 176: 175: 174: 166: 162: 158: 154: 153: 152: 151: 150: 149: 144: 140: 136: 132: 127: 123: 119: 115: 114: 113: 110: 108: 103: 99: 98: 92: 91: 90: 89: 85: 81: 77: 70:Primary topic 69: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3996: 3986: 3940: 3920: 3918: 3909: 3901: 3883: 3828: 3806: 3802: 3788: 3767: 3765: 3751: 3744: 3724: 3720: 3716: 3712: 3685: 3675: 3671: 3642: 3635: 3631: 3624: 3614:article.) — 3600: 3596: 3576: 3570: 3555: 3530:WP:MALPLACED 3527: 3500: 3480: 3440: 3411:WP:MALPLACED 3386: 3354: 3346: 3339: 3332: 3314: 3296: 3289: 3283: 3263:is affected. 3242: 3224: 3214: 3178: 3174: 3164: 3155: 3153: 3146: 3132: 3121: 3114: 3096: 3091: 3087: 3026: 2968: 2934: 2909: 2897: 2861: 2761: 2754: 2750: 2737: 2701: 2694: 2687: 2680: 2670: 2638: 2631: 2627: 2613: 2596:toolbox. -- 2533: 2529: 2525: 2520: 2506: 2471: 2467: 2462: 2461: 2447: 2445: 2418: 2414: 2410: 2406: 2321: 2260: 2239: 2234:User:Jusses2 2229: 2150: 2143: 2072: 2068: 2064: 1991: 1976: 1966: 1954: 1941:(Styx album) 1938: 1929: 1922: 1872: 1868: 1846: 1840: 1836: 1758: 1754: 1708: 1696:70.24.251.71 1673: 1645: 1628: 1626: 1618: 1611: 1548:Encycloshave 1503:and one for 1448: 1443: 1438: 1354:redirect to 1304:Encycloshave 1297: 1286: 1166: 1056:ignore rules 1018: 1009: 874: 694:— Preceding 690: 683: 680: 645:Encycloshave 639: 538:The Simpsons 534:WP:PRECISION 526:WP:PRECISION 506:Encycloshave 401: 378:WP:PRECISION 370:WP:CONSENSUS 352: 351: 336:Encycloshave 302: 251: 191:Encycloshave 182: 164: 100: 95: 73: 60: 43: 37: 3915:sections): 3872:this layout 3818:this layout 3353:, which we 2900:search for 2892:arrived at 1875:base name: 1733:Sea-Monkeys 897:76.70.89.12 700:76.70.89.12 434:Ally McBeal 398:Ally McBeal 94:correct. -- 36:This is an 3937:MOS:DABINT 3913:MOS:DABINT 3791:MOS:DABINT 3725:Family Guy 3693:David Levy 3616:David Levy 3547:David Levy 3507:neutrality 3447:Apple Inc. 3445:. Clearly 3407:neutrality 3395:Apple Inc. 3393:. Clearly 3363:David Levy 3206:David Levy 3031:David Levy 3027:Family Guy 2973:David Levy 2969:increasing 2910:percentage 2873:David Levy 2796:David Levy 2766:David Levy 2713:David Levy 2707:Likewise, 2646:David Levy 2538:David Levy 2437:David Levy 2375:David Levy 2356:David Levy 2251:David Levy 2214:David Levy 2155:David Levy 2077:David Levy 1992:percentage 1977:Family Guy 1861:David Levy 1809:David Levy 1010:Family Guy 755:page, not 582:Gypsy Girl 183:Family Guy 3999:in bold. 3971:this edit 3933:WP:MOSDAB 3906:WP:MOSDAB 3854:117Avenue 3830:cosmonaut 3822:WP:MOSDAB 3797:WP:MOSDAB 3774:117Avenue 3674:straw man 3651:article.) 3632:straw man 3503:WP:GOOGLE 3479:Big Bang 3403:WP:GOOGLE 3303:Evolution 2749:But even 2736:Big Bang 2702:shouldn't 2681:advantage 2580:117Avenue 2458:Evolution 2292:117Avenue 2094:try again 2063:And this 1845:Big Bang 1775:117Avenue 1737:SeaMonkey 1660:117Avenue 1633:Aervanath 1629:not moved 1360:WP:MALDAB 1348:WP:MALDAB 1338:-- it is 1318:WP:MALDAB 1296:Big Bang 1078:let it go 744:WP:MALDAB 546:Big Ideas 542:Survivors 426:Babylon 5 390:Babylon 5 252:ambiguous 61:Archive 1 3730:CapitalQ 3649:Red Meat 3645:red Meat 3612:Red Meat 3608:red Meat 3603:doesn't? 3578:Red Meat 3572:red meat 3562:Red Meat 3558:Red meat 3494:Red Meat 3490:Red meat 3471:Big Bang 3329:Big Bang 3257:Big Bang 3227:Big Bang 3198:Big Bang 3131:article 3129:Big Bang 3092:evidence 2864:that of 2858:Big Bang 2850:Big Bang 2822:JHunterJ 2755:combined 2744:Big Bang 2598:JHunterJ 2515:Big Bang 2505:article 2503:Big Bang 2347:Red meat 2343:Big Bang 2326:Red Meat 2306:JHunterJ 2278:JHunterJ 2149:Are you 2060:results. 1869:Support. 1853:Big Bang 1818:JHunterJ 1797:Red Meat 1793:Red meat 1741:JHunterJ 1729:Red meat 1725:Red Meat 1682:Big Bang 1563:JHunterJ 1385:JHunterJ 1255:JHunterJ 1206:JHunterJ 1153:JHunterJ 1114:. Since 1074:WP:Gnome 1060:JHunterJ 1044:WP:Gnome 993:WP:Gnome 979:JHunterJ 933:JHunterJ 929:Big Bang 879:JHunterJ 857:to move 826:JHunterJ 798:JHunterJ 794:Big Bang 779:Big Bang 714:JHunterJ 696:unsigned 590:JHunterJ 574:McCallum 558:Big Love 455:War Game 407:JHunterJ 303:Big Bang 218:JHunterJ 187:Big Bang 165:Big Bang 135:JHunterJ 80:JHunterJ 4001:Jusses2 3945:Jusses2 3888:Jusses2 3840:Jusses2 3766:Why is 3762:Bolding 3658:Andrewa 3583:Andrewa 3516:WP:NPOV 3423:Jusses2 3387:Comment 3333:already 3270:Andrewa 3133:already 3101:Andrewa 2982:Jusses2 2914:Jusses2 2751:without 2521:already 2497:title). 2491:pretend 2477:Andrewa 2423:Andrewa 2407:Support 2261:Support 2230:Support 2176:Jusses2 2118:Jusses2 2016:Jusses2 1837:Oppose. 1759:article 1755:Article 1684:) as a 1674:Comment 1546:Cheers 1501:Sheldon 1368:WP:TLDR 1322:Jusses2 1229:Jusses2 1179:Jusses2 1134:Jusses2 1028:Jusses2 1012:episode 964:Jusses2 906:Jusses2 841:Jusses2 812:Jusses2 765:Jusses2 732:WP:BIAS 550:Lovejoy 39:archive 3868:Mozart 3713:Oppose 3656:True. 3299:sitcom 2862:worsen 2792:policy 2530:reduce 2454:sitcom 2365:Powers 2330:Powers 2265:Powers 1943:(2005) 1934:(1998) 1709:Oppose 1444:Result 1439:Action 1399:WP:RMs 1370:text. 1364:WP:DAB 1298:Theory 997:WP:MOS 952:WP:MOS 948:gnomes 790:et al. 734:. The 450:Impact 384:, and 309:years. 216:.) -- 3979:wiser 3975:older 3483:heory 3460:Apple 3451:Apple 3443:Apple 3399:Apple 3391:Apple 3361:). — 2898:every 2841:wiser 2837:older 2810:wiser 2806:older 2794:.) — 2779:wiser 2775:older 2740:heory 2727:wiser 2723:older 2688:still 2662:wiser 2658:older 2571:wiser 2567:older 2494:page. 2399:wiser 2395:older 2276:. -- 2274:WP:AT 1873:exact 1849:heory 1789:WP:AT 1721:Maven 1717:MAVEN 1713:WP:AT 1376:wiser 1372:older 1251:WP:RM 1247:WP:NC 1225:WP:RM 1167:exact 1076:, so 991:From 960:WP:RM 893:WP:RM 855:WP:RM 757:WP:RM 736:WP:RM 374:WP:RM 97:Ckatz 78:. -- 16:< 4005:talk 3949:talk 3941:bold 3919:The 3892:talk 3858:talk 3844:talk 3778:talk 3734:talk 3662:talk 3587:talk 3556:The 3488:The 3427:talk 3347:true 3290:What 3274:talk 3154:I'm 3105:talk 2986:talk 2960:and 2948:and 2918:talk 2826:talk 2628:also 2602:talk 2584:talk 2507:does 2481:talk 2470:and 2427:talk 2310:talk 2296:talk 2282:talk 2232:per 2180:talk 2122:talk 2020:talk 1879:and 1822:talk 1807:. — 1803:and 1795:and 1779:talk 1769:and 1745:talk 1735:and 1727:and 1719:and 1711:per 1700:talk 1664:talk 1637:talk 1567:talk 1552:talk 1513:Yes 1505:Fred 1389:talk 1326:talk 1308:talk 1259:talk 1233:talk 1210:talk 1183:talk 1173:and 1157:talk 1138:talk 1128:and 1104:and 1088:and 1064:talk 1032:talk 983:talk 968:talk 937:talk 927:and 910:talk 883:talk 875:from 845:talk 830:talk 816:talk 802:talk 781:and 769:talk 752:WP:D 740:WP:D 718:talk 704:talk 649:talk 594:talk 510:talk 411:talk 340:talk 222:talk 195:talk 159:and 139:talk 84:talk 3910:and 3878:at 3749:. 3717:The 3601:one 3597:two 3536:to 3462:to 3417:to 3156:not 3122:did 2935:not 2933:is 2762:The 2534:far 2526:now 2322:may 2151:not 2073:The 2069:all 2065:far 2055:In 2036:or 2002:or 1895:or 1887:to 1494:No 1483:No 1472:No 1461:OK 1362:or 1287:two 1204:-- 1197:USA 861:to 792:to 640:The 402:and 388:): 106:spy 4007:) 3997:is 3977:≠ 3951:) 3894:) 3886:. 3860:) 3846:) 3827:A 3824:: 3780:) 3736:) 3664:) 3589:) 3581:. 3523:.) 3429:) 3421:. 3355:do 3297:A 3276:) 3120:I 3107:) 2988:) 2956:, 2920:) 2839:≠ 2828:) 2808:≠ 2777:≠ 2725:≠ 2683:.) 2660:≠ 2604:) 2586:) 2569:≠ 2483:) 2429:) 2397:≠ 2312:) 2298:) 2284:) 2236:. 2204:/ 2182:) 2124:) 2052:"? 2022:) 1859:.— 1824:) 1781:) 1747:) 1731:; 1723:; 1702:) 1692:}} 1686:{{ 1666:) 1658:. 1650:→ 1639:) 1616:. 1569:) 1554:) 1391:) 1374:≠ 1328:) 1310:) 1261:) 1235:) 1212:) 1185:) 1159:) 1140:) 1096:. 1066:) 1034:) 1026:. 985:) 970:) 939:) 912:) 885:) 847:) 832:) 818:) 804:) 771:) 720:) 706:) 651:) 596:) 584:, 580:, 576:, 572:, 568:, 564:, 560:, 556:, 552:, 548:, 544:, 540:, 512:) 432:, 428:, 413:) 396:, 392:, 380:, 342:) 224:) 197:) 141:) 86:) 4003:( 3947:( 3890:( 3856:( 3842:( 3776:( 3732:( 3721:9 3660:( 3638:. 3585:( 3540:. 3485:. 3481:T 3425:( 3272:( 3160:. 3103:( 2984:( 2964:. 2941:. 2916:( 2824:( 2757:. 2738:t 2600:( 2582:( 2517:. 2479:( 2463:T 2448:T 2425:( 2373:— 2354:— 2308:( 2294:( 2280:( 2178:( 2144:9 2120:( 2018:( 1979:) 1847:t 1841:T 1820:( 1777:( 1743:( 1698:( 1680:( 1662:( 1635:( 1565:( 1550:( 1387:( 1324:( 1306:( 1257:( 1231:( 1208:( 1181:( 1155:( 1136:( 1062:( 1030:( 981:( 966:( 935:( 908:( 881:( 843:( 828:( 814:( 800:( 767:( 716:( 702:( 647:( 592:( 508:( 409:( 338:( 272:. 261:? 220:( 193:( 137:( 82:( 50:.

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

Index