341:
Todfox wants it to mean, or does its current meaning have anything to do with the meaning it has had down through the years. Grab a real dictionary - "encyclopedic" carries a connotation of completeness in converage, so restricting the reader to a single viewpoint on the event - that of BMORG - or even to just a select few viewpoints, would be to make the article less encyclopedic. It would also be to make a mockery of NPOV, because as we get to the question of which 'worthier' views of the event should be allowed in, we're left with the question of "who is Todfox, and what qualifies him to make that decision". Just by making it, you've engaged in POV.
162:
shape it. However, Burning Man has policies despite its anarchistic leanings, and when those policies are violated things are brought back in line with policy (whether its your art car speeding/endangering pedestrians, on the playa or selling something). Similarly, despite
Knowledge (XXG)'s 'anyone can edit' and consensus based models, there are still policies which should be followed. I don't think it is elitist of me to seek to enforce policies set by collective agreement of the hundreds or thousands of wikipedia editors.
171:
never heard of this great event (yes, they still exist) or those looking for more info for their own prospective trips, and who would like the most useful and authoritative information possible (as much as such a thing is possible when it comes to BM!). This goes for the external links too -- an unwieldy collection of links does not serve the curious newbie well; what they need are links to sites with the most, clearest, and best information. Please draw your attention to
Knowledge (XXG)'s style guide on
678:
interested in the event. I think that the list of quotations on my site and the humour, both on my site and links to the Onion articles, capture an inkling of the
Burning Man experience that the article (or even the hand-drawn map that was accepted as a valid link) doesn't convey. There's no substitute to going to the event but a quick summary of what people think about it can be useful. I do get a lot of refferals from this site and people googling for Burning Man info, so I know that people go there.
149:
ignoring the heart and bulk of the event, in a way ironically at odds with the entire concept of
Knowledge (XXG) itself. Who is Joe anonymous, that we should all want to see his gallery? Fine, who is Todfox or any other editor who has ever worked on Knowledge (XXG), that our experience of anything should be filtered through his viewpoint? Almost the entire site is put together by people that nobody has ever heard of, so where is this sudden burst of elitism coming from? (comment by
31:
787:" hasn't intentionally deleted that link even once, much less persisted in doing so. Todfox is, however, persisting in throwing the same bit of mud in the apparent hope that it will stick if he throws it enough times. I have no objection to the image gallery at burningman.com being linked to from this article. I think it makes an excellent addition, and am surprised that it wasn't one of the first pages linked to.
894:" refers to self-promoting links. My link isn't for self-promotion. I can make my pages seem less self-promotional but I don't think I should have to. Also, not all worthwhile pages are eventually linked to by someone other than the author, and linking to someone's site that isn't your own doesn't necessarily make it worthwhile. And I don't think that a site has to be
258:-- I would argue that your edits have made this page more elitist, by favoring the viewpoints of these two individuals (out of the thousands who have photographed BM) and removing a link to a gallery with hundreds of individuals viewpoints on it. The latter seems more anarchistic and in the spirit of the event, which belongs to no one person.
236:-- a link repository. This is a good place random links to a Burner's homepage or photo gallery can go. Unlike wikipedia, which is an encylcopedia, this site is designed to hold and categorize many links on a topic. By providing a link to the ODP we give people the opportunity to find J. Random Burner's page if they want to do so.
828:
assuming these were things you said merely in the heat of the moment and as such I have deleted them, in keeping with the guidelines on that page. Please try not to resort to comments about my character or personal attacks in the future as I think it is unbecoming behavior for both a fellow wikipedia editor and a fellow Burner.
496:
another. This is why the NPOV policy does not allow you to do what you just did - the very choice you're making is a form of POV; is it appropriate in a wiki for the reader's experience to be filtered through the subjective judgment calls of one person, or even of two or three?
764:
Tod, I think you know full well that when somebody reverts a page, as I did to get back the links that you took out, that all edits that came after the version one reverts to, come undone. While you're clearly trying to affect a civil tone, to do something as blatantly dishonest as
729:
states explicitly, "Adding links to one's own page is strongly discouraged." Your site consists of one personal essay, 3 links to other sites, and a bit of forwarded humor about BMan. This does not suggest to me a reason to link to your own site. In my opinion, if you link to your own site you should
677:
because I think it adds a point of view that really isn't available elsewhere. Not everyone reads the article--some just go straight to the links to find out what
Burning Man is about. It's not true that my site "offers no info about the event" and how would anyone know that it's not useful to anyone
491:
An event of this size, with as many camps and projects as it has, and you claim that - was ity even a dozen links - is excessive. Remarkable. But Tod, at the risk of being seen quoting Rush
Limbaugh, words mean things, and the word "random" is no exception. None of these links
340:
I'm amused by your remark about my "deleting your work", given the fact that all I did was undo your deletion of the work of many others, when you wiped out most of that links section. As for your not getting your way somehow making this article less "encyclopedic" - does that word mean just whatever
314:
I generally agree with the remarks expressed here on each of the external links. In general I think it's a bit absurd for anyone to just wander in and add their
Burning Man photo gallery or theme camp website to the bottom of the page... after all, there are thousands out there, and this is Knowledge
809:
I do think we've gotten off to the wrong foot, so let me first off apologize for assuming you maliciously deleted my link to the images.burningman.com gallery. It is clear to me now that in reverting my changes you unintentionally deleted the one link I added along with the ones I deleted. Knowledge
223:
This site appears to be down although I was able to visit it when I first visited the links on this page for editting. However, regardless of whether it comes up it is a link to an indivudal theme camp. I do not think links to individual theme camp homepages belong on this page unless they provide a
915:
I did find some of the links on your page worthwhile, for what it's worth. I enjoyed reading
Sterling's Wired article (I think I had seen it before but it was good to be reminded of it, fun to see ways the event has changed and stayed the same both in the 9 years since he wrote that). Anyway thanks
898:
in order to be linked to, whether it be by the author or someone else. I think that if a site is relevant, can possibly be of some value to someone, and doesn't have content that is the same or very similar to the other links (or links from linked pages), it should be included in the external links
796:
My remarks are inserted next to the comments of yours they come in response to. When you, for example, try to mislead the reader about my actions, that's where my response has to be. You've written a small novel up there, one that taxes the attention span of most of those who'll just be
332:
Burning Man, more than anything else, is about the individual camps and individual projects which are set up and run by the individuals burners, with a minimum of interference from BMORG - a point I've already made, even if you're going to turn a willfully deaf ear to it. To show that creative mess
161:
You have failed to provide justification for providing lots of links to random people's pages. Please review
Knowledge (XXG) policy. It is not a matter of elitism -- in case you hadn't noticed, Knowledge (XXG) has many similarities with an "anarchist" event, as as you say anyone can participate and
152:
Burning Man weighs in at about 35,000 participants each year, with a total number of participants ever attending coming to something like the population of
Buffalo, New York. When you look at it in those terms, that link section, if anything, is looking shorter than it probably should be. Each year
837:
quite clearly states that replies should go on the bottom of the talk page, after the last discussion. I am enforcing this here for clarity, not to irritate or "play" you -- because you inserted your comments directly in the middle of mine, I did not realize that you had replied at all -- MarXidad
704:
Frankly, I'm very suspicious of the vanity inherent in adding a link to one's own site. If it's really worthwhile, someone else will eventually add the link. I've written plenty of worthwhile stuff elsewhere on the Internet, outside of Knowledge (XXG). The only place I link to any of it is from my
170:
articles possible. Burning Man is a wild, hedonistic festival and as such its contents should be wild and hedonistic. Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopedia, and if it is to serve its visitors its articles need to be encyclopedic. Please remember the primary audience of this article is people who have
336:
To demand, as you do, that I go though, link by link and tell you why I think this camp or that project sums up what Burning is all about - even in cases where I was not the submitter of that link, which is usually the case - is a way of sneaking a very debatable concept in through the back door,
165:
Another similarity between Knowledge (XXG) and Burning Man is that although it is in some ways "unplanned," in reality a lot of planning and organization go into its back end. The Burning Man organization, which has full time employees throughout the year, handles a plethora of business and legal
148:
If one is going to cover an event, one should cover the event in the spirit in which it occurs, and if the article looks untidy, that's fine, because so is the event. It's a decentralized, largely unplanned, DIY mass happening, and if you take to ignoring the experience of "Joe anonymous", you're
495:
How one is supposed to rigorously prove that a link is either of these things is a mystery; on what basis was this discussion of your supposed to proceed? It's a judgement call, Todd; it's like trying to discuss why you like a particular food, or why you prefer one band over
483:
Translation: I refused to feed your ego in the way that you wanted it fed, so you decided to show me by redefining a well-known word ("encyclopedic") in a ludicrous way so that you could blow off the NPOV policy while pretending to be in compliance with it. I did not, for example,
827:
if you have not done so, or review them if it has been a while. The former insists quite clearly that a polite tone be used during Talk page discussions and especially in disputes, and explains why personal attacks are not allowed. Since you have stated your desire to 'de-escalate' things, I am
179:
If you will reread my original response, you will see that my request was for other people to suggest the sites they think should be listed here, and why. Rather than delete each other's work why don't we go through the list and discuss them. If you feel a site should go or stay please tell me
838:
replied after you, so my watchlist on this page showed only his reply and it was not until I reviewed the whole page did I notice you had once again replied to me. As I hope you can see, there is real potential for confusion here and would ask you to post comments on the bottom of the page.
117:
I think the links are getting a little out of hand -- we don't need links to somebody's random photo collection, most likely (or I'd put in a link to mine :). What do people think are essential links on this topic, other than obviously the main site? I do think we should have a link to
487:
The real question is "does the NPOV policy mean anything". If viewpoints are going to start vanishing from the coverage the moment those who have reported them go off and do something other than engage in revert wars, the answer to this question is going to be "no".
166:
issues. Hundreds or thousands of theme camps begin their planning months or years in advance of execution. Without this oversight, very little would get done. Likewise, it is the job of the editors and administrators of wikipedia to create the best, most authoritative, and most
153:
brings a different set of approaches and experiences, so one might do better to think of Burning Man as a larger city spread out across the time line than as a smaller city that has hung around for a number of years, the rate of replacement of places in BRC being what it is.
800:
Which is really the intention, isn't it? So, no, I have solidly good reasons to not follow this rule that you just made up. Honestly, Tod, in real life, unless you draw a weapon on me, I'm a nice guy. I'd just not a doormat and yes, there's a difference.
328:
Todfox, if you want to turn this into a test of wills, then fine - you win. I'm not going to waste my whole day going back and forth with you. I would, however, point out that your interpretation of the rules is absurd and your approach more than a little disingenuous.
118:
images.burningman.com, the huge central image collection, since it is difficult to include images from the event on this page due to BM's restrictions on use of photography. It has 1000s of images and probably means we don't need to link to joe anonymous' pics page.
287:
and the general populace of the site. Since we are both attendees of one of the greatest happenings of history, I trust that you and I can keep this civil. Please sign future posts with four tildes (~) so that we know who is writing the response. Happy Burning!
868:
To add more, you will note I have not re-deleted MarXidad's link. I won't edit the Links section until we can settle this via either a survey, mediation, or other forms of dispute resolution. I would ask you do the same to prevent further edit warring.
144:
You're editing an article about an anarchist event, and then essentially talking about limiting the links put in to including maybe one to the "official" site, with the question left floating in the air as to whether or not there should be any others.
352:
Getting multiple viewpoints is exactly the reason I would like to work with you and others on creating a good link section. However, since you have declined to do so I will go ahead and bring things back in line with wikipedia policy, as I see it.
337:
namely that this anarchist event should be portrayed through the eyes of a single, central, "official" organization. This would take unreasonably long, and that's really the point, isn't it Todd - procedural gameplaying as a debating technique.
938:
Disorient, no. Although a theme camp section should be further developed, I don't believe we should list theme camps with the rest of the external links. A different list at least, though fine leaving it alone until further rewrite efforts.
775:
That's like putting your morning newspaper next to your neighbor's sprinkler, and then complaining that he sprayed water all over your newspaper. What you're trying to do is prevail on a questionable action by setting me up.
224:
great deal of resources for visitors or researchers of the event. There are thousands of camps every year, and it is not desirious to link to all their home pages here. If you feel differently please explain why we should link to this page.
505:
Harley K. DuBois writes: "Theme camps are the interactive core of Burning Man." As one of the largest camp at Burning Man since 2001 (one of our founding members has been going to the event since 1993), Disorient feels that a link to the
804:
But perhaps we've merely gotten off on the wrong foot, and things have started to escalate. I'd like it if that would be the case, because one can always choose to de-escalate. Just don't try to play me, Tod. I don't like that.
199:- I admit I deleted this after too limited a look at the page, as it does have useful directions and resources on many area towns. However, this should perhaps be linked from the Wikitravel article rather than here. However, this link,
652:
Please continue to discuss changes here (such as your insistence that we retain Disorient) rather than simply reverting my changes. Please be aware there are wikipedia policy limits on the number of legal reverts that can be made (see
484:
submit the link for Disorient which is very much a live link. So why should I be called on to defend that particular link, and why should that link need my defense or approval, or yours, or any combination of these?
779:
Comment: And what would you call a dogged attempt to create the illusion that I was doing something that in fact I was not doing? Were you under the impression that trying to set somebody up was a friendly act?
529:
Your increasing rudeness is not becoming of a wikipedia editor and I would prefer if we could keep this civil, please do no continue to insult me on these pages as I have been very careful not to attack you
192:
since this provides thousands of images of the event from hundreds of visitors. If this event is made up of all its visitors, I would argue this presents a better picture than a photo gallery from a single
126:
Since no one responded I went ahead and pared down the External links to a more manageable length. They do not need to include J. Random Burners gallery, but the packing list page is a good one. Remember,
934:
Marxidad, why don't you find someone else's page to add... yours is, well, yours. All content on this page could be written into main article if warrented (sterling's article etc.) This link should go
580:. Although I still disagree with links to individual theme camps I bow to the majority at this time. I think an article on theme camps or Disorient itself would be a more appropriate place for this link.
793:
Comment from opposition: Tod, I'll insert those remarks where I damned well please. Maybe I'd better break the news to you. A rule doesn't become a rule just because you try to say it is.
211:. Rather than 3 links to smaller articles on the same site, it makes far more sense to condense these down into a single link to that page. This is what I would propose to do in future revisions.
492:
were "random". A coin toss is random; these links were put in because somebody took a look at them and found them interesting and somehow informative about the event.
771:
See remarks above. Wipe out a bunch of links, insert one of your own, and when somebody reverts the page to get back what you took out, gripe about the link : -->
797:
skimming this page, and if I don't challenge those remarks swiftly on the page, I won't have an open minded and attentive reader by the time he gets down to my rebuttal.
315:(XXG), not ePlaya or Tribe. In general the quality of this page is declining, but this is getting ridiculous. I hope that if any new links are added, it is done so judiciously.
283:
I look forward to your response. So that this is not an elitist decision made by just two people, I will invite some other Wikipedians to comment (including the other members of
730:
have a really compelling reason to do so -- your site should be one of the best sources of information on a particular topic on the Internet, and that simply isn't true here.
464:
was added, and after some deliberation I left it. What do other people think? Finally, i there a template for linking to Wikitravel or do you have to use an External link?
740:(The following comments were left for me by the anonymous editor I am in a dispute with, at the time operating from IP address 65.182.172.91. In keeping with
242:-- this site is really not useful to those who are interested in the event. It consists mostly of offsite links and forwarded humor about the event.
333:
from a single point of view is to artificially impose an order upon the portrayal of the subject that would be absent from the subject in reality.
99:
765:
pretending that I deliberately took that link out is extremely uncivil as an action, no matter what you try to pretend your tone is.
748:
I am removing his personal attacks on me as they do not add anything to either this discussion or the settling of the dispute in question
930:
I arrived here independently from a note at the village pump. My opinion in short, the external links list should be kept to a minimum.
589:
410:
233:
586:-- deleted, since this is not a theme camp but merely a proposal for one and thus offers little or nothing to Knowledge (XXG) visitors
188:-- the official site. I think we can agree this is a useful link. However I find it questionable that you chose to delete the link to
955:
Thanks Todfox/Kit for the effort to solicit comment. I'll keep an eye here and see if I can lend a hand with a big picture re-org.
623:
444:
269:
834:
824:
741:
128:
844:
848:
811:
654:
230:-- this is not even a theme camp page, but a proposal for a theme camp. This does not provide value to encyclopedia users.
344:
So, do these policies apply for real, or do they only apply to those editors who don't belong to large enough cliques?
248:-- very useful! Again, maybe this belongs more in the wikitravel article but I don't have a problem with it being here.
726:
172:
560:. They have not been moved to wikitravel after all, since wikitravel does not want links to unofficial sites (oops).
533:
despite our obvious disagreements. In an attempt to reach consensus on changes, I have made the following changes:
95:
76:
71:
59:
38:
284:
945:
arfarfarf, no too. Unimpressed with resources on arfarfarf, all available on main site / survival guide pages.
852:
784:
573:
545:
522:
477:
385:- since this link was about travel and how to prepare, I moved it to the wikitravel article as a link to
345:
154:
820:
745:
577:
515:
316:
819:
I would like to continue this discussion with you, but I would politely request that you read
84:
This archive page covers approximately the dates between August 19 2005 and October 17 2005.
710:
88:
47:
17:
645:
PLease refrain from adding your comments in the middle of my comments as you did before.
629:
450:
275:
266:-- I will admit this is an impressive resource and perhaps I was too quick to delete it.
298:
902:
681:
511:
207:
all are linked from the same personal website, and can all be found on this page:
959:
920:
917:
905:
873:
870:
859:
856:
752:
749:
734:
731:
713:
706:
684:
661:
658:
601:
510:
is valuable to the Burning Man article on Knowledge (XXG). Please note that the
468:
465:
422:
357:
354:
319:
305:
302:
292:
289:
245:
135:
132:
119:
106:
103:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
611:
432:
255:
744:
I am moving the comments to the end of the page for clarity. In keeping with
956:
927:
896:
one of the best sources of information on a particular topic on the Internet
847:) on this matter, would you be willing to try to settle this via a survey (
563:
392:
214:
768:
Comment from opposition: Agreed, at least tentatively. Good observation.
502:
272:-- gives people an idea of where the event is located. Plus it is nifty.
607:
557:
428:
386:
251:
217:-- Another wikimedia project, with some great info. I would leave this.
208:
91:, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.
814:) suggest this is not what I should have done and I am sorry for that.
635:
617:
461:
438:
263:
941:
As an aside, your conduct leaves something to be desired, what gives?
674:
595:
416:
239:
553:
382:
196:
556:- links to gwally and arfarfarf are condensed to this single link:
204:
583:
404:
227:
200:
541:
377:
189:
948:
25:
537:
373:
185:
569:
507:
398:
220:
525:, wikipedia has standards of conduct and common courtesy.
636:
Photo essay from a Burning Man first-timer's perspective
462:
Photo essay from a Burning Man first-timer's perspective
951:
would be nice to include somewhere (regional or links)
892:
Adding links to one's own page is strongly discouraged
514:
as well. Thank you. The Eye, Architect of Disorient. (
887:
598:-- deleted, since it offers no info about the event
278:-- helps people understand the layout of the City.
916:for keeping this Civil even though we disagree.
843:In order to facilitate dispute resolution (see
8:
624:Google Maps view of the Black Rock City site
445:Google Maps view of the Black Rock City site
270:Google Maps view of the Black Rock City site
630:Hand-drawn map of Burning Man 2005 (Psyche)
451:Hand-drawn map of Burning Man 2005 (Psyche)
276:Hand-drawn map of Burning Man 2005 (Psyche)
503:Theme Camp section of the Burning Man site
100:Knowledge (XXG):How to archive a talk page
540:-- untouched, and restored the link to
376:-- untouched, and restored the link to
205:Reviews of Products Used at Burning Man
129:Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) is not
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
564:Wikitravel article on Black Rock City
393:Wikitravel article on Black Rock City
215:Wikitravel article on Black Rock City
7:
835:Knowledge (XXG):Talk page guidelines
825:Knowledge (XXG):Talk page guidelines
742:Knowledge (XXG):Talk page guidelines
558:http://www.arfarfarf.com/burningman/
387:http://www.arfarfarf.com/burningman/
209:http://www.arfarfarf.com/burningman/
851:) or, failing that, mediation (see
725:I agree with Jmabel. The policy on
512:Disorient site uses wiki technology
845:Knowledge (XXG):Dispute resolution
761:Comment from Todfox's opposition:
24:
849:Knowledge (XXG):Survey guidelines
812:Knowledge (XXG):Assume good faith
655:Knowledge (XXG):Three revert rule
141:OK, fine, here's a response ...
29:
727:Knowledge (XXG):External links
1:
501:In the first sentence of the
297:p.s. good work expanding the
960:06:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
921:04:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
906:01:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
874:21:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
860:21:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
753:21:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
735:07:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
714:05:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
685:01:03, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
662:19:27, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
608:Tristan's Burning Man Photos
542:http://images.burningman.com
538:Official Burning Man Website
469:06:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
429:Tristan's Burning Man Photos
378:http://images.burningman.com
374:Official Burning Man Website
358:05:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
320:23:33, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
306:21:09, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
293:21:07, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
252:Tristan's Burning Man Photos
190:http://images.burningman.com
186:Official Burning Man Website
107:21:28, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
94:Please add new archivals to
572:retained at the request of
544:for the second time, since
285:Category:Wikipedian Burners
136:22:20, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
122:04:58:02, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
975:
612:Pmatt's Burning Man Photos
596:MarXidad.com - Burning Man
433:Pmatt's Burning Man Photos
417:MarXidad.com - Burning Man
256:Pmatt's Burning Man Photos
240:MarXidad.com - Burning Man
96:Talk:Burning Man/Archive03
853:Knowledge (XXG):Mediation
602:Burning Man Packing Lists
423:Burning Man Packing Lists
366:so here is what happened:
246:Burning Man Packing Lists
821:Knowledge (XXG):Civility
746:Knowledge (XXG):Civility
548:persists in deleting it.
201:Artist Resource for Fire
673:I put back the link to
499:Answer from Disorient:
425:-- moved to wikitravel
42:of past discussions.
785:User: 65.182.172.111
301:page beyond a stub!
87:Post replies to the
888:what was said above
675:my Burning Man site
574:User:65.182.172.111
546:User:65.182.172.111
523:User:65.182.172.111
478:User:65.182.172.111
346:User:65.182.172.111
155:User:65.182.172.111
131:a link repository.
810:(XXG) guidelines (
554:Driving Directions
476:Comments added by
383:Driving Directions
197:Driving Directions
620:-- left untouched
592:-- left untouched
578:User:69.200.87.58
566:-- left untouched
516:User:69.200.87.58
441:-- left untouched
413:-- left untouched
395:-- left untouched
82:
81:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
966:
890:, I think that "
772:he< deleted.
68:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
18:Talk:Burning Man
974:
973:
969:
968:
967:
965:
964:
963:
886:In response to
806:
802:
798:
794:
788:
781:
777:
773:
769:
766:
762:
738:
638:left untouched.
618:Burning Man 3-D
590:Category at ODP
497:
493:
489:
485:
460:a new link, to
439:Burning Man 3-D
411:Category at ODP
264:Burning Man 3-D
234:Category at ODP
115:
64:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
972:
970:
953:
952:
946:
943:
936:
925:
913:
912:
911:
910:
909:
908:
900:
879:
878:
877:
876:
863:
862:
840:
839:
830:
829:
816:
815:
803:
799:
795:
792:
790:
782:
778:
774:
770:
767:
763:
760:
758:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
705:user page. --
695:
694:
693:
692:
691:
690:
689:
688:
687:
679:
651:
649:
648:
647:
646:
640:
639:
633:
627:
621:
615:
605:
599:
593:
587:
581:
567:
561:
550:
549:
527:
526:
508:Disorient site
500:
494:
490:
486:
482:
474:
473:
472:
471:
455:
454:
448:
442:
436:
426:
420:
414:
408:
402:
396:
390:
380:
370:
369:
368:
367:
361:
360:
327:
325:
324:
323:
322:
309:
308:
299:Green Tortoise
295:
280:
279:
273:
267:
260:
259:
249:
243:
237:
231:
225:
218:
212:
194:
182:
181:
176:
175:
173:external links
163:
139:
138:
114:
111:
110:
102:.) Thank you.
89:main talk page
80:
79:
74:
69:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
971:
962:
961:
958:
950:
947:
944:
942:
937:
933:
932:
931:
929:
923:
922:
919:
907:
904:
901:
897:
893:
889:
885:
884:
883:
882:
881:
880:
875:
872:
867:
866:
865:
864:
861:
858:
854:
850:
846:
842:
841:
836:
832:
831:
826:
822:
818:
817:
813:
808:
807:
791:
786:
759:
756:
754:
751:
747:
743:
737:
736:
733:
728:
715:
712:
708:
703:
702:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
686:
683:
680:
676:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
660:
656:
644:
643:
642:
641:
637:
634:
631:
628:
625:
622:
619:
616:
613:
609:
606:
603:
600:
597:
594:
591:
588:
585:
582:
579:
575:
571:
568:
565:
562:
559:
555:
552:
551:
547:
543:
539:
536:
535:
534:
531:
524:
521:
520:
519:
517:
513:
509:
504:
481:
479:
470:
467:
463:
459:
458:
457:
456:
452:
449:
446:
443:
440:
437:
434:
430:
427:
424:
421:
418:
415:
412:
409:
406:
403:
400:
397:
394:
391:
388:
384:
381:
379:
375:
372:
371:
365:
364:
363:
362:
359:
356:
351:
350:
349:
347:
342:
338:
334:
330:
321:
318:
313:
312:
311:
310:
307:
304:
300:
296:
294:
291:
286:
282:
281:
277:
274:
271:
268:
265:
262:
261:
257:
253:
250:
247:
244:
241:
238:
235:
232:
229:
226:
222:
219:
216:
213:
210:
206:
202:
198:
195:
191:
187:
184:
183:
178:
177:
174:
169:
164:
160:
159:
158:
156:
150:
146:
142:
137:
134:
130:
125:
124:
123:
121:
112:
109:
108:
105:
101:
97:
92:
90:
85:
78:
75:
73:
70:
67:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
954:
940:
924:
914:
895:
891:
789:
757:
739:
724:
650:
532:
528:
498:
475:
343:
339:
335:
331:
326:
168:encyclopedic
167:
151:
147:
143:
140:
116:
93:
86:
83:
65:
43:
37:
949:euroburners
36:This is an
833:Likewise,
783:Comment: "
614:-- deleted
584:Café Satan
435:-- deleted
419:-- deleted
407:-- deleted
405:Café Satan
228:Café Satan
928:user:here
570:Disorient
399:Disorient
221:Disorient
77:Archive 4
72:Archive 3
66:Archive 2
60:Archive 1
926:This is
903:MarXidad
899:section.
682:MarXidad
632:-- ditto
626:-- ditto
453:-- ditto
447:-- ditto
193:visitor.
604:-- left
401:deleted
203:, and *
98:. (See
39:archive
707:Jmabel
935:away.
317:Gecko
113:Links
16:<
957:Here
823:and
711:Talk
610:and
576:and
431:and
254:and
180:why.
918:Kit
871:Kit
857:Kit
855:)?
755:):
750:Kit
732:Kit
659:Kit
657:).
480:):
466:Kit
355:Kit
303:Kit
290:Kit
133:Kit
120:Kit
104:Kit
709:|
518:)
348:)
157:)
389:.
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.