Talk:Donald Trump/Archive 34

2673:

with complaints about the existing image of Trump. What will you do when others continue to object, as they have and no doubt will continue to do? Shush them away and direct them not to talk because others have already discussed it? Also, Mandruss, with all due respect for administrators, while they have certain privileges, this doesn't make them more qualified to make subject/content decisions, and if I'm not mistaken, they can't stop someone from beginning a new conference or RfC simply because legitimate considerations have emerged, like the election. Much of America and the world will now be reading this biography, where they'll also look at Clinton's bio and see a pleasing pose. But when they compare it the Trump biography they will see the exact opposite with some people rationalizing that the picture is 'okay', which will tell them that Knowledge is just another biased political rag. We need a new

1760:

reasons. Given this situation, all personal opinions should be set aside, and the biography be allowed to receive the same treatment as the others. This has not happened, even after repeated objections to the current photo. We now have two sides arguing, and it looks like there will never be any resolution until long after Trump is sworn in and an official government photo is made available. We can belabor about what Trump's expression is, i.e. frown, or sober and serious, and prolong resolution indefinitely if that is your intention. The fact remains, there are far better images available, yet we have a marginal consensus not to use them. Good faith or not, that is a fact. Personal opinion aside, Trump has not received the same formal and favorable image Clinton and other famous living people have received, all the while such photos are available. --

343: 3443:, more so than anyone, by far, you're all over the map around here and need to stop reassuring yourself by speaking for other editors. As you're well aware, many editors/readers have expressed a desire to change the existing photo since the election and are not fixated on your narrow take of process, such that it was, before the election. i.e.Not carved in stone for all time. Since the 2nd RfC is stuck in the middle of this (very) long talk page, many, like myself who have arrived later and/or haven't sifted through the entire page, no doubt will overlook this RfC, which, btw, only has two similar photos to chose from, which even I find less than adequate. Once again your concern for the readership seems to have taken a back seat to your apparent blind allegiance for that pre-election RfC. -- 4281:. And you failed to hear my comment yesterday or the day before that we edit according to policy, not according to what readers will believe about our credibility or neutrality. At the risk of glibness, Knowledge is not engaged in a popularity contest. We are a non-profit encyclopedia, not a newspaper with the need to consider profitabililty. Again, you neither countered my statement (I don't think you even responded to it, actually) nor accepted it and altered your position. Again, IDHT. This pattern is what is so frustrating with you and other editors who behave in that manner. It is simply impossible to communicate with you in a constructive way and affter several days one wonders why they are wasting their time. ― 1961: 3534:

for debate and consensus, so it matters not how many other editors feel it should be circumvented. I don't care if you have somehow evaded standard process your entire Knowledge career (you appeared to know little or nothing about RfCs, stating that they usually have their own page), that doesn't make that legitimate. Need I list the things you have gotten objectively wrong in these threads? I really don't think you're in a position to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about here. I reiterate, you are a minority of 1 as to process, and nothing you can say here will ever change that fact. ―

2628:

settled, stop bringing it up.") The RfC went on for a long time; it involved many people; it doesn't change because somebody objects to it. As for your accusation that people deliberately chose an unflattering image: personally I thought, and still think, it was the best of the images on offer. Most of them showed him smirking, or with his eyes squinting closed. And yes, many of them were "formal smiling poses". This image shows him looking alert, interested, and curious, as if talking to someone. It's not ideal but it was better than what else was on offer.

4217:

RfC. I strongly dispute that. You seem to have trouble with the concept of subjectivity, trouble accepting that there are good faith differences in perception of the existing image. This was elaborated at length during the last push to change the image. You appear to believe that your view of the image is self-evident, and you in fact suggested the other day that failing to agree with your view was evidence of bad faith. It is not, and I would call that the ultimate bulletproof debate argument, "Agree with me or you are acting in bad faith".

3030:, (a Talk page policy I'm sure you're not ignorant about) and not get their feathers ruffled when someone doesn't accept their opinion as gospel. If something comes up on a Talk page someone doesn't like, no one is forcing them to participate, so kindly not carry on like you're emotionally disabled, 'disrupted', and are being dragged through this against your will. If concerns come up on the TALK page, then they naturally are addressed on the TALK page. Your efforts have only attempted to disrupt this legitimate process. -- 3915:

readers, (our top priority hopefully) will compare the current Trump image with that of Clinton's and make the same obvious deduction you and many others have made. No one can argue that Trump is not smiling, as is Clinton -- nor can they argue that the image is not formal in appearance, as is Clinton's. All bio's should receive the same considerations, esp when controversial subjects are involved, yet we will have to wait months before that happens, even with adequate images available. Hopefully the

355: 379: 4851: 5248:

valuation, and that had he only invested in the stock market he would have been richer than he is now. Regardless it belongs in the lede as something central to Donald Trump, especially considering his controversial comments about "small loans". I just can't see how this is problematic? As for that score it seems difficult to get a proper source for that when his fortune is so difficult to pin down, and to base editorial decisions on it seems bordering on

2449:. Have you read it? I have. I and others believe that cost exceeds benefit of debating what photo is shown in that infobox for the two or three months before the White House official portrait becomes available. That's a good faith non-spurious argument, I get that you and others disagree with it. You're entitled to disagree with it, but you are not entitled to say that it lacks legitimacy. The way to resolve that good faith disagreement is through an 31: 582:

suit the one you want. The image has been changed on that page many many times so a proper procedure should now be followed, that said, it would be wise if admins watching the page do not block users trying to restore the longstanding image by mistake, As i was told by another admin, the IRR on that page is not very clear..That said, I do like the first image but it has to be zoomed in a bit, its supposed to be a headshot, not a longshot :)--

4863:

removed. Yet again I see someone added another section for Donald's hair and even added a degrading picture of him where sweat drips from his face. Imagine if someone made a section of Obama's ears, lips or feet in his article with a picture to follow it up? Or likewise on Hillary's article, making fun of any of her body parts? I think we need to take body shaming very seriously, even if we don't like Trump and like to talk about his body.

2180:). That there was actually a "consensus" to keep the unflattering picture of Trump over the more favorable/formal poses is troubling and negatively reflects on Knowledge, the consensus process and the idea of neutrality. Since the election 11 users have expressed a desire to change the existing photo to a better picture, while 5 editors want to keep the existing image. Can we now make the change and treat the Trump article fairly? -- 2542:

from all the discussions. All the photos show him as smirking, growling, yelling, orange, or with some other problem. The photo in a new discussion above has been previously quoted as making him look squinting and constipated. Blaming editors for bad faith because the photo is not compelling is out of line. A suggestion was made that we wait for an official presidential photo. I really don’t see how anyone can argue with that.

367: 1651:

arguing, the current picture will still be in place when Trump is sworn in. (!) WP credibility is sinking fast in the eyes of at least half of Knowledge's readership, as I know there are a lot of Clinton supporters that have not stooped to using Knowledge to express their particular political peeves. Can we please treat the Trump biography like any other and include a favorable and formal pose? --

1483:

over many many other pictures that various editors deemed "more presidential". In this picture, Trump looks serious and attentive, his face is in focus, the colors are neutral, well it's just fine. (And for the record, I once advocated for a picture change as well, at least an edit of this one to remove the microphone and background artefact, but I accepted consensus to keep this one). —

3270:

objectionable". I sort of doubt he'd approve of using this out of context image in his biography. Many people already find the image, uh, less than acceptable, esp when compared to other biographies showing formal/smiling poses, as the Clinton bio does. Not a fair and balanced presentation for the readers, who should be our primary concern. --

4304:

attacks, etc, not to mention your habit of speaking for others, your recital about what Knowledge is and isn't has become something of a blur. IDHT? Look who's talking. I heard very well, and when it comes to policy about "process" you never took the ball past your own ten yard line. Once again, the RfC is about establishing consensus.

3242:, which is where the consensus I referred to is located, but this is not an RfC. RfC's are usually on their own page. Anyway, I said I would consider an RfC, per your statement that it would take another RfC to override the old one, but the idea of post election considerations seem to be routinely ignored by a couple of editors. -- 3205:- the bio of every former U.S. president after Franklin Roosevelt shows an official government photo in the infobox. Why would there be a need to revisit the photo then? For that matter, I wouldn't see a problem with a Donald Trump photo RfC every four years, and there is no way we would need anywhere near that much. ― 4363:, possibly somewhere in the Arbcom infrastructure where ArbCom restrictions are in place, I'm not very familiar with that area. Discretionary sanctions are available at this article but I've yet to see them exercised for talk-page-only misbehavior. So, sadly, I believe the answer to your question is "probably not". ― 1499:

lack of a close, nobody restored the RfC from the archive or asked that that be done, because we were all suffering from severe infobox image fatigue. I think many of us still are, I know I am. In the end, all that editor time and energy were wasted. My advice is to wait for the official White House portrait. ―

5399:

I'd just say "elected" and leave the EV/PV thing to lower in the article. EV may be a historical artifact but it's what campaigns work to win (thus the intense effort in swing states). There's been increased argument since the election to get rid of the EC (including a constitutional amendment bill

5182:

Well, that's 60-75 million $ . Worthy of the lede? Maybe not. But I think what it did is let it be known that Donald was not the builder of the family fortune. It should be written in the lede that his father and grandfather built up the family fortune and Donald continued in the same business as his

4308:

about the neutrality of images however can occur where it may, and there is no policy about "process" that says editors can't express such opinions while an RfC is occurring. Is there? Your attempts to suppress these discussions, which no one is forcing you to participate in, obviously says more than

1645:

as the image shows Trump with a frown and eyes shifted to his left. There were other more favorable images used in the Trump biography before this one came along. Consensus can not override POLICY. The image is clearly "disparaging". Are Knowledge administrators, etc, just going to sit there and let

1498:

FYI, the last big push to change the image consisted of a week or two of heated debate in a series of talk threads, followed by a big RfC. After the RfC got several dozen !votes, the activity died to the point that the archive bot archived the RfC before it was closed. And nobody complained about the

3969:

Just noticed that the sections (not RfC's} filled with support for a new photo have been tucked away in numerous collapsible boxes by one editor who took it upon himself to do so -- the same one whose name appears all over the page more than any other, by a huge margin. Very revealing. It appears we

3533:

I just suggested you add your preferred image, and that's far from the first time you have failed to hear what I said. Are you intentionally doing this or just uninterested in real discussion and communication here? Anyway, as Melanie has indicated, this question of Knowledge process is not a matter

3393:

and move on—even if you are absolutely certain that your debate opponents are wrong. That's the only practical way this business can work, and this is another thing that I feel you should already understand at your experience level. In this case, "move on" means go participate in the decision-making

2672:

Okay, smiling formal poses were available, yet were not chosen. Gosh, my faith is restored. Yes, Trump looks serious -- he also and obviously looks angry -- not shouting or screaming, but clearly pissed-off. Anyway, the first RfC came before the election. Many people chimed in immediately thereafter

2570:

Consensus can change, as any experienced editor will tell you. POV issues are nothing new and they will continue to surface every time a controversial subject presents itself. The "50 pound consensus" was established some time before Trump was elected and as such can easily be regarded as out dated.

2238:

There is no "new consensus" sufficient to override the existing hard-fought RfC consensus, as has been explained to you with great clarity. You did not respond to that explanation, and it would be pointless to try because there is no viable response to it. Nothing in the existing RfC consensus said,

1650:

for a better image, while there should be overwhelming agreement that Knowledge not be used to express political POV's. Again, how many people have to weigh in before someone does something around here, and then, how much longer will the debate continue?? At this rate, with all the foot dragging and

1482:

I understand you are proposing a picture change in good faith, however it will not be accepted unless you run a formal RfC. The sooner you start the process, the sooner it will end. Besides, I personally don't see how the longstanding picture is disparaging; it actually gathered consensus repeatedly

596:

Yes, there's been quite a bit of confusion and discussion about discretionary sanctions lately; in the case of the editor I blocked they had breached 3RR not just the discretionary 1RR sanction so it was a fairly clear-cut decision. You're quite right, admins should not block users trying to restore

3113:

Gwillhickers, I am totally baffled what your point is in this thread. You are demanding a new post-election RFC. There IS such an RFC currently active on this page. As you already know, and as Mandruss has reminded you. You already have what you are asking for. So why are you still asking for it ?

2916:

I didn't try to make anything of you being an administrator, as Mandruss attempted to do. (No? why was it brought up?) No one is forced to participate in these discussions and I don't appreciate being harassed by the same lone editor (not you) who has resorted to personal attacks several times now.

2594:

This might be easier to accept if there were no formal poses with Trump smiling, however there are and have been. It can easily be argued that a formal pose with Trump smiling, in full display above, be used to replace the one that has been objected to by many editors. Apparently the formal/smiling

2501:

Consensus is an entity unto itself and changes. We must go by the latest consensus, wherever it may be found, esp on the Talk page of the article in question. You can't ignore the existing consensus and say those who don't aren't following process. You say you don't love the existing image, yet you

2341:

I will now bow out of discussion of this dispute. I've said everything there is to say about this, and it's clear that it would be pointless to continue saying it. If any editor changes the infobox image without an RfC consensus to do so, and I have reason to believe they are aware of this dispute,

1695:

Yes, I suspect Knowledge administrators, etc, are just going to sit there and let this continue, because this is how the Knowledge collaborative process is designed to work. If I'm not mistaken we have a hard-fought RfC consensus for the current image, and that consensus will not be overridden by a

581:

Indeed, I did not revert's ZiaLater's edit on the page because I did not like the image but because he/she did not follow the protocol which is that images need to be discussed here and a proper outcome (if there is one) needs to be adhered to. You cannot just go 'willy-nilly' changing the image to

5013:

As far as I can see, the longest discussions here have been about the photo, not about any detail in text. That said, physical appearance, including hair comb is much more important than any content. The hair style is part of that. The point is, one should start to use the real studies about such

4779:

At this current time point, even if Mr. Trump suffers an heart attack tomorrow, and never make to the white house, he will for generations to come be remembered as the president elect, years after he is forgotten as the owner of Trump towers. As much as he deserves an article as a business man and

4276:

Again, and for about the 4th time, Knowledge policy does not require that kind of "consistency". Can you see why you are seen as "not hearing" what is said? If you hear what is said, you either dispute it with evidence, or you accept it and change your position accordingly. You did neither, simply

4216:

Ok, I read what was written. I see you comparing smiling Hillary to serious Donald, as if that "inconsistency" is precluded by Knowledge neutrality policy. It is not. I think I see you saying that the issue is too urgent to wait for an RfC resolution, so we must resolve it more quickly outside the

2267:

There is an active RfC for the purpose of deciding (1) should the infobox image be changed before the official White House portrait is made available, and (2) if so, what should it be changed to. This has been explained to you above in a thread you created, you didn't like what you heard there, so

2017:

You need to get an official photo approved by the individual. Famous folks like Trump have readily available approved photos. It's not up to WP editors to stage a beauty pageant or photoshop retouching bee. That's why we end up with silly threads that say he looks like a chicken in this one and

1784:

discussion which would be unlikely to involve more than 6 or 8 editors. RfC consensuses generally require RfCs to change, and that is especially true for RfCs that had such high participation and involved so much debate. We don't so easily throw out the result of that much editor time and energy. ―

1759:

We're not debating whether the image looks like Trump. I respect your concern for established consensus but it was almost entirely established before Trump was elected. Since then there are new and important things to be considered, esp since consensus is now marginal and clearly split for obvious

1746:

It would have helped if you clicked on the link and read the item. Trump's expression is clearly disparaging, not at all the best picture to represent him with. The image looks like a media sniper shot, typically taken by photographers who lie in wait to capture the worst possible expression. They

900:

Image 3 has been placed into the infobox for now since most agreed with in and because most agreed that the previous image was not NPOV. Image 3 can stay for now but if others want to agree on the other proposed images, decide below. The previous image, however, should not be placed back. At least

5337:

I made some organizational changes to the lede, although I didn't add or delete anything. The information about his election as president was formerly scattered among three paragraphs; I combined it into a single paragraph and put it right after the lede sentence. The information about his birth,

4606:

right, I don't disagree with you, but I think he is more commonly notable for being a reality tv personality than a producer. I for one, had no idea he produced anything, yet as a person who really doesn't know anything about this guy, I do know he was on reality tv shows. I think if you are only

4303:

Oh my goodness, you're still fuming. Given your rather frantic participation, suppression of opposing opinions, disregard for fair treatment and neutrality, even when numerous editors point out the obvious difference in the photos, disregard for policy regarding ownership, Talk, repeated personal

2541:

On various Trump related pages there have been hundreds of Talk edits on the subject of his photos. As soon as a decision is made, yet another discussion begins. Let us be honest. He doesn’t photograph well. I’m not saying that as a measure of his character. I’m saying that it is patently obvious

2428:

It was flawed reasoning that says the current picture is the best image for the article. We are not trying to decipher hieroglyphs here. Claiming that the existing image is all a matter of how you look at it is a POV cop-out. Esp when there are a fair number of better poses, with smiles, to chose

2346:

with the possiibility of preventative sanction for disruptive editing. I would much prefer that an admin proactively stated here that my position is correct as to process, so we could get on with our work, but it has been seen above that admins are very reluctant to step in and stop disruption at

1179:

is the best image to use here, and yet another editor put in the current image, claiming some others liked it on this talk page. However, lacking a detailed discussion and consensus like the other one received, the above-linked image must be used until a new consensus is reached. This is standard

5247:

It's the entire base upon which his current fortune stands. Sure it has been expanded, but the fact remains we don't know how much it is now—and the inheritance was very substantial. Some sources even say it makes up most of Trump's fortune once you correct for inflation and the increase in NYSE

3025:

compare the Clinton and Trump pages they're going to wonder what's going on around here. Brushing it off as "external criticism" is a slap in the face to the readership. There is no policy, proceedual or otherwise, that says consensus can't be reestablished when circumstances warrant it, as they

2983:

My whole point is that that discussion belongs in the active RfC, not in separate unstructured threads. But we can't do that because Gwillhickers refuses to go there and discuss it, instead insisting on taking the issue out of that process and starting one thread after another to demand that his

2369:

Speaking for myself, I've no intention for changing anything without consensus. All that was asked is that the new consensus be recognized, as it is the latest and was established after the election. Acknowledging that the current picture is horrible and raises POV issues would be a sign of good

1283:

feeling, saying "I like this one", you're making a mess of something that actually achieved a proper consensus. Respect it, or again open a full RfC with multiple image options and tagging multiple WikiProjects and other relevant groups. What you have here is an embarrassing form of 'consensus'.

1282:

Oh my god, people. Please look at the many discussions of the infobox image, which received votes from scores of editors and went through a formal analysis and vote based on photography and appearance attributes. Just because a small handful of editors now seem to like this one just based on gut

5384:

Thank you, I like that wording better and have changed it. There has been controversy on talk pages about whether to mention the popular vote in the lede; it is already present in the body of the article. I think I will clarify the "won" sentence to say something like "by getting more electoral

3046:

Re the claim: "Consensus has not changed. It would take a new RfC." Okay, can we see the policy that expresses this idea exactly? Is there a time limit? Two years from now will we still be required to use the RfC to establish consensus? If that's truly the case then I'll forget about trying to

4117:

on this page has become quite tiresome. My opinion, and that of many here, is that the alternative images of Trump are all poor. The ones in the new group are squinty and make him look constipated. The claim that we are purposely trying to keep un unflattering image due to political beliefs is

1855:

Fine, so go !vote in the existing RfC. Participate in the process. This thread is out of process. And following your suggestion would be a clear violation of the ArbCom restrictions in effect at this article, making a consensus-free edit already known to be highly controversial. You have given

4862:

The last time this was discussed, it was made very clear that detailing sections for people's physical appearance, such as their hair, hands, breasts or ears, is a serious violation of BLP. Some people even got banned for making fun of Donald's appearance and one user even got their adminship

4096:

Well, I had a similar concern, that people on both sides of the POV fence would line up and vote accordingly, resulting in a long debate, which indeed has occurred. This is why I hoped that policy would prevail (not that anyone has out-right violated policy) and both bio's would simply get a

3914:

You're not the only one, as it is buried in the middle of a sea of talk, with a TOC a mile long. No one editor's fault. I agree, the Trump biography has not received the same treatment as Clinton's which reflects unfavorably on Knowledge and the idea of unbiased writing. I mentioned that many

2627:

Consensus has not changed. It would take a new RfC, and any attempt at a new RfC would probably get shouted down, because people are sick and tired of arguing the same issue over and over. (That's undoubtedly why more people aren't chiming in here. Their silence reflects "This matter has been

4068:

Please review the sections involved. Most of these sections have been tucked away in green collapsible boxes so they are easier to find now. Many editors have expressed a desire for a new image, including the editor that initiated this section. The new RfC is where we will determine any new

1783:

That's a fair reason to seek a new consensus via a new RfC (I would oppose such an RfC at this point for the reason I have given in the existing RfC, but it would at least be a legitimate use of established process). Not a legitimate reason to argue for a new consensus in unstructured, open

3269:

is quite different than viewing the single image photo used in a WP article, esp when compared to the favorable pose of Clinton. Again, the existing photo is out of context, misleading and disparaging in that regard. Where are you getting the idea that Trump "does not find the photograph

4607:

able to make one mention of his tv work, then the reality tv personality is better to use. I also think that maybe using the term, "Television Personality" is more accurate that reality tv personality, because he was on a lot of non reality shows like Oprah and such in the past as well.

4383:

I was willing to bury the hatchet, and let the RfC run it's course, and look at the reply. Again, I'm willing to let the RfC run it's course. Evidently this was not good enough for Mandruss, who initiated and has made repeated personal attacks. I'm done with this thread. Mandruss? --

5140:(avoid lengthy paragraphs and over-specific descriptions). Also, the business was named "Elizabeth Trump & Son" when Fred was running it. Some readers could erroneously understand the text to mean that at some point in time, Fred ran a business called "The Trump Organization". -- 3935:

Just to note the reason Clinton's image is the way it is: that is her official portrait as Secretary of State. Most biographies of office holders use an official portrait like that. Trump has never held office so we don't have that option. Presumably that will be rectified soon.

2571:

There are new and significant considerations to address now, including newer images of Trump. Were any formal/smiling images of Trump considered when this "50 pound" consensus was established? If so, I'll bow out now and wait for the formal presidential photo to be released. --

5372:

No, it sounds like a strange construct to me. I'd leave it at something like "he won the general election on November 8th..." (personally, I'd also include "without winning the popular vote" or "despite not winning a majority of votes" but YMMV). Rest of the changes are good.

2966:

debate, as was noted repeatedly in long-winded discussions about the most suitable portrait. The only event that might change the status quo is the issue of an official photograph by the Trump campaign (that didn't happen) or by the White House (that will happen soon enough). —

2848:

As an admin, you are a relative expert on many things including Knowledge process. I'm going to assume that you don't forget all that when you login as your alt. I did call it "admin input", not "admin ruling". I don't expect your comments to be binding, only informative.

5316:

I have combined the two lede paragraphs about his career into a single paragraph. It does not mention inheritance or "family fortune," just says that he took over the family business and expanded it. I trust this meets with people's approval, but if not let's discuss it.

4890:(not Body politic, but the role of politician's and rulers bodies) is an important topic as well for the Trump election and perception, but one should finally start to base such an entry or section on academic sourcing, less on Huffpost and Slate googelites. Polentarion 2457:

consensus. The fact that the election is over does not change the fact that there is an enormous weight difference between the existing consensus and the one that you say should replace it, one that is far less formal and involves far fewer editors. I reiterate. Again.

3317:

That RfC above has been closed, but it had nothing to do with the infobox image and therefore nothing to do with this dispute. The applicable open RfC, which I identified and linked above at 17:58, 15 November 2016 for MelanieN since she was new to this dispute, is at

5385:

college votes than Clinton". I'm not so sure about mentioning the popular vote in the lede since it might confuse people who are not familiar with our unusual process for electing presidents - or might require more explanation than is appropriate for the lede. --

2949:

This article peaked at 6 million views a day, an exceptional surge for any article in Knowledge's history. In that context, some readers don't like the picture and they should not be ignored. However we cannot guess how many readers would have complained about

541:'s first proposal (at the top of this section) is the better one. Please be aware though that the image should not be changed without clear consensus here. This article is subject to 1RR sanctions and I've reluctantly just had to block an editor who exceeded 296:

I think it's time to change the lead image. The smiling Trump is reflective of the man who is now President-elect of the United States. Trump is not the man in deep contemplation but the man who contemplated a winning strategy and stands ready, and happy to

4780:

reality TV he is not extraordinary due to that. He has become extraordinary by winning the race to the white house. Let me ask it this way - If you were to write this page from scratch, what would be the most important thing you could say about Mr. Trump?

5096:

This was recently added to the lead. Per the article body, "After his father died in 1999, Trump and his siblings received equal portions of his father's estate valued at $ 250–300 million." So when he got his share, it was a small portion of his total

3986:

The same editor just tried to do the same thing with this current discussion. Will someone please talk sense to this individual? He is apparently too angry to listen to me anymore. Discussion about the Trump image is not confined to the current RfC. --

2718:

even less than the huge number of Knowledge editors who misunderstand it (which includes you, apparently). So what? We edit Knowledge according to Knowledge policy, not to avoid external criticism. Best of luck with your plans for continued disruption.

951:

mentions the behaviour or "Trump's and Clinton's supporters" : I am not a Trump supporter, but that doesn't stop from thinking that the photo should be changed. Quite simply because it does not only make Trump look bad (hence violating NPOV) : it makes

4691:

In the first sentence, it makes sense to change to order of titles and speak first on the fact that he is the president elect. This outshdow all other information, and the main reason people enter this page. I would suggest something along that line:

2595:

images of Trump were not considered when the old consensus was established. If we don't come up to speed on this and wait months for a formal pose (esp when several formal poses are presently available) and much of America views the current photo on

2519:

See my previous comment. I certainly can ignore your little consensus, for the reason I clearly articulated there. All consensuses are not created equal. They have varying weight, and a 1-pound consensus cannot replace a 50-pound consensus. Period.

462:. Please see WP on conduct—anything remotely percieved as bullying is to be avoided, and don't be resistant to allow others to contribute within guidelines. You're not the only user here, and so far you're the only one resistant to this edit. 1693:; I see no frown. I do see a serious and sober expression. Unlike you, I recognize my perception as my perception, my interpretation as my interpretation. And I don't go around accusing fellow editors of bad faith or incompetence en masse. 2677:

RfC. Making everyone wait months for a better picture is unfair. I move that a new post-election RfC be initiated. If no one seconds this motion, then I'll wipe the egg off my face and wait for the official picture to arrive, someday. --

928:

I do agree with others that the current photo is not ideal. It is difficult to find a photo that is both available for usage per its licensing and also one that everyone can agree upon, but I think the current one could be much better.

5353:

BTW to avoid the recurrent arguments about whether he was really "elected" on November 8 or won't be until the Electoral College meets, I said he was "selected" in the general election to become the next president. Does that sound OK?

2221:

and were well aware that the current picture is objectionable. Don't cry 'lack of good faith' when someone assumes they knew what they were doing. There is a new consensus. Can we get on with this without these diversion tactics? --

2921:

air their concerns, and they should be counted in the consensus process when they take the time to chime in. Should we ignore them because of an outdated RfC that occurred before it was known that Trump was our next president? --

2884:

I think a reasonable editor with 55K edits, acting in good faith, would read your comments and reluctantly concede. I know I would in their place, I don't believe I know more about Knowledge process than a widely respected admin.

2401:

No it would not. It would be a sign of agreeing with your viewpoint. I said I would bow out of discussion, but that was incorrect. I will bow of out of discussion when you cease addressing me directly with such flawed reasoning.

4749:

As a biography of a living person, most of his life has been as a business man and celebrity. People may come here cuz of recent events but it would be NPOV in my mind to classify this man first and foremost as a politician.

1837:'s photograph has an American flag in the background with her smiling. Gwillhickers, I encourage you to find a smiling photo of President-elect Trump, with a U.S. flag in the background, and replace this controversial image. 4903:

It's still not worthy for an encyclopedia that takes itself somewhat serious to include this in an article about a US President. If he never ran for president, I wouldn't mind as much. But this is just bad taste/indecorous.

3952:

Which doesn't change the fact that the two biographies have not been treated in a fair and balanced manner. Clinton's image is pleasing and formal in appearance -- Trump's is not, even with several such images available. --

1015:

Seems not to matter now. The practice is to keep the official government photo of their last government position -- so in a couple months it would become his official Presidential Photo, and then it stays that forever.

480:

Sorry for placing it without discussion! One of the reasons I uploaded my image is that in the current image, the microphone is in the way. The other proposed image seen in the reminder has a microphone too but is not

4957: 2917:

Many readers have expressed legitimate concerns, since the election, on the Talk page. Should we ignore them? RfC's are for editors. Very few, if any, readers ever participate there. The Talk page is where concerned

4189:, please read what is written. This is a current discussion about something other than consensus or process. No one said this discussion will override anything. No policy has been violated. If so, please give us a 3784:

President-elect is the proper title for the position he is in right now. Between the general election and inauguration. If the electors end up being faithless (extremely unlikely) only then would the title change.

3769:

He is the presumptive president-elect since the electoral voting is on December 19. It's just the same nature as he was the presumptive Republican nominee before the votes were cast at the RNC convention in July.

4050:. I have seen plenty of people agreeing that the current image is not ideal, but none agreeing on a new one. In order to agree on a new image these people are going to have to agree to one image in one place. -- 880:, present the subject with a favorable pose. We need to treat this biography like any other. The image should be changed now and administrators should make sure Knowledge policy is maintained for all editors. -- 4794:

You're being blinded by current events, my man. All in due time. All in due time... He is still a wannabe politician to many. He has never even held office and you are ready to call him an "American politician"

4695:

Donald John Trump (/ˈdɒnəld dʒɒn trʌmp/; born June 14, 1946) is an American politician, the President-elect of the United States, an American businessman, reality television personality and real estate mogul.

1668:

Nice try, but the policy you pointed to says that a photo cannot be "misleading." The current photo is not "mislading" at all. If you were to randomly bump into Donald Trump, that's what he would look like.

3727:, which is a correct description of Trump's position between now and the inauguration. The vote of the Electoral College does not change his title (assuming the electors vote "faithfully" on December 19). 3191:

Please note that there is a guideline advising against using bullets in a thread that was started without bullets, or vice versa. Switching the method makes formatting for good readability unnecessarily

2869:

You understand that; I just wanted to make sure Gwillhickers does. You called attention to my admin status. I didn't want them to think I was trying to give any kind of orders or throw my weight around.

2075:

Let's wait on this. When President Trump is sworn in, he will have an official picture made for the Armed Forces chain of command. Let's wait and use that picture. IMO, all the pictures shown so far

1449:

If you can get permission, Example 1 is pretty good. If you receive permission, let us know. As for now, the current image is more NPOV than the original, but hopefully you can get their permission.--

2307:

and I'm well aware of the discussion, which, btw, I linked to. Hello? Once again, the former consensus was established before the election and a new consensus has emerged. How long do you plan on

342: 636:

Ok, I added a gallery now, its an easier method and makes it less congested, peopel can add more options (just make sure its an actual headshot and recent and not images from 2014 or before).--

3394:

process already started in that RfC. If your preferred image is not on the table there, I don't see a problem with adding it yourself, especially with so few !votes already stated there. ―

3197:- After we have an official photo for Trump, are we going to consider a different official photo while he's in office? Why on earth would we do that? Because the first official photo is a 2954:

picture, had it been changed to one of the suggestions. Each proposed picture was deemed unfathomable by enough people that none gathered enough support over the current one. Obviously

876:, as it is a "disparaging" image of Trump. Since there are more formal pictures that could have been chosen, this is a POV issue as well. All president's biographies, and even that of 4400:

Thank you for letting the RfC run its course. Thanks again for being done with this thread. If you want to have a general discussion about infobox images and neutrality, the venue is

5301:

This "material" probably isn't lede worthy. Also, it is now mentioned twice in the lede that he took over his dad's company, that should probably be addressed or corrected or not. --

4958:

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/09/donald-trump-alicia-machado-hillary-clinton-presidential-debate-rosie-odonnell-fatness-weight-fat-shaming-amy-farrell/501827/

4246:

will see a glaring difference in the bio' images. and wonder about Knowledge's credibility, as has been expressed by several editors. Okay, let's try to bury the hatchet and let the

4239:

All 'perceptions' aside, Clinton's image gives us a smiling and formal pose, Trump's does not. Re: Urgency, I wouldn't say that, but the fact remains, several months will pass where

3859:

wait for Trump's official portrait. The current image makes wikipedia look ridiculous, and you don't have to like Trump to think that. Even Hitler's infobox picture looks better !

3155:

My understanding is that the subject himself does not find the photograph objectionable. Moreover, it comports with the take-home message in his acceptance speech: He is actively

2311:? You should learn that consensus can change, and there is nothing lately that says it hasn't. Sorry. Please don't assume the roll of talk page cop with this apparent effort to 5426:

Real estate mogul is a subset of businessman. Real estate mogul implies businessman. Businessman does not imply real estate mogul. Real estate mogul should not be in the lead.

3502:

Be that it may, that's not going to cut it in an open date where editors are expected to at least make an attempt to support highly questionable claims such as you've made. --

2746:

OK, Gwillhickers, you've made your motion for a new RFC. The appropriate action now would be to stop arguing and wait to see if you get any support for the idea. Fair enough?

4008:

Strongly disagree. Anything "decided" outside the RfC with respect to the infobox image could not override the RfC result, so would be a pointless waste of editor time. ―

1956:

has agreed. So why are we STILL using a low-quality 2015 photo of Trump here???? Can we just finally agree here, for once and for all, to change the lead image to this:

1057:

This is my opnion but I don't think the new picture looks presidential with the black background and the expression on his face. I proposed a new picture in a new topic

4930:

and the result was that the content was merged here. There was no consensus for the material to be purged completely. I think it's too soon to debate the issue again.--

706:

Why don't we wait until his presidential picture is released? We are going to change this picture to only have to change it again soon. When will this non-sense end?

3202: 1696:

relatively few editors outside RfC with significant opposition. I believe there is still a thread on this page soliciting suggestions for good replacement photos. ―

1253: 1176: 2754:) 17:36, 15 November 2016 (UTC) P. S. Just to make it clear: I function at this article as just another editor. I do not take any admin actions here because I am 2217:"Another picture discussion"? I was referring to the existing one. The prior consensus was established before the election, as I've said several times now. I was 5224: 2268:

you started another thread in the hopes of getting a different answer. You were out of process before, you remain out of process, and you are becoming tiresome.

4878:

So far this sort of section has been based on press clippings - similar as the whole portion on his political stance. That say, try a google scholar search on

3593:

could you clarify your point? The link you shared describes his situation quite perfectly, thus substantiating why he should be listed as the president elect.

1423:

I know, his picture was changed 30 minutes to an hour ago but based on all the other president pictures, it is no good and looks unprofessional in my opinion.

798:

to 3 or 4. 3 is him grinning and not smiling as much while 4 is closer and shows him smiling. The current image shows him hunched over behind a microphone.--

2197:

Not another picture discussion. Any suggestion that editors here have reached consensus to purposely insist that the photo must be unflattering is a vio of

4401: 3692:, the title of President Elect is used for the apparent winner of the election between the general election in November, and the inauguration in January. 1717:

As I do agree it's not the best photo choice it does not seem to violate the policy. If you are going to complain about it at least suggest a new one....

664:

I like Image 2 the most but it would be better if the microphone was photoshopped out. 1, 3, and 4 are also feasible. Note that the photo of Trump on the

3475:

Many people already find the image ... less than acceptable ... when compared to other biographies showing formal/smiling poses, as the Clinton bio does.

1817:

I agree. It does seem odd and out of place for a U.S. Presidential politician to have an unflattering frowning photograph on a WP page. Compare this to

175:. It's very unlikely that you'll get much support for reopening that debate now, as the discussion was quite recent and resulted in a firm consensus. 1941: 665: 313: 240: 868:

Pretty soon all of Trump's and Clinton's supporters that come to this page are going to line up and vote accordingly here. So we must let Knowledge

777:. Out of all the photos to chose from, this was obviously a negative POV choice. There's no reason not to change to an image with a formal pose. -- 5443:

Instead of making another section on this, please add your opinion to one of the above sections that are covering this exact same subject. Thanks.

4988:" could be based on scholarly sources and is for sure noteable. Why confine gender and body studies to Dolezal, Merkel and Butler ;) ? Polentarion 4309:

you care to admit. As I said, we'll let the RfC run it's course. Now have your "last word" and repeat yourself for the nice folks out there. --

1949: 3970:

have POV and ownership issues at work here. The current RfC only "supersedes" the old RfC, it is not a license to suppress opposing opinions. --

3473:" A truly authoritative source for that information would most likely have communicated it only in confidence, but you can take my word for it. " 1097:

would qualify. We should change to this photo immediately, and if in a few months there is an 'official photo', we can later change to that one.

1093:

in the background. This is the standard for literally all U.S. president's WP pages, and U.S. presidential candidate's WP pages. Therefore, only

5137: 4551: 4250:

run its course. At least most are willing to use the official photo when it becomes available. Trying to count the blessings here. Cheers. --

1426:

I found a picture that looks like a presidential picture and I think should be used. I am currently getting permission from the photographer.

4781: 4736: 4703: 5287: 4571: 4564: 3724: 3568: 1945: 3026:

have, on the Talk page. I will consider initiating a post election RfC. In the mean time all editors need to limit their discussions to

5400:

introduced by Barbara Boxer iirc) and that should also be mentioned. But it's all relatively technical and doesn't belong in the lede.

4944:

I agree that it should not be in the article, but, if we are allowed a moment of levity, it certainly would seem to be "just desserts."

5429: 3771: 5338:

education and career was scattered between two paragraphs; I combined them into one. Comments/suggestions/corrections are welcome. --

5401: 3635: 2822:

Gwillhickers has been advised of the existing RfC multiple times throughout this multi-thread dispute. They were well aware of it. ―

1842: 1102: 4735:

He already won the race, and is the president elect. What do you mean "... when we get to it ..."? This is exactly where we're at.

727: 4968: 4872: 3760: 241:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Donald_J._Trump_October_2016.jpg/113px-Donald_J._Trump_October_2016.jpg

2429:

from. Or are those images with smiling poses something that is equally abstract to you and all a matter of "viewpoint"? BS. --

1960: 378: 2339:

makes no sense. AGF is not about being right or wrong. I don't doubt your good faith, I doubt your competence on this question.

872:

determine what photo is used. -- The existing photo of Trump, clearly wearing a frown with eyes shifted to his left, violates

3903: 3864: 3328: 2446: 2281: 1978: 1888: 1120: 961: 655: 432: 325: 4464:"Mr. Trump is producing additional network and cable television programming via his Los Angeles based production company..." 4408:

watch that page and offer comments. While that does not always happen, it at least gets the discussion off this talk page. ―

2114:

wow that face, its exactly like my constipation face..we should use it , TheDonald just realising what he got into .lol ..--

730:. As president elect of the United States, Trump should at least have a decent picture until the official one is unveiled.-- 2984:

mini-consensus replace the existing hard-fought RfC consensus. Please, let's observe process first, then discuss content. ―

1689:; I see no such explicit prohibition against this image in Knowledge policy. Your perception of the image is exactly that, 5257: 4770: 2315:

new consensus that the above RfC has revealed. We have heard your opinion coming and going -- your name occurs more than

1876: 1838: 1685:

Many editors disagree in good faith with your premises, including me. Your policy interpretation here is exactly that,

1098: 97: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 4069:

consensus. There is no process (or any) policy however that says every discussion about the image must occur there. --

1295: 1192: 4160:

Superseded by active RfC. Please take any content discussion to that RfC. There is nothing to discuss as to process. ―

2958:

applies, you are free to suggest a change and see if the community would support it now. Alas, this is ultimately an

1089:

The only images we should be considering are those which A. include President-elect Trump smiling, and B. include an

4927: 2808:

I didn't realize that one was still active. Apparently neither did Gwillhickers with their call here for a new RFC.

354: 4219:

If there is something I'm missing in this thread that makes my collapse inappropriate, please point it out to me. ―

1257: 1227: 467: 38: 5076: 3656:

You are incorrect. He is receiving top Secret Service briefings, which are only given to POTUS and POTUS-elect.

3630:

of course : if i understand american election (i'm french), he'll be elected december 19th... He seems to be just

5169: 5120: 5102: 3899: 3860: 1884: 1116: 957: 651: 428: 321: 239:

Why would a person who just won the presidential office have a frown on them??? Use the photo from Wiki Commons (

5253: 4785: 4766: 4740: 4707: 1743:

Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light.

855: 4656: 1883:. We already have better, more flattering images of Trump, one of which even has a US flag in the background. 4985: 650:

1, 2 and 4 are fine as far as I'm concerned. What matters is that we have to replace the current photo ASAP.

4886:(Verena Born, 2016). No kidding, the topic as such is noteable and warrants an separate article. That said, 4346: 4123: 3084: 2547: 2206: 1833:. All other U.S. Presidents have a smiling photo of them, with an American flag in the background. Even the 680: 5215:— a 1 indicating the fortune was completely inherited, while a 10 was for a Horatio Alger-esque journey... 4627:

Also, just to add, being a TV producer is really just a business venture of an American Businessman right?

2599:, it could cause a good segment of the readership to come to regard Knowledge as no more credible than the 463: 248: 5433: 5235: 5145: 5056: 5042: 4909: 4868: 4825: 4670: 4590: 4509: 4391: 4316: 4257: 4200: 4104: 4076: 4037: 3994: 3977: 3960: 3926: 3775: 3620: 3509: 3486: 3450: 3277: 3249: 3164: 3119: 3054: 3037: 2929: 2875: 2813: 2763: 2751: 2685: 2633: 2610: 2578: 2509: 2436: 2377: 2326: 2229: 2187: 1953: 1767: 1658: 887: 784: 692: 162: 5288:

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/54699/1-easy-way-donald-trump-could-have-been-even-richer-doing-nothing

4193:

to the exact policy -- not a general link/referral to some page, but the exact policy, please. Thanx. --

3481:'s an (historic) winner and he apparently would not have felt a need to smile for his Knowledge photo. -- 934: 5405: 5306: 5188: 5080: 5015: 4989: 4935: 4891: 4800: 4755: 4726: 3390: 2319:

on the existing talk page alone. Please let other editors establish the consensus so we can move on. --

1366: 1021: 4519:

I'd say he is both. He was the subject of a reality TV show, which makes him a reality TV personality.

3265:

The existing picture of Trump may have been taken from footage during a debate, and viewing it in that

688: 669: 2399:

Acknowledging that the current picture is horrible and raises POV issues would be a sign of good faith

1434: 1429: 1017: 412:

It needs to be DISCUSSED first Gage/Calibrador, stop imposing it, most of us like to follow rules...--

5165: 5131: 5116: 5098: 4699: 3845: 3790: 3756: 3729: 1966: 1674: 1568: 302: 180: 930: 901:

for the next few months until his official portrait is unveiled, we can have a NPOV image for him.--

5453: 4637: 4617: 4529: 3702: 3603: 2098: 2026: 1970: 985: 851: 4850: 2706:

One more comment pointing out your flawed reasoning and/or ignorance, and then I'm done with you.

5390: 5359: 5343: 5322: 5277: 5014:

topics, not the Huffington posts. Body politics is clearly important for the Donald. Polentarion

4964: 4560: 4493: 4418: 4373: 4342: 4291: 4229: 4170: 4119: 4018: 3941: 3888: 3826: 3544: 3478: 3404: 3341: 3215: 3080: 2994: 2899: 2859: 2832: 2798: 2755: 2729: 2657: 2589: 2543: 2530: 2468: 2412: 2357: 2294: 2249: 2202: 2154: 2081: 2054: 2003: 1974: 1927: 1866: 1794: 1706: 1625: 1509: 1460: 1409: 1333: 1271: 1235: 1161: 1044: 1004: 912: 835: 809: 741: 525: 492: 400: 282: 125: 2445:

I am not in love with the current image. I am, however, in love with the reasoning in the essay

2090:

Let's not disparage his appearance. This one is very flattering, but it shouldn't be up to us.

763:

until his official portrait emerges. That was the consensus in zillions of prior discussions. —

547:

This is a reminder to all editors not revert more than once on this article in a 24 hour period.

366: 4046:

Speaking as an uninvolved editor, please keep the image discussions in one place, in this case

3079:

We seem to be entering a new era of nastiness. We are all volunteers. Can we try to be polite?

5282: 5231: 5141: 5067: 5052: 5038: 4905: 4864: 4821: 4666: 4601: 4586: 4505: 4385: 4310: 4268: 4251: 4247: 4211: 4194: 4098: 4070: 4047: 4031: 3988: 3971: 3954: 3920: 3916: 3875: 3841: 3816:. Please take any content discussion to that RfC. There is nothing to discuss as to process. ― 3813: 3614: 3503: 3497: 3482: 3464: 3444: 3329:

Knowledge:Requests for comment#Request comment on articles, policies, or other non-user issues

3319: 3271: 3260: 3243: 3239: 3235: 3160: 3150: 3115: 3048: 3031: 2959: 2944: 2923: 2871: 2809: 2785: 2775: 2759: 2747: 2679: 2629: 2604: 2572: 2503: 2430: 2371: 2320: 2223: 2181: 2175: 2169: 1880: 1830: 1809: 1761: 1652: 1647: 1537: 996: 946: 881: 778: 618: 569: 230: 158: 147: 47: 17: 4812:'s observation is correct -- in part. Most mainstream sources say that Trump is not truly a " 4277:

repeating the same thing you said before my comment. The concept is the subject of the essay

3389:. If you remain a minority of 1 after a couple of days of very active discussion, you review 5302: 5199: 5184: 5026: 4931: 4816:" -- at least, he didn't wannabe elected as much Clinton or Cruz did. (And judging from his 4809: 4796: 4751: 4722: 3744:

Obama is calling him "President-elect"- I think it doesn't get any more official than that.

3679: 3661: 3647: 3576: 2784:

One of us is missing something here. There is already an active RfC about infobox image, at

2119: 1362: 641: 587: 417: 244: 203: 1291: 1188: 317: 5272: 4461:"Donald J. Trump is the co-owner and Executive Producer of the 'Miss Universe Pageant'..." 3786: 3745: 3386: 3201:

violation? As for after he leaves office, with the possible exception of Lyndon Johnson -

2273: 1834: 1735: 1722: 1670: 1562: 1442: 1210: 1065: 877: 427:

Reminder : this image has also been proposed (see section above and previous discussions)

298: 176: 1299: 1196: 4497: 1115:

change that photo ? Quite frankly, the current one is making wikipedia look ridiculous.

5444: 4954: 4765:

What Bod said. He may one day be better known as a president. That day is not today...

4650: 4628: 4608: 4545: 4520: 4405: 4360: 4278: 3693: 3594: 3471:

Where are you getting the idea that Trump 'does not find the photograph objectionable'.

3198: 2963: 2715: 2312: 2308: 2269: 2239:"This consensus will be void after the election", so you're inventing your own rules. ― 2091: 2019: 1822: 981: 5230:

Had his score been 1, 2, 3, or even 4, the information would clearly be leadworthy. --

5386: 5355: 5339: 5318: 4960: 4409: 4364: 4356: 4282: 4220: 4184: 4161: 4114: 4009: 3937: 3879: 3849: 3817: 3535: 3438: 3395: 3332: 3229: 3206: 3012: 2985: 2955: 2911: 2890: 2850: 2823: 2789: 2779: 2720: 2648: 2565: 2521: 2459: 2403: 2348: 2343: 2336: 2316: 2304: 2285: 2240: 2218: 2198: 2145: 2077: 2045: 1994: 1918: 1857: 1818: 1785: 1754: 1741: 1697: 1640: 1616: 1587: 1521: 1500: 1477: 1450: 1400: 1324: 1261: 1231: 1152: 1035: 1000: 902: 873: 869: 826: 799: 731: 542: 538: 515: 482: 455: 451: 447: 390: 273: 116: 4404:, not this page. In theory, at least, some editors who are especially familiar with 3671: 458:. Several others have already reverted your disruptive edit concerning this matter, 5458: 5437: 5409: 5394: 5379: 5363: 5347: 5326: 5310: 5261: 5249: 5239: 5192: 5173: 5149: 5124: 5106: 5083: 5060: 5046: 5018: 4992: 4939: 4913: 4894: 4887: 4855: 4829: 4804: 4789: 4774: 4759: 4744: 4730: 4711: 4674: 4642: 4622: 4594: 4534: 4513: 4423: 4395: 4378: 4350: 4320: 4296: 4261: 4240: 4234: 4204: 4175: 4127: 4108: 4089: 4080: 4054: 4041: 4023: 3998: 3981: 3964: 3945: 3930: 3907: 3893: 3868: 3831: 3794: 3779: 3764: 3738: 3707: 3683: 3665: 3651: 3625: 3608: 3580: 3549: 3513: 3490: 3454: 3409: 3346: 3281: 3253: 3220: 3195:

Two years from now will we still be required to use the RfC to establish consensus?

3168: 3123: 3088: 3058: 3041: 2999: 2971: 2933: 2904: 2879: 2864: 2837: 2817: 2803: 2767: 2734: 2689: 2662: 2637: 2614: 2582: 2551: 2535: 2513: 2473: 2440: 2417: 2381: 2362: 2330: 2299: 2277: 2254: 2233: 2210: 2191: 2159: 2123: 2103: 2085: 2059: 2031: 2008: 1990: 1982: 1932: 1892: 1871: 1846: 1826: 1799: 1771: 1726: 1711: 1678: 1662: 1630: 1594: 1572: 1547: 1528: 1514: 1487: 1466: 1414: 1370: 1338: 1302: 1277: 1239: 1214: 1199: 1166: 1124: 1106: 1049: 1025: 1008: 989: 965: 938: 918: 891: 859: 840: 815: 788: 767: 747: 713: 696: 682: 659: 645: 625: 598: 591: 576: 549: 531: 498: 471: 436: 421: 406: 329: 306: 287: 252: 234: 226: 216: 207: 193: 184: 172: 166: 151: 143: 130: 3381:

Ultimately, while you have some support as to content, you remain all alone as to

4926:

Someone created an article, "Donald Trump's hair". Last month, it was put up for

4585:

the subject, and which tries to describe five or six notable things about him? --

4355:

My understanding and experience is that no admin will act without a complaint at

320:, it's time to use it. This is not equivalent to "beating a dead horse" anymore. 5374: 5219:: Inherited small or medium-size business and made it into a ten-digit fortune: 5073: 4559:

A. Donald John Trump is an American businessman, television producer, radio and

4086: 4063: 4051: 3675: 3657: 3643: 3588: 3572: 3531:

only has two similar photos to chose from, which even I find less than adequate.

2116: 638: 597:

the longstanding image (unless it's clear the consensus has changed of course).

584: 459: 414: 199: 46:

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

1284: 1181: 1180:

practice. I cannot enforce this again due to 1RR; I suggest someone else does.

4882:- you will be surprised to find about 4000 entries and a German thesis called 3385:

regarding this issue. That's basically the test for the widely-accepted essay

1718: 1581: 1558: 1473: 1438: 1219: 1206: 1061: 4820:, when Trump sleeps, he dreams of building golf courses, not campaigning.) -- 3919:

will weigh in soon so we can present an article in a truly neutral manner.--

5161:

he took control of his father Fred Trump's real estate and construction firm

3689: 3613:

Apparently the Electoral Colleges don't cast their votes until December 19.

850:

I don't like Trump, but he does look pretty damn presidential in picture #3

4570:

B. Donald John Trump is an American businessman, television producer, and

1256:

was not appropriate or NPOV. Overall, most people agreed that Image 3, or

5225:

The New Forbes 400 Self-Made Score: From Silver Spooners To Bootstrappers

4484:"His radio program with Clear Channel Radio ... was a wonderful success." 2978: 2968: 2708:

which will tell them that Knowledge is just another biased political rag.

1591: 1484: 764: 3529:

Not a problem, we can move it to the bottom if that's an issue for you.

1879:: I agree that the current image is a disaster but you should be voting 5136:

Suggestion: Remove 'formerly run by his father, which is now...', per

4550:

Correct, he's both. Next question: Which lead sentence conflicts with

1588:

WP:RFC#Request comment on articles, policies, or other non-user issues

157:

Are you serious or joking? Please check out the talk page archives. --

4721:

we can cross that bridge when we get to it, not a moment too soon. --

2647:

I was wishing for. I sincerely hope we can drop this, at long last. ―

1639:

The present "long standing" picture of Trump is a clear violation of

221:

I presume it will have to be changed since he is now preisdent-elect.

4274:

Clinton's image gives us a smiling and formal pose, Trump's does not

4006:

Discussion about the Trump image is not confined to the current RfC.

2714:

seeing bias at Knowledge. That will always be true. They understand

450:

is following the rules, but you are not. I agree with the logic of

4849: 4817: 4501: 139:

I think it's time to put a more appropriate image in the infobox.

5079:. We shall overcomb! End of the world as we know it. Polentarion 4661: 726:

How long does it take for this official picture to be revealed?

198:

The current image looks OK. How could a better image be chosen?

4085:

The more the discussion is diluted the longer it will take. --

3567:

hello, this point must be changed... Donald Trump is not, yet,

5278:

http://time.com/money/4005271/donald-trump-index-funds-wealth/

2219:

assuming the editors involved before weren't incredibly stupid

1781:

Since then there are new and important things to be considered

334:

I placed a new, less obscured image of Trump in the infobox.

25: 2347:

this article. That leaves ANI as the only remaining option. ―

5207:"gave each member of The Forbes 400 a score on a scale from 2502:

voted to keep it from the start. Yes we have no bananas? --

5283:

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund

4845: 4341:

Would someone please stop these constant personal attacks?

825:

per JFG, although zillions may be a slight overstatement. ―

4884:

We Shall Overcomb. An Analysis of Donald Trump Hair Memes

2387:

I've no intention for changing anything without consensus

316:, the pages about the Republican primaries, etc. We have 5273:

http://fortune.com/2015/08/20/donald-trump-index-funds/

5112: 336:

If this is reverted, this image is the proposed image:

4858:, another body politics trademark, is noteable as well 3563:

He is not President-elect of the United States.... yet

2887:

Consensus has not changed. It would take a new RfC ...

2643:

And in case you don't know, Gwillhickers, this is the

3874:

There is an active RfC to decide those questions, at

3017:

The readers should be our top priority. They are the

1989:

Sigh. Summoning strength (or trying to), considering

5422:

real estate mogul in the first sentence is redundant

4955:

http://www.americanhairloss.org/general/about_us.asp

4846:

Donald's hair and other physical appearances (again)

1222:, just as a note, the end result of the discussion 5154:Okay, that sounds reasonable. The next paragraph 3672:https://www.usa.gov/inauguration-2017#item-213261 3527:stuck in the middle of this (very) long talk page 3688:It's "President Elect" not "Elected". Also, per 2168:Since the election a new consensus has emerged ( 2018:she looks Martian with the red blouse, etc etc. 3203:File:Lyndon_B._Johnson_Oval_Office_Portrait.tif 1254:File:Donald Trump August 19, 2015 (cropped).jpg 1177:File:Donald Trump August 19, 2015 (cropped).jpg 5009:Role of hair comb and photo on this talk page 1740:"Nice try"? The BOLP policy I refer to says 1642:Policy regarding Biographies of Living People 874:Policy regarding Biographies of Living People 389:Placed this in the talk page just in case! -- 8: 3642:, yet : let's wait : tell me if i'm wrong ! 3477:" Yes, but Clinton's an acknowledged loser. 4402:Knowledge:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard 2201:. I hope that isn't what anyone is saying. 1361:I agree. Far too much discussion on this.-- 5031:Says right there in the lead graf: "He is 4697: 4659:isn't an owner or proprietor; he's labor. 3807: 2139: 1964: 1912: 1610: 1566: 1394: 1146: 267: 110: 4030:Does the 1RR apply to this talk page? -- 3803:Can we at last change the infobox image ? 2335:Sorry, the "Wrong on all counts" link to 1942:United States presidential election, 2016 1260:, should be used as it is more neutral.-- 666:United States presidential election, 2016 454:, and I vote to keep the contribution of 314:United States presidential election, 2016 2788:. What "new RfC" are you referring to? ― 3810: 3327:- Incorrect, per the first sentence at 2142: 1950:List of Presidents of the United States 1915: 1613: 1397: 1149: 976:Can we now please get a new picture of 866:How much longer is this going to go on? 338: 270: 113: 4273: 4005: 3530: 3526: 3324: 3314: 3194: 2886: 2707: 2603:, just in case anyone's concerned. -- 2398: 2386: 1780: 506:Also, here is another proposed image: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1606:Current Trump picture violates policy 1142:Revert to image that gained consensus 545:who was edit warring over the image. 7: 4572:President-elect of the United States 4565:President-elect of the United States 4242:many thousands of viewers, every day 3725:President-elect of the United States 2276:apply here, and you are approaching 1946:President-elect of the United States 1557:@JFG How do I start a formal Rfc? -- 312:Agree, of course. The same goes for 4563:personality, real estate mogul and 3876:Talk:Donald Trump#Trump Photo 2 Rfc 3690:Presidential Transition Act of 1963 3325:RfC's are usually on their own page 3320:Talk:Donald Trump#Trump Photo 2 Rfc 2786:Talk:Donald Trump#Trump Photo 2 Rfc 2309:referring to the outdated consensus 514:Should be enough options for now.-- 4118:outrageous and without any merit. 3432:New Post election consensus (cont) 2393:consensus. Replacing the existing 1223: 668:article has been changed as well. 24: 2342:the question will be resolved at 1646:this continue? Currently we have 4453:Trump is a television producer: 4097:pleasing and formal picture. -- 1959: 377: 365: 353: 341: 29: 4687:First sentence order of titles 4492:He's not, in that context, a " 3315:The RfC above has been closed. 2447:Knowledge:Process is important 2282:Knowledge:Process is important 1445:) 2:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC) 1068:) 2:46, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 510:(moved image to gallery above) 442:(moved image to gallery above) 1: 5459:21:24, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5438:21:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5410:18:21, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5395:17:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5380:17:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5364:17:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5348:17:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5327:16:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5311:12:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5262:11:40, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5240:03:22, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5193:02:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5174:02:29, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5150:02:21, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5125:01:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5107:01:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5084:07:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5061:04:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5047:00:31, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 5019:06:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4993:18:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 4969:13:31, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 4940:07:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 4914:07:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 4895:06:04, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 4873:05:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 4830:04:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4805:01:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4790:01:38, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4775:23:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4760:22:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4745:22:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4731:22:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4712:22:41, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4675:03:48, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4643:03:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4623:03:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4595:02:49, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4535:02:00, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4514:00:35, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4424:03:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4396:03:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4379:02:52, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4351:02:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4321:02:14, 18 November 2016 (UTC) 4297:23:26, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4262:22:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4235:20:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4205:20:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4176:19:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4128:21:56, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4109:21:48, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4090:20:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4081:20:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4055:19:43, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4042:19:41, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 4024:19:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3999:19:37, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3982:19:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3965:19:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3946:19:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3931:18:46, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3908:15:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3894:15:27, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3869:15:22, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3855:. IMHO, we should definitely 3832:19:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3795:20:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3780:16:27, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3765:00:16, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 3739:22:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3708:22:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3684:22:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3666:22:04, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3652:21:59, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3626:21:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3609:21:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3581:21:33, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 3550:03:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3514:03:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3491:01:22, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3455:03:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 3410:22:38, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3347:22:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3282:21:54, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3254:21:54, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3221:11:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3169:05:18, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3124:05:12, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 3089:23:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 3059:23:52, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 3047:resolve the matter here. -- 3042:23:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 3000:07:44, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 2972:05:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 2934:23:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2905:21:46, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2880:18:09, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2865:18:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2838:18:08, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2818:18:05, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2804:17:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2768:17:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2735:16:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2690:16:01, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2663:05:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2638:03:37, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2615:02:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2583:02:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2552:23:05, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2536:21:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2514:21:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2474:20:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2441:20:45, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2418:20:31, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2382:20:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2363:20:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2331:19:58, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2300:19:37, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2255:19:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2234:19:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2211:18:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2192:18:07, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2160:16:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 2124:01:34, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2104:01:21, 15 November 2016 (UTC) 2086:18:41, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2060:16:32, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2032:16:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 2009:16:22, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1983:16:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1933:16:37, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 1893:09:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1872:06:43, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1847:01:46, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1800:11:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1772:22:25, 13 November 2016 (UTC) 1727:21:24, 13 November 2016 (UTC) 1712:20:47, 13 November 2016 (UTC) 1679:20:17, 13 November 2016 (UTC) 1663:19:02, 13 November 2016 (UTC) 1631:16:35, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 1595:20:43, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1573:18:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1548:16:47, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1515:16:43, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1488:16:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1467:02:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1415:16:34, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 1371:08:29, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1339:04:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1303:03:23, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1278:02:45, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1240:02:29, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1215:02:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1200:02:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 1167:16:33, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 1125:09:12, 16 November 2016 (UTC) 1107:12:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC) 1050:05:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 1026:01:47, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 966:13:07, 12 November 2016 (UTC) 939:04:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 919:02:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 892:00:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC) 860:15:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 841:05:13, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 816:02:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 748:03:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC) 288:16:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 253:03:49, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 131:16:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC) 5077:title page use an "hairbomb" 3238:has been closed. There is a 3159:to other peoples' voices. -- 1009:17:10, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 990:17:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 789:23:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 768:23:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 714:23:10, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 697:16:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 683:16:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 660:15:50, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 646:10:54, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 626:10:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 592:10:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 577:09:55, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 532:09:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 499:09:03, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 472:09:22, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 437:08:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 422:08:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 407:08:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 384:Image 4 (cropped of Image 1) 330:08:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 307:08:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 235:09:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 208:06:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC) 185:21:48, 8 November 2016 (UTC) 167:21:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC) 152:21:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC) 5115:how I edited this just now. 5092:"Heir to the Trump fortune" 2710:Yes, much of the public is 2453:that replaces the existing 2144:Superseded by active RfC. ― 2135:New Post election consensus 1917:Superseded by active RfC. ― 1615:Superseded by active RfC. ― 1399:Superseded by active RfC. ― 1175:There was a consensus that 1151:Superseded by active RfC. ― 272:Superseded by active RfC. ― 115:Superseded by active RfC. ― 5475: 5051:Used to say it, anyway. -- 4113:The constant violation of 3021:why we are here. When the 1687:your policy interpretation 1258:File:President Trump 2.jpg 1252:Yes, most agreed that the 1228:File:President Trump 2.jpg 728:With Obama, it took months 3898:Duh. I hadn't seen that. 1856:exceedingly bad advice. ― 995:This is under discussion 4449:Producer or personality? 3638:vote, no ? so, he's not 4986:Donald Trump Hair Memes 4496:personality". Sources: 4472:He's also a television 3878:. Please participate. ― 3615:Curly "the jerk" Turkey 2044:I remember derp face. ― 1877:Ontario Teacher BFA BEd 1839:Ontario Teacher BFA BEd 1747:did it to Hillary also. 1099:Ontario Teacher BFA BEd 5333:My changes to the lede 4859: 4502:Donald Trump Biography 3840:Per the discussion in 1954:Family of Donald Trump 5158:gets more specific: " 4853: 978:PRESIDENT ELECT TRUMP 42:of past discussions. 4880:"Donald Trump", hair 4581:Hint: Which version 3900:Jean-Jacques Georges 3861:Jean-Jacques Georges 1885:Jean-Jacques Georges 1586:Instructions are at 1117:Jean-Jacques Georges 958:Jean-Jacques Georges 687:I vote for Image 4. 652:Jean-Jacques Georges 429:Jean-Jacques Georges 322:Jean-Jacques Georges 5254:Distrait cognizance 4767:Distrait cognizance 3028:article improvement 2305:Wrong on all counts 4860: 4814:wannabe politician 4561:reality television 4494:reality television 5267:Relevant sources: 4714: 4702:comment added by 4498:Trump Productions 4445: 4444: 3844:, as proposed by 3753: 3749: 3640:president elected 3636:Electoral College 3559: 3558: 2131: 2130: 1985: 1969:comment added by 1904: 1903: 1831:George H. W. Bush 1810:User:Gwillhickers 1602: 1601: 1575: 1545: 1390:Trump New Picture 1386: 1385: 1323:100% agreement. ― 1138: 1137: 956:look even worse. 623: 574: 259: 258: 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 18:Talk:Donald Trump 5466: 5456: 5451: 5449: 5377: 5203: 5135: 5071: 5030: 4888:de:Body Politics 4654: 4640: 4635: 4633: 4620: 4615: 4613: 4605: 4549: 4532: 4527: 4525: 4421: 4416: 4376: 4371: 4294: 4289: 4272: 4232: 4227: 4215: 4188: 4173: 4168: 4067: 4021: 4016: 3917:other supporters 3891: 3886: 3829: 3824: 3808: 3751: 3747: 3737: 3735: 3705: 3700: 3698: 3619: 3606: 3601: 3599: 3592: 3547: 3542: 3501: 3468: 3442: 3407: 3402: 3344: 3339: 3264: 3240:discussion above 3233: 3218: 3213: 3154: 3016: 2997: 2992: 2982: 2948: 2915: 2902: 2897: 2862: 2857: 2835: 2830: 2801: 2796: 2783: 2732: 2727: 2660: 2655: 2597:Inauguration Day 2593: 2569: 2533: 2528: 2471: 2466: 2415: 2410: 2360: 2355: 2297: 2292: 2280:. See the essay 2252: 2247: 2157: 2152: 2140: 2122: 2096: 2057: 2052: 2024: 2006: 2001: 1963: 1930: 1925: 1913: 1869: 1864: 1797: 1792: 1758: 1739: 1709: 1704: 1628: 1623: 1611: 1585: 1546: 1542: 1535: 1533: 1525: 1512: 1507: 1481: 1463: 1457: 1456: 1412: 1407: 1395: 1336: 1331: 1289: 1274: 1268: 1267: 1186: 1164: 1159: 1147: 1047: 1042: 972:Trump Picture!!! 915: 909: 908: 838: 833: 812: 806: 805: 744: 738: 737: 711: 676: 675: 644: 619: 590: 570: 528: 522: 521: 495: 489: 488: 464:WikiEditorial101 420: 403: 397: 396: 381: 369: 357: 345: 285: 280: 268: 220: 197: 128: 123: 111: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5474: 5473: 5469: 5468: 5467: 5465: 5464: 5463: 5454: 5447: 5445: 5424: 5375: 5335: 5292:original source 5197: 5166:Anythingyouwant 5132:Anythingyouwant 5129: 5117:Anythingyouwant 5099:Anythingyouwant 5094: 5065: 5024: 5011: 4848: 4782:128.237.184.222 4737:128.237.184.222 4704:128.237.184.222 4689: 4662:Organized labor 4648: 4638: 4631: 4629: 4618: 4611: 4609: 4599: 4543: 4530: 4523: 4521: 4451: 4446: 4419: 4410: 4374: 4365: 4292: 4283: 4266: 4230: 4221: 4209: 4182: 4171: 4162: 4061: 4048:the ongoing RfC 4019: 4010: 3889: 3880: 3834: 3827: 3818: 3805: 3763: 3730: 3728: 3703: 3696: 3694: 3617: 3604: 3597: 3595: 3586: 3565: 3560: 3545: 3536: 3495: 3462: 3436: 3434: 3405: 3396: 3342: 3333: 3258: 3227: 3216: 3207: 3148: 3010: 2995: 2986: 2976: 2942: 2909: 2900: 2891: 2860: 2851: 2833: 2824: 2799: 2790: 2773: 2730: 2721: 2658: 2649: 2587: 2563: 2531: 2522: 2469: 2460: 2413: 2404: 2370:faith, btw. -- 2358: 2349: 2295: 2286: 2250: 2241: 2162: 2155: 2146: 2137: 2132: 2115: 2092: 2055: 2046: 2020: 2004: 1995: 1935: 1928: 1919: 1910: 1905: 1867: 1858: 1835:Hillary Clinton 1795: 1786: 1752: 1733: 1707: 1698: 1691:your perception 1633: 1626: 1617: 1608: 1603: 1579: 1563:User talk:Dyl1G 1538: 1529: 1527: 1519: 1510: 1501: 1471: 1461: 1452: 1451: 1443:User talk:Dyl1G 1417: 1410: 1401: 1392: 1387: 1334: 1325: 1285: 1272: 1263: 1262: 1182: 1169: 1162: 1153: 1144: 1139: 1076:Hello everyone, 1045: 1036: 974: 913: 904: 903: 878:Hillary Clinton 836: 827: 810: 801: 800: 742: 733: 732: 707: 673: 672: 637: 583: 526: 517: 516: 493: 484: 483: 413: 401: 392: 391: 385: 382: 373: 370: 361: 358: 349: 346: 290: 283: 274: 265: 260: 214: 191: 133: 126: 117: 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5472: 5470: 5462: 5461: 5423: 5420: 5419: 5418: 5417: 5416: 5415: 5414: 5413: 5412: 5367: 5366: 5334: 5331: 5330: 5329: 5299: 5298: 5295: 5285: 5280: 5275: 5269: 5268: 5245: 5244: 5243: 5242: 5228: 5180: 5179: 5178: 5177: 5176: 5093: 5090: 5089: 5088: 5087: 5086: 5049: 5010: 5007: 5006: 5005: 5004: 5003: 5002: 5001: 5000: 4999: 4998: 4997: 4996: 4995: 4952: 4951: 4950: 4949: 4948: 4947: 4946: 4945: 4919: 4918: 4917: 4916: 4898: 4897: 4847: 4844: 4843: 4842: 4841: 4840: 4839: 4838: 4837: 4836: 4835: 4834: 4833: 4832: 4818:biography page 4807: 4688: 4685: 4684: 4683: 4682: 4681: 4680: 4679: 4678: 4677: 4625: 4579: 4578: 4577: 4576: 4575: 4568: 4538: 4537: 4490: 4489: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4470: 4469: 4468: 4467: 4466: 4465: 4462: 4450: 4447: 4443: 4442: 4441: 4440: 4439: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4435: 4434: 4433: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4426: 4330: 4329: 4328: 4327: 4326: 4325: 4324: 4323: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4218: 4159: 4158: 4157: 4156: 4155: 4154: 4153: 4152: 4151: 4150: 4149: 4148: 4147: 4146: 4145: 4144: 4143: 4142: 4141: 4140: 4139: 4138: 4137: 4136: 4135: 4134: 4133: 4132: 4131: 4130: 4028: 4027: 4026: 3984: 3967: 3836: 3835: 3812:Superseded by 3811: 3806: 3804: 3801: 3800: 3799: 3798: 3797: 3767: 3755: 3721: 3720: 3719: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3715: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3711: 3710: 3564: 3561: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3554: 3553: 3552: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3433: 3430: 3429: 3428: 3426: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3422: 3421: 3420: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3415: 3414: 3413: 3412: 3391:WP:How to lose 3364: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3358: 3357: 3356: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3352: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3323: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3256: 3193: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3130: 3129: 3128: 3127: 3126: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3044: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3003: 3002: 2937: 2936: 2845: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2697: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2641: 2640: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2621: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2585: 2539: 2538: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2476: 2340: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2164: 2163: 2143: 2138: 2136: 2133: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2069: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2012: 2011: 1937: 1936: 1916: 1911: 1909: 1906: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1850: 1849: 1823:George W. Bush 1814: 1813: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1775: 1774: 1749: 1748: 1715: 1714: 1694: 1682: 1681: 1635: 1634: 1614: 1609: 1607: 1604: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1571:comment added 1555: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1419: 1418: 1398: 1393: 1391: 1388: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1171: 1170: 1150: 1145: 1143: 1140: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1111:Agree. Can we 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1029: 1028: 1012: 1011: 973: 970: 969: 968: 941: 922: 921: 863: 862: 852:UNSC Luke 1021 848:Change picture 844: 843: 819: 818: 796:Change picture 792: 791: 775:Change picture 771: 770: 757: 756: 755: 754: 753: 752: 751: 750: 717: 716: 700: 699: 685: 662: 648: 633: 632: 631: 630: 629: 628: 512: 511: 504: 503: 502: 501: 475: 474: 444: 443: 425: 424: 387: 386: 383: 376: 374: 371: 364: 362: 359: 352: 350: 347: 340: 333: 332: 318:a fine picture 292: 291: 271: 266: 264: 261: 257: 256: 223: 222: 211: 210: 189: 188: 187: 159:Dr. Fleischman 135: 134: 114: 109: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5471: 5460: 5457: 5452: 5442: 5441: 5440: 5439: 5435: 5431: 5427: 5421: 5411: 5407: 5403: 5398: 5397: 5396: 5392: 5388: 5383: 5382: 5381: 5378: 5371: 5370: 5369: 5368: 5365: 5361: 5357: 5352: 5351: 5350: 5349: 5345: 5341: 5332: 5328: 5324: 5320: 5315: 5314: 5313: 5312: 5308: 5304: 5296: 5293: 5289: 5286: 5284: 5281: 5279: 5276: 5274: 5271: 5270: 5266: 5265: 5264: 5263: 5259: 5255: 5251: 5241: 5237: 5233: 5229: 5226: 5222: 5218: 5214: 5210: 5206: 5201: 5196: 5195: 5194: 5190: 5186: 5181: 5175: 5171: 5167: 5163: 5162: 5157: 5153: 5152: 5151: 5147: 5143: 5139: 5133: 5128: 5127: 5126: 5122: 5118: 5114: 5111: 5110: 5109: 5108: 5104: 5100: 5091: 5085: 5082: 5078: 5075: 5069: 5064: 5063: 5062: 5058: 5054: 5050: 5048: 5044: 5040: 5036: 5035: 5028: 5023: 5022: 5021: 5020: 5017: 5008: 4994: 4991: 4987: 4983: 4982: 4981: 4980: 4979: 4978: 4977: 4976: 4975: 4974: 4973: 4972: 4971: 4970: 4966: 4962: 4959: 4956: 4943: 4942: 4941: 4937: 4933: 4929: 4925: 4924: 4923: 4922: 4921: 4920: 4915: 4911: 4907: 4902: 4901: 4900: 4899: 4896: 4893: 4889: 4885: 4881: 4877: 4876: 4875: 4874: 4870: 4866: 4857: 4852: 4831: 4827: 4823: 4819: 4815: 4811: 4808: 4806: 4802: 4798: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4787: 4783: 4778: 4777: 4776: 4772: 4768: 4764: 4763: 4761: 4757: 4753: 4748: 4747: 4746: 4742: 4738: 4734: 4733: 4732: 4728: 4724: 4720: 4717: 4716: 4715: 4713: 4709: 4705: 4701: 4693: 4686: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4663: 4658: 4652: 4647: 4646: 4645:{{reply to|} 4644: 4641: 4636: 4626: 4624: 4621: 4616: 4603: 4598: 4597: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4584: 4580: 4573: 4569: 4566: 4562: 4558: 4557: 4556: 4555: 4553: 4547: 4542: 4541: 4540: 4539: 4536: 4533: 4528: 4518: 4517: 4516: 4515: 4511: 4507: 4503: 4499: 4495: 4483: 4482: 4481: 4480: 4479: 4478: 4477: 4476:personality: 4475: 4463: 4460: 4459: 4458: 4457: 4456: 4455: 4454: 4448: 4425: 4422: 4417: 4415: 4414: 4407: 4403: 4399: 4398: 4397: 4393: 4389: 4388: 4382: 4381: 4380: 4377: 4372: 4370: 4369: 4362: 4358: 4354: 4353: 4352: 4348: 4344: 4343:Objective3000 4340: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4336: 4335: 4334: 4333: 4332: 4331: 4322: 4318: 4314: 4313: 4307: 4302: 4298: 4295: 4290: 4288: 4287: 4280: 4275: 4270: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4259: 4255: 4254: 4249: 4245: 4243: 4238: 4237: 4236: 4233: 4228: 4226: 4225: 4213: 4208: 4207: 4206: 4202: 4198: 4197: 4192: 4186: 4181: 4180: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4174: 4169: 4167: 4166: 4129: 4125: 4121: 4120:Objective3000 4116: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4101: 4095: 4094: 4093: 4092: 4091: 4088: 4084: 4083: 4082: 4078: 4074: 4073: 4065: 4060: 4059: 4058: 4057: 4056: 4053: 4049: 4045: 4044: 4043: 4039: 4035: 4034: 4029: 4025: 4022: 4017: 4015: 4014: 4007: 4004: 4003: 4002: 4001: 4000: 3996: 3992: 3991: 3985: 3983: 3979: 3975: 3974: 3968: 3966: 3962: 3958: 3957: 3951: 3950: 3949: 3948: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3928: 3924: 3923: 3918: 3913: 3912: 3911: 3910: 3909: 3905: 3901: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3892: 3887: 3885: 3884: 3877: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3858: 3854: 3851: 3847: 3843: 3838: 3837: 3833: 3830: 3825: 3823: 3822: 3815: 3809: 3802: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3783: 3782: 3781: 3777: 3773: 3768: 3766: 3762: 3758: 3754: 3743: 3742: 3741: 3740: 3736: 3734: 3726: 3709: 3706: 3701: 3691: 3687: 3686: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3673: 3669: 3668: 3667: 3663: 3659: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3624: 3623: 3616: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3607: 3602: 3590: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3570: 3562: 3551: 3548: 3543: 3541: 3540: 3532: 3528: 3525: 3524: 3523: 3522: 3515: 3511: 3507: 3506: 3499: 3494: 3493: 3492: 3488: 3484: 3480: 3476: 3472: 3466: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3452: 3448: 3447: 3440: 3431: 3427: 3411: 3408: 3403: 3401: 3400: 3392: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3379: 3378: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3373: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3365: 3348: 3345: 3340: 3338: 3337: 3330: 3326: 3321: 3316: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3298: 3283: 3279: 3275: 3274: 3268: 3262: 3257: 3255: 3251: 3247: 3246: 3241: 3237: 3231: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3222: 3219: 3214: 3212: 3211: 3204: 3200: 3196: 3190: 3189: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3181: 3170: 3166: 3162: 3158: 3152: 3147: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3090: 3086: 3082: 3081:Objective3000 3078: 3077: 3076: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3060: 3056: 3052: 3051: 3045: 3043: 3039: 3035: 3034: 3029: 3024: 3020: 3014: 3009: 3008: 3001: 2998: 2993: 2991: 2990: 2980: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2970: 2965: 2961: 2957: 2953: 2946: 2941: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2935: 2931: 2927: 2926: 2920: 2913: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2903: 2898: 2896: 2895: 2888: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2877: 2873: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2863: 2858: 2856: 2855: 2847: 2846: 2839: 2836: 2831: 2829: 2828: 2821: 2820: 2819: 2815: 2811: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2802: 2797: 2795: 2794: 2787: 2781: 2777: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2765: 2761: 2757: 2753: 2749: 2736: 2733: 2728: 2726: 2725: 2717: 2713: 2709: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2682: 2676: 2675:post election 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2661: 2656: 2654: 2653: 2646: 2639: 2635: 2631: 2626: 2625: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2607: 2602: 2598: 2591: 2590:Objective3000 2586: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2575: 2567: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2544:Objective3000 2537: 2534: 2529: 2527: 2526: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2506: 2495: 2475: 2472: 2467: 2465: 2464: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2443: 2442: 2438: 2434: 2433: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2416: 2411: 2409: 2408: 2400: 2396: 2392: 2388: 2385: 2384: 2383: 2379: 2375: 2374: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2361: 2356: 2354: 2353: 2345: 2338: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2323: 2318: 2314: 2310: 2306: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2298: 2293: 2291: 2290: 2283: 2279: 2275: 2271: 2266: 2265: 2256: 2253: 2248: 2246: 2245: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2231: 2227: 2226: 2220: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2203:Objective3000 2200: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2184: 2179: 2178: 2173: 2172: 2166: 2165: 2161: 2158: 2153: 2151: 2150: 2141: 2134: 2125: 2121: 2118: 2113: 2112: 2105: 2102: 2101: 2097: 2095: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2083: 2079: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2070: 2061: 2058: 2053: 2051: 2050: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2033: 2030: 2029: 2025: 2023: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2010: 2007: 2002: 2000: 1999: 1992: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1984: 1980: 1976: 1972: 1968: 1962: 1957: 1955: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1939: 1938: 1934: 1931: 1926: 1924: 1923: 1914: 1907: 1894: 1890: 1886: 1882: 1878: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1870: 1865: 1863: 1862: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1819:Barrack Obama 1816: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1806: 1801: 1798: 1793: 1791: 1790: 1782: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1764: 1756: 1751: 1750: 1745: 1744: 1737: 1732: 1731: 1730: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1713: 1710: 1705: 1703: 1702: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1683: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1660: 1656: 1655: 1649: 1644: 1643: 1637: 1636: 1632: 1629: 1624: 1622: 1621: 1612: 1605: 1596: 1593: 1589: 1583: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1574: 1570: 1564: 1560: 1549: 1543: 1541: 1534: 1532: 1523: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1513: 1508: 1506: 1505: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1489: 1486: 1479: 1475: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1464: 1458: 1455: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1431: 1427: 1424: 1421: 1420: 1416: 1413: 1408: 1406: 1405: 1396: 1389: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1340: 1337: 1332: 1330: 1329: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1304: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1290: 1288: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1275: 1269: 1266: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1241: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1198: 1194: 1190: 1187: 1185: 1178: 1173: 1172: 1168: 1165: 1160: 1158: 1157: 1148: 1141: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1092: 1091:American flag 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1067: 1063: 1058: 1051: 1048: 1043: 1041: 1040: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1014: 1013: 1010: 1006: 1002: 998: 994: 993: 992: 991: 987: 983: 979: 971: 967: 963: 959: 955: 950: 949: 945: 942: 940: 936: 932: 927: 924: 923: 920: 916: 910: 907: 899: 896: 895: 894: 893: 889: 885: 884: 879: 875: 871: 867: 861: 857: 853: 849: 846: 845: 842: 839: 834: 832: 831: 824: 821: 820: 817: 813: 807: 804: 797: 794: 793: 790: 786: 782: 781: 776: 773: 772: 769: 766: 762: 759: 758: 749: 745: 739: 736: 729: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 715: 710: 705: 702: 701: 698: 694: 690: 686: 684: 681: 679: 678: 677: 667: 663: 661: 657: 653: 649: 647: 643: 640: 635: 634: 627: 624: 622: 617: 616: 613: 610: 607: 604: 601: 595: 594: 593: 589: 586: 580: 579: 578: 575: 573: 568: 567: 564: 561: 558: 555: 552: 548: 544: 540: 539:User:ZiaLater 536: 535: 534: 533: 529: 523: 520: 509: 508: 507: 500: 496: 490: 487: 479: 478: 477: 476: 473: 469: 465: 461: 457: 453: 449: 446: 445: 441: 440: 439: 438: 434: 430: 423: 419: 416: 411: 410: 409: 408: 404: 398: 395: 380: 375: 368: 363: 356: 351: 344: 339: 337: 331: 327: 323: 319: 315: 311: 310: 309: 308: 304: 300: 294: 293: 289: 286: 281: 279: 278: 269: 263:Infobox image 262: 255: 254: 250: 246: 242: 237: 236: 232: 228: 218: 213: 212: 209: 205: 201: 195: 190: 186: 182: 178: 174: 170: 169: 168: 164: 160: 156: 155: 154: 153: 149: 145: 140: 137: 136: 132: 129: 124: 122: 121: 112: 105: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5430:207.245.44.6 5428: 5425: 5336: 5300: 5291: 5246: 5232:Dervorguilla 5221:Donald Trump 5220: 5216: 5212: 5208: 5204: 5160: 5159: 5155: 5142:Dervorguilla 5095: 5068:Dervorguilla 5053:Dervorguilla 5039:Dervorguilla 5033: 5032: 5012: 4953: 4906:Beatitudinem 4883: 4879: 4865:Beatitudinem 4861: 4856:Merkel-Raute 4822:Dervorguilla 4813: 4718: 4698:— Preceding 4694: 4690: 4667:Dervorguilla 4660: 4602:Dervorguilla 4587:Dervorguilla 4582: 4506:Dervorguilla 4491: 4473: 4471: 4452: 4412: 4411: 4387:Gwillhickers 4386: 4367: 4366: 4312:Gwillhickers 4311: 4305: 4285: 4284: 4269:Gwillhickers 4253:Gwillhickers 4252: 4241: 4223: 4222: 4212:Gwillhickers 4196:Gwillhickers 4195: 4190: 4164: 4163: 4100:Gwillhickers 4099: 4072:Gwillhickers 4071: 4033:Gwillhickers 4032: 4012: 4011: 3990:Gwillhickers 3989: 3973:Gwillhickers 3972: 3956:Gwillhickers 3955: 3922:Gwillhickers 3921: 3882: 3881: 3856: 3852: 3839: 3820: 3819: 3772:207.245.44.6 3732: 3722: 3639: 3631: 3621: 3566: 3538: 3537: 3505:Gwillhickers 3504: 3498:Dervorguilla 3483:Dervorguilla 3474: 3470: 3465:Gwillhickers 3446:Gwillhickers 3445: 3435: 3398: 3397: 3382: 3335: 3334: 3273:Gwillhickers 3272: 3266: 3261:Dervorguilla 3245:Gwillhickers 3244: 3209: 3208: 3161:Dervorguilla 3156: 3151:Gwillhickers 3116:MelanieN alt 3050:Gwillhickers 3049: 3033:Gwillhickers 3032: 3027: 3022: 3018: 2988: 2987: 2951: 2945:Gwillhickers 2925:Gwillhickers 2924: 2918: 2893: 2892: 2872:MelanieN alt 2853: 2852: 2826: 2825: 2810:MelanieN alt 2792: 2791: 2776:MelanieN alt 2760:MelanieN alt 2748:MelanieN alt 2745: 2723: 2722: 2711: 2681:Gwillhickers 2680: 2674: 2651: 2650: 2644: 2642: 2630:MelanieN alt 2606:Gwillhickers 2605: 2600: 2596: 2574:Gwillhickers 2573: 2540: 2524: 2523: 2505:Gwillhickers 2504: 2500: 2462: 2461: 2454: 2450: 2432:Gwillhickers 2431: 2406: 2405: 2394: 2390: 2373:Gwillhickers 2372: 2351: 2350: 2322:Gwillhickers 2321: 2288: 2287: 2243: 2242: 2225:Gwillhickers 2224: 2183:Gwillhickers 2182: 2176: 2170: 2167: 2148: 2147: 2099: 2093: 2068: 2048: 2047: 2027: 2021: 1997: 1996: 1965:— Preceding 1958: 1952:has agreed, 1948:has agreed, 1944:has agreed, 1940: 1921: 1920: 1860: 1859: 1827:Bill Clinton 1788: 1787: 1763:Gwillhickers 1762: 1742: 1716: 1700: 1699: 1690: 1686: 1654:Gwillhickers 1653: 1648:good support 1641: 1638: 1619: 1618: 1556: 1540:open channel 1539: 1530: 1503: 1502: 1453: 1433: 1428: 1425: 1422: 1403: 1402: 1327: 1326: 1286: 1264: 1183: 1174: 1155: 1154: 1112: 1094: 1090: 1059: 1056: 1038: 1037: 977: 975: 953: 948:Gwillhickers 947: 943: 925: 905: 897: 883:Gwillhickers 882: 865: 864: 847: 829: 828: 822: 802: 795: 780:Gwillhickers 779: 774: 760: 734: 708: 703: 689:Anjo-sozinho 674:CatcherStorm 671: 670: 620: 614: 611: 608: 605: 602: 599: 571: 565: 562: 559: 556: 553: 550: 546: 518: 513: 505: 485: 426: 393: 388: 335: 295: 276: 275: 238: 224: 141: 138: 119: 118: 78: 43: 37: 5402:50.0.136.56 5303:Malerooster 5200:Bodhi Peace 5156:of the lead 5074:Der Spiegel 5072:The recent 5027:Polentarion 4932:Jack Upland 4657:TV producer 4248:current RfC 3842:this secton 3019:only reason 2756:WP:INVOLVED 2645:admin input 2397:consensus. 1590:. Enjoy! — 1567:—Preceding 1526:Agreed. - 1363:Jack Upland 1018:Markbassett 245:hvacrmaster 243:) instead. 106:New picture 36:This is an 5183:father. -- 4583:introduces 4306:Discussion 3846:John Cline 3814:active RfC 3787:PackMecEng 3192:difficult. 2960:WP:ILIKEIT 2712:constantly 1736:Proud User 1671:Proud User 299:John Cline 177:Fyddlestix 98:Archive 40 90:Archive 36 85:Archive 35 79:Archive 34 73:Archive 33 68:Archive 32 60:Archive 30 5448:MordeKyle 5138:MOS:INTRO 4651:MordeKyle 4632:MordeKyle 4612:MordeKyle 4546:MordeKyle 4524:MordeKyle 4474:and radio 3723:Also see 3697:MordeKyle 3632:expecting 3598:MordeKyle 3479:Roosevelt 3236:RfC above 3157:listening 2094:SPECIFICO 2022:SPECIFICO 1991:wikibreak 1908:New photo 1435:Example 2 1430:Example 1 1230:be used. 1226:was that 1095:image # 2 982:Subman758 954:Knowledge 931:Nagylelkű 823:No change 761:No change 372:Image 3 348:Image 1 5387:MelanieN 5356:MelanieN 5340:MelanieN 5319:MelanieN 4961:Activist 4928:deletion 4719:Disagree 4700:unsigned 4552:WP:BEGIN 4413:Mandruss 4368:Mandruss 4286:Mandruss 4224:Mandruss 4185:Mandruss 4165:Mandruss 4013:Mandruss 3938:MelanieN 3883:Mandruss 3850:ZiaLater 3821:Mandruss 3731:General 3674:Cheers! 3622:¡gobble! 3539:Mandruss 3439:Mandruss 3399:Mandruss 3387:WP:STICK 3336:Mandruss 3230:MelanieN 3210:Mandruss 3013:Mandruss 2989:Mandruss 2912:MelanieN 2894:Mandruss 2854:Mandruss 2827:Mandruss 2793:Mandruss 2780:MelanieN 2724:Mandruss 2652:Mandruss 2566:Mandruss 2525:Mandruss 2463:Mandruss 2407:Mandruss 2352:Mandruss 2317:80 times 2289:Mandruss 2274:WP:STICK 2244:Mandruss 2149:Mandruss 2078:Hilltrot 2049:Mandruss 1998:Mandruss 1979:contribs 1971:User1937 1967:unsigned 1922:Mandruss 1861:Mandruss 1789:Mandruss 1755:Mandruss 1701:Mandruss 1620:Mandruss 1522:Mandruss 1504:Mandruss 1478:ZiaLater 1454:ZiaLater 1404:Mandruss 1328:Mandruss 1265:ZiaLater 1232:Primefac 1205:Done. -- 1156:Mandruss 1039:Mandruss 1034:Agree. ― 1001:MelanieN 906:ZiaLater 898:Comment: 830:Mandruss 803:ZiaLater 735:ZiaLater 704:Comment: 537:I think 519:ZiaLater 486:ZiaLater 456:ZiaLater 452:ZiaLater 448:ZiaLater 394:ZiaLater 360:Image 2 297:serve.-- 277:Mandruss 120:Mandruss 5097:wealth. 5037:..." -- 4406:WP:NPOV 4361:WP:ANEW 4279:WP:IDHT 3733:Ization 3569:elected 3383:process 3267:context 3199:WP:NPOV 3023:readers 2964:WP:JDLI 2952:another 2919:readers 2716:WP:NPOV 2601:Enquire 2389:I said 2270:WP:IDHT 1569:undated 1531:Mlpearc 1113:at last 944:Comment 926:Comment 227:Reollun 217:Reollun 194:Reollun 144:Reollun 39:archive 5376:Bastun 5205:Forbes 5113:Here's 4655:No. A 4357:WP:ANI 4115:WP:AGF 4087:zzuuzz 4064:Zzuuzz 4052:zzuuzz 3676:Tylr00 3658:Tylr00 3644:Sg7438 3589:Sg7438 3573:Sg7438 2956:WP:CCC 2344:WP:ANI 2337:WP:AGF 2313:ignore 2199:WP:AGF 1829:, and 1808:Hello 1729:Dyl1G 1292:(talk) 1189:(talk) 870:POLICY 481:bad.-- 460:Stemoc 200:Jarble 5297:more… 5250:WP:OR 5223:". (" 4191:quote 3853:et al 2278:WP:DE 2076:suck. 1719:Dyl1G 1582:Dyl1G 1559:Dyl1G 1474:Dyl1G 1439:Dyl1G 1224:above 1220:TBM10 1207:TBM10 1062:Dyl1G 997:above 709:Chase 16:< 5434:talk 5406:talk 5391:talk 5360:talk 5344:talk 5323:talk 5307:talk 5258:talk 5236:talk 5189:talk 5170:talk 5146:talk 5121:talk 5103:talk 5081:Talk 5057:talk 5043:talk 5034:heir 5016:Talk 4990:Talk 4965:talk 4936:talk 4910:talk 4892:Talk 4869:talk 4854:The 4826:talk 4801:talk 4786:talk 4771:talk 4756:talk 4741:talk 4727:talk 4708:talk 4671:talk 4665:. -- 4591:talk 4510:talk 4504:. -- 4392:talk 4347:talk 4317:talk 4258:talk 4201:talk 4124:talk 4105:talk 4077:talk 4038:talk 3995:talk 3978:talk 3961:talk 3942:talk 3927:talk 3904:talk 3865:talk 3791:talk 3776:talk 3761:cont 3757:talk 3752:OTTO 3748:ARTH 3680:talk 3670:See 3662:talk 3648:talk 3634:the 3577:talk 3571:... 3510:talk 3487:talk 3451:talk 3278:talk 3250:talk 3234:The 3165:talk 3120:talk 3085:talk 3055:talk 3038:talk 2930:talk 2876:talk 2814:talk 2778:and 2764:talk 2752:talk 2686:talk 2634:talk 2611:talk 2579:talk 2548:talk 2510:talk 2437:talk 2378:talk 2327:talk 2272:and 2230:talk 2207:talk 2188:talk 2177:here 2174:and 2171:here 2100:talk 2082:talk 2028:talk 1975:talk 1889:talk 1881:here 1843:talk 1768:talk 1723:talk 1675:talk 1659:talk 1476:and 1462:talk 1367:talk 1300:coi) 1273:talk 1236:talk 1211:talk 1197:coi) 1121:talk 1103:talk 1066:talk 1022:talk 1005:talk 999:. -- 986:talk 962:talk 935:talk 914:talk 888:talk 856:talk 811:talk 785:talk 743:talk 693:talk 656:talk 621:TALK 572:TALK 527:talk 494:talk 468:talk 433:talk 402:talk 326:talk 303:talk 249:talk 231:talk 204:talk 181:talk 173:here 171:See 163:talk 148:talk 5227:".) 5211:to 5185:Bod 4810:Bod 4797:Bod 4762:~~ 4752:Bod 4723:Bod 3857:not 3331:. ― 2979:JFG 2969:JFG 2455:RfC 2451:RfC 2395:RfC 2391:RfC 2284:. ― 2120:moc 2117:Ste 1993:. ― 1592:JFG 1565:) 1485:JFG 1296:vbm 1193:vbm 980:?-- 765:JFG 642:moc 639:Ste 588:moc 585:Ste 543:3RR 418:moc 415:Ste 5450:} 5436:) 5408:) 5393:) 5362:) 5354:-- 5346:) 5325:) 5317:-- 5309:) 5260:) 5252:. 5238:) 5213:10 5191:) 5172:) 5164:". 5148:) 5123:) 5105:) 5059:) 5045:) 4967:) 4938:) 4912:) 4871:) 4828:) 4803:) 4795:-- 4788:) 4773:) 4758:) 4750:-- 4743:) 4729:) 4710:) 4673:) 4634:} 4614:} 4593:) 4554:- 4526:} 4512:) 4500:; 4394:) 4359:, 4349:) 4319:) 4260:) 4203:) 4126:) 4107:) 4079:) 4040:) 3997:) 3980:) 3963:) 3944:) 3936:-- 3929:) 3906:) 3867:) 3848:, 3793:) 3778:) 3699:} 3682:) 3664:) 3650:) 3618:🍁 3600:} 3579:) 3512:) 3489:) 3453:) 3280:) 3252:) 3167:) 3122:) 3087:) 3057:) 3040:) 2962:/ 2932:) 2878:) 2816:) 2766:) 2758:. 2688:) 2636:) 2613:) 2581:) 2550:) 2512:) 2439:) 2380:) 2329:) 2232:) 2209:) 2190:) 2084:) 1981:) 1977:• 1891:) 1845:) 1825:, 1821:, 1770:) 1725:) 1677:) 1669:-- 1661:) 1465:) 1437:-- 1369:) 1298:· 1294:· 1276:) 1238:) 1213:) 1195:· 1191:· 1123:) 1105:) 1060:-- 1024:) 1007:) 988:) 964:) 937:) 917:) 890:) 858:) 814:) 787:) 746:) 712:| 695:) 658:) 609:ge 560:ge 530:) 497:) 470:) 435:) 405:) 328:) 305:) 251:) 233:) 225:-- 206:) 183:) 165:) 150:) 142:-- 94:→ 64:← 5455:☢ 5446:{ 5432:( 5404:( 5389:( 5358:( 5342:( 5321:( 5305:( 5294:) 5290:( 5256:( 5234:( 5217:5 5209:1 5202:: 5198:@ 5187:( 5168:( 5144:( 5134:: 5130:@ 5119:( 5101:( 5070:: 5066:@ 5055:( 5041:( 5029:: 5025:@ 4984:" 4963:( 4934:( 4908:( 4867:( 4824:( 4799:( 4784:( 4769:( 4754:( 4739:( 4725:( 4706:( 4669:( 4653:: 4649:@ 4639:☢ 4630:{ 4619:☢ 4610:{ 4604:: 4600:@ 4589:( 4574:. 4567:. 4548:: 4544:@ 4531:☢ 4522:{ 4508:( 4420:☎ 4390:( 4375:☎ 4345:( 4315:( 4293:☎ 4271:: 4267:@ 4256:( 4244:, 4231:☎ 4214:: 4210:@ 4199:( 4187:: 4183:@ 4172:☎ 4122:( 4103:( 4075:( 4066:: 4062:@ 4036:( 4020:☎ 3993:( 3976:( 3959:( 3940:( 3925:( 3902:( 3890:☎ 3863:( 3828:☎ 3789:( 3774:( 3759:• 3750:B 3746:D 3704:☢ 3695:{ 3678:( 3660:( 3646:( 3605:☢ 3596:{ 3591:: 3587:@ 3575:( 3546:☎ 3508:( 3500:: 3496:@ 3485:( 3469:" 3467:: 3463:@ 3449:( 3441:: 3437:@ 3406:☎ 3343:☎ 3322:. 3276:( 3263:: 3259:@ 3248:( 3232:: 3228:@ 3217:☎ 3163:( 3153:: 3149:@ 3118:( 3083:( 3053:( 3036:( 3015:: 3011:@ 2996:☎ 2981:: 2977:@ 2947:: 2943:@ 2928:( 2914:: 2910:@ 2901:☎ 2889:― 2874:( 2861:☎ 2849:― 2834:☎ 2812:( 2800:☎ 2782:: 2774:@ 2762:( 2750:( 2731:☎ 2719:― 2684:( 2659:☎ 2632:( 2609:( 2592:: 2588:@ 2577:( 2568:: 2564:@ 2546:( 2532:☎ 2520:― 2508:( 2470:☎ 2458:― 2435:( 2414:☎ 2402:― 2376:( 2359:☎ 2325:( 2296:☎ 2251:☎ 2228:( 2205:( 2186:( 2156:☎ 2080:( 2056:☎ 2005:☎ 1973:( 1929:☎ 1887:( 1868:☎ 1841:( 1812:, 1796:☎ 1766:( 1757:: 1753:@ 1738:: 1734:@ 1721:( 1708:☎ 1673:( 1657:( 1627:☎ 1584:: 1580:@ 1561:( 1544:) 1536:( 1524:: 1520:@ 1511:☎ 1480:: 1472:@ 1459:( 1441:( 1411:☎ 1365:( 1335:☎ 1287:ɱ 1270:( 1234:( 1209:( 1184:ɱ 1163:☎ 1119:( 1101:( 1064:( 1046:☎ 1020:( 1003:( 984:( 960:( 933:( 911:( 886:( 854:( 837:☎ 808:( 783:( 740:( 691:( 654:( 615:s 612:r 606:g 603:a 600:W 566:s 563:r 557:g 554:a 551:W 524:( 491:( 466:( 431:( 399:( 324:( 301:( 284:☎ 247:( 229:( 219:: 215:@ 202:( 196:: 192:@ 179:( 161:( 146:( 127:☎ 50:.

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

Index