Talk:Death and state funeral of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani

5719:, and I realized that if you remove Larry Sanger from his work in the founding and policy making positions of the encyclopedia, you'd have a very different Knowledge. It would not be the same thing. I'm not conversational enough in it to give an apt descriptor, but I know that the history of key foundational Knowledge events and pioneers contains Larry Sanger's wisdom, attention, and direction. Sanger still has energy and drive enough to criticize Knowledge, so it'd be really nice if he got some of that off his chest and came back as a regular editor, or at least joined some discussions. 1421:, 'state funeral' unambiguously defines the topic scope. Removing the word 'state' no longer precisely defines the article by these standards. It is misleading to suggest that, to take a fatuous example, 'Death and funeral of my gran' is be functionally equivalent to 'Death and funeral of ...'. There is a level to state funerals that goes far above a simple funeral, and it would be wrong - and imprecise - to conflate these in article names. This is why the addition of the word 'state' where appropriate 1875:, the extra word is largely redundant and AFAIK the final 'private' ceremonies and/or burial are ordinarily covered briefly by us as well - though by their very nature - the final ceremonies are private, largely unreported, wholly un-broadcast and adequately covered by a sentence or two to outline how the person's body was finally dealt with and final farewells said by those closest to the individual in their private life. It is obvious that the title primarily refers to the public 74: 53: 2055:

wielding a large weapon to immediately shoot down views contrarian to you own, instead of perhaps reading and absorbing. I wonder if the note to Closer that you generated before any of the debate was started - implying the implications after a particular outcome - has also unconsciously biased the debate. A cycle of Oppose / Shoot / Oppose / Shoot / Support / Support / Oppose / Shoot, with comments such as

163: 142: 173: 22: 1589:

why? You could simply keep quiet and trust the eventual closer. I don't think it was appropriate for you to say my comment was 'a waste of time' and effectively address the eventual closer to ignore it. Nor do I think you needed to state "I'm arguing and you're not". There are kinder ways to say "Can you please support your arguments by referring to specific policies"

1359:- While it is true that "death and funeral" is easier to absorb for an everyday person, I feel we should not compromise the true meaning of separating the difference between "state funeral" and a conventional funeral. Per some other points provided above for the opposes, I feel that we should keep "state funeral" in the names of these heads of state. 5715:, so I haven't really taken the other viewpoint in enough to make a mental map and understand it. My apologies if it read kind of direct, but since I didn't assume total good faith and made more of a flippant comment, I didn't seek out the backstory. My passive aggressive apologies. On the very positive end, writing that has made me consider 1051:: I see no need to rename such set categories just because the attribute is no longer in the title. Most article are categorised by multiple attributes which are not included in the title. For example, Queen Elizabeth II died in September 2022 and her funeral was in London, but "September 2022 in London" is nor part of the title. 4174:- the funeral service or ceremony itself is usually a small part of the overall state funeral. There's normally a lying-in-state, processions, formal state or political tributes, etc, that form part of the state funeral in addition to the funeral itself. These articles cover all of these aspects, so should be named accordingly. 3949:

at those locations I fail to see how they would be more appropriate titles for the pages in question now. Given the scale of the changes proposed, I also feel this is the wrong venue for this discussion. While Rafsanjani was an important figure, the proposed changes affect a number of far more high-profile articles including

3167:

Gnews for the phrase "the weather in", it stops at 309 results. If I filter to only articles within the last year, it still gives me about the same number. All that is to say, I would not rely on GNews hits here. But your earlier Jstor experiments stand on more solid ground. You could also try ngrams.

3948:

arguments to move away from the current practice are not convincing and subjects are properly and commonly referred to as state funerals. I also feel obliged to point out that more than half of the proposed titles are redlinks - if nobody has even deemed it necessary or worthwhile to create redirects

3475:

One more policy to throw at you and this one actually is policy. WP:IAR. You can quote any rule you like in support of this and try and WP:BLUDGEON your way to getting your own way but ignoring them in this instance improves Knowledge as it provides a distinction between a regular funeral and a state

2054:

address policy, rather than at least waiting 48 hours to see what views are out there, in my opinion is a process that is far from helpful, as it will discourage debate. You are passionate about policy, whereas others appear to be passionate about content, and thats fine; but you are coming across as

1290:

And you miss my point, which is that the greater specificity does not help. It does not help identify the topic, it does not resolve ambiguity, and it does not reflect common usage in scholarly sources. So no positives; and the downside is that it may mislead about the scope, because while the word

393:

pages requested for move. Just moving a subset of these articles would introduce inconsistency in article titling. I see that these were listed in alphabetical order, which explains why this discussion is on the talk page of a person whose name begins with "A". Some here may have missed that a recent

4624:

is a markedly distinct and notable event; including that fact in the title is appropriate. If it were no different to 'normal' funerary ritual, why do we have a fairly lengthy standalone article on the topic? Adding one little five letter adjective is not larding the title with excess words, and the

3166:

But to further complicate matters, I think there's some fuzzing going on behind the Google algorithm. I strongly suspect that, for queries that match a large number of stories, Google News will just peter out after a certain point rather than giving you an exhaustive list. For example, when I search

1588:

I feel I must also note that - and I accept you may not realise or intend it - some of your responses here come across as unnecessarily antagonistic. You have replied to a lot of 'oppose' votes to essentially tell people they're wrong. If your argument is so strong and the oppose arguments so weak -

5299:

Consider the distinction between a state funeral such as that of Reagan versus non-state funeral such as that of Thatcher or Gorbahev or MLK. It's a much much smaller distinction that between the funeral of Thatcher and yer average citizen. You desire to use "state" as a type-distinguisher places

5272:

Your latest reply affirms that you can identify no policy basis for your !vote, and that you prefer to complain about the apparently outrageous fact that someone has politely asked you to explain your rationale, and politely challenged your replies. That's what rational debate looks like. Complain

5227:

the first time you've opted to single me out for special criticism as if I were some special kind of stupid who needed some special kind of badgering reeducation, either — so I really think I deserve to know why you go straight to "attack Bearcat while leaving other people who agree with him alone"

4826:

a state funeral to take place anyway — but absolutely none of those actually have their own articles as separate topics from the person's life and work.) And the fact that non-state funerals can still be public events sometimes is precisely a reason to maintain the distinction in article titles: if

3601:

State funerals, unlike specific minidresses, are often seared into the collective memory of a nation's populace and act as protracted national honors for duty done. They are not just funerals. I have yet to understand why editors here are saying that a shorter name is the proper Knowledge name when

357:

not just by considering the preferences of the participants in a given discussion, but also by evaluating their arguments, assigning due weight accordingly, and giving due consideration to the relevant consensus of the Knowledge community in general as reflected in applicable policy, guidelines and

5504:

Note too that all the facts I have asserted above were also readily available to Bearcat, if he had chosen to check before making assertions. But Bearcat prefers to make rigid, no-exception assertions, with bolding and italicisation, and reacts with indignant hostility to evidence which disproves

4074:

The phrase 'State funeral' unambiguously signals the fact that, as well as being noteworthy individuals who have died, these people were given a rare national honour in the way that their deaths were marked. This is a key aspect of the topical scope of all these articles; the inclusion of the word

3154:

I don't think these numbers are supporting your argument the way you think they do. "funeral of Queen Elizabeth II" is a substring of "state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II", so the search results for the latter will be a subset of the former. Your numbers would suggest that, of the 172 news sources

2561:

because "state" is unnecessary for a clear and unambiguous title in each case, and because, as stated above, the articles may in some cases (eq QE2) go beyond the "state funeral" to describe any private commemorations so that including "state" in the title misleadingly suggests a narrowing of the

2247:

without the unnecessary disambiguation of "state". No one can point to any articles where there are both state and non-state funerals for the same individual and they need to be distinguished; and let's face it, if there was such a case with multiple funerals, any coverage of the non-state funeral

378:

criterion. The topical scope of the article seems unambiguously defined without "state" – a state funeral is a funeral, and these articles cover private ceremonies as well, albeit to a lesser extent than the public ceremonies. However exceptions to the precision criterion may sometimes result from

2931:

further to my opposition above a lot of editors are citing WP:COMMONNAME as an argument in support of this move, as is the opener in their badgering and almost borderline harassment of editors with opposing viewpoints. BBC, Sky News and Time all refer to the funeral of the queen as being a state

2960:

Yes of course, the phrase "state funeral" was used by news outlets, because the status of the ceremony was "state funeral". However, that is not in dispute: nobody in this discussion is suggesting that it was not a "state funeral". The issue is whether that phrase needs to be included in the

1944:

Seriously?????? I’ve seen some ridiculous move, delete and merge requests since the Queen sadly passed but this one takes the biscuit. Others have put the reasons why across better than I will but it’s as simple as this. This was a state funeral fact and that should clearly be reflected in the

1521:

I, on the other hand, am arguing on a per-category record; that the distinction between 'funeral' and 'state funeral' is important enough that it should be noted. This argument is on a level removed from an individual person; it doesn't matter to me if there is another Dave Jones who has had a

1335:

is misdescriptive due to the inclusion of the "state" qualifier: the article covers not only the death and the "state" funeral (as indicated by the title), but the semi-private (limited to 800 guests) committal service and the private interment service. Both of these would be expected to have

3587:? I would say no, and for the same reasons that I support the moves under discussion here. Titles should generally be no more specific than necessary. Moreover, while some sources do refer to it as a "Union Jack minidress", there are more sources that simply call it the "Union Jack dress". 2077:: ideally, all editors would uphold decent standards, and there would be no need to remind them that arguments not based in policy carry no weight. Sadly, that is not the case here, which is why I have been trying to point editors towards constructive debate, i.e. debate founded in policy. 2025:

That has not been the case here, where a flurry of editors have made !votes whilst demonstrating complete ignorance of the principles by which articles are named. These are in fact "arguments in place of policy", and in practice most of them are "arguments in flagrant defiance of policy".

3897:

I understand why the original nomination is made, but "state funeral" means something different than "funeral" and using the more specific title provides additional meaning. It is not additionally precise, and distinguishes public events intermingled with government from private events.

402:. However that notice has already been archived! Ideally this high-profile article should have been made "primary topic" for this discussion, and listed at the top, with the others listed below it in alpha order. I commend the nominator for her thoroughness, but she missed at least one: 1517:

You are, I think, being needlessly pedantic. You appear to be arguing that because there isn't a Dave Jones (to use a stand-in name for any and all actual examples) who has had a funeral, his article doesn't need to say he had a state funeral. You are therefore arguing on a per-person

1007:- State funerals are only for heads of state, and should be so named. And they are officially referred to as state funerals when covered by the media. Who is Knowledge to decide that they know better that the world media, and government protocols, about how they name their funerals? 4764:

include the word "state", because any article which covers both state funeral and a separate private funeral is clearly mislabelled if it uses only the term "state funeral". I am not aware of any article on this list where we have split out the private funeral to a separate article.

3776:

is "a ceremony connected with the final disposition of a corpse, such as a burial or cremation, with the attendant observances." Therefore a state funeral is a very different thing to any old funeral and losing the word "state" would change the very meaning of the article's title.

2080:

I find it bizarre and Kafka-esque that you claim that is somehow not constructive to ask editors to avoid cluttering the page with argument which ignore policy, and even more bizarre that you did so while making no reproach to those who ignore policy. Whatever your intent, the

5500:

So the distinction is of status, not of type. A state funeral is a posh funeral, and a lying in state is a posh wake. So the word "state" is not needed to remove ambiguity, and it is not needed for scope ... and adding a word to a title to denote status is not part of

2372:

Though I agree with the moves, I can understand why other Wikipedians want to differentiate state funerals from regular funerals and therefore consider the word 'state' necessary to these titles. The question is more one of interpretation and article scope than policy.

1879:

event iro figures such as QEII, Churchill, Mandela etc. so no useful purpose is served by the - at best, marginally - more precise title. Yes it is true that a state funeral is - in most countries - a rare honour, but there is no necessity for the title to record that.

5396:(either in the Hall of Honour or in the Senate Chamber), while a non-state funeral does not, which in and of itself makes a state funeral logistically and historically and notability-wise a very different thing than even an elaborate ceremonial but not-state funeral. 1694:

All I'm saying is that, if each of you thinks the other has been insulting, but you both want a friendly discussion, the easiest thing might be to just forget the previous comments move on civilly. Anyway, this isn't my discussion so I'm going to keep quiet now!

1922:

as the proposed titles appear sufficiently clear and precise in the absence of separate articles dedicated to the private funerals. If anything, the current titles are overly precise for cases where the private funeral activites are also covered by the articles.

2433:

a matter of interpretation. Adding the word "state" does not in any way make the title more precise or less ambiguous. Despite numerous requests, nobody in this discussion has identified even one example where omitting "state" would make the topic harder to

4117:

I don't think that there's a difference in scope; it's just that, in my opinion, "Death and state funeral..." unambiguously defines the topical scope of the article (to use the wording of the policy), whereas "Death and funeral of..." defines it rather more

2248:

would logically be in the same article. Finally, it avoids the pointless sidebar arguments we frequently see about whether a particular government-sponsored event is a funeral or something else; or whether it is a funeral but maybe not a state funeral (e.g.

5581:, I see by your user page that you live in Ireland, so maybe you were not aware that State Funerals in the US are generallly on a Federal level, and always for an elected official or a highly appointed office holder/official, such as Supreme Court Justice 1185:: I am not aware of any case where a Knowledge article on the "Death and state funeral of Foo" is accompanied by another article on the same person with the title e.g. ""Private funeral of Foo". If I have missed some, please can you post some examples. 4757:, but in all cases their deaths fly past GNG. State funerals are held for people whose deaths are even more significant than those deaths, and the lack of a state ceremony would not have pushed Reagan or QEII or Rafsanjani into non-notable territory. 3112:

Regardless I’ve said my piece. You continue to disrupt this discussion with your constant bludgeoning anyone who disagrees with you and continue to harass other Wikipedians rather than treating them with respect (which is policy). I’m done with you

5733:

Not sure you messed up. At least as far as this one goes. Yes you could have detailed your reasoning more but you made the right decision. Precisely one person took issue with this close on your talk page and no prizes for guessing who that was

2932:

funeral in a quick search so if WP:COMMONNAME applies it clearly supports the name as it currently stands. I cannot comment on the rest of the, frankly ridiculous sized, mountain of articles being considered but suspect the same applies there

2112:

I will desist immediately; my comments on the Requested Move are as above. I am not attacking any editor. I am pointing out that it is the behaviour or conduct of the debate, not the quality of arguments on policy, that i find disappointing.

1216:. This is not uncommon for heads of state of any nation to have a public service followed by a private service. I don't know if there are separate Knowledge articles on the private services, but for heads of state it's normal to have both. 3127:

Dave, my replies to you have been thoroughly civil. Consensus-building requires attention to policy and to evidence, and I am sad that your response to an editor who produces evidence is so hostile. That hostility is not respectful.

5359:, so I'm entitled to offer my opinion without having to put up with a constant jackhammering of endless ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping-ping of neverending criticism. 351:!votes, by my count, were 10–23 (30% support). Since reopening, another eleven opposes checked in, against no more supports, so now there is just 23% support. Among administrators, I see two supports vs. four opposes. But, of course 422:", prior to this requested move, that the distinction between state and ceremonial funerals is sufficiently important to merit inclusion of "state" in article titles. To borrow a term used in Knowledge categorization, "state" is a " 2133:

Instead you attacked me for asking editors to focus on policy, and for reminding them that the closer is obliged to disregard arguments not based on policy. A retraction would have been nice, but thank you for agreeing to desist.

5260:

I chose to reply to you because your !vote seems to contain novel rationales which don't seem to me to be founded in policy, and which seem to me to use poor logic. So I tried to engage you in civil debate: I did not in any way

2415:, which states that 'titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that.' In this case your interpretation of what 'no more precise' means differs from that of others. 3490:

Somehow I didn’t think so. Sums up your behaviour. Bludgeon those with opinions other than yours. Accuse them of personally abusing you when they stand up to you. Don’t have the backbone to follow through on your accusations

3307:

This coming from a person whose breaches of WP:BLUDGEON in this discussion are so plain you can’t even defend them other than saying that it isn’t policy (though it is good etiquette, civil behaviour and touches on policy in

5529:

This feels unnecessarily aggressive, I think it would be worth revising this to include your disagreements with Bearcat's points without the broader attacks on Bearcat themself, particularly given the editing restriction at

410:

might find another). That makes this proposal go against the consistency criterion. As it may be necessary to favor one or more of these goals over the others, the consensus here is to favor consistency over concision and

5603:: actually, I was aware of that criterion. I just don't see how it has any relevance whatsoever to this discussion about article titles, and I still don't see any relevance. The only fact that I see as relevant is that 1054:

It seems that you may have misunderstood this proposal. It is not a plan to somehow pretend that these state funerals are not state funerals; it just a proposal to follow the conciseness principle of the naming policy

299: 4737:: on the contrary, most of these deaths would have been highly notable because of the death of that person was of itself a highly notable event, regardless of the nature of the funeral. There was no state funeral for 4821:

funeral. (Canada, too, has had "national funerals" for a selection of people who weren't eligible for a state funeral on political grounds, but were still deemed culturally or socially important enough for something

1713:

I apologise for the first comment, I didn't intend that to be hostile but I accept it was poorly worded. I'm baffled as to the issue with the second comment, however, and don't understand how that caused offence.

1488:

But that leaves with no editor having identified any of article(s) nominated where removal of the word "state" would cause ambiguity, or otherwise make the articles hard to find or identify. I fact, I don't see

1858:, it is more often than not the "state" character of the funeral that makes the funeral notable. Removingfrom the article article the word that is most clearly linked to its relevance can not be a clever move. 5585:. You mention above that Coretta Scott King never had a state funeral. Neither she not her husband MLK had held elective or appointed government office. No matter how loved they were, they were not eligile. 4046:

In Kennedy's case (and a few others) his death and funeral warrant separate articles, so it makes sense to keep the current convention in these cases where the article is purely about the state funeral itself.

1751:), so only a small subset would apply to articles pertaining to particular individuals, such as the list of people that are the subject of this requested move. Having made myself familiar with the policy under 3034:

policy. And the reason I have replied to so many !votes here is that so many editors have either ignored that policy or failed to apply it properly. I would be delighted to find that editors actually studied

2283:

That distinction is debatable, because the gap is not as big as claimed. Some funerals are not formally labelled as "state funerals" yet share many similar characteristics. See e.g. para 3 of the lead of

455: 4093:: what exactly is difference in scope between e.g. "Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan" "Death and funeral of Ronald Reagan"? What aspects of the topic are included in one but not in the other? 4506:

itself states that it must be balanced "with sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area." The proposed change introduces ambiguity, contrary to

1659:: if H. Carver chooses to conduct themselves with proper civility, by basing their comments on policy and refraining from their ad hominems, then I will be very happy to have a friendly discussion. 4175: 4048: 3954: 2717:

The checks I have done on JSTOR show that in reliable sources they are overwhelmingly just called "funeral", not "state funeral". The data is posted above, timestamped 02:09, 25 September 2022.

5339:

Firstly, I don't do "novel" reasoning — you're free to agree or disagree with my reasoning, but you're not free to claim that my reasoning is inherently invalid or "novel". Policy doesn't back

5239:, and the other type of thing may sometimes be notable enough for an article and sometimes not. It's really that simple, and I don't need to keep arguing the same point over and over again. 3262:

Many people are asking why on earth someone would nominate the removal of the word state from the title of events that were state funerals and then WP:BLUDGEON anyone who disagrees with them

2541: 2270: 1265:

Assuming this is a valid argument, I fail to see how removing 'state' improves anything. By your argument, it would still 'misleadingly that the article does not go beyond the funeral.'

1241:

Using the term "state funeral" in the title is not just un-needed precision; it is worse than that, because it misleadingly implies that the article does not go beyond the state funeral.

5748:

Didn't mess up at all, the original close of "no move" makes even more sense now. I had somehow missed that a close had been made and retracted, and thought it was a straight relisting.

3602:

the descriptor 'State' on these pages contains both the officially accurate and the powerful emotionally-shared-by-millions titling included in the important and correct descriptor. See

1903:

is clear and there's virtually no risk of ambiguity. Elizabeth II, for example, did not have a state and a none-state funeral, and I imagine this is true of everyone in the list above.

5534:"Should BrownHairedGirl behave uncivilly or make personal attacks, she may be blocked first for twelve hours and then for a duration at the discretion of the blocking administrator." 5016:

has fifty entries, but only two with a standalone article, neither of which has a title including the term "funeral", let alone "state funeral". In the last 50 years, there have been

1805:: I agree that we should use the COMMONNAME. However, neither you nor anyone else in this discussion has even attempted to provide any evidence that the COMMONNAME includes "state". 399: 689: 4917:

Sorry, I'm not playing that game. It's there in your comments about Thatcher, but since you can't or won't acknowledge having written that, continued discussion is clearly futile.

4746: 3727:

So no, of course they should not be merged. It is routine practice on Knowledge for a sub-topic to be split off into a new article, if it would overwhelm the main article: see

2000:

The fact that you are even asking this questions shows that Usually, such a policy should apply, but in some cases arguments in addition to policy are relevant considerations.

450: 442:

which was derived from significant discussions, but that's not directly relevant to funerals. A discussion to more formally encode or change this convention could be started at

4972:

notable, depending on circumstances such as the depth of coverage that it does or doesn't have, but even if standalone notability can be established it's still something very

4644:- for the reasons already stated above. A state funeral is markedly different from any other funeral, for example, it is organised by the state, not by the deceased's family. 2326:

I believe you're mistaking different interpretations of the policies for a lack of understanding. Although you disagree, there is an argument for including 'state' even under

4760:

You are right to mention that some people have both a state funeral for the public and a separate private funeral. However, that correct observation is actually a reason to

2249: 480: 4661:

per pretty much everyone above, including Kiwipete and Pyrope. A funeral and a state funeral are not the same thing and reducing accuracy to save six characters is not what

1167:

State funerals are state funerals. For some leaders, a state funeral is followed by a private burial. The difference between the two must be noted so there is no confusion.

766: 5707:, thanks for explaining. This has been an interesting discussion, so it's actually better that it continue. Keeping the 'State' just seems common sense to me, and remember 439: 898: 2748:

You've not convinced me with your arguments. I still oppose re-naming those pages & nothing will change my position on that. Best that you try to convince others.

2022:

can by definition by made only if the presenter is aware that they are outside policy, and can make a case as to why policy is inadequate to an exceptional situation.

1641:

have established that you want a friendly discussion why not set any insults in previous comments aside and be cordial going forward? It's only Knowledge, after all

2269:. As pointed out, there is a major distinction between state funerals and regular funerals in regards to the recipients and the organization and traditions involved. 513: 876: 755: 356: 832: 292: 263: 5454:

do not include that phase; Lying in state is only organised for a sitting Taoiseach or President, and such funerals account for only 4% of Irish state funerals.

2197: 5429:

is clear that un-necessary precision is to be avoided. In this case the addition of the word state does not remove any ambiguity, nor does it widen the scope.

974:: if there is a consensus to make these moves, then a lot of navboxes will need to be updated, and a lot of eponymous categories will need speedy renaming per 799: 2302:

Why is this discussion getting so many posts from editors who know absolutely nothing about the relevant policies? Is there some on- or off-wiki canvassing?

909: 865: 535: 4686:

Given the rarity and import of a state funeral compared to the commonality of a regular funeral, I have no comprehension on why such changes are necessary.

4587:

It's a reasonable question, asked concisely and politely. If you choose not explain where the ambiguity lies, the closer will have to weigh that omission.

4320: 1585:

However, I will post a response to my original comment later with references to specific policy documents. I wouldn't want to risk my vote being discounted.

1213: 3878:

These articles usually cover the circumstances of the person in question's death as well as their funeral, so 'death and funeral' is an appropriate title.

788: 722: 623: 403: 5093:

can be two different sets. In Canada, for example, the two state funerals that have articles are the two state funerals that took place as current events

711: 645: 443: 5505:

his neat absolutes. I expect another round of angry indignation for daring to demonstrate the falsity of yet more of Bearcat's unresearched absolutes.

3953:

which has been dominating the news recently so it feels like the discussion is tucked away in a quiet corner. Perhaps an RfC would be more appropriate?

1522:

funeral. This is why I won't - indeed, can't - respond to your request to identify specific articles. Your framing is overly specific and I refute it.

5165:

Oh dear oh dear. It would have helped in Bercat had read my nomination, which explains very clearly why the existing titles are in any conflict with

887: 821: 777: 579: 4525: 2050:

The process here, where the move requester rapidly replies to posts that Oppose with statements implying ignorance, or now flagrant defiance, or to

854: 843: 634: 590: 491: 5604: 4750: 3950: 1332: 1235: 744: 700: 678: 524: 502: 1069:

As to usage, I see no evidence to support your assumption that reliable sources predominantly use the term "state funeral" rather than "funeral".

4980:

a state funeral or a private funeral. (3) Genuinely private funeral = almost never notable at all. That doesn't resemble what you claimed in #2

1747:, on the basis that state funerals are (generally) considered to be a special, quite small subset of funerals (such as described in the article 5791: 5674: 5308: 5184:

Nobody has identified any way in which removing the word "state" creates ambiguity. And nobody has denied that "state funeral" is more precise.

4742: 4738: 667: 656: 612: 568: 353:

consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Knowledge policy

124: 114: 5020:, of which only two have a standalone article. We could examine more countries, but it's already clear that Bearcat's extreme assertion that 1558:

to discount arguments which are not founded in policy, so all your non-policy ideas are simply a waste of your time and everyone else's time.

5801: 5625: 5519: 5329: 5201: 5068: 4934: 4893: 4779: 4601: 4553: 4462: 4418: 4377: 4155: 4107: 3826: 3745: 3653: 3458: 3420: 3380: 3339: 3297: 3252: 3195: 3142: 3096: 3053: 2834: 2779: 2738: 2670: 2625: 2489: 2451: 2401: 2362: 2316: 2148: 2102: 2040: 1988: 1826: 1759:

vs. the world over following the policy to the letter, there should be consideration of the first word of the section on Precision, which is

1684: 1627: 1572: 1507: 1457: 1398: 1313: 1255: 1199: 1150: 1118: 992: 945: 810: 733: 435: 237: 227: 5303:

There is also a huge variation between countries in the nature of a state funeral. For example, the state funerals of former Taoisigh and

4831:

notable, whereas "non-state funerals" can sometimes be notable public events and sometimes non-notable private ones, then it's important to

3160: 1613:

Both those claims are false and hostile. When you choose to conduct yourself like that, don't complain that the response you get is blunt.

4030: 2285: 557: 1384:: that difference should be conveyed in the text of article. What part of policy do you believe supports keeping the word in the title? 334:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a

5470: 1026: 601: 546: 3997:

is reserved only for heads of state, prominent politicians, or national heroes. They are rare and not everyone is entitled to get one.

3039:

before posting here, and tried to apply it properly. If that happened, then I would be delighted not to post reminders of the policy.

5806: 4179: 4052: 3958: 2997: 1371: 1030: 195: 4703:. A funeral and a state funeral are very much not the same thing. For one thing, most of these wouldn't even have their own articles 2130:

You made it very clear that you have absolutely no objection at all to the misconduct of editors who disrupt debate by ignore policy.

2915: 2545: 2274: 1443:: please can you identify the article(s) nominated where removal of the word "state" would cause ambiguity with some other article. 1336:

coverage in the death-and-funeral article -- and neither of them are part of the state funeral as the title misleadingly suggests.

5436:

is also false; once again, the reality is much more varied than the simple absolutes which you like to assert in many discussions.

2540:

that are currently at "State funeral of X". Two of them have a separate requested moves discussion going on, but the others don't.

4754: 4217: 4014: 3862:

in that case shouldn't it just be "Funeral of X"? The "death" part is redundant too as no one can have a funeral unless they die.

3279:

I and others have given clear policy-based reasons for removing a redundant word from the title. Davethorp's choice to call that

2911: 348: 90: 5457:

lying-in-state is not the exclusive preserve of state funerals: in the USA, for example, there was a lying-in-state for each of

5097:

in order to be "easy writeups from current news readily scrapable from the web" — it's not that the past ones aren't notable in

5012:

I don't agree at all with #1: the vast majority of state funerals do not have an standalone article on Knowledge. For example,

4018: 3066: 3002: 1582:

I was under the impression that we were both arguing over a policy, and our difference was in the interpretation of said policy.

5786: 4026: 4022: 3430:

Doesn’t specify where I’ve personally abused you now does it. That’s a serious allegation and I would invite you to retract it

419: 199: 3772:

is "a public funeral ceremony, observing the strict rules of protocol, held to honour people of national significance." and a

5796: 5661: 2088:

Attacking any editor for demanding attention to policy is disruptive conduct, which I find deeply insulting. Please desist.

426:" concept for the purpose of article titles (whereas location of the funeral is not). Currently, in "Wiki-lawyer terms" this 4805:, because a genuinely private funeral usually wouldn't be a topic of any significant coverage — Thatcher may not have had a 1082: 453:. Please consider that such "domination of the speaker's platform" in future requested move discussions may be considered a 5773:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

5294:

a ceremony connected with the final disposition of a corpse, such as a burial or cremation, with the attendant observances

4988:" different from a "non-state funeral", and I have no responsibility to take ownership of any suggestion to the contrary. 3472:

an admin to take a look at this page. I might even get the speedy close I pushed for given your conduct in this discussion

3071: 203: 5132:

with CRITERIA or AT, not on me to have to defend titles that haven't been demonstrated as problematic in the first place.

1808:

OTOH, see evidence I posted above from JSTOR that in the case of Ronald Reagan and Winston Churchill, the COMMONAME does

5757: 5743: 5728: 5698: 5686: 5665: 5630: 5594: 5557: 5543: 5524: 5451: 5405: 5334: 5248: 5206: 5160: 5073: 5013: 4997: 4939: 4912: 4898: 4844: 4784: 4728: 4695: 4678: 4653: 4636: 4606: 4582: 4578: 4558: 4529: 4521: 4480: 4467: 4435: 4423: 4399: 4382: 4344: 4332: 4312: 4282: 4259: 4241: 4227: 4209: 4183: 4160: 4127: 4112: 4084: 4056: 4038: 4005: 3981: 3962: 3936: 3915: 3887: 3873: 3850: 3831: 3803: 3786: 3750: 3717: 3684: 3658: 3632: 3619: 3596: 3570: 3549: 3500: 3485: 3463: 3439: 3425: 3399: 3385: 3361: 3344: 3320: 3302: 3274: 3257: 3229: 3200: 3176: 3147: 3122: 3101: 3058: 2955: 2941: 2923: 2898: 2857: 2839: 2802: 2793:

others to agree with you, will nearly always get you the opposite result. Best to let others have a chance to chime in.

2784: 2757: 2743: 2697: 2675: 2648: 2630: 2598: 2581: 2549: 2508: 2494: 2470: 2456: 2424: 2406: 2382: 2367: 2339: 2321: 2278: 2261: 2235: 2214: 2182: 2153: 2122: 2107: 2068: 2045: 2009: 1993: 1958: 1934: 1912: 1889: 1867: 1850: 1831: 1796: 1723: 1704: 1689: 1650: 1632: 1598: 1577: 1531: 1512: 1480: 1462: 1434: 1403: 1375: 1345: 1318: 1274: 1260: 1225: 1204: 1176: 1155: 1123: 1096: 1042: 1016: 997: 964: 473: 311: 307: 278: 274: 33: 4234:

Note: Wikiproject for all of the countries associated with these state funerals have been notified of this discussion.

2656:

That seems to me to make these topics a very poor area to apply some special treatment and abandon our broad policies.

1603:

H. Carver, you made a series of post which had absolutely no foundation in Knowledge policy. You accused me of being

1076: 380: 81: 58: 2964:

It's easy to find evidence that the term "state funeral" has been used. But that's not the issue here. The test of

4429: 1136:

is false. It does not apply to the United States, to Ireland, the UK, or to Australia. Please will you strike it?

3575:

I don't think anyone's disputing that it's a real term or a real thing. As an analogy, no would would dispute that

186: 147: 4625:

benefit in clarity and specificity to the reader greatly outweighs any extremely slight increase in title length.

1090: 1062:

As to your comment about government protocols, following them is contrary to policy. The actual policy is to use

5657: 5621: 5515: 5325: 5197: 5064: 4930: 4889: 4775: 4597: 4549: 4458: 4414: 4373: 4205: 4151: 4103: 3932: 3822: 3741: 3649: 3636: 3454: 3416: 3376: 3335: 3293: 3248: 3191: 3138: 3092: 3049: 2830: 2775: 2734: 2666: 2621: 2485: 2447: 2397: 2358: 2312: 2144: 2098: 2036: 1984: 1822: 1680: 1623: 1568: 1503: 1453: 1394: 1309: 1251: 1195: 1146: 1114: 988: 941: 325: 2499:

If we continue this will become an argument. I've said I support the moves, I don't want to engage any further.

1033:(etc.) there would have to be a whole lot of renaming of related categories and articles, just for consistency. 5231:

A "state funeral" and a "non-state funeral" are objectively two different types of thing. One type of thing is

5017: 4539:: what is the nature of this ambiguity? What other topic may be confused with this one if "state" is removed? 4034: 3782: 2196:

Is the word “state” needed in any of these to disambiguate it from a separate non-state funeral article, e.g.,

2118: 2064: 2005: 1792: 1764: 361: 5418:; I merely noted that it was novel, and I did so because it advanced claims which which I had not seen before. 1419:"titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that" 929:"titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that" 4356:) say that a state funeral is a type of funeral. None of them say that a state funeral is a different thing. 2765:

The purpose of my replies is to demonstrate to other editors that your position defies both fact and policy.

2589:- as state funerals are rare (usually held for heads of state), particularly where monarchies are concerned. 5539: 5187:

So I am asking Bearcat to explain what part of the policy supports their desire to retain the word "state".

5175:

titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that

4574: 4536: 4517: 4278: 1331:'s citation of the QE2 example demonstrates exactly why the proposed move is appropriate. The article title 303: 270: 4707:

if they hadn't been state funerals, because a private funeral would not have been a noteworthy historic or

3325:

Dave, you ignore policy, and you make unevidenced assertions. Now you are just engaged in personal abuse.

2919: 2820:

Maybe the two GoodDays can have a wee chat somewhere else, and come back when they have reached agreement.

5039:) on which you base your claim that this supports having a title of "state funeral" rather than "funeral"? 4340:

as has been stated 'state funeral' and 'funeral' are diffrent things, tease articles are about teh former—

4328: 4123: 4080: 3728: 3584: 3542: 1546:

It would be very helpful if before contributing further, you would take time to actually study the policy

1367: 5388:

central to the definition of a ceremonial-but-non-state funeral. A state funeral in Canada, for example,

4948:

not playing the "I take ownership of your strawman or else the communication breakdown is my fault" game

4856:

a state funeral should be explicitly labelled as such because they are very different from other funerals

3869: 3639:

was also a hugely public affair with massive emotional engagement, but it was also not a state funeral.

3015:

determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources

2970:

determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources

2653:

Heads of state are often controversial topics, and for many people their deaths are emotionally charged.

1543:

No part of article policy supports your desire to use article titles to convey a "category distinction".

389:

was barely mentioned in the discussion, but is the reason we have such a large multi-move request, with

335: 39: 4269:

per the other comments about the clear difference in meaning between "state funeral" and just "funeral"

2994:

I searched for two phrases, "state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II" and "funeral of Queen Elizabeth II":

2987:, by searching Google News (to concentrate reliable sources) and checked to the end of the results per 5311:. So the word "state" is a very poor guide to the scale of the event, as well as being unnecessarily 4964:

notable without exception. (2) Non-state but still public (e.g. "ceremonial" or "national") funeral =

5753: 5724: 5682: 5612: 5578: 5506: 5316: 5188: 5055: 4921: 4880: 4766: 4588: 4540: 4513: 4449: 4405: 4364: 4354: 4323:. The current names are not a problem, so there's no need to waste anyone's time with so many moves. 4308: 4302: 4201: 4142: 4094: 3928: 3859: 3813: 3799: 3732: 3680: 3640: 3615: 3566: 3445: 3407: 3367: 3326: 3284: 3239: 3182: 3129: 3083: 3040: 3010: 2988: 2984: 2973: 2965: 2907: 2821: 2766: 2725: 2721: 2657: 2612: 2476: 2438: 2388: 2349: 2303: 2231: 2135: 2089: 2027: 1975: 1813: 1780: 1768: 1756: 1671: 1614: 1559: 1494: 1468: 1444: 1385: 1300: 1242: 1209: 1186: 1137: 1105: 1063: 979: 932: 3671:. Taking your postion in these RMs into account, should those pages now be merged? If not, why not ( 3635:

was a highly public affair, with massive emotional engagement, but it was not a state funeral. The

21: 5739: 5582: 5553: 5042:(Note that the notion of including a term in the title because it is a key factor in notability is 4674: 3977: 3778: 3496: 3481: 3435: 3395: 3357: 3316: 3270: 3118: 2951: 2937: 2178: 2114: 2074: 2060: 2015: 2001: 1954: 1802: 1788: 1772: 1719: 1594: 1527: 1476: 1430: 1270: 338:

after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2475:

It is up to all good-faith editors to dismiss an "interpretation" which has zero basis in policy.

89:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

5695: 5535: 5426: 5166: 5109: 5047: 5032: 4872: 4649: 4570: 4472:

I fail to see how the criteria of being grand public event organized by a state does not make it

4274: 4256: 4238: 4224: 3883: 3846: 3021: 2886: 2790: 2504: 2466: 2420: 2378: 2335: 2296: 2201: 2200:? I don’t think so. Remove the term to improve conciseness without compromising any of the other 1930: 1908: 1885: 1846: 1700: 1646: 1551: 961: 423: 5473:, of the last five people to like in state in the US Capitol, only one received a state funeral. 4960:

different kinds of funerals that a famous person may have upon their death. (1) State funeral =

5031:

But let's leave the counterfactuality aside for a moment. Please can you identify the part of

2976:

requires some evidence of usage of the various alternative terms, which is wholly absent from @

259:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

5716: 5590: 5491: 5401: 5312: 5244: 5156: 5078:

Firstly, not "refined", but "exactly the very G.D. thing I said from the very G.D. beginning".

4993: 4908: 4840: 4797:

While I suppose there may be occasional exceptions, the overwhelming majority of the time the

4724: 4666: 4662: 4507: 4503: 4324: 4119: 4090: 4076: 4067: 3809: 3721: 3592: 3537: 3225: 3172: 2894: 2889:

of conciseness and precision, which ultimately translates to a better experience for readers.

2853: 2798: 2753: 2693: 2644: 2594: 2558: 2437:

Adding "state" is merely a signifier of status, which is usually omitted from article titles.

2412: 2327: 2244: 2223: 1900: 1865: 1752: 1667: 1414: 1381: 1360: 1284: 1221: 1172: 1038: 1012: 924: 469: 374:

criterion (indeed omitting "state" from these titles makes them more consise) and the related

4193:- I don't really get the point of doing all those changes for all those pages. If anything , 2815:

Attempts to persuade others to agree with you, will nearly always get you the opposite result

5708: 5269:

you, and I strongly object to those utterly false claims. I hope that you will retract them.

4631: 3927:

ibid others' points so far. Not time to drift away from what has worked so well for us yet.

3907: 3864: 3580: 3155:

referring to the "funeral of Queen Elizabeth II", only 8 of them fail to use the qualifier "

2209: 2085:

of your partisan criticism is encourage editors to ignore policy, which is very undesirable.

1963:

Another passionate oppose without even a hint of an attempt to find any basis in the policy

352: 3628:

two different things. Each is a ceremony connected with the final disposition of a corpse.

5749: 5720: 5678: 5487: 5393: 5304: 4691: 4297: 3808:

On the contrary, the problem is clearly identified in the nomination as a failure to meet

3795: 3690: 3676: 3672: 3611: 3562: 3390:

Only you haven’t. Or if you have maybe it’s been lost in the sea of your other posts here

2227: 1287:. If you don't see how that is an improvement, then go start an RFC to change the policy. 5282:

a b"state funeral" and a "non-state funeral" are objectively two different types of thing

5009:

1) State, always notable; 2) public, sometimes notable; 3) private, almost never notable.

3663:

If Knowledge doesn't consider them two different things then why are there two articles?

5414:

is again reacting angrily to something I did not write. I did not claim that Beracat's

4141:

Or some aspects of the topic whose inclusion might be unclear without the word "state"?

3159:

funeral". (Though the 164 figure will include sources that use a mixture of forms. e.g.

2946:

The OP should also take a look at WP:BLUDGEON since they like discussing policy so much

2057:. . . all your non-policy ideas are simply a waste of your time and everyone else's time 288:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

5735: 5549: 5531: 5481: 5477: 5447: 5376: 5135:

Fourthly, nobody ever said that notability was relevant to what should or shouldn't be

5006:: So, your refined assertion is that is that there are actually three types of funeral: 4670: 4477: 4432: 4396: 4350: 4341: 3973: 3631:

One is more public than the other, but the distinction is not rigid. For example, the

3492: 3477: 3431: 3391: 3353: 3312: 3266: 3211: 3114: 2977: 2947: 2933: 2572: 2461:

Well, it's not up to me to tell you whether to consider other interpretations or not.

2257: 2174: 2173:

WP:IAR also applies in this case and by extension WP:SNOW in support of a speedy close

1950: 1715: 1638: 1590: 1537: 1523: 1472: 1440: 1426: 1341: 1280: 1266: 5257:: Sigh. If I reply to many people, I get accused of bludegeoning. So I am selective. 3163:

uses "Funeral of Queen Elizabeth II" in the headline and "state funeral" in the body.)

73: 52: 5780: 5712: 5704: 5692: 5608: 5462: 5443: 5347:, so claiming that it doesn't back me up simply isn't a useful mic drop — policy has 5120:"state funeral" in the title of an article about a state funeral — so the onus is on 4708: 4645: 4621: 4441: 4293: 4253: 4235: 4221: 3999: 3994: 3879: 3842: 3769: 3709: 3698: 3664: 3603: 3558: 3235: 3217: 3109:” Dominating a discussion is a violation of the WP:DE policy and can get you blocked” 2636: 2500: 2462: 2416: 2374: 2348:: if there is such an argument, I have yet to see it. Would you like to present it? 2345: 2331: 1968: 1924: 1904: 1881: 1842: 1841:

per the above arguments that have been made about the conventions of state funerals.

1748: 1696: 1656: 1642: 975: 958: 5480:

is not an event unique to funerals: as noted and sourced in the lead of the article

4711:-passing event in the first place — and for another, sometimes people actually have 931:... and in all of these cases "Death and funeral of Foo" is sufficiently precise. -- 921:– the word "state" is redundant detail, because it is not needed for disambiguation. 5600: 5586: 5411: 5397: 5274: 5254: 5240: 5152: 5113: 5051: 5036: 5003: 4989: 4904: 4876: 4850: 4836: 4734: 4720: 3694: 3588: 3221: 3168: 3036: 3028: 2890: 2849: 2794: 2749: 2689: 2640: 2608: 2604: 2590: 1964: 1859: 1547: 1328: 1292: 1231: 1217: 1182: 1168: 1129: 1056: 1048: 1034: 1008: 465: 5292:. The reality is that they are two variations of the same type of thing, namely 5177:... and in all of these cases "Death and funeral of Foo" is sufficiently precise. 4809:

funeral in the official sense, but her funeral most certainly still had a public

3311:

You’re coming off so poorly in this “debate”. It’s a shame you can’t even see it

1540:: on the contrary, this is very simple: I am arguing per policy, and you are not. 5548:

Why does it not surprise me that she’s been warned about her conduct previously

5458: 4626: 3989:

Because the definitions of the two words are widely different. Unlike a regular

3899: 2206: 1784: 1662:

However, ignoring policy is uncivil and disruptive. Attacking other editors as

269:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —

190:, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to 178: 5471:

State funerals in the United States#List_of_lying_in_state_and_honor_recipients

4863:

very different from a "ceremonial funeral" (UK) or a "national funeral" Canada.

4687: 4395:

These articles cover the protracted afairs that are clearly not just funerals—

3705:

must either be wholly different or be the same. There are other possibilities.

449:

Finally, I note that one editor is, prior to my closing this, responsible for

168: 5215:

of people who've expressed opposition to your proposal, you opted to single

3576: 3181:

Colin, I agree: those Gnews results are messy, and appear to be unreliable.

3078:

So, in this test a small majority for "state funeral", but not the required

2563: 2536:. Regardless of the decision made for these pages, what should be done with 2253: 1337: 4868:

Please can you explain which of these incompatible views you actually hold?

2291:

In any case, regardless of the merits of that distinction, the question of

162: 141: 5466: 4442:

the observances held for a dead person usually before burial or cremation

1974:

What is it about state funerals that generates such policy-free passion?

431: 4428:

A state funeral is specfically a wider public event involving a funeral

4135:

But you do reckon that there is ambiguity. So what exactly is ambiguous?

3009:

So there is no way that "state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II" meets the

5367: 5300:

the boundary between the very similar things, which is the wrong place.

5289: 5280:

And you close with a more extreme assertion than you have made so far:

4859:

a state funeral should be explicitly labelled as such because they are

3990: 3773: 3713: 3702: 3668: 3607: 2537: 1776: 255:

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

3234:

What on earth is the point of that comment? Why would anyone nominate

1212:

QE2 had a public funeral service followed by a private burial service.

5691:

Because I messed up as the closer, so I reopened it and relisted it.

5607:

was one of many people whose funeral was notable despite not being a

4132:

So, you agree that there is no difference in scope, which is helpful.

4072:"titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article" 3024:

is an essay, not a guideline, let alone a policy. It has no standing.

1238:

includes the state funeral, the Committal service and the interment.

370:, not as rules. The arguments in support are primarily based on the 5228:

every damn time we find ourselves on the opposite side of anything.

5103:

digging into the archives to find the sourcing needed to write them

5050:; in fact the word "notability" is mentioned nowhere in the policy 4502:- A state funereal is a different thing from a funeral generally. 4197:

is what will be redundant. No real issue in need of changing here.

4138:

If there some other event that the article might be confused with?

2720:

It seems that in your enthusiasm to IAR, you have jettisoned both

86: 1637:

I don't want speak where I'm not wanted, but since both you and @

1291:"funeral" may or may not be read to exclude the burial service, @ 1283:: removing redundant verbiage from article titles is policy: see 4359:

Do you have any reliable sources to support your assertion that

284:

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

191: 5469:, none of whom received a state funeral. In fact, AFAICS from 4404:

So not actually different, then. Same core, but a bit broader.

1059:

by removing a word which is not needed to identify the article.

5392:

includes a period when the coffin lays in the Centre Block of

2639:. Particularly where presidents & monarchs are concerned. 15: 4719:

a separate private funeral for the family and close friends.

2980:'s comment, and indeed from every other opponent of renaming. 2170:

Given your conduct in this matter section 2 of WP:CSK applies

5671:

Why in the name of Larry Sanger was this relisted yesterday?

5105:, which isn't the same thing as non-notability in the least. 3557:, respectfully I don't even know why this is a dispute. See 3063:

PS I repeated my search without the work "Queen". That gave

2293:

the recipients and the organization and traditions involved

2059:

is far from constructive debate from such a senior editor.

1755:, and noting that this discussion appears to be currently @ 1072:

I just checked JSTOR, which concentrates reliable sources:

4984:: it in no way implies that a "state funeral" is somehow " 5432:

Your assertion that the element which non-state funerals

4569:

i see no reason to engage with you and be the subject of

3610:. They are two different articles. Two different things. 1967:. Similarly, the "speedy close" request has no basis in 978:. I would be happy to assist in those tasks, if asked. -- 5423:

policy has nothing to say about this in either direction

5211:

And I'm asking you to explain why, out of the literally

3535: 2607:: please can you explain how that relates to the policy 4252:

After much discussion, I have reopened this request. -

3405: 1493:

policy-based arguments for retaining the word "state".

914: 903: 892: 881: 870: 859: 848: 837: 826: 815: 804: 793: 782: 771: 760: 749: 738: 727: 716: 705: 694: 683: 672: 661: 650: 639: 628: 617: 606: 595: 584: 573: 562: 551: 540: 529: 518: 507: 496: 485: 407: 194:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please

5307:

were vastly less elaborate than the non-state funeral

5284:. That assertion is demonstrably false: if they were 4903:

After you identify where I ever said anything like #2

5366:, they would probably not share the common core of a 5288:, they would probably not share the common core of a 5273:

if you like, but the policy basis is what matters at

3283:

says a lot about Dave and Dave's approach to debate.

1666:

for upholding policy is very nasty; in my view it is

5656:- I support Pyrope's & Bearcat's comment above. 4956:

said about Thatcher in my above comments: there are

2848:, now. For your sake, I'm going to stop responding. 2680:

We shall have to disagree. These events were called

1471:

I have said all I have to say in the comment above.

418:

naming convention here. There seems to have been a "

379:

the application of some other naming criteria, i.e.

85:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 5434:

don't share is the common element of lying in state

2910:. I also make the similar move request about it at 690:

Death and state funeral of Lech and Maria Kaczyński

481:

Death and state funeral of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani

5101:, it's that nobody's actually taken on the job of 5085:has articles — what already has articles and what 2998:164 hits for "state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II" 2611:. I can't see any connection, but maybe you can. 1763:. This discussion could be a case of applying the 440:Knowledge:Naming conventions (violence and deaths) 5028:is at best a wildly counterfactual overstatement. 4361:'state funeral' and 'funeral' are diffrent things 4353:: all the dictionaries that I have checked (e,g. 1779:, where adding the state name is in deference to 364:specifies five criteria, which should be seen as 5355:direction, so all we're left with is discussing 2762:I didn't have any expectation of persuading you. 767:Death and state funeral of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk 5081:Secondly, notability is not determined by what 2989:WP:GOOGLETEST#Google_distinct_page_count_issues 2299:which policy applies to the naming of articles. 514:Death and state funeral of Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed 5237:even if that article doesn't already exist yet 3349:By all means highlight where I have abused you 3220:article, end up being nominated for deletion? 877:Death and state funeral of Ruth Bader Ginsburg 756:Death and state funeral of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq 298:Participate in the deletion discussion at the 4013:per arguments above. For articles named like 2885:. Pretty straightforward win with respect to 2295:has absolutely nothing to do with any of the 2198:Death and funeral of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani 695:Death and funeral of Lech and Maria Kaczyński 486:Death and funeral of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani 8: 3067:150 hits for "state funeral of elizabeth ii" 3003:172 hits for "funeral of Queen Elizabeth II" 1066:, which may or may not be the official name. 910:Death and state funeral of Winston Churchill 866:Death and state funeral of Ruhollah Khomeini 536:Death and state funeral of George H. W. Bush 789:Death and state funeral of Norodom Sihanouk 624:Death and state funeral of Jawaharlal Nehru 5384:to the definition of a state funeral, and 4801:funeral wouldn't even be an article topic 4511: 4075:'State' serves a clear and useful purpose. 4019:Death and State funeral of John F. Kennedy 1134:State funerals are only for heads of state 800:Death and state funeral of Néstor Kirchner 772:Death and funeral of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk 712:Death and state funeral of Leonid Brezhnev 646:Death and state funeral of Josip Broz Tito 324:The following is a closed discussion of a 136: 47: 4871:Also please can you identify the part of 4027:Death and State funeral of Queen Victoria 899:Death and state funeral of Võ Nguyên Giáp 888:Death and state funeral of Vladimir Lenin 822:Death and state funeral of Pierre Trudeau 778:Death and state funeral of Nelson Mandela 580:Death and state funeral of Hafez al-Assad 519:Death and funeral of Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed 293:Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's funeral 11.jpg 264:Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's funeral 11.jpg 5486:"It is a more formal and public kind of 5124:to demonstrate that the existing titles 2411:It is. Your argument is mostly based on 1787:, appears to be pertinent in this case. 882:Death and funeral of Ruth Bader Ginsburg 855:Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan 844:Death and state funeral of Richard Nixon 833:Death and state funeral of Raúl Alfonsín 761:Death and funeral of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq 723:Death and state funeral of Liliʻuokalani 635:Death and state funeral of Joseph Stalin 591:Death and state funeral of Heydar Aliyev 492:Death and state funeral of Boris Yeltsin 460:At least keep it under half, preferably 404:Death and two state funerals of Kalākaua 3951:Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II 1333:Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II 1236:Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II 745:Death and state funeral of Michael Sata 701:Death and state funeral of Lee Kuan Yew 679:Death and state funeral of King Hussein 525:Death and state funeral of Fidel Castro 503:Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II 138: 49: 19: 5433: 5422: 5415: 5363: 5285: 5281: 5266: 5262: 5223:deserving of a troutslap. And this is 5174: 5147:an article (and by extension a title) 5021: 4853:: So, it seems that your view is that 4360: 4220:has been notified of this discussion. 4176:2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:A40C:45CC:322A:58FB 4049:2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:A40C:45CC:322A:58FB 4017:ones, they should named as a standard 3955:2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:2191:AF83:6F3A:9ACF 3794:. Solution in search of a problem. -- 3280: 3079: 3072:132 hits for "funeral of elizabeth ii" 3014: 2969: 2814: 2808: 2292: 2056: 2019: 1663: 1608: 1604: 1133: 1081:"state funeral of Winston Churchill": 915:Death and funeral of Winston Churchill 871:Death and funeral of Ruhollah Khomeini 668:Death and state funeral of Kim Jong-il 657:Death and state funeral of Kim Il-sung 613:Death and state funeral of Jack Layton 569:Death and state funeral of Gerald Ford 541:Death and funeral of George H. W. Bush 811:Death and state funeral of Omar Bongo 794:Death and funeral of Norodom Sihanouk 734:Death and state funeral of Mao Zedong 629:Death and funeral of Jawaharlal Nehru 436:Knowledge:Naming conventions (events) 398:included in this discussion, and its 7: 3579:is a real thing or term. But should 2968:is that the term is the most common 2809:Best that you try to convince others 2702:Au contraire, you are confusing the 2542:2601:241:300:B610:C479:CF14:9F1:F4F2 2387:That's not a policy-based argument. 2286:State funerals in the United Kingdom 2271:2601:241:300:B610:C479:CF14:9F1:F4F2 2243:. The proposed titles are perfectly 805:Death and funeral of Néstor Kirchner 717:Death and funeral of Leonid Brezhnev 651:Death and funeral of Josip Broz Tito 558:Death and state funeral of George VI 343:The result of the move request was: 184:This article is within the scope of 79:This article is within the scope of 4296:is different to any other funeral. 3468:Then by all means make it. I would 1027:State funerals in the United States 904:Death and funeral of Võ Nguyên Giáp 893:Death and funeral of Vladimir Lenin 827:Death and funeral of Pierre Trudeau 783:Death and funeral of Nelson Mandela 602:Death and state funeral of Hirohito 585:Death and funeral of Hafez al-Assad 547:Death and state funeral of George V 38:It is of interest to the following 5421:As to policy, your assertion that 4292:as per other comments about why a 4025:, they should named as a standard 3561:, which is a real term and thing. 1295:insists that "state funeral" does 1095:"state funeral of Ronald Reagan": 1031:Category:State funerals by country 860:Death and funeral of Ronald Reagan 849:Death and funeral of Richard Nixon 838:Death and funeral of Raúl Alfonsín 728:Death and funeral of Liliʻuokalani 640:Death and funeral of Joseph Stalin 596:Death and funeral of Heydar Aliyev 497:Death and funeral of Boris Yeltsin 14: 5143:a factor in whether a topic even 5035:(or any other part of the policy 4875:(or any other part of the policy 3265:Crazy stuff happens on Knowledge 2983:To make a comparison, I followed 750:Death and funeral of Michael Sata 706:Death and funeral of Lee Kuan Yew 684:Death and funeral of King Hussein 530:Death and funeral of Fidel Castro 508:Death and funeral of Elizabeth II 5769:The discussion above is closed. 5091:if anybody deigned to write them 4952:. So here's a summary of what I 4015:State funeral of John F. Kennedy 2912:State funeral of John F. Kennedy 2710:. This discussion is about the 1075:"funeral of Winston Churchill": 673:Death and funeral of Kim Jong-il 662:Death and funeral of Kim Il-sung 618:Death and funeral of Jack Layton 574:Death and funeral of Gerald Ford 317:Requested move 25 September 2022 198:where you can contribute to the 171: 161: 140: 72: 51: 20: 5416:reasoning is inherently invalid 5374:share is the common element of 4715:a state funeral for the public 4321:If it ain't broke, don't fix it 4023:State funeral of Queen Victoria 2020:arguments in addition to policy 950:00:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 816:Death and funeral of Omar Bongo 739:Death and funeral of Mao Zedong 232:This article has been rated as 119:This article has been rated as 5703:Makes perfect sense of course 5235:notable enough for an article 4879:) which supports any of this? 4006:23:48, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 3982:22:43, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 3963:20:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 3937:17:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 3916:05:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 3874:03:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 3851:18:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3832:13:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3804:12:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3787:08:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3751:04:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3685:04:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3659:04:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3620:03:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3597:18:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3571:17:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3550:11:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3501:16:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3486:14:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3464:13:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3440:13:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3426:13:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3400:13:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3386:13:35, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3366:I have already answered that. 3362:13:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3345:13:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3321:13:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3303:12:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3275:07:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 3258:18:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3230:16:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3201:19:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3177:19:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3148:13:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3123:13:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3102:13:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3059:12:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 3013:test of being the most common 2956:10:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2942:10:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2924:09:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2899:00:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2858:05:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2840:05:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2803:05:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2785:05:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2758:04:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2744:03:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2698:01:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2676:00:31, 27 September 2022 (UTC) 2649:21:44, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2631:21:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2599:21:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2582:04:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2550:00:39, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2509:18:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2495:18:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2471:18:11, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2457:17:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2425:17:29, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2407:17:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2383:16:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2368:08:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2340:07:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2322:23:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2279:22:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2262:19:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2236:17:04, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2215:14:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2183:16:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC) 2154:00:48, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2123:00:42, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2108:00:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2069:00:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC) 2046:23:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 2010:22:44, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1994:12:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1959:12:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1942:Strong oppose and speedy close 1935:11:20, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1913:11:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1890:11:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1868:09:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1851:07:25, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1832:10:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1797:06:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1724:17:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1705:17:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1690:17:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1651:16:51, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1633:16:21, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1609:arguing on a per-person record 1599:16:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1578:03:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1532:03:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1513:03:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1481:03:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1463:02:47, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1435:02:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1404:02:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1376:01:30, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1346:19:55, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1319:03:19, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1275:03:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1261:03:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1226:02:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1205:01:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1177:01:26, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1124:02:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1043:01:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 1017:01:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 998:00:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 563:Death and funeral of George VI 444:WT:Naming conventions (events) 1: 5792:Mid-importance Death articles 4835:the distinction for clarity. 1771:. The example given of using 607:Death and funeral of Hirohito 552:Death and funeral of George V 93:and see a list of open tasks. 5802:Mid-importance Iran articles 5014:List of Irish state funerals 3718:Funeral of Margaret Thatcher 3633:funeral of Margaret Thatcher 1299:include the burial service. 1089:"funeral of Ronald Reagan": 451:62% of the text on this page 5758:21:34, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5744:19:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5729:03:10, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5699:23:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5687:20:58, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5666:17:07, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5631:23:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5595:23:29, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5558:11:49, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5544:10:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5525:09:25, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5439:Three crucial points here: 5406:05:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5335:00:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC) 5249:23:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5207:23:33, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5161:23:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5139:the title — but notability 5108:Thirdly, no part of either 5074:23:10, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 5018:13 state funerals in Canada 4998:22:16, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4940:22:10, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4913:21:53, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4899:21:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4845:21:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4785:21:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4729:16:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4696:14:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4679:08:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4654:04:29, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 4637:22:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4607:19:35, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4583:18:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4559:17:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4530:17:28, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4481:19:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4468:19:37, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4436:18:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4424:17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4400:16:16, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4383:15:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4345:15:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4333:12:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4313:11:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4283:11:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4260:11:16, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4242:11:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4228:10:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 4210:01:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC) 4184:17:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 4161:14:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 4128:13:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 4113:13:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 4085:13:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 4057:17:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 4039:08:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 3888:11:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC) 2906:more concise title and per 2724:and the need for evidence. 1156:23:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC) 965:10:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC) 474:17:55, 8 October 2022 (UTC) 394:high-profile state funeral 99:Knowledge:WikiProject Death 5823: 5362:So, you say, if they were 2635:Best in this situation to 312:07:45, 27 March 2019 (UTC) 279:05:31, 27 March 2019 (UTC) 238:project's importance scale 212:Knowledge:WikiProject Iran 125:project's importance scale 102:Template:WikiProject Death 5807:WikiProject Iran articles 5219:out as if I were somehow 5026:notable without exception 4444:. More grand, but not a 3998: 3637:funeral of Princess Diana 3444:I stand by my complaint. 231: 215:Template:WikiProject Iran 156: 118: 67: 46: 5771:Please do not modify it. 5364:different types of thing 5286:different types of thing 331:Please do not modify it. 5370:. Great, but what they 5095:while Knowledge existed 4813:that made it something 3693:: You are creating a 2972:. So a claim based on 434:". It isn't encoded in 5787:C-Class Death articles 4968:notable and sometimes 1357:Neutral leaning Oppose 1132:: your assertion that 400:talk page was notified 28:This article is rated 5797:C-Class Iran articles 5450:. For example, most 5425:is false. Policy at 5351:to say about this in 4827:"state funerals" are 4440:But still a funeral: 1485:OK, that's up to you. 362:article titles policy 5711:is above all rules, 5677:at a state funeral? 5658:GeographicAccountant 5452:Irish state funerals 3841:per other comments-- 3585:Union Jack minidress 3080:significant majority 1423:unambiguously define 414:The community has a 408:more thorough search 5583:Ruth Bader Ginsburg 3216:I wonder, will the 2844:You're starting to 1773:Bothell, Washington 1605:needlessly pedantic 430:consensus is just " 5673:, has anyone seen 4751:Coretta Scott King 4575:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz 4537:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz 4518:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz 3972:per other points. 3720:is a sub-topic of 1899:. The guidance at 1767:more aligned with 456:civility violation 381:naming conventions 358:naming conventions 304:Community Tech bot 271:Community Tech bot 202:and help with our 34:content assessment 5629: 5523: 5333: 5309:Margaret Thatcher 5205: 5072: 4938: 4920:Have a nice day. 4897: 4817:from a genuinely 4783: 4743:Mikhail Gorbachev 4739:Margaret Thatcher 4605: 4557: 4532: 4516:comment added by 4466: 4422: 4381: 4244: 4230: 4218:WikiProject Death 4202:— That Coptic Guy 4159: 4111: 3914: 3830: 3749: 3722:Margaret Thatcher 3657: 3462: 3424: 3384: 3343: 3301: 3256: 3199: 3146: 3106:From WP:BLUDGEON: 3100: 3057: 2838: 2783: 2742: 2674: 2629: 2493: 2455: 2413:Knowledge:Precise 2405: 2366: 2328:Knowledge:Precise 2320: 2152: 2106: 2044: 1992: 1830: 1812:include "state". 1765:WP:NAMINGCRITERIA 1688: 1631: 1576: 1554:. The closer is 1511: 1461: 1402: 1317: 1259: 1203: 1154: 1122: 996: 967: 949: 349:originally closed 252: 251: 248: 247: 244: 243: 135: 134: 131: 130: 82:WikiProject Death 5814: 5620: 5618: 5616: 5514: 5512: 5510: 5324: 5322: 5320: 5196: 5194: 5192: 5063: 5061: 5059: 5022:State funeral = 4929: 4927: 4925: 4888: 4886: 4884: 4774: 4772: 4770: 4634: 4629: 4596: 4594: 4592: 4548: 4546: 4544: 4457: 4455: 4453: 4413: 4411: 4409: 4372: 4370: 4368: 4233: 4215: 4150: 4148: 4146: 4102: 4100: 4098: 4004: 4002: 3910: 3904: 3902: 3821: 3819: 3817: 3740: 3738: 3736: 3648: 3646: 3644: 3581:Union Jack dress 3548: 3545: 3540: 3453: 3451: 3449: 3415: 3413: 3411: 3375: 3373: 3371: 3334: 3332: 3330: 3292: 3290: 3288: 3247: 3245: 3243: 3215: 3190: 3188: 3186: 3137: 3135: 3133: 3091: 3089: 3087: 3048: 3046: 3044: 2829: 2827: 2825: 2813:GoodDay, 05:03: 2807:GoodDay, 04:55: 2774: 2772: 2770: 2733: 2731: 2729: 2665: 2663: 2661: 2620: 2618: 2616: 2579: 2570: 2484: 2482: 2480: 2446: 2444: 2442: 2396: 2394: 2392: 2357: 2355: 2353: 2311: 2309: 2307: 2143: 2141: 2139: 2097: 2095: 2093: 2035: 2033: 2031: 1983: 1981: 1979: 1821: 1819: 1817: 1679: 1677: 1675: 1622: 1620: 1618: 1567: 1565: 1563: 1502: 1500: 1498: 1452: 1450: 1448: 1393: 1391: 1389: 1308: 1306: 1304: 1250: 1248: 1246: 1194: 1192: 1190: 1145: 1143: 1141: 1113: 1111: 1109: 987: 985: 983: 951: 940: 938: 936: 917: 906: 895: 884: 873: 862: 851: 840: 829: 818: 807: 796: 785: 774: 763: 752: 741: 730: 719: 708: 697: 686: 675: 664: 653: 642: 631: 620: 609: 598: 587: 576: 565: 554: 543: 532: 521: 510: 499: 488: 420:silent consensus 368: 347:. When this was 333: 220: 219: 216: 213: 210: 196:join the project 187:WikiProject Iran 181: 176: 175: 174: 165: 158: 157: 152: 144: 137: 107: 106: 103: 100: 97: 76: 69: 68: 63: 55: 48: 31: 25: 24: 16: 5822: 5821: 5817: 5816: 5815: 5813: 5812: 5811: 5777: 5776: 5775: 5774: 5614: 5613: 5579:BrownHairedGirl 5508: 5507: 5394:Parliament Hill 5318: 5317: 5305:Albert Reynolds 5190: 5189: 5057: 5056: 4923: 4922: 4882: 4881: 4768: 4767: 4745:or the British 4632: 4627: 4590: 4589: 4542: 4541: 4451: 4450: 4407: 4406: 4366: 4365: 4144: 4143: 4096: 4095: 4000: 3929:InvadingInvader 3908: 3900: 3872: 3860:BrownHairedGirl 3815: 3814: 3734: 3733: 3729:WP:SUMMARYSTYLE 3673:Socratic method 3642: 3641: 3543: 3538: 3447: 3446: 3409: 3408: 3369: 3368: 3328: 3327: 3286: 3285: 3241: 3240: 3209: 3184: 3183: 3131: 3130: 3085: 3084: 3042: 3041: 2823: 2822: 2768: 2767: 2727: 2726: 2659: 2658: 2614: 2613: 2573: 2564: 2478: 2477: 2440: 2439: 2390: 2389: 2351: 2350: 2305: 2304: 2137: 2136: 2091: 2090: 2029: 2028: 1977: 1976: 1815: 1814: 1757:BrownHairedGirl 1673: 1672: 1616: 1615: 1561: 1560: 1496: 1495: 1469:BrownHairedGirl 1446: 1445: 1425:s the article. 1387: 1386: 1302: 1301: 1244: 1243: 1210:BrownHairedGirl 1188: 1187: 1139: 1138: 1107: 1106: 981: 980: 934: 933: 913: 902: 891: 880: 869: 858: 847: 836: 825: 814: 803: 792: 781: 770: 759: 748: 737: 726: 715: 704: 693: 682: 671: 660: 649: 638: 627: 616: 605: 594: 583: 572: 561: 550: 539: 528: 517: 506: 495: 484: 464:under half. – 366: 329: 319: 300:nomination page 286: 257: 217: 214: 211: 208: 207: 177: 172: 170: 150: 104: 101: 98: 95: 94: 61: 32:on Knowledge's 29: 12: 11: 5: 5820: 5818: 5810: 5809: 5804: 5799: 5794: 5789: 5779: 5778: 5768: 5767: 5766: 5765: 5764: 5763: 5762: 5761: 5760: 5731: 5668: 5650: 5649: 5648: 5647: 5646: 5645: 5644: 5643: 5642: 5641: 5640: 5639: 5638: 5637: 5636: 5635: 5634: 5633: 5576: 5575: 5574: 5573: 5572: 5571: 5570: 5569: 5568: 5567: 5566: 5565: 5564: 5563: 5562: 5561: 5560: 5502: 5498: 5497: 5496: 5482:lying in state 5478:lying in state 5474: 5455: 5448:lying in state 5444:state funerals 5437: 5430: 5419: 5377:lying in state 5360: 5301: 5297: 5278: 5270: 5258: 5229: 5185: 5182: 5181: 5180: 5179: 5178: 5133: 5106: 5089:have articles 5079: 5040: 5029: 5010: 5007: 4918: 4869: 4866: 4865: 4864: 4857: 4790: 4789: 4788: 4787: 4758: 4698: 4681: 4656: 4639: 4614: 4613: 4612: 4611: 4610: 4609: 4564: 4563: 4562: 4561: 4496: 4495: 4494: 4493: 4492: 4491: 4490: 4489: 4488: 4487: 4486: 4485: 4484: 4483: 4388: 4387: 4386: 4385: 4357: 4335: 4315: 4286: 4285: 4271: 4270: 4263: 4262: 4246: 4245: 4231: 4199: 4198: 4187: 4186: 4169: 4168: 4167: 4166: 4165: 4164: 4163: 4139: 4136: 4133: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4031:125.167.57.167 4008: 3984: 3966: 3965: 3942: 3941: 3940: 3939: 3919: 3918: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3868: 3853: 3836: 3835: 3834: 3789: 3779:Rodney Baggins 3763: 3762: 3761: 3760: 3759: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3755: 3754: 3753: 3725: 3708:In this case, 3706: 3629: 3552: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3524: 3523: 3522: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3488: 3473: 3350: 3309: 3263: 3238:for deletion? 3207: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3164: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3110: 3107: 3104: 3076: 3075: 3074: 3069: 3025: 3020:As to policy: 3018: 3007: 3006: 3005: 3000: 2992: 2981: 2962: 2961:article title. 2958: 2926: 2901: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2818: 2811: 2763: 2718: 2715: 2686:state funerals 2682:state funerals 2654: 2584: 2552: 2538:these articles 2531: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2520: 2519: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2435: 2300: 2289: 2264: 2238: 2217: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2171: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2131: 2128: 2115:Matilda Maniac 2086: 2078: 2075:Matilda Maniac 2061:Matilda Maniac 2023: 2016:Matilda Maniac 2002:Matilda Maniac 1972: 1947: 1946: 1938: 1937: 1916: 1915: 1893: 1892: 1870: 1853: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1806: 1803:Matilda Maniac 1789:Matilda Maniac 1785:disambiguation 1742: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1660: 1611: 1586: 1583: 1544: 1541: 1519: 1486: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1325: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1288: 1239: 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1126: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1070: 1067: 1060: 1052: 1045: 1020: 1019: 1001: 1000: 972:Note to closer 922: 919: 918: 907: 896: 885: 874: 863: 852: 841: 830: 819: 808: 797: 786: 775: 764: 753: 742: 731: 720: 709: 698: 687: 676: 665: 654: 643: 632: 621: 610: 599: 588: 577: 566: 555: 544: 533: 522: 511: 500: 489: 477: 448: 447: 413: 412: 385: 384: 341: 340: 326:requested move 320: 318: 315: 296: 295: 285: 282: 267: 266: 256: 253: 250: 249: 246: 245: 242: 241: 234:Mid-importance 230: 224: 223: 221: 183: 182: 166: 154: 153: 151:Mid‑importance 145: 133: 132: 129: 128: 121:Mid-importance 117: 111: 110: 108: 105:Death articles 91:the discussion 77: 65: 64: 62:Mid‑importance 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5819: 5808: 5805: 5803: 5800: 5798: 5795: 5793: 5790: 5788: 5785: 5784: 5782: 5772: 5759: 5755: 5751: 5747: 5746: 5745: 5741: 5737: 5732: 5730: 5726: 5722: 5718: 5714: 5710: 5706: 5702: 5701: 5700: 5697: 5694: 5690: 5689: 5688: 5684: 5680: 5676: 5672: 5669: 5667: 5663: 5659: 5655: 5652: 5651: 5632: 5627: 5623: 5619: 5610: 5609:state funeral 5606: 5602: 5598: 5597: 5596: 5592: 5588: 5584: 5580: 5577: 5559: 5555: 5551: 5547: 5546: 5545: 5541: 5537: 5536:JaggedHamster 5533: 5528: 5527: 5526: 5521: 5517: 5513: 5503: 5499: 5495: 5493: 5489: 5483: 5479: 5475: 5472: 5468: 5464: 5463:Daniel Inouye 5460: 5456: 5453: 5449: 5445: 5441: 5440: 5438: 5435: 5431: 5428: 5424: 5420: 5417: 5413: 5409: 5408: 5407: 5403: 5399: 5395: 5391: 5387: 5383: 5379: 5378: 5373: 5369: 5365: 5361: 5358: 5354: 5350: 5346: 5342: 5338: 5337: 5336: 5331: 5327: 5323: 5314: 5310: 5306: 5302: 5298: 5295: 5291: 5287: 5283: 5279: 5276: 5271: 5268: 5264: 5259: 5256: 5252: 5251: 5250: 5246: 5242: 5238: 5234: 5230: 5226: 5222: 5218: 5214: 5210: 5209: 5208: 5203: 5199: 5195: 5186: 5183: 5176: 5173: 5172: 5171: 5170: 5168: 5164: 5163: 5162: 5158: 5154: 5150: 5146: 5142: 5138: 5134: 5131: 5127: 5123: 5119: 5115: 5111: 5107: 5104: 5100: 5096: 5092: 5088: 5084: 5080: 5077: 5076: 5075: 5070: 5066: 5062: 5053: 5049: 5045: 5041: 5038: 5034: 5030: 5027: 5025: 5019: 5015: 5011: 5008: 5005: 5001: 5000: 4999: 4995: 4991: 4987: 4983: 4979: 4975: 4971: 4967: 4963: 4959: 4955: 4951: 4947: 4943: 4942: 4941: 4936: 4932: 4928: 4919: 4916: 4915: 4914: 4910: 4906: 4902: 4901: 4900: 4895: 4891: 4887: 4878: 4874: 4870: 4867: 4862: 4858: 4855: 4854: 4852: 4848: 4847: 4846: 4842: 4838: 4834: 4830: 4825: 4820: 4816: 4812: 4808: 4804: 4800: 4796: 4795: 4794: 4793: 4792: 4791: 4786: 4781: 4777: 4773: 4763: 4759: 4756: 4752: 4748: 4744: 4740: 4736: 4732: 4731: 4730: 4726: 4722: 4718: 4714: 4710: 4706: 4702: 4699: 4697: 4693: 4689: 4685: 4682: 4680: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4660: 4657: 4655: 4651: 4647: 4643: 4640: 4638: 4635: 4630: 4623: 4622:state funeral 4619: 4616: 4615: 4608: 4603: 4599: 4595: 4586: 4585: 4584: 4580: 4576: 4572: 4568: 4567: 4566: 4565: 4560: 4555: 4551: 4547: 4538: 4534: 4533: 4531: 4527: 4523: 4519: 4515: 4509: 4505: 4501: 4498: 4497: 4482: 4479: 4475: 4471: 4470: 4469: 4464: 4460: 4456: 4447: 4443: 4439: 4438: 4437: 4434: 4430: 4427: 4426: 4425: 4420: 4416: 4412: 4403: 4402: 4401: 4398: 4394: 4393: 4392: 4391: 4390: 4389: 4384: 4379: 4375: 4371: 4362: 4358: 4355: 4352: 4348: 4347: 4346: 4343: 4339: 4336: 4334: 4330: 4326: 4322: 4319: 4316: 4314: 4310: 4306: 4305: 4301: 4300: 4295: 4294:state funeral 4291: 4288: 4287: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4275:JaggedHamster 4273: 4272: 4268: 4265: 4264: 4261: 4258: 4255: 4251: 4248: 4247: 4243: 4240: 4237: 4232: 4229: 4226: 4223: 4219: 4214: 4213: 4212: 4211: 4207: 4203: 4196: 4192: 4189: 4188: 4185: 4181: 4177: 4173: 4170: 4162: 4157: 4153: 4149: 4140: 4137: 4134: 4131: 4130: 4129: 4125: 4121: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4109: 4105: 4101: 4092: 4088: 4087: 4086: 4082: 4078: 4073: 4069: 4065: 4062: 4058: 4054: 4050: 4045: 4042: 4041: 4040: 4036: 4032: 4028: 4024: 4020: 4016: 4012: 4009: 4007: 4003: 3996: 3995:state funeral 3992: 3988: 3985: 3983: 3979: 3975: 3971: 3968: 3967: 3964: 3960: 3956: 3952: 3947: 3944: 3943: 3938: 3934: 3930: 3926: 3923: 3922: 3921: 3920: 3917: 3912: 3911: 3903: 3896: 3893: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3876: 3875: 3871: 3867: 3866: 3861: 3857: 3854: 3852: 3848: 3844: 3840: 3839:Strong oppose 3837: 3833: 3828: 3824: 3820: 3811: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3801: 3797: 3793: 3790: 3788: 3784: 3780: 3775: 3771: 3770:state funeral 3767: 3764: 3752: 3747: 3743: 3739: 3730: 3726: 3723: 3719: 3715: 3712:is a type of 3711: 3710:state funeral 3707: 3704: 3700: 3699:state funeral 3696: 3692: 3688: 3687: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3666: 3665:State funeral 3662: 3661: 3660: 3655: 3651: 3647: 3638: 3634: 3630: 3627: 3624:No, they are 3623: 3622: 3621: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3605: 3604:State funeral 3600: 3599: 3598: 3594: 3590: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3560: 3559:State funeral 3556: 3553: 3551: 3547: 3546: 3541: 3539:Peter Ormond 3534:per Dentren. 3533: 3530: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3489: 3487: 3483: 3479: 3474: 3471: 3467: 3466: 3465: 3460: 3456: 3452: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3437: 3433: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3422: 3418: 3414: 3406: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3397: 3393: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3382: 3378: 3374: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3359: 3355: 3352:I’ll wait……… 3351: 3348: 3347: 3346: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3324: 3323: 3322: 3318: 3314: 3310: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3282: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3272: 3268: 3264: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3254: 3250: 3246: 3237: 3236:state funeral 3233: 3232: 3231: 3227: 3223: 3219: 3218:State funeral 3213: 3208: 3202: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3165: 3162: 3158: 3153: 3149: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3111: 3108: 3105: 3103: 3098: 3094: 3090: 3081: 3077: 3073: 3070: 3068: 3065: 3064: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3055: 3051: 3047: 3038: 3033: 3030: 3026: 3023: 3019: 3016: 3012: 3011:WP:COMMONNAME 3008: 3004: 3001: 2999: 2996: 2995: 2993: 2990: 2986: 2985:WP:GOOGLETEST 2982: 2979: 2975: 2974:WP:COMMONNAME 2971: 2967: 2966:WP:COMMONNAME 2963: 2959: 2957: 2953: 2949: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2939: 2935: 2930: 2927: 2925: 2921: 2917: 2913: 2909: 2908:WP:COMMONNAME 2905: 2902: 2900: 2896: 2892: 2888: 2884: 2881: 2859: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2836: 2832: 2828: 2819: 2816: 2812: 2810: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2800: 2796: 2792: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2781: 2777: 2773: 2764: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2755: 2751: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2740: 2736: 2732: 2723: 2722:WP:COMMONNAME 2719: 2716: 2713: 2709: 2705: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2695: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2655: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2646: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2610: 2606: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2585: 2583: 2580: 2578: 2577: 2571: 2569: 2568: 2560: 2556: 2553: 2551: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2532: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2491: 2487: 2483: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2453: 2449: 2445: 2436: 2432: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2422: 2418: 2414: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2403: 2399: 2395: 2386: 2385: 2384: 2380: 2376: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2347: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2318: 2314: 2310: 2301: 2298: 2294: 2290: 2287: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2265: 2263: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2246: 2242: 2239: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2218: 2216: 2213: 2211: 2208: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2192: 2191: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2169: 2155: 2150: 2146: 2142: 2132: 2129: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2120: 2116: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2104: 2100: 2096: 2087: 2084: 2079: 2076: 2072: 2071: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2053: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2024: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1973: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1956: 1952: 1949: 1948: 1945:article title 1943: 1940: 1939: 1936: 1932: 1928: 1927: 1921: 1918: 1917: 1914: 1910: 1906: 1902: 1898: 1895: 1894: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1878: 1874: 1871: 1869: 1866: 1863: 1862: 1857: 1854: 1852: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1837: 1833: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1811: 1807: 1804: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1769:WP:COMMONNAME 1766: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1749:State funeral 1746: 1743: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1712: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1686: 1682: 1678: 1669: 1665: 1661: 1658: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1612: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1596: 1592: 1587: 1584: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1557: 1553: 1550:, especially 1549: 1545: 1542: 1539: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1529: 1525: 1520: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1492: 1487: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1478: 1474: 1470: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1459: 1455: 1451: 1442: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1412: 1409: 1405: 1400: 1396: 1392: 1383: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1363: 1358: 1355: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1320: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1298: 1294: 1289: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1268: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1240: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1211: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1184: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1163: 1162: 1157: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1125: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1104: 1098: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1074: 1073: 1071: 1068: 1065: 1064:WP:COMMONNAME 1061: 1058: 1053: 1050: 1046: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1003: 1002: 999: 994: 990: 986: 977: 973: 970: 969: 968: 966: 963: 960: 957: 956: 947: 943: 939: 930: 926: 916: 911: 908: 905: 900: 897: 894: 889: 886: 883: 878: 875: 872: 867: 864: 861: 856: 853: 850: 845: 842: 839: 834: 831: 828: 823: 820: 817: 812: 809: 806: 801: 798: 795: 790: 787: 784: 779: 776: 773: 768: 765: 762: 757: 754: 751: 746: 743: 740: 735: 732: 729: 724: 721: 718: 713: 710: 707: 702: 699: 696: 691: 688: 685: 680: 677: 674: 669: 666: 663: 658: 655: 652: 647: 644: 641: 636: 633: 630: 625: 622: 619: 614: 611: 608: 603: 600: 597: 592: 589: 586: 581: 578: 575: 570: 567: 564: 559: 556: 553: 548: 545: 542: 537: 534: 531: 526: 523: 520: 515: 512: 509: 504: 501: 498: 493: 490: 487: 482: 479: 478: 476: 475: 471: 467: 463: 459: 457: 452: 445: 441: 437: 433: 429: 425: 421: 417: 409: 405: 401: 397: 392: 388: 382: 377: 373: 369: 363: 359: 354: 350: 346: 339: 337: 332: 327: 322: 321: 316: 314: 313: 309: 305: 301: 294: 291: 290: 289: 283: 281: 280: 276: 272: 265: 262: 261: 260: 254: 239: 235: 229: 226: 225: 222: 218:Iran articles 205: 201: 197: 193: 189: 188: 180: 169: 167: 164: 160: 159: 155: 149: 146: 143: 139: 126: 122: 116: 113: 112: 109: 92: 88: 84: 83: 78: 75: 71: 70: 66: 60: 57: 54: 50: 45: 41: 35: 27: 23: 18: 17: 5770: 5717:Larry Sanger 5675:so much Snow 5670: 5653: 5485: 5389: 5385: 5381: 5375: 5371: 5356: 5352: 5348: 5344: 5340: 5293: 5236: 5232: 5224: 5220: 5216: 5212: 5148: 5144: 5140: 5136: 5129: 5125: 5121: 5117: 5102: 5098: 5094: 5090: 5086: 5082: 5046:part of the 5043: 5023: 4985: 4981: 4977: 4973: 4969: 4965: 4961: 4957: 4953: 4949: 4945: 4860: 4832: 4828: 4823: 4818: 4814: 4810: 4806: 4802: 4798: 4761: 4747:Queen Mother 4716: 4712: 4704: 4700: 4683: 4658: 4641: 4617: 4512:— Preceding 4499: 4473: 4445: 4337: 4325:Cambalachero 4317: 4303: 4298: 4289: 4266: 4249: 4200: 4194: 4190: 4171: 4120:Barabbas1312 4118:ambiguously. 4091:Barabbas1312 4077:Barabbas1312 4071: 4063: 4043: 4010: 3986: 3969: 3945: 3924: 3906: 3894: 3863: 3855: 3838: 3791: 3765: 3695:false binary 3625: 3554: 3536: 3531: 3469: 3156: 3031: 2928: 2903: 2882: 2845: 2789:Attempts to 2711: 2707: 2703: 2685: 2681: 2586: 2575: 2574: 2566: 2565: 2554: 2533: 2430: 2266: 2240: 2219: 2205: 2193: 2082: 2051: 1941: 1925: 1919: 1896: 1876: 1872: 1860: 1855: 1838: 1809: 1760: 1744: 1555: 1490: 1422: 1418: 1410: 1382:Qwertyxp2000 1361: 1356: 1296: 1234:the article 1164: 1004: 971: 954: 953: 928: 920: 461: 454: 427: 415: 395: 390: 386: 375: 371: 365: 344: 342: 330: 323: 297: 287: 268: 258: 233: 185: 120: 80: 40:WikiProjects 5459:John McCain 5427:WP:CRITERIA 5167:WP:CRITERIA 5110:WP:CRITERIA 5048:WP:CRITERIA 5033:WP:CRITERIA 4873:WP:CRITERIA 4755:Helmut Kohl 4669:are about. 4571:WP:BLUDGEON 3583:be renamed 3161:this source 3022:WP:BLUDGEON 2916:182.3.72.35 2887:WP:CRITERIA 2297:WP:Criteria 2202:WP:criteria 1781:common name 1775:instead of 1552:WP:CRITERIA 1364:wertyxp2000 387:Consistency 336:move review 200:discussions 179:Iran portal 5781:Categories 5750:Randy Kryn 5721:Randy Kryn 5679:Randy Kryn 5617:HairedGirl 5511:HairedGirl 5446:include a 5410:Oh dear. @ 5321:HairedGirl 5313:WP:PRECISE 5193:HairedGirl 5116:militates 5060:HairedGirl 4926:HairedGirl 4885:HairedGirl 4824:resembling 4771:HairedGirl 4667:WP:CONCISE 4663:WP:PRECISE 4593:HairedGirl 4545:HairedGirl 4508:WP:PRECISE 4504:WP:CONCISE 4454:HairedGirl 4410:HairedGirl 4369:HairedGirl 4147:HairedGirl 4099:HairedGirl 4068:WP:PRECISE 3818:HairedGirl 3810:WP:PRECISE 3796:Necrothesp 3737:HairedGirl 3716:, just as 3691:Randy Kryn 3677:Randy Kryn 3645:HairedGirl 3612:Randy Kryn 3563:Randy Kryn 3450:HairedGirl 3412:HairedGirl 3372:HairedGirl 3331:HairedGirl 3289:HairedGirl 3244:HairedGirl 3187:HairedGirl 3134:HairedGirl 3088:HairedGirl 3045:HairedGirl 2826:HairedGirl 2771:HairedGirl 2730:HairedGirl 2688:they are. 2662:HairedGirl 2617:HairedGirl 2559:WP:PRECISE 2481:HairedGirl 2443:HairedGirl 2393:HairedGirl 2354:HairedGirl 2308:HairedGirl 2245:WP:CONCISE 2228:Rreagan007 2224:WP:CONCISE 2140:HairedGirl 2094:HairedGirl 2032:HairedGirl 1980:HairedGirl 1901:WP:PRECISE 1818:HairedGirl 1753:WP:PRECISE 1676:HairedGirl 1668:WP:NOTHERE 1619:HairedGirl 1564:HairedGirl 1499:HairedGirl 1449:HairedGirl 1415:WP:PRECISE 1390:HairedGirl 1305:HairedGirl 1285:WP:PRECISE 1247:HairedGirl 1191:HairedGirl 1142:HairedGirl 1110:HairedGirl 1025:Also note 984:HairedGirl 955:Relisting. 937:HairedGirl 925:WP:PRECISE 438:. We have 411:precision. 204:open tasks 5736:Davethorp 5709:WP:COMMON 5550:Davethorp 5380:. That's 5267:troutslap 5099:principle 4974:different 4966:sometimes 4815:different 4811:component 4671:Thryduulf 4478:blindlynx 4446:different 4433:blindlynx 4397:blindlynx 4351:Blindlynx 4342:blindlynx 3974:Richiepip 3901:\/\/slack 3577:minidress 3493:Davethorp 3478:Davethorp 3432:Davethorp 3392:Davethorp 3354:Davethorp 3313:Davethorp 3267:Davethorp 3212:Davethorp 3115:Davethorp 3027:However, 2978:Davethorp 2948:Davethorp 2934:Davethorp 2706:with the 2684:& so 2562:content. 2434:identify. 2175:Davethorp 1951:Davethorp 1761:"Usually" 1716:H. Carver 1670:conduct. 1639:H. Carver 1591:H. Carver 1538:H. Carver 1524:H. Carver 1473:H. Carver 1441:H. Carver 1427:H. Carver 1281:H. Carver 1267:H. Carver 376:Precision 372:Concision 345:Not moved 5705:UtherSRG 5693:UtherSRG 5626:contribs 5587:— Maile 5520:contribs 5467:Bob Dole 5442:not all 5357:opinions 5330:contribs 5221:uniquely 5202:contribs 5130:conflict 5069:contribs 4954:actually 4935:contribs 4894:contribs 4780:contribs 4646:Kiwipete 4602:contribs 4554:contribs 4526:contribs 4514:unsigned 4474:diffrent 4463:contribs 4419:contribs 4378:contribs 4254:UtherSRG 4236:UtherSRG 4222:UtherSRG 4156:contribs 4108:contribs 4001:Keivan.f 3880:A.D.Hope 3856:Question 3843:JTZegers 3827:contribs 3746:contribs 3654:contribs 3459:contribs 3421:contribs 3381:contribs 3340:contribs 3298:contribs 3253:contribs 3196:contribs 3143:contribs 3097:contribs 3054:contribs 2846:annoy me 2835:contribs 2791:persuade 2780:contribs 2739:contribs 2671:contribs 2626:contribs 2501:A.D.Hope 2490:contribs 2463:A.D.Hope 2452:contribs 2429:That is 2417:A.D.Hope 2402:contribs 2375:A.D.Hope 2363:contribs 2346:A.D.Hope 2332:A.D.Hope 2317:contribs 2250:this one 2149:contribs 2103:contribs 2041:contribs 1989:contribs 1926:Ljleppan 1905:A.D.Hope 1882:Pincrete 1843:Originoa 1827:contribs 1697:A.D.Hope 1685:contribs 1664:pedantic 1657:A.D.Hope 1643:A.D.Hope 1628:contribs 1573:contribs 1508:contribs 1458:contribs 1399:contribs 1372:contribs 1327:I think 1314:contribs 1256:contribs 1218:— Maile 1200:contribs 1151:contribs 1119:contribs 1035:— Maile 1009:— Maile 993:contribs 959:UtherSRG 946:contribs 432:case law 428:de facto 424:defining 416:de facto 5601:Maile66 5532:WP:EDRC 5501:policy. 5492:viewing 5412:Bearcat 5398:Bearcat 5382:central 5368:funeral 5349:nothing 5290:funeral 5265:you or 5255:Bearcat 5241:Bearcat 5153:Bearcat 5128:in any 5118:against 5083:already 5004:Bearcat 4990:Bearcat 4905:Bearcat 4851:Bearcat 4837:Bearcat 4819:private 4799:private 4735:Bearcat 4721:Bearcat 4448:thing. 4318:Oppose: 4250:comment 4044:Comment 3991:funeral 3774:funeral 3714:funeral 3703:funeral 3697:: that 3669:Funeral 3608:Funeral 3589:Colin M 3222:GoodDay 3169:Colin M 2929:Comment 2904:Support 2891:Colin M 2883:Support 2850:GoodDay 2795:GoodDay 2750:GoodDay 2690:GoodDay 2641:GoodDay 2605:GoodDay 2591:GoodDay 2555:Support 2534:Comment 2241:Support 2220:Support 2207:Michael 2194:Support 2127:Not so. 1920:Support 1897:Support 1877:(State) 1873:Support 1861:Dentren 1777:Bothell 1607:and of 1556:obliged 1518:record. 1329:Maile66 1293:Thriley 1232:Maile66 1183:Thriley 1169:Thriley 1130:Maile66 1077:21 hits 1049:Maile66 466:wbm1058 236:on the 123:on the 30:C-class 5713:WP:IAR 5696:(talk) 5654:Oppose 5622:(talk) 5516:(talk) 5390:always 5353:either 5345:either 5326:(talk) 5263:attack 5233:always 5213:dozens 5198:(talk) 5149:at all 5065:(talk) 5024:always 4982:at all 4978:either 4962:always 4950:either 4944:Well, 4931:(talk) 4890:(talk) 4833:uphold 4829:always 4803:at all 4776:(talk) 4709:WP:GNG 4705:at all 4701:Oppose 4684:Oppose 4659:Oppose 4642:Oppose 4618:Oppose 4598:(talk) 4550:(talk) 4500:oppose 4459:(talk) 4415:(talk) 4374:(talk) 4338:oppose 4299:Joseph 4290:Oppose 4267:Oppose 4257:(talk) 4239:(talk) 4225:(talk) 4216:Note: 4191:Oppose 4172:Oppose 4152:(talk) 4104:(talk) 4064:Oppose 4011:Oppose 3987:Oppose 3970:Oppose 3946:Oppose 3925:Oppose 3895:Oppose 3823:(talk) 3792:Oppose 3766:Oppose 3742:(talk) 3650:(talk) 3555:Oppose 3532:Oppose 3455:(talk) 3417:(talk) 3377:(talk) 3336:(talk) 3308:parts) 3294:(talk) 3249:(talk) 3192:(talk) 3139:(talk) 3093:(talk) 3050:(talk) 2914:page. 2831:(talk) 2776:(talk) 2735:(talk) 2704:status 2667:(talk) 2637:WP:IAR 2622:(talk) 2587:Oppose 2557:: per 2486:(talk) 2448:(talk) 2398:(talk) 2359:(talk) 2313:(talk) 2267:Oppose 2145:(talk) 2099:(talk) 2083:effect 2037:(talk) 1985:(talk) 1969:WP:CSK 1856:Oppose 1839:Oppose 1823:(talk) 1745:Oppose 1681:(talk) 1624:(talk) 1569:(talk) 1504:(talk) 1454:(talk) 1413:- Per 1411:Oppose 1395:(talk) 1310:(talk) 1252:(talk) 1196:(talk) 1165:Oppose 1147:(talk) 1115:(talk) 1097:1 hits 1091:9 hits 1083:2 hits 1005:Oppose 989:(talk) 976:WP:C2D 962:(talk) 942:(talk) 360:. The 355:, and 36:scale. 5615:Brown 5509:Brown 5372:don't 5319:Brown 5275:WP:RM 5191:Brown 5114:WP:AT 5087:could 5058:Brown 5052:WP:AT 5037:WP:AT 4976:than 4958:three 4924:Brown 4883:Brown 4877:WP:AT 4807:state 4769:Brown 4688:Nfitz 4628:Pyrop 4591:Brown 4543:Brown 4452:Brown 4408:Brown 4367:Brown 4145:Brown 4097:Brown 3816:Brown 3735:Brown 3643:Brown 3448:Brown 3410:Brown 3370:Brown 3329:Brown 3287:Brown 3281:crazy 3242:Brown 3185:Brown 3157:state 3132:Brown 3086:Brown 3043:Brown 3037:WP:AT 3029:WP:AT 2824:Brown 2769:Brown 2728:Brown 2660:Brown 2615:Brown 2609:WP:AT 2479:Brown 2441:Brown 2391:Brown 2352:Brown 2306:Brown 2138:Brown 2092:Brown 2030:Brown 1978:Brown 1965:WP:AT 1816:Brown 1674:Brown 1617:Brown 1562:Brown 1548:WP:AT 1497:Brown 1447:Brown 1388:Brown 1303:Brown 1245:Brown 1189:Brown 1140:Brown 1108:Brown 1057:WP:AT 982:Brown 935:Brown 367:goals 96:Death 87:Death 59:Death 5754:talk 5740:talk 5725:talk 5683:talk 5662:talk 5591:talk 5554:talk 5540:talk 5488:wake 5465:and 5402:talk 5245:talk 5157:talk 5145:gets 4994:talk 4909:talk 4841:talk 4725:talk 4713:both 4692:talk 4675:talk 4650:talk 4620:- A 4579:talk 4522:talk 4329:talk 4309:talk 4304:2302 4279:talk 4206:talk 4195:that 4180:talk 4124:talk 4081:talk 4053:talk 4035:talk 3993:, a 3978:talk 3959:talk 3933:talk 3909:talk 3884:talk 3870:talk 3858:for 3847:talk 3800:talk 3783:talk 3768:- A 3701:and 3681:talk 3667:and 3616:talk 3606:and 3593:talk 3567:talk 3497:talk 3482:talk 3476:one 3470:love 3436:talk 3404:see 3396:talk 3358:talk 3317:talk 3271:talk 3226:talk 3173:talk 3119:talk 2952:talk 2938:talk 2920:talk 2895:talk 2854:talk 2799:talk 2754:talk 2712:name 2708:name 2694:talk 2645:talk 2595:talk 2546:talk 2505:talk 2467:talk 2421:talk 2379:talk 2336:talk 2275:talk 2258:talk 2254:TJRC 2232:talk 2222:per 2179:talk 2119:talk 2065:talk 2052:only 2006:talk 1955:talk 1931:talk 1909:talk 1886:talk 1847:talk 1793:talk 1783:not 1720:talk 1701:talk 1647:talk 1595:talk 1528:talk 1477:talk 1431:talk 1368:talk 1342:talk 1338:TJRC 1271:talk 1222:talk 1173:talk 1039:talk 1029:and 1013:talk 923:Per 470:talk 462:much 308:talk 275:talk 209:Iran 192:Iran 148:Iran 5624:• ( 5605:CSK 5518:• ( 5490:or 5386:not 5343:up 5341:you 5328:• ( 5225:not 5200:• ( 5126:are 5122:you 5112:or 5067:• ( 5044:not 4986:not 4970:not 4946:I'm 4933:• ( 4892:• ( 4861:not 4778:• ( 4762:not 4753:or 4749:or 4741:or 4717:and 4665:or 4600:• ( 4552:• ( 4461:• ( 4417:• ( 4376:• ( 4154:• ( 4106:• ( 4021:or 3825:• ( 3744:• ( 3675:)? 3652:• ( 3626:not 3457:• ( 3419:• ( 3379:• ( 3338:• ( 3296:• ( 3251:• ( 3194:• ( 3141:• ( 3095:• ( 3052:• ( 2833:• ( 2778:• ( 2737:• ( 2669:• ( 2624:• ( 2567:Pam 2488:• ( 2450:• ( 2431:not 2400:• ( 2361:• ( 2315:• ( 2252:). 2204:. — 2147:• ( 2101:• ( 2039:• ( 1987:• ( 1825:• ( 1810:not 1683:• ( 1626:• ( 1571:• ( 1506:• ( 1491:any 1456:• ( 1397:• ( 1312:• ( 1297:not 1254:• ( 1198:• ( 1149:• ( 1117:• ( 991:• ( 944:• ( 406:(a 302:. — 228:Mid 115:Mid 5783:: 5756:) 5742:) 5727:) 5685:) 5664:) 5611:. 5593:) 5556:) 5542:) 5484:, 5476:a 5461:, 5404:) 5315:. 5247:) 5217:me 5169:: 5159:) 5151:. 5141:is 5137:in 5054:) 4996:) 4911:) 4843:) 4727:) 4694:) 4677:) 4652:) 4581:) 4573:. 4528:) 4524:• 4510:. 4363:? 4331:) 4311:) 4281:) 4208:) 4182:) 4126:) 4083:) 4070:: 4066:. 4055:) 4037:) 4029:. 3980:) 3961:) 3935:) 3898:-- 3886:) 3865:VR 3849:) 3812:. 3802:) 3785:) 3731:. 3683:) 3618:) 3595:) 3569:) 3544:💬 3499:) 3484:) 3438:) 3398:) 3360:) 3319:) 3273:) 3228:) 3175:) 3121:) 3082:. 3032:is 2954:) 2940:) 2922:) 2897:) 2856:) 2801:) 2756:) 2696:) 2647:) 2597:) 2548:) 2507:) 2469:) 2423:) 2381:) 2338:) 2330:. 2277:) 2260:) 2234:) 2226:. 2181:) 2121:) 2067:) 2018:: 2008:) 1957:) 1933:) 1911:) 1888:) 1864:| 1849:) 1795:) 1722:) 1703:) 1649:) 1597:) 1530:) 1479:) 1433:) 1417:: 1374:) 1370:| 1344:) 1273:) 1224:) 1175:) 1041:) 1015:) 952:— 927:: 912:→ 901:→ 890:→ 879:→ 868:→ 857:→ 846:→ 835:→ 824:→ 813:→ 802:→ 791:→ 780:→ 769:→ 758:→ 747:→ 736:→ 725:→ 714:→ 703:→ 692:→ 681:→ 670:→ 659:→ 648:→ 637:→ 626:→ 615:→ 604:→ 593:→ 582:→ 571:→ 560:→ 549:→ 538:→ 527:→ 516:→ 505:→ 494:→ 483:→ 472:) 396:is 391:40 328:. 310:) 277:) 5752:( 5738:( 5723:( 5681:( 5660:( 5628:) 5599:@ 5589:( 5552:( 5538:( 5522:) 5494:" 5400:( 5332:) 5296:. 5277:. 5253:@ 5243:( 5204:) 5155:( 5071:) 5002:@ 4992:( 4937:) 4907:( 4896:) 4849:@ 4839:( 4782:) 4733:@ 4723:( 4690:( 4673:( 4648:( 4633:e 4604:) 4577:( 4556:) 4535:@ 4520:( 4476:— 4465:) 4431:— 4421:) 4380:) 4349:@ 4327:( 4307:( 4277:( 4204:( 4178:( 4158:) 4122:( 4110:) 4089:@ 4079:( 4051:( 4033:( 3976:( 3957:( 3931:( 3913:) 3905:( 3882:( 3845:( 3829:) 3798:( 3781:( 3748:) 3724:. 3689:@ 3679:( 3656:) 3614:( 3591:( 3565:( 3495:( 3480:( 3461:) 3434:( 3423:) 3394:( 3383:) 3356:( 3342:) 3315:( 3300:) 3269:( 3255:) 3224:( 3214:: 3210:@ 3198:) 3171:( 3145:) 3117:( 3099:) 3056:) 3017:. 2991:. 2950:( 2936:( 2918:( 2893:( 2852:( 2837:) 2817:. 2797:( 2782:) 2752:( 2741:) 2714:. 2692:( 2673:) 2643:( 2628:) 2603:@ 2593:( 2576:D 2544:( 2503:( 2492:) 2465:( 2454:) 2419:( 2404:) 2377:( 2365:) 2344:@ 2334:( 2319:) 2288:. 2273:( 2256:( 2230:( 2212:. 2210:Z 2177:( 2151:) 2117:( 2105:) 2073:@ 2063:( 2043:) 2014:@ 2004:( 1991:) 1971:. 1953:( 1929:( 1923:- 1907:( 1884:( 1845:( 1829:) 1801:@ 1791:( 1718:( 1699:( 1687:) 1655:@ 1645:( 1630:) 1593:( 1575:) 1536:@ 1526:( 1510:) 1475:( 1467:@ 1460:) 1439:@ 1429:( 1401:) 1380:@ 1366:( 1362:Q 1340:( 1316:) 1279:@ 1269:( 1258:) 1230:@ 1220:( 1214:1 1202:) 1181:@ 1171:( 1153:) 1128:@ 1121:) 1047:@ 1037:( 1011:( 995:) 948:) 468:( 458:. 446:. 383:. 306:( 273:( 240:. 206:. 127:. 42::

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

Index