1148:
biographical articles here at
Knowledge so please don't treat me like some vandal. On the other hand, I appreciate that maybe you were annoyed that I began to use a different citation system and that I changed the formatting of the chunk quotations. I still would like to see those two things reformatted, but that's an issue we can deal with another day. In the meantime, I am going to reintegrate some of the more minor information that you removed back into the article. I'll try and restrict myself to re-adding the minor stuff, and will hold off on adding any new sections until we can agree on this together (hopefully with some RfC contributions too). I respect you as an editor and I really hope that we can work constructively on this one, because an ongoing edit war and mud-slinging isn't good for either of us or the Knowledge project itself. Best,
3429:"Hence, the RFC" - Since the RFC was so obviously non-neutral, attacking me personally, people commenting in it are inevitably swayed to disagree with me on all points. That is the reason, of course, why RFCs are supposed to be neutral. Also, no discussion had occurred beforehand, as is supposed to be the case, so no one commenting even understands what the arguments are about. Since the RFC was so fundamentally illegitimate, it is no surprise that it has not been productive. Really I think the best thing is for people to stop pretending that a biased RFC needs to take place before any discussion, and instead start discussing on article talk.
1203:, exactly? I've simply bolstered the prose in places with extra citations, particularly after direct quotations, including to one direct quotation that currently is not-referenced at all. I've added the name of Dilling's school with a link to the appropriate article on the subject, I've made mention of the Spanish Civil War in a sentence describing her travels in Spain, and I've slightly re-worded a sentence to better reflect the wording of the original source. To be honest, I can't see anything here that you could reasonably object to. Are you simply unhappy that someone else is contributing to
2723:. At present it consists of two rather thin paragraphs, each of which mention some of Dilling's significant achievements but which give no wider discussion of her biography; it does not mention for example where she was born and doesn't give any wider outline of her life. The lede also mentions information (such as "Dilling's writings secured her a lasting influence among right-wing groups") which actually doesn't appear to be present in the main article body at all, which again is in contravention of WP:Lede. Previously I drew comparisons with yesterday's Featured Article,
2004:. Given that it is typical to include mention of any schools that an individual attended in political biography articles here at Knowledge, I added this information into the article. Signedzzz removed it, and when questioned on this course of action responded "Why do you want to add it?". My response would be that this is exactly the sort of information than an encyclopaedia such as Knowledge concerns itself with, hence why school names are regularly found in other GA and FA-rated biographical articles.
3818:"Their relationship was turbulent; when Dilling discovered her husband was having an affair with another woman, she broke into the latter's home at gunpoint and threatened her. Albert gave his wife $ 100,000 not to divorce him, and although he promised not to commit adultery again, he had two further extra-marital relationships before their eventual divorce." - why do you object to the addition of this valuable information? Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
3536:
was made by GRuban, I agreed with him that 'school' is useful additional, not essential info. Of course I read what you wrote. … … Specific reason as given by GRuban, true, slightly useful fact, like many others, which on their own are trivial, meaningless to 99+% of readers but which give a more rounded overall picture. … … could you make up your mind whether you object to the school going in or not? A few posts ago you said it was no big deal either way.
2819:
titles are not italicised, books are described as first editions (this is only necessary when dealing with revised editions), some books are given location of publisher while others aren't, etc. I corrected all of these issues, but
Signedzzz simply went in and undid this, without offering an explanation. Do I have support for re-introducing the division into "Footnotes" and "Sources" sub-headings and for standardising the format of the sources?
31:
3552:(edit conflict) It is "no big deal", in the sense that I think it is only slightly detrimental, in my view, as I stated. Now that I have spent another day on this "problem", it would make sense to actually come up with a reason for the change. The suburb analogy doesn't work in favour of inclusion, but rather against, as I stated. What, specifically, is the reason to include the name rather than a million other true facts - in other words:
1241:
then a citation at the very end of the paragraph, but in my (extensive) experience of getting articles to GA and FA, there will always be calls for ensuring that every direct quotation is cited at the end of the sentence, not the end of the paragraph. Adding an additional citation in these instances is very minor and simple and really not something that needs to be argued about, so why you insist on removing the citations is beyond me.
1518:
then moving on to the Soviet Union; only at the very end of the entire paragraph do you have citations. A reader could reasonably think that those citations only apply to the information about the USSR and not the earlier material too. The additional citations don't cause you or the reader any harm and they make it clearer that the paragraph is fully or properly referenced. Adding them causes no problems and has clear benefits.
965:. the prose as it originally stood stated: "They spent a month in the Soviet Union in 1931, where local guides, who Dilling claimed were Jews, showed her a map of the US with Soviet city names, and warned her that communism would take over the world." This can cause confusion; I mean, what on Earth is a "Soviet city name"? The source states that what concerned Dilling was that U.S. cities would be named after Soviet war heroes
1464:"Their relationship was turbulent; when Dilling discovered her husband was having an affair with another woman, she broke into the latter's home at gunpoint and threatened her. Albert gave his wife $ 100,000 not to divorce him, and although he promised not to commit adultery again, he had two further extra-marital relationships before their eventual divorce." - why do you object to the addition of this valuable information?
3700:
argument over the map anecdote—but on giving it a second look, I can't even tell if you're alleging an error there or not, in any case it looks like a trivial disagreement over wording, with the other editor proposing a wording closer to the original source. Even if those two claims were errors, I'm not sure if I'd call that being "replete" with errors, other objections look like issues of emphasis.
2614:
correct this, I went through the paragraphs and integrated citations to the reliable sources at the appropriate junctures. Once again, Signedzzz undid these edits. However, these additional citations cause no problems, and moreover help prevent any confusion that the reader may have regarding what information comes from what reference, whether a sentence is actually referenced or not, etc.
3136:
article beyond its present size would turn it into an article about that book instead. As for adding more about her "personal life", that's a bad idea on two counts: more would be undue in relation to the article; and I don't think you would be saying that if she was male. Her personal life is well-covered in the article, inasmuch as it had any impact on her public life.
2242:" Well clearly, I do think that this is valuable biographical information, as does the reliable source in question. I don't know why they would want to omit this information from the article, although its omission might suggest a desire to avoid mention of incidents which paint Dilling in a less-favourable light, in which case we have a neutrality issue at play.
589:
1665:, we really should be rewording and expanding the lede so that it properly summarises the wider content of the article. At present it doesn't do that; it adds some core facts about her life and her significance but gives no broader biographical overview. To demonstrate how it could be improved just take a look at today's featured article,
3325:. There is no hope of progress if you don't offer reasons, or simply claim to have already given them in places I just cannot see. How much info about her personal life, marriage and its problems, for example, do you think is appropriate? If none, why? I've already said above that I think the offered text could be 'pruned' somewhat.
3382:
decided to remove the name. Clearly, I could change my mind if a reason for adding the name is stated. That is what is needed here to advance the discussion, which is just going round in circles at this point. I'm happy to discuss this with other users, by the way, contrary to what is stated in the RFC notice above.
3485:
In describing the personal attacks against me as "gripes" and stating that you "don't see it as 'attacking'", I can only assume that you intend to insinuate that the personal attacks are legitimate (if I have not misunderstood.) I have no wish to discuss your opinion of my personal failings, however,
3443:
Another result is that people are now looking for any evidence that the allegations are true, so in that sense, I have no objection to you adding the name of the school, of course. It's no big deal either way, just very slightly detrimental. Ideally I'd prefer to hear from someone who was not brought
3195:
I know you didn't, in which case why exclude information about private life, inc schooling? Why exclude context to those who don't know what was happening in Spain in the 1930s? What are the factual errors that you speak of? If you are right about any of this, how would any of us know, outside of the
2838:
As part of my attempted improvements to this article I added sections on
Dilling's "Ideology" and her "Personality and personal life", in keeping with most other GA and FA political biography articles. Signedzzz deleted these. Admittedly both sections were fairly scanty at the time of their deletion,
2608:
Repeatedly, citations are left to the very end of the paragraph rather than being positioned at different points throughout the paragraph. In some cases this causes problems; for instance, we have a number of direct quotes which end sentences but are left without a citation immediately following them
3849:
Secondly, I am not comfortable with the idea of relating the break-in anecdote in an incomplete form. As this is an encyclopedia article -and not a
Hollywood film script - it seems pretty dodgy to edit the story like that, omitting to mention one of the "main characters" involved, as per the source.
3579:
It hardly matters to most readers that a person was born on the xth of the month, but we include it, it hardly matters the name of the suburb or city, it hardly matters what the name of their mother was, but all taken together constitute basic biog info. Since known, I believe the few extra words of
3228:
I know I did, because I was trying to find out what the objection was. The objection therefore isn't lack of source. It's a bit strange to claim it is because she is a woman we should exclude where she went to school and that she had some troubles in her marriage. The objection that disproportionate
2934:
by summarising the wider content of the article and providing an outline of
Dilling's life rather than simply mention of her impact and legacy (as it presently does). 2) Should the article have a section devoted to Dilling's personality and personal life. 3) Should the article have a section devoted
2237:
There is a piece of what I think is quite significant information mentioned in the reliable sources but which is missing from the article. I added it in thusly; "Their relationship was turbulent; when
Dilling discovered her husband was having an affair with another woman, she broke into the latter's
1893:
or none of them do. Once this is decided, we can address whether these later citations are necessary. However, the LEAD is suppose to summarize the main body. No fact in the LEAD should be without equivalent or greater detail in the main body. This includes birth/death dates. There should be greater
1147:
I'll try to meet you half-way, Signedzzz. I'm not going to stand by and let you delete everything and anything I have added. You need to reflect on your ownership issues and recognise that
Knowledge is a collaborative effort. I am only here to help, and I have a great deal of experience in improving
1061:
Moreover, on a wider level, Signedzzz, I'm certainly not trying to undo all of the good work that you have done with this article in getting it to GA status. Indeed, I thank you for that! However, I have a great deal of experiences with political biographies here at
Knowledge, and I think that there
1003:
To directly quote the source: "Her fears were exacerbated by
Russian guides, whom Dilling claimed were Jews. One guide told her communism would conquer the world, beginning with a revolution in China and culminating in the takeover of United States. The guides also showed her a map on which American
420:
Apparently her second husband, Jeremiah Stokes (1877-1954) published her book in 1964 (note the ten year discrepancy!). Given the somewhat controversial nature of
Dilling, it would be good if the article was as accurate as possible, and an error of this type might give ideological diehards an excuse
3884:
I don't know what you mean by making the text align with the source. I have not offered any opinion on the importance of the exact number. I am opposed to stating an incorrect number, or one which is not verified. "From an encyclopedic gender neutral perspective, it is not at all clear that this is
3795:
Came here via RfC. Looks like there are some disputes over the verifiability of certain claims that are being sourced to print works. It's hard for me to comment directly on those disputes, as I don't have access to the cited books. And Google Books can be somewhat unreliable, in terms of what gets
3535:
I don't intend to 'insinuate' anything, except that 5 times as much space, time and 'bad blood' has been spent on characterising the 'gripes' than they themselves occupy, I would welcome them being struck through. They are unproductive, but so is taking umbrage on such a scale. The 'suburb' analogy
2968:
If my changes are getting instantly removed, and the Talk Page points I raise get rejected by you, how will we progress? The opinions of others will be useful here in allowing us to come to some sort of arrangement when it comes to the required improvements to the lede and article body. An RfC will
2376:
is appropriate. As I read it, the source implies that the "Jews" whom Dilling met in the Soviet Union claimed that communism will sweep across the United States, resulting in American cities being renamed after "Soviet heroes" (it explicitly says the latter). For this reason I think that mention of
1765:
At present this section is called "Early Life and Family", however a very large proportion of it deals with Dilling's travels in Europe and Asia. I suggest that it could therefore be renamed "Early life, family, and travel"; a very minor and not particularly important change but one which adds some
1240:
In the version of the page that you keep reverting to, we have various quotations that end sentences ("great improvement of conditions", "don't believe the stories you hear that this man has not done a great good for this country.") without any citation provided immediately afterward. Yes, there is
400:
Someone put a line at the end of the article saying Dilling put false lines in the Talmud. Though anti-Semites often fabricate quotes from the Talmud, the allegation was unsourced, so I removed it. Either a reference should be provided for this claim, or some examples should be provided, with links
252:
I don't know which ref you're reading, but read it more carefully, please. And, it's "anti-Semitic", self-published blogs are not RS, but blogs affiliated with established orgs are. I have cited 2 works by historians that refer to Dilling's anti-Semitism. So, sourcing aside, what about the issue
124:
Saying 'She believed Franco was a brave Christian' does not seem to get to what was different about Dilling. Surely everyone, including his foes, believed that Franco was personaly brave (as shown by battles in Morocco) and that he was a believing member of the Roman Catholic Church. I suggest this
3461:
I agree that the RfC is seriously flawed, I don't see it as 'attacking', though it contains unnecessary 'gripes'. Its main flaw is that it is too complex, RfC's are good at asking 'A or B' questions, presented with both sides of the argument. Having said that, I think naming the school is the same
3409:
It's an exact and undisputed fact, and it is slightly useful. That, in my opinion (and presumably that of those that likewise agree), combines to be worth the space it takes up on the page. If you disagree, fine. People can disagree on editorial decisions like this one in perfectly good faith. And
3381:
As I said before, the question is not "why would we not mention her school's name", but "Why would we add her school's name?" Or "How would adding the name of the school benefit readers in any way?" It is already stated that it is a Catholic girls' school. It is a grey area to me, and I eventually
3026:
As I said, "hostility" may not have been the right word; however I am not using this term simply because you don't agree with my edits; my frustration was with your mass deletion of my edits without any explanation either in your edit summary or on the Talk Page. On your second point, you have not
2818:
At present, the referencing system is a little messy. We have footnotes followed by sources, but the two are not differentiated into sub-headings (which is of course the norm here at Knowledge). Moreover, the list of sources displays some problems. Different sources are formatted differently; book
1517:
Why do you insist on leaving citations till the end of the paragraph in several instances rather than having them at the end of every sentence discussing a different issue? For instance, in one paragraph you discuss her travels in Britain, France, Italy, and the impact that they had on her, before
969:
the US fell to communism. Thus, we really need to be mentioning that "communism would take over the world" first; it's not a major change, and I don't really see why anyone would oppose it. It's a simple amendment that makes things a lot clearer. We can always take this to 3rd Opinion if you like?
3489:
You did not read what I just wrote. You stated: "school is the same kind of info as 'suburb'". I just stated (immediately above) why, in this article, that is plainly not the case. Added to which, as I also just stated, none of the main sources mentioned the name of the suburb; similarly, I would
3425:
DOB + full name goes without saying. Parents profession also, could be of interest. Wilmette comes up later in the article, so that was an obvious choice (although none of the main sources mentioned it). I think therefore that this would be the most trivial fact in the article. I am glad that you
3397:
For the same reason we mention where she was born, or her middle name, or her exact date of birth, or her parents' professions, or that she lived in Wilmette or not just any Chicago suburb, or any of a hundred other individually trivial facts, any one of which can be left out and lose little, but
3166:
Why would we not be saying that someone was married, but had problems with their marriage, if the subject were male? We even have 'personal life' sections on longterm bachelor men and women, sometimes saying little is known, or who their friends were. If mainly one source is used for 'historical'
2381:
in the sentence, and moreover it should be made clear that the map displayed would depict U.S. cities being named after "Soviet heroes"; after all, the US would have already appeared on Soviet maps with Russian names for its cities... At present the sentence doesn't really make sense. My proposed
1941:
I am either confused or wrong that I am not confused, but I do not believe I am confused. My point is that what is at issue in this point is subject to correctly formatting the LEAD. Once you decide which way you want to format the LEAD and do so, it will affect the response to this issue in some
1866:
At present the opening sentence relies solely on one citation and doesn't mention Dilling's date of birth. Granted, this isn't a major issue, but I added an additional citation and the date of birth (the latter being found in the additional citation) to this sentence. Signedzzz then removed these
1270:
I did miss that cite. Added now. I don't agree that it is necessary to add cites directly after every quote for this article, obviously, or I would have done so already. Same goes for adding the name of her school. I don't think the Civil War needs to be spelled out, either, obviously, or I would
4010:
The first sentence of the lead presents these key facts in one place, already. The box would make that two places, for no apparent reason. The other facts - name of husband, number of children, religion - are not key facts. I honestly think it is much better without. The picture doesn't fit, and
3594:
So, your answer is, DOB, name of suburb, and name of parents. As you already know, the name of the suburb is important elsewhere in the article, so it is clearly not possible to suggest in good faith that it is as trivial/meaningless as the name of the school. You also claim that DOB and name of
821:"It was the base of the isolationist America First Committee found in September 1940, which by 1941 had 850,000 members, and influential far-right activists Father Charles E. Coughlin, Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith and Lyrl Clark Van Hyning." could be reworded. It's just cluttered and hard to read.
3826:
From an encyclopedic gender neutral perspective, it is not at all clear that this is "valuable information". More importantly, what you added is factually wrong. The cite states "He soon acquired two new mistresses, and the Dillings separated twice before divorcing in 1943." And you omitted the
3699:
The only real case I see where you've tried to discuss one of the alleged errors on the talk page is regarding her husband's affairs, and comparing the text that had been added to the Wiki article to the source, I can't see the distinction you're making. The other argument I had in mind was the
3135:
From the above comments, I can see that those commenting don't realise that no biography of Dilling has been written, which is why this article is shorter than most, and yet comprehensive (one of the main GA criteria). There is one source that is already used for most of the info; to expand the
2895:
has done some fantastic work on this page recently, pulling it up to GA status. However, I notice that there are still some significant omissions to the content; there is no section discussing Dilling's personal life or personality for instance, and no wider discussion of her political views or
2613:
at Knowledge and I've been called out for it at GAN and FAC's in the past). In others, we have a wide range of different topics discussed in a paragraph, all then relying on the citations at the very end. Again, something I've been called out for doing back in my early years as a Wikipedian. To
3775:
The final line of the lead "Dilling's writings secured her a lasting influence among right-wing groups", whilst true, and almost a quote of the 'Jeansonne', is a bit vague. 'Right-wing' is a very broad term covering everything from 'right of centre', to extreme right. It appears to be more the
3361:
I've read them, I don't think most of them are either clear or valid, Why would we not mention her school, give context to younger readers by mentioning the Spanish civil war and give info on her married life. Her reactions to the various European countries seem very relevant to later role and
2997:
Of course I want to discuss it with you. That's why I reached out to you to start with. But given that the response was fairly 'hostile' (forgive me if that's the wrong word), i.e. mass deletions without explanation, I felt that this is a situation that should probably involve others to act as
2854:
There would need to be a reason to NOT include 'personal life', which would include the marriage mentioned above, and its problems. 'Personality' can be problematic. I note that there is also little 'criticism', either in her own time or since, though some of her 'battles' are within other
74:
There's an awful lot of discussion of her ancestry on this page that doesn't seem germaine to her own history is may only be the contributions of those editors interested in promoting her as "racially pure." Should these stay, since they may be factual, or not, since they are potentially
1249:" – isn't cited at all. I checked the citations provided at the end of the paragraph, and this quotation isn't actually in them. So I went and did some investigating of my own, found the necessary citation, and added it in after that first sentence (but you just keep removing it; again,
3834:
The proposed addition claims that "he had two further extra-marital relationships before their eventual divorce." This leaves the reader in no doubt that he had two affairs/mistresses, i.e. not 3 or more, before their divorce, many years later. However, the cite merely states that he
1669:, as an example; it is about a successful woman who lived around the same time as Dilling and so serves as a good comparison. Look at the structure of the lede; that is what we should be seeking to emulate here. I'm more than happy to work on putting a new lede together with you.
338:
I recall a survey of the far right in the mid 60's called 'the further shores', or something like that. It mentioned Dilling as someone from an earlier generation living in Chicago, and opposed to civil rights marches. If the reference can be tracked, it could address this point.
3841:
acquired two new mistresses". The book actually mentions at least one more later on, I believe (I will re-read it to confirm that, at some point); regardless of whether it does or not, however, the proposed addition is not verified by the citation. This is why I removed it, per
1434:" Christian scripture" - why do you object to the word "Christian", which helps keep things clearer for the reader? Just mentioning "scripture" could result in a reader gaining the impression that Dilling had been reading the scriptures of many different religious traditions.
3995:
There is neither a requirement for, nor a policy against them. The advantage is that key-facts (dob, dod, etc.) are presented in one place. I have a slight preference for inclusion on biogs, so long as they do not become bloated mini-articles, which this one isn't IMO.
1926:
Sorry Tony, it looks like there has been some confusion here. By "At present the opening sentence" I mean the opening sentence of the "Early Life and Family Section"; it appears you are talking about the opening sentence of the lead. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.
2116:
The article mentions that Dilling read "scripture"; I argue that we should make it clear that this is a reference to "Christian scripture" lest any readers think that perhaps she was reading scriptures from a range of religious backgrounds (i.e. was interested in
3120:
I have deleted the RFC because it was started minutes after "discussion" began, it was clearly biased etc. It was started by a user who was offended that I reverted her 5-minute rewrite, replete with factual errors, while the article was on the main page at DYK.
3151:
This is totally and utterly unacceptable. The RFC results in several other uninvolved editors actually stating that they agree with my proposed changes, so you unilaterally shut it down to stop debate. This will be reported to the administrators' noticeboard.
2998:
mediating figures and additional perspectives. (Moreover, saying that I "admitted I was wrong" misrepresents my argument there; I was wrong about saying "war hero" rather than "hero", but the rest of my point still stands, and actually stands unanswered).
2238:
home at gunpoint and threatened her. Albert gave his wife $ 100,000 not to divorce him, and although he promised not to commit adultery again, he had two further extra-marital relationships before their eventual divorce." Signedzzz removed this, relating "
1979:
doesn't support the policy that the lede needs to be either "fully cited or fully uncited". Rather, it suggests that potentially controversial claims in the lede should be cited, but less controversial claims backed up in the article body need not be.
3595:
parents are less important than name of school (or of equal importance). This is also plainly wrong. The fact that you make these categorically wrong statements in support further inclines me to believe, at this point, that it should not be included.
276:
I think reading her book 'The Plot Against Christianity'(1952) will settle the question of whether she was an anti-Semite or not. I vote yes; however it should be noted in the article somewhere that she only shifted to this view in the late 1930's.
1739:
A range of properly referenced changes and additions to the article have been proposed; a core contributor disagrees with their value and argues against their inclusion. A list of the proposed changes has been provided here for further discussion.
3609:
I didn't say anything was less important than school, what I said was that collectively all these facts give a rounded picture and follow standard patterns. I believe you have already said you oppose inclusion, I and others have already said we
3556:
do you think the name of the school "gives a more rounded picture"? This is the crux of the issue. As I said before, a comment from a neutral editor would be useful here. (Unfortunately, because of the RFC, that is currently highly unlikely.)
1537:
Why do you oppose any mention of the Spanish Civil War? Readers unfamiliar with Spanish history (let's face it, that'll be a lot of people) won't be aware that the communist killings of priests, church burnings etc were part of the conflict.
380:
Yes. She went to the USSR and took several films, showing them around the US with commentary in the early 1930's. See the 'Mother's Movement' book in the references for more info; it is the single best source of info I know of about Dilling.
1271:
have done so already: it is reasonably clear given the context, I believe. So that's covered everything you mentioned except "I've slightly re-worded a sentence to better reflect the wording of the original source" - which sentence is that?
2916:, which I think is completely unwarranted in this situation. I'm more than happy to work with them in improving the article, but at this stage I think it is best if I take it to RfC to see what other people have to say. Do I have a point?
2479:". But this relies on the reader having a pre-existing knowledge of the conflict, which may well not be the case for many people; moreover, mentioning the war is not in any way at all detrimental to the article so its removal bemuses me.
3346:"Checklist", a section on this talk page, is a list of questions. I answered them, (my answers have been ignored so far), then the questions were repeated below. I suggest that users read my answers, to aid the forming of a consensus.
1246:
Dilling's political activism was spurred by the "bitter opposition" she encountered upon her return to Illinois in 1931, "against my telling the truth about Russia ... from suburbanite 'intellectual' friends and from my own Episcopal
1332:
Okay, I've seen that you have agreed to add a citation in after the quotation that had none. That's a good start. Now, let's look at the other issues on a point by point basis now. What is your objection to each of these edits?
2474:
cite the war). Given that many readers unfamiliar with Spanish or modern European history may never have heard of the war, I felt that a minor mention of the conflict in the sentence was appropriate. Signedzzz removed it with
3663:'s claim that the material they were reverting was "replete with factual errors" looks to my eyes untrue; the arguments they've made on this talk page to that effect mostly appear to be semantic nitpicks. It's possible these
4091:
I agree to the extent that this is more 'hatred of Jews' (antisemitism) than rational criticism of the religion. I could not quickly find an apt category though but thought her views on Jews were a defining characteristic.
2727:, which is also a biography of a woman living at around the same time as Dilling, urging that we reformat the lede to look more like that of the Murray article; rather than a reasoned response I received a torrent of abuse
171:
Elizabeth Dilling Stokes (April 19, 1894 – May 26, 1966) was an American anti-communist and anti-war activist and writer in the 1930s and 1940s, who was charged with antisemitism and sedition in the Great Sedition Trial of
237:
The "Women and war: a historical encyclopedia from antiquity to the present" link doesn't mention the word anti-semetic, anti-semite, or anything of that nature. A blog is a blog, and one source isn't enough for the lead.
2735:, which were admittedly later removed. Again, I had tried to make some tentative changes to the lede in order to expand it a little but these were pretty quickly reverted. Do others agree that the lede could be improved?
3097:
and thanks for stopping by. Given that Signedzzz contests almost every one of my proposed additions, I shall produce a list and post it below. Your thoughts on any or all of these points would be gratefully appreciated.
3865:
zzz, could you not have c/ed to make the text align with the source? The exact number of mistresses hardly seems important, that he (soon) acquired a number does as a factor in their marriage. I still don't understand
1498:"warned her that communism would take over the world and showed her a map of the US with cities named after Soviet heroes" - why do you insist that we mention the map first when the source material mentions it second?
1482:
More importantly, what you added is factually wrong. The cite states "He soon acquired two new mistresses, and the Dillings separated twice before divorcing in 1943." And you omitted the mother's role in the break-in.
1062:
are a few ways in which I can improve on this article; for instance there were various problems with the list of sources (some titles weren't italicised etc), the lede doesn't really properly cover the article as per
2367:
The article currently states "showed her a map of the US with Soviet city names, and warned her that communism would take over the world". Now given that the reliable source mentions communism taking over the world
1867:
alterations. I can see no good reason for this omission; we often include dates of birth in the opening sentences of early life sections of biographical articles at Knowledge, and two citations is hardly excessive.
253:
of the lead treating Dilling as an anti-Communist, anti-war activist (not generally seen as bad things) but ignoring her darker inclinations (anti-Semitism, white supremacist, Hitler-friendly....)Needs work, agreed?
1133:"Various problems with the list of sources (some titles weren't italicised etc)": Books were not italicised, Journal articles were. In other words, it was fine (and had already been checked by other editors)
3966:
Because we always add infoboxes to articles about people, except for music composers because some editors don't like it. She's not a music composer, so please let me add it. It makes the article easier to
2911:
Unfortunately, Signedzzz has simply undone almost all of my additions, often not giving any explanation in their edit summaries and barely responded to my Talk Page comments. In my opinion, this smacks of
358:
The article states that when she returned to Illinois she began a tour exposing the workers' paradise as anything but. It is not explained what that was but implies the USSR and that she had been there?
3229:
use of one source could obviously be used to exclude any info, but why this info, not the stuff you want to keep? What possible objection is there to a phrase or two saying what the Spanish Civil war was?
1113:
over this page above any attempt to see its faults and problems corrected. I've tried reaching out to work constructively but you just ignore by overtures and continue removing any edits that I've done.
1066:, and the article doesn't have sections on her personal life and ideology. These are all things that I know I can improve on; there's no need to feel threatened by me edits, I'm just here to help! Best,
2908:). Thus, this evening I have gone back to the reliable sources, and used them as part of a project to add these sections into the article and to ensure that on the whole it is more thoroughly sourced.
3885:"valuable information." - that was in the context of proposals to add a section on her "personal life". I am not opposed to stating that her husband had affairs, if the wording is sourced accurately.
195:
Ok, so we have a blog, a source that doesn't mention anti-semitism, and a single source. That's not enough for the lead IMO. Perhaps the body, but not the lead (or at least not an assertion of fact).
2983:
So far, you have discussed one point, above (and eventually admitted you were wrong). I would be happy to discuss any other changes, also. But if you prefer not to discuss with me, that's also fine.
4034:
Why don't we reinsert the infobox here to make it look like the vast majority of Knowledge articles about people, and then you can argue about the usefulness or lack thereof of infoboxes elsewhere?
3265:
Why did you say "It's a bit strange to claim it is because she is a woman we should exclude where she went to school and that she had some troubles in her marriage" when you know I didn't say that?
2839:
but I had intended to expand and build on them, using the appropriate reliable sources. Do others think that the inclusion of sections on these topics would be a good addition to this article?
4073:
Contrast this with your own quote from this article: "It airs their (Jews) dirty lying attempts to shut every Christian mouth and prevent anyone from getting a fair trial in this country" ??
3471:
I am assuming now that her visits to Spain were during or immediately after the civil war, why not contextualise it for those readers who don't know what was happening in 1930's Spain?
3012:
Accusing me of "hostility" merely because I don't agree with your edits is obviously counterproductive. Please feel free to clarify what you think "stands unanswered", by the way.
2876:
Update: In hindsight, this initial introduction to the RfC is not sufficiently neutral and is excessively verbose. I have replaced it with a more appropriate introduction (above).
2253:
This seems to be a strong encyclopedic contribution. It helps us understand the woman and her relationships, which is part of the purpose of a biography. I support including it.--
3565:
trivial/meaningless fact in the article (probably - I cannot think of anything as trivial/meaningless as this, anyway). This argues against inclusion, also, on the face of it.
2121:, which various figures on the far right were). Certainly, the addition of "Christian" is in no way detrimental to the article. Again, Signedzzz has removed this, commenting "
4106:
I agree with Hob Gadling on this; hatred of Jews is not criticism of Judaism; nor is inventing stuff about Judaism. I don't really see where she actually criticized Judaism.
1846:(Came here via RfC) On Knowledge, it seems common practice to use "early life" to mean anything that happened before the events the person is most notable for. For example,
482:
3321:
I mean I cannot see where your objections to edit suggestions are. I don't even know which text you actually object to, nor specifically why. Isn't that what discussion is?
4182:
She's not a publication, but this article is the only one that discusses her publications. In any event, I've created a couple of redirects that should serve the purpose.
2372:
Dilling being shown such a map, I restructured the sentence to reflect that source. Signedzzz undid that edit. However, I believe that mentioning the spread of communist
4076:
You call that criticism? It's polemics. And it has no connection to Judaism the religion. This lady was just a regular simple-minded Jew-hater. No criticism involved. --
905:
for seven days to allow for the aforementioned changes to be made. Please @PING me here with any questions, comments, or concerns. Thanks so much and good luck! Cheers,
594:
3796:
included in a preview. My suggestion is including direct quotes from the sources in discussions on this talk page, so editors can have an informed discussion about the
3635:'School' is relatively trivial either way. Why would we not give context to the Spain trip(s)? Not everyone is going to understand why she was shown burnt-out churches.
3275:
Why did you say "What possible objection is there to a phrase or two saying what the Spanish Civil war was?" when I have already stated "possible objection"s to that?
1714:
3667:
semantic nitpicks, and some of the distinctions zzz is insisting on are important, but if so they should explain why the distinctions are important on the talk page.
627:
3404:
2) contribute to the (hopefully correct!) impression that this profile is a carefully researched one, rather than a superficial one based on editorial and opinion.
3444:
here by a biased RFC attacking me, no offense, but never mind. Obviously, I could easily be wrong, and it's actually a very slight improvement. We'll never know.
1608:
522:
518:
504:
4063:: "denounced the Talmud, making assertions that it contained passages that were derogatory in regards to Jesus and Mary" (weak, but still a sort of criticism)
226:
As for sourcing, I don't see how you're missing the anti-Semitism mentions in the refs, not all blogs are equal, and the cites are historical reference works.
617:
212:
OK. Where then? The lead calls her an anti-Communist, which is generally seen as a positive thing, but her anti-Communism was linked to her anti-Semitism.
125:
sentence be replaced with a summary of Dilling's beliefs, sourced from her books, that military dictatorship could be an acceptable alternative to Communism.
2477:
I don't think the Civil War needs to be spelled out, either, obviously, or I would have done so already: it is reasonably clear given the context, I believe
1828:
If the travels were mainly with birth family, I concur with zzz, if they were later in life they might move to new section/merge with existing sections.
1533:
I am opposed to adding cites to the same thing repeatedly after each sentence. I remove these when I see them. Cites should convey useful information.
3167:
info and is deemed reliable for that purpose, why does it become unreliable for personal info? I agree the suggested personal info could be pruned.
239:
196:
176:
The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects the rights of anti-Semites to freedom of speech. That was true even during the Second World War.
2299:
I began to construct a "Personality and personal life" section but before it could be properly developed and expanded it was deleted by Signedzz.
1022:
You said "The source states that what concerned Dilling was that U.S. cities would be named after Soviet war heroes". However, that is definitely
3510:
Please state specifically what your reason for adding the name of the school is. I read what you just wrote, but I am sure you would agree that "
2586:, and strikes me as the kind of thing that would justify going to ANI if they don't come around to respecting the consensus of the editors here.
1356:
on April 19, 1894." - why do you object to the addition of the date, the linking of Illinois, and the addition of a further bolstering citation?
599:
94:"Her second husband, Jeremiah Stokes (1877-1954), was a lawyer and author. He published the antisemitic The Plot Against Christianity in 1964,"
3870:. Because Dilling was a woman, we shouldn't give the circumstances leading to their divorce? I have never heard of such a policy or practice.
3260:
Why did you say "I was trying to find out what the objection was" when I had already stated the objection, immediately above, in this section?
2935:
to a wider exposition of Dilling's specific ideological beliefs? 4) Should the various details I have introduced in the article be re-added?
1847:
1040:
Okay, granted I was wrong on that. But that doesn't in any way invalidate my argument that we should mention the conquering of the US first.
105:
2000:
The reliable sources give us the name of the Catholic girls' school which Dilling attended, and we have a Knowledge article on the subject:
472:
1653:
What on earth are encyclopedic 'gender-neutral' standards and why should anyone care? Please leave current intellectual fads out of this.
483:
https://web.archive.org/20061109190246/http://www.state.il.us:80/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2006/1stDistrict/September/Html/1042372.htm
2691:
Signedzzz has simply reverted my re-introduction of this material, stating that they refuse to recognise the legitimacy of this RfC (see
2564:
Signedzzz has simply reverted my re-introduction of this material, stating that they refuse to recognise the legitimacy of this RfC (see
2442:
Signedzzz has simply reverted my re-introduction of this material, stating that they refuse to recognise the legitimacy of this RfC (see
2343:
Signedzzz has simply reverted my re-introduction of this material, stating that they refuse to recognise the legitimacy of this RfC (see
2213:
Signedzzz has simply reverted my re-introduction of this material, stating that they refuse to recognise the legitimacy of this RfC (see
2092:
Signedzzz has simply reverted my re-introduction of this material, stating that they refuse to recognise the legitimacy of this RfC (see
1782:
The travel was done with her family, as the article states. I have already addressed the other points in the section above, "Checklist"
1640:
985:
No, the source (as I recall it) does not "state that what concerned Dilling was that U.S. cities would be named after Soviet war heroes
402:
382:
366:
340:
278:
126:
3270:
Why did you say "but why this info, not the stuff you want to keep?" when I had already stated why, immediately above, in this section?
3580:
the school name are worth including on that basis, you don't, fair enough. The judgement is a judgement, let's see what others think.
3067:
2768:
2655:
2514:
2406:
2263:
2149:
2028:
1952:
1904:
1806:
422:
2750:
Make sure that the LEAD summarizes each section in the Table of Contents. Then confirm that you are attempting to have a fully cited
1081:
And why are you repeatedly deleting (referenced) material I add in? Particularly without giving any reason. It's just not necessary.
4144:
1513:
The current version is perfectly clear and more concise, and avoids talking about "Soviet heroes". No one else has objected to it.
151:
486:
3831:
I thought my original explanation was understood, since there was no reply; the following is intended as further clarification.
1222:
Which direct quotation did you "bolster with extra citations", and which direct quotation is "currently not referenced at all"?
1942:
senses. Regardless, this section must have more detail than what is in the LEAD. The LEAD is only a summary of the main body.--
622:
2913:
1639:
If Dilling threatened someone with a gun, it is interesting info, and belongs in the article, if it can be properly sourced.
1110:
666:
300:, or the Civil Rights movement in general? I would assume that she did, but right now the article doesn't explicitly say so.
3027:
responded any further to my argument that the sentence should be restructured to mention the spread of communism to the US
3490:
most likely not have mentioned in the article the name of the suburb unless there was a good enough reason to mention it.
2001:
1401:
1109:
You're even reintegrating the old source system which was replete with errors. Looks to me like you're placing your own
645:
38:
3462:
kind of info as 'suburb', it's relatively inconsequential, but since we know and since it is a few words, include.
3920:
3805:
3733:
3705:
3672:
3210:
Look: you just said "If mainly one source is used for 'historical' info and is deemed reliable for that purpose,
3157:
3103:
3036:
3003:
2974:
2940:
2921:
2881:
2844:
2824:
2803:
2740:
2700:
2682:
2619:
2591:
2573:
2555:
2484:
2451:
2433:
2387:
2352:
2334:
2304:
2247:
2222:
2204:
2130:
2101:
2083:
2009:
1985:
1932:
1872:
1855:
1771:
1745:
1722:
1696:
1674:
1574:
1543:
1523:
1503:
1469:
1439:
1409:
1361:
1338:
1311:
1261:
1212:
1182:
1153:
1119:
1100:
1086:
1071:
1045:
1013:
975:
751:
Maybe break up the last sentence; it's a little lengthy. Or at some semi-colons rather than the excessive commas.
109:
521:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
3728:
I'm trying to offer suggestions on how you could interact with other editors more helpfully on this talk page.
3426:
state that people can disagree in good faith. I would be interested to see what others have to say about this.
3743:
Talk pages are for improving the encyclopedia, not for expressing personal opinions on a subject or an editor.
1479:
From an encyclopedic gender neutral perspective, it is not at all clear that this is "valuable information".
1306:
I was referring to the sentence discussing communism in the USA, however it's all in the checklist now. Best,
406:
370:
1644:
1256:
Further, you still haven't given me any explanation as to why you have opposed my other edits. I'm waiting.
426:
386:
344:
305:
282:
130:
3776:
latter, extreme groups, on whom she has had any 'lasting influence'. Is a more explicit phrasing possible?
2950:
As I said before, "please feel free to discuss your proposed changes". When are you intending to discuss -
1717:
to see what they think I should do about them. Such personal attacks were totally and utterly unwarranted.
4069:: "He came to believe that the rabbinic leadership was too consumed by ritualism and legalistic posturing"
3868:
From an encyclopedic gender neutral perspective, it is not at all clear that this is "valuable information
3063:
2764:
2651:
2510:
2402:
2259:
2145:
2024:
1948:
1900:
1802:
641:
297:
47:
17:
4129:
I presume there is no objection to "Category:Antisemitism in the United States" - which I've just added.
4173:
4081:
2628:
I don't object to 'end of para' cites but citing controversial claims more often make sourcing clearer.
1163:
No, please don't "reintegrate" minor information into the article. It is excluded for a reason. Thanks.
560:
540:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
528:
473:
https://web.archive.org/20070930035029/http://www.zoominfo.com/people/dilling_kirkpatrick_153347511.aspx
324:
258:
231:
217:
155:
301:
3916:
3801:
3729:
3701:
3682:
3668:
3153:
3099:
3032:
2999:
2970:
2936:
2917:
2877:
2840:
2820:
2799:
2736:
2696:
2678:
2615:
2587:
2569:
2551:
2480:
2447:
2429:
2383:
2348:
2330:
2300:
2243:
2218:
2200:
2126:
2118:
2097:
2079:
2005:
1981:
1928:
1868:
1851:
1767:
1741:
1718:
1692:
1670:
1570:
1539:
1519:
1499:
1465:
1435:
1405:
1357:
1334:
1307:
1287:
1257:
1208:
1178:
1149:
1115:
1096:
1082:
1067:
1041:
1009:
971:
362:
296:
The article mentions that she thought Gandhi, etc., were Communists. Did she feel the same way about
147:
101:
2719:
At present I am not convinced that the lede does the best possible job at matching the criteria for
476:
4039:
4016:
3986:
3972:
3957:
3942:
3890:
3855:
3750:
3719:
3690:
3600:
3570:
3519:
3495:
3449:
3434:
3387:
3351:
3312:
3280:
3255:
Why did you say "why does it become unreliable for personal info?" when you know I didn't say that?
3219:
3186:
3141:
3126:
3017:
2988:
2959:
1787:
1558:
1488:
1454:
1424:
1390:
1297:
1276:
1227:
1168:
1138:
1031:
994:
947:
926:
855:
790:
177:
4134:
4120:
4115:
Is there another suitable category? To not categorise her views on Jews/Judaism seems v. strange.
4097:
4001:
3875:
3781:
3640:
3585:
3541:
3476:
3371:
3330:
3298:
3234:
3201:
3172:
2896:
ideology. Moreover, the lead does not aptly summarise the rest of the article, as is required in
2860:
2791:
2633:
2498:
2290:
2176:
2055:
1976:
1833:
910:
660:
76:
2466:
The article mentioned burnt-out churches in Spain but does mention that these took place in the
525:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
487:
http://www.state.il.us/court/OPINIONS/AppellateCourt/2006/1stDistrict/September/Html/1042372.htm
541:
3094:
3075:
3058:
2776:
2759:
2663:
2646:
2522:
2505:
2467:
2414:
2397:
2271:
2254:
2157:
2140:
2036:
2019:
1960:
1943:
1912:
1895:
1814:
1797:
1404:." - why do you object to the mentioning of her school when we have a whole article about it?
1372:
454:
444:
181:
3401:
1) combine to building up a more exact picture of this person than leaving them out does, and
2139:
I support this reasonable clarification unless there is some good reason for its exclusion.--
4169:
4165:
4077:
4060:
3415:
3079:
2901:
2794:, Dilling appears to have been quite anti-Semitic, which seems like it merits mention under
2780:
2667:
2541:
2526:
2418:
2320:
2275:
2190:
2161:
2069:
2040:
1964:
1916:
1894:
detail about birth in the body than the LEAD. Please include such detail in the main body.--
1850:
covers Obama's life up until his mid-thirties, including the publication of his first book.
1818:
556:
320:
254:
243:
227:
213:
200:
80:
1379:, Illinois. I agree with this change. Linking both separately is wrong in cases like this.
548:
2724:
2677:
Given the clear support here at RfC, I shall incorporate this text back into the article.
2550:
Given the clear support here at RfC, I shall incorporate this text back into the article.
2329:
Given the clear support here at RfC, I shall incorporate this text back into the article.
2199:
Given the clear support here at RfC, I shall incorporate this text back into the article.
2078:
Given the clear support here at RfC, I shall incorporate this text back into the article.
1666:
462:
4186:
4177:
4159:
4138:
4124:
4110:
4101:
4085:
4043:
4020:
4005:
3990:
3976:
3961:
3946:
3924:
3894:
3879:
3859:
3809:
3785:
3754:
3737:
3723:
3709:
3694:
3676:
3644:
3604:
3589:
3574:
3545:
3523:
3499:
3480:
3453:
3438:
3419:
3391:
3375:
3355:
3334:
3316:
3302:
3284:
3238:
3223:
3205:
3190:
3176:
3161:
3145:
3130:
3107:
3084:
3040:
3021:
3007:
2992:
2978:
2963:
2944:
2925:
2885:
2864:
2848:
2828:
2807:
2785:
2744:
2704:
2686:
2672:
2637:
2623:
2595:
2577:
2559:
2545:
2531:
2488:
2455:
2437:
2423:
2391:
2356:
2338:
2324:
2308:
2294:
2280:
2226:
2208:
2194:
2180:
2166:
2134:
2105:
2087:
2073:
2059:
2045:
2013:
1989:
1969:
1936:
1921:
1876:
1859:
1837:
1823:
1791:
1775:
1749:
1726:
1700:
1678:
1648:
1578:
1569:
What am I supposed to do in this situation; do I respond to them or not? It's very odd.
1547:
1527:
1507:
1492:
1473:
1458:
1443:
1428:
1413:
1394:
1365:
1342:
1315:
1301:
1280:
1265:
1231:
1216:
1186:
1172:
1157:
1142:
1123:
1104:
1090:
1075:
1049:
1035:
1017:
998:
979:
951:
930:
914:
859:
794:
670:
568:
430:
410:
390:
374:
348:
328:
309:
286:
262:
247:
221:
204:
185:
159:
134:
113:
84:
4066:
4035:
4012:
3982:
3968:
3953:
3938:
3934:
3886:
3851:
3746:
3742:
3715:
3686:
3660:
3596:
3566:
3515:
3512:
it's relatively inconsequential, but since we know and since it is a few words, include
3491:
3445:
3430:
3383:
3347:
3308:
3276:
3215:
3182:
3137:
3122:
3071:
3013:
2984:
2955:
2931:
2905:
2897:
2892:
2795:
2772:
2751:
2720:
2659:
2583:
2518:
2410:
2267:
2153:
2032:
1956:
1908:
1886:
1810:
1783:
1662:
1554:
1484:
1450:
1420:
1386:
1293:
1272:
1223:
1164:
1134:
1063:
1027:
990:
962:
943:
922:
851:
786:
507:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
547:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
4130:
4116:
4093:
3997:
3871:
3777:
3636:
3581:
3537:
3472:
3367:
3326:
3294:
3230:
3197:
3168:
2856:
2629:
2494:
2286:
2172:
2051:
1829:
938:
906:
656:
3714:
Is there anything you want explaining, or are you just making general observations?
2428:
Given the support here at RfC, I shall incorporate this text back into the article.
2396:
Please clarify and contextualize as you originally intended. This is good editing.--
875:
Insert commas before and after "convened in 1941 to investigate fascist propaganda".
2755:
2642:
1890:
1004:
cities had been renamed for Soviet heroes.27" It mentions the spread of communism
3843:
3559:
like many others, which on their own are trivial, meaningless to 99+% of readers
3411:
2537:
2316:
2186:
2065:
514:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
4164:
But she is not a publication. Category names in plural mean the categories are
2900:(Contrast, for example, this article with that of other political figures like
2493:
Context of civil war is essential to understanding, possibly a sentence or so.
2240:
Obviously, I thought about this, and decided it was not "valuable information".
1889:
is going to be fully cited or fully uncited. Either all facts in the LEAD have
1385:
You didn't say why you think that a "further bolstering citation" is required.
4183:
4156:
4107:
513:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
3561:" - which "many others" are you referring to? As stated above, this would be
2930:
My specific points: 1) Should the article lead follow the recommendations of
98:
A neat trick for Mr. Stokes to publish something ten years after his death!
3912:
3745:
Thank you for your contributions to Knowledge, and please have a nice day.
648:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
1353:
4056:
is a religion. If you want to know how criticism of Judaism works, read
1713:
were sufficiently aggressive and abusive that I had to take them to the
459:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
4053:
1376:
1349:
3952:
As I said, I think it's better without. Why do you keep on adding it?
2123:
Totally disagree. Possibly one of the most ridiculous things you added
1705:
Anyway, I'm sorry to have to take it to this level, but your comments
748:
Replace "on her doctor's advice" with "following her doctor's advice".
3981:
Please explain why you think it makes the article easier to read.
1244:
Moreover, the opening sentence of the "Anti-communism" section – "
745:
Replace "she encountered, on her" with "she encountered upon her".
467:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
2470:(incidentally, the reliable source used to cite this information
1766:
additional accuracy. This is a change that Signedzzz has undone.
477:
http://www.zoominfo.com/people/dilling_kirkpatrick_153347511.aspx
2382:
restructuring fixes the problems and makes it all much clearer.
4011:
adding a massive box to draw attention to these makes no sense.
921:
Thanks very much for the comments. I think I fixed everything.
714:
Omit "extensively" in the first sentence; it seems unnecessary.
2790:
Agree. In addition to the general points that can be found in
2582:
Came here via RfC. This is fairly bad behavior on the part of
767:
Reword the first sentence somehow; it's a little disorganized.
25:
3364:(I am presuming all this is RS, which you appear to endorse)
3293:
Point me to these answers above, because I cannot see them.
492:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
780:
Replace "and sold more than" with "and has sold more than".
2285:
Include, I note that there is no 'personal life' section.
319:
She died in 1966, so her "productive" years predated MLK.
2834:"Personality and personal life" and "Ideology" sections
2798:'s guideline to mention "any prominent controversies".
2732:
2728:
2692:
2565:
2476:
2443:
2344:
2239:
2214:
2122:
2093:
1710:
1706:
1689:
1685:
1566:
1562:
1200:
1008:
mentioning the map. We should too, for clarity's sake.
448:
443:
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
890:
There's a lot of turned around dates; please fix them.
3681:(Answering pings) What would you like me to explain,
3307:
What do you mean, "Point me to these answers above"?
777:
Replace "The book had been" with "The book has been".
727:
Replace "when she noted a" with "where she noted a".
3486:
so please keep this type of commentary to yourself.
841:
Replace "in December 1941" with "on December 1941".
517:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
3181:I did not say that a source is unreliable. Cheers
3907:Seems like the topic should get more coverage. I
3824:
3816:
3791:Suggestion re: claims of disputed verifiability
2171:Reasonable, though not essential clarification.
1596:
1594:
1592:
3915:, though I don't have a source at the moment.
1567:delete those same responses all shortly after?
503:This message was posted before February 2018.
166:Anti-Semitism has never been a crime in the US
1561:) 04:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC) And why have you
8:
4147:? She wrote two famously antisemitic books,
1207:article? Because that's how it looks to me.
878:Weird date: "21 July 1942" - turn it around.
3771:a lasting influence among right-wing groups
3057:What particular content remains at issue?--
764:Replace "organisation" with "organization".
3323:'Text A doesn't work because of reason B'
2969:be a good way of facilitating this. Best,
577:
2754:. Make sure each fact in the LEAD has a
1375:, as per MOS. Then a user changed it to
3937:: Why do you keep removing the infobox?
1607:was invoked but never defined (see the
1588:
608:
580:
3410:yet we must decide. Hence, the RfC. --
1292:which sentence were you referring to?
831:"7 March" ? Turn it around to March 7.
401:to the real texts (available online).
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1885:First, we need to decide whether the
1848:Early life and career of Barack Obama
1382:The date is in the lead, just above.
881:Another weird date: "4 January 1944".
7:
2018:Include this encyclopedic content.--
1735:RfC on Content Additions and Removal
1095:Okay, this is just getting silly...
1690:delete your response shortly after?
1599:
893:Insert a comma following "in 1954".
24:
4145:Category:Antisemitic publications
2377:communism's spread should appear
447:. Please take a moment to review
29:
3800:content of those sources here.
1760:"Early Life and Family" section
806:Insert a comma after "In 1938".
761:Insert a comma after "In 1932".
730:Insert a comma after "in 1939".
717:Insert a comma after "In 1923".
704:Insert a comma after "In 1912".
689:Insert a comma after "In 1934".
3827:mother's role in the break-in.
1563:responded to many of my points
1449:Following normal usage in RS.
1199:What is it that you object to
887:And again: "29 November 1944".
884:And another: "3 January 1944".
144:Some mistake in dates, here.
1:
4153:The Plot against Christianity
3212:why does it become unreliable
2002:Academy of Our Lady (Chicago)
1195:Early Life and Family section
569:11:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
160:20:53, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
4044:15:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
4021:10:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
4006:10:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
3991:10:12, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
3977:10:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
3962:09:18, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
3947:09:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
3685:? Can you be more specific?
2609:(in my experience, that's a
431:10:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
85:01:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
4049:Category:Critics of Judaism
2758:immediately following it.--
1715:administrators' noticeboard
1649:21:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
1419:Why do you want to add it?
989:the US fell to communism".
411:08:56, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
354:Did She Visit Soviet Union?
349:21:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
114:21:40, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
4213:
3925:16:40, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
3895:12:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
3880:11:23, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
3860:11:00, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
3810:14:20, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
3755:22:02, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
3738:19:57, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
3724:18:41, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
3710:18:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
3695:17:40, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
3677:15:00, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
2808:14:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
2596:14:01, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
2501:) 16:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC
1990:13:58, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
1860:13:54, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
1755:The content issues at hand
646:Talk:Elizabeth Dilling/GA1
534:(last update: 5 June 2024)
465:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
440:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
421:to discredit the article.
4187:16:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4178:15:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4160:15:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4143:None from me. What about
4139:14:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4125:14:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4111:13:49, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4102:09:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
4086:00:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
3786:19:07, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
3659:Brought here by the RfC.
3645:10:23, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
3605:22:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3590:22:15, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3575:21:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3546:20:23, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3524:20:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3514:" is not a valid reason.
3500:17:52, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3481:10:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3454:00:11, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
3439:23:49, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3420:23:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3392:23:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3376:21:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3356:20:50, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3335:10:51, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3317:05:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3303:00:34, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
3285:21:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3239:21:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3224:20:47, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3206:20:45, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3196:assertion that it is so?
3191:20:08, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3177:16:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3162:16:14, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3146:01:17, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3131:01:14, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
3108:10:07, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
3085:05:11, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
3041:22:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
3022:22:04, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
3008:22:01, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
2993:21:56, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
2979:21:47, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
2964:21:44, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
2945:21:59, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
2926:21:41, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
2886:20:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
2865:18:18, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2849:17:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2829:11:00, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2786:20:28, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2745:10:42, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2705:19:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2687:19:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2673:20:26, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2638:16:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2624:10:36, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2578:19:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2560:19:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2546:17:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
2532:20:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2489:10:29, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2456:19:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2438:19:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2424:20:24, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2392:10:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2357:19:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2339:19:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2325:17:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
2309:17:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2295:16:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2281:15:45, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2227:19:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2209:19:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2195:17:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
2181:16:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2167:15:43, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2135:10:18, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2106:19:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2088:19:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
2074:17:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
2060:16:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2046:15:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
2014:10:12, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1970:20:19, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1937:16:33, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1922:15:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1877:10:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1838:16:58, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1824:15:36, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1792:10:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1776:10:12, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1750:20:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
1727:18:50, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1701:16:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1679:10:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1579:16:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1548:10:33, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1528:10:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1508:10:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1493:05:11, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1474:10:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1459:04:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1444:10:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1429:04:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1414:10:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1395:04:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
1366:10:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1343:10:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1316:10:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1302:10:50, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1281:10:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1266:10:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1232:10:05, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1217:09:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1187:09:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1173:09:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1158:09:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
1143:21:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1124:21:30, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1105:21:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1091:21:22, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1076:21:15, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1050:21:15, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1036:21:12, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
1018:21:09, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
999:21:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
980:20:49, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
952:11:44, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
931:11:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
915:05:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
860:11:30, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
795:11:28, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
785:I rearranged it slightly.
671:03:27, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
391:21:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
287:21:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
186:21:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
135:21:30, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
1553:Already answered above.
1177:And that reason is... ?
375:00:43, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
329:02:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
310:02:13, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
263:01:07, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
248:00:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
222:23:47, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
205:22:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
2645:are always preferred.--
436:External links modified
292:MLK, Civil Rights, etc.
3829:
3820:
3814:Repeating from above:
1026:what the source says.
298:Martin Luther King Jr.
18:Talk:Elizabeth Dilling
1686:responded to my point
694:Early life and family
42:of past discussions.
3214:for personal info?"
2119:comparative religion
1684:Again, why have you
1603:The named reference
515:regular verification
500:to let others know.
451:. If necessary, add
3913:this sedition trial
1402:Academy of Our Lady
957:Maps of the USA etc
505:After February 2018
496:parameter below to
3530:nb edit conflicts:
1796:Concur with zzz.--
1371:Originally it was
1111:sense of ownership
510:InternetArchiveBot
3398:which, together,
3083:
2784:
2671:
2530:
2468:Spanish Civil War
2422:
2279:
2165:
2044:
1968:
1920:
1822:
1373:Chicago, Illinois
898:End of GA Review:
636:
635:
567:
535:
445:Elizabeth Dilling
365:comment added by
150:comment added by
104:comment added by
67:
66:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
4204:
4061:Pablo Christiani
3911:she was part of
3061:
2902:Else Christensen
2871:Old introduction
2762:
2649:
2508:
2504:Contextualize.--
2400:
2257:
2143:
2022:
1946:
1898:
1800:
1632:
1629:
1623:
1620:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1606:
1598:
1291:
942:
590:Copyvio detector
578:
563:
562:Talk to my owner
558:
533:
532:
511:
466:
458:
377:
162:
116:
75:propagandistic?
63:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
4212:
4211:
4207:
4206:
4205:
4203:
4202:
4201:
4051:
3932:
3917:Chris Hallquist
3905:
3802:Chris Hallquist
3793:
3773:
3730:Chris Hallquist
3702:Chris Hallquist
3683:Chris Hallquist
3669:Chris Hallquist
3154:Midnightblueowl
3118:
3100:Midnightblueowl
3033:Midnightblueowl
3000:Midnightblueowl
2971:Midnightblueowl
2937:Midnightblueowl
2918:Midnightblueowl
2878:Midnightblueowl
2873:
2841:Midnightblueowl
2836:
2821:Midnightblueowl
2816:
2800:Chris Hallquist
2737:Midnightblueowl
2725:Margaret Murray
2717:
2697:Midnightblueowl
2679:Midnightblueowl
2616:Midnightblueowl
2588:Chris Hallquist
2570:Midnightblueowl
2552:Midnightblueowl
2481:Midnightblueowl
2448:Midnightblueowl
2430:Midnightblueowl
2384:Midnightblueowl
2349:Midnightblueowl
2331:Midnightblueowl
2301:Midnightblueowl
2244:Midnightblueowl
2219:Midnightblueowl
2201:Midnightblueowl
2127:Midnightblueowl
2098:Midnightblueowl
2080:Midnightblueowl
2006:Midnightblueowl
1982:Chris Hallquist
1929:Midnightblueowl
1869:Midnightblueowl
1852:Chris Hallquist
1768:Midnightblueowl
1762:
1757:
1742:Midnightblueowl
1737:
1719:Midnightblueowl
1693:Midnightblueowl
1671:Midnightblueowl
1667:Margaret Murray
1659:
1637:
1636:
1635:
1630:
1626:
1621:
1617:
1604:
1602:
1600:
1590:
1571:Midnightblueowl
1540:Midnightblueowl
1520:Midnightblueowl
1500:Midnightblueowl
1466:Midnightblueowl
1436:Midnightblueowl
1406:Midnightblueowl
1358:Midnightblueowl
1335:Midnightblueowl
1330:
1308:Midnightblueowl
1288:Midnightblueowl
1285:
1258:Midnightblueowl
1209:Midnightblueowl
1197:
1179:Midnightblueowl
1150:Midnightblueowl
1116:Midnightblueowl
1097:Midnightblueowl
1083:Midnightblueowl
1068:Midnightblueowl
1042:Midnightblueowl
1010:Midnightblueowl
972:Midnightblueowl
959:
936:
900:
872:
838:
828:
818:
813:
803:
774:
758:
742:
737:
724:
711:
701:
696:
686:
681:
640:This review is
632:
604:
576:
566:
561:
526:
519:have permission
509:
460:
452:
438:
418:
398:
360:
356:
294:
193:
168:
145:
142:
122:
106:209.147.247.254
99:
92:
72:
59:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
4210:
4208:
4200:
4199:
4198:
4197:
4196:
4195:
4194:
4193:
4192:
4191:
4190:
4189:
4166:set categories
4127:
4071:
4070:
4067:Uriel da Costa
4064:
4050:
4047:
4032:
4031:
4030:
4029:
4028:
4027:
4026:
4025:
4024:
4023:
3935:User:Signedzzz
3931:
3928:
3904:
3903:Sedition trial
3901:
3900:
3899:
3898:
3897:
3792:
3789:
3772:
3769:
3768:
3767:
3766:
3765:
3764:
3763:
3762:
3761:
3760:
3759:
3758:
3757:
3657:
3656:
3655:
3654:
3653:
3652:
3651:
3650:
3649:
3648:
3647:
3622:
3621:
3620:
3619:
3618:
3617:
3616:
3615:
3614:
3613:
3612:
3611:
3527:
3526:
3507:
3506:
3505:
3504:
3503:
3502:
3487:
3466:
3465:
3464:
3463:
3423:
3422:
3407:
3406:
3405:
3402:
3379:
3378:
3344:
3343:
3342:
3341:
3340:
3339:
3338:
3337:
3288:
3287:
3272:
3271:
3267:
3266:
3262:
3261:
3257:
3256:
3252:
3251:
3250:
3249:
3248:
3247:
3246:
3245:
3244:
3243:
3242:
3241:
3117:
3116:Comment on RFC
3114:
3113:
3112:
3111:
3110:
3088:
3087:
3054:
3053:
3052:
3051:
3050:
3049:
3048:
3047:
3046:
3045:
3044:
3043:
2906:Vladimir Lenin
2893:User:Signedzzz
2872:
2869:
2868:
2867:
2835:
2832:
2815:
2812:
2811:
2810:
2788:
2716:
2713:
2712:
2711:
2710:
2709:
2708:
2707:
2675:
2640:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2602:
2601:
2600:
2599:
2598:
2548:
2534:
2502:
2463:
2462:
2461:
2460:
2459:
2458:
2426:
2364:
2363:
2362:
2361:
2360:
2359:
2327:
2313:
2312:
2311:
2283:
2234:
2233:
2232:
2231:
2230:
2229:
2197:
2183:
2169:
2113:
2112:
2111:
2110:
2109:
2108:
2076:
2062:
2048:
1997:
1996:
1995:
1994:
1993:
1992:
1974:
1973:
1972:
1880:
1879:
1863:
1862:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1840:
1779:
1778:
1761:
1758:
1756:
1753:
1736:
1733:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1658:
1655:
1634:
1633:
1631:Jeansonne, 8–9
1624:
1615:
1587:
1586:
1582:
1551:
1550:
1531:
1530:
1511:
1510:
1477:
1476:
1447:
1446:
1417:
1416:
1369:
1368:
1329:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1318:
1283:
1254:
1242:
1235:
1234:
1196:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
963:User:Signedzzz
958:
955:
934:
933:
899:
896:
895:
894:
891:
888:
885:
882:
879:
876:
871:
868:
867:
866:
865:
864:
863:
862:
850:Removed date.
843:
842:
837:
834:
833:
832:
827:
824:
823:
822:
817:
814:
812:
809:
808:
807:
802:
799:
798:
797:
782:
781:
778:
773:
770:
769:
768:
765:
762:
757:
754:
753:
752:
749:
746:
741:
738:
736:
735:Anti-communism
733:
732:
731:
728:
723:
720:
719:
718:
715:
710:
707:
706:
705:
700:
697:
695:
692:
691:
690:
685:
682:
680:
677:
675:
651:
650:
634:
633:
631:
630:
625:
620:
614:
611:
610:
606:
605:
603:
602:
600:External links
597:
592:
586:
583:
582:
575:
572:
559:
553:
552:
545:
490:
489:
481:Added archive
479:
471:Added archive
437:
434:
417:
414:
397:
394:
355:
352:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
293:
290:
274:
273:
272:
271:
270:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
192:
189:
167:
164:
141:
138:
121:
118:
97:
91:
88:
71:
68:
65:
64:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4209:
4188:
4185:
4181:
4180:
4179:
4175:
4171:
4167:
4163:
4162:
4161:
4158:
4154:
4150:
4146:
4142:
4141:
4140:
4136:
4132:
4128:
4126:
4122:
4118:
4114:
4113:
4112:
4109:
4105:
4104:
4103:
4099:
4095:
4090:
4089:
4088:
4087:
4083:
4079:
4074:
4068:
4065:
4062:
4059:
4058:
4057:
4055:
4048:
4046:
4045:
4041:
4037:
4022:
4018:
4014:
4009:
4008:
4007:
4003:
3999:
3994:
3993:
3992:
3988:
3984:
3980:
3979:
3978:
3974:
3970:
3965:
3964:
3963:
3959:
3955:
3951:
3950:
3949:
3948:
3944:
3940:
3936:
3929:
3927:
3926:
3922:
3918:
3914:
3910:
3902:
3896:
3892:
3888:
3883:
3882:
3881:
3877:
3873:
3869:
3864:
3863:
3862:
3861:
3857:
3853:
3847:
3845:
3840:
3839:
3832:
3828:
3823:
3819:
3815:
3812:
3811:
3807:
3803:
3799:
3790:
3788:
3787:
3783:
3779:
3770:
3756:
3752:
3748:
3744:
3741:
3740:
3739:
3735:
3731:
3727:
3726:
3725:
3721:
3717:
3713:
3712:
3711:
3707:
3703:
3698:
3697:
3696:
3692:
3688:
3684:
3680:
3679:
3678:
3674:
3670:
3666:
3662:
3658:
3646:
3642:
3638:
3634:
3633:
3632:
3631:
3630:
3629:
3628:
3627:
3626:
3625:
3624:
3623:
3608:
3607:
3606:
3602:
3598:
3593:
3592:
3591:
3587:
3583:
3578:
3577:
3576:
3572:
3568:
3564:
3560:
3555:
3551:
3550:
3549:
3548:
3547:
3543:
3539:
3534:
3533:
3532:
3531:
3525:
3521:
3517:
3513:
3509:
3508:
3501:
3497:
3493:
3488:
3484:
3483:
3482:
3478:
3474:
3470:
3469:
3468:
3467:
3460:
3459:
3458:
3457:
3456:
3455:
3451:
3447:
3441:
3440:
3436:
3432:
3427:
3421:
3417:
3413:
3408:
3403:
3400:
3399:
3396:
3395:
3394:
3393:
3389:
3385:
3377:
3373:
3369:
3365:
3360:
3359:
3358:
3357:
3353:
3349:
3336:
3332:
3328:
3324:
3320:
3319:
3318:
3314:
3310:
3306:
3305:
3304:
3300:
3296:
3292:
3291:
3290:
3289:
3286:
3282:
3278:
3274:
3273:
3269:
3268:
3264:
3263:
3259:
3258:
3254:
3253:
3240:
3236:
3232:
3227:
3226:
3225:
3221:
3217:
3213:
3209:
3208:
3207:
3203:
3199:
3194:
3193:
3192:
3188:
3184:
3180:
3179:
3178:
3174:
3170:
3165:
3164:
3163:
3159:
3155:
3150:
3149:
3148:
3147:
3143:
3139:
3133:
3132:
3128:
3124:
3115:
3109:
3105:
3101:
3096:
3092:
3091:
3090:
3089:
3086:
3081:
3077:
3073:
3069:
3065:
3060:
3056:
3055:
3042:
3038:
3034:
3030:
3025:
3024:
3023:
3019:
3015:
3011:
3010:
3009:
3005:
3001:
2996:
2995:
2994:
2990:
2986:
2982:
2981:
2980:
2976:
2972:
2967:
2966:
2965:
2961:
2957:
2953:
2949:
2948:
2947:
2946:
2942:
2938:
2933:
2928:
2927:
2923:
2919:
2915:
2909:
2907:
2903:
2899:
2894:
2890:
2889:
2887:
2883:
2879:
2870:
2866:
2862:
2858:
2853:
2852:
2851:
2850:
2846:
2842:
2833:
2831:
2830:
2826:
2822:
2813:
2809:
2805:
2801:
2797:
2793:
2789:
2787:
2782:
2778:
2774:
2770:
2766:
2761:
2757:
2753:
2749:
2748:
2747:
2746:
2742:
2738:
2734:
2730:
2726:
2722:
2714:
2706:
2702:
2698:
2694:
2690:
2689:
2688:
2684:
2680:
2676:
2674:
2669:
2665:
2661:
2657:
2653:
2648:
2644:
2641:
2639:
2635:
2631:
2627:
2626:
2625:
2621:
2617:
2612:
2607:
2606:
2597:
2593:
2589:
2585:
2581:
2580:
2579:
2575:
2571:
2567:
2563:
2562:
2561:
2557:
2553:
2549:
2547:
2543:
2539:
2535:
2533:
2528:
2524:
2520:
2516:
2512:
2507:
2503:
2500:
2496:
2492:
2491:
2490:
2486:
2482:
2478:
2473:
2469:
2465:
2464:
2457:
2453:
2449:
2445:
2441:
2440:
2439:
2435:
2431:
2427:
2425:
2420:
2416:
2412:
2408:
2404:
2399:
2395:
2394:
2393:
2389:
2385:
2380:
2375:
2371:
2366:
2365:
2358:
2354:
2350:
2346:
2342:
2341:
2340:
2336:
2332:
2328:
2326:
2322:
2318:
2314:
2310:
2306:
2302:
2298:
2297:
2296:
2292:
2288:
2284:
2282:
2277:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2261:
2256:
2252:
2251:
2249:
2245:
2241:
2236:
2235:
2228:
2224:
2220:
2216:
2212:
2211:
2210:
2206:
2202:
2198:
2196:
2192:
2188:
2184:
2182:
2178:
2174:
2170:
2168:
2163:
2159:
2155:
2151:
2147:
2142:
2138:
2137:
2136:
2132:
2128:
2124:
2120:
2115:
2114:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2095:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2085:
2081:
2077:
2075:
2071:
2067:
2063:
2061:
2057:
2053:
2049:
2047:
2042:
2038:
2034:
2030:
2026:
2021:
2017:
2016:
2015:
2011:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1998:
1991:
1987:
1983:
1978:
1975:
1971:
1966:
1962:
1958:
1954:
1950:
1945:
1940:
1939:
1938:
1934:
1930:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1918:
1914:
1910:
1906:
1902:
1897:
1892:
1888:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1878:
1874:
1870:
1865:
1864:
1861:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1826:
1825:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1799:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1789:
1785:
1781:
1780:
1777:
1773:
1769:
1764:
1763:
1759:
1754:
1752:
1751:
1747:
1743:
1734:
1728:
1724:
1720:
1716:
1712:
1708:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1698:
1694:
1691:
1687:
1683:
1682:
1681:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1668:
1664:
1656:
1654:
1651:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1641:96.90.200.185
1628:
1625:
1619:
1616:
1610:
1605:Jeansonne, p8
1597:
1595:
1593:
1589:
1585:
1581:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1564:
1560:
1556:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1480:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1432:
1431:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1392:
1388:
1383:
1380:
1378:
1374:
1367:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1340:
1336:
1327:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1304:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1289:
1284:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1252:
1248:
1243:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1194:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1145:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1112:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1002:
1001:
1000:
996:
992:
988:
984:
983:
982:
981:
977:
973:
968:
964:
956:
954:
953:
949:
945:
940:
932:
928:
924:
920:
919:
918:
916:
912:
908:
904:
897:
892:
889:
886:
883:
880:
877:
874:
873:
869:
861:
857:
853:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
840:
839:
835:
830:
829:
825:
820:
819:
815:
810:
805:
804:
800:
796:
792:
788:
784:
783:
779:
776:
775:
771:
766:
763:
760:
759:
755:
750:
747:
744:
743:
739:
734:
729:
726:
725:
721:
716:
713:
712:
708:
703:
702:
698:
693:
688:
687:
683:
678:
676:
673:
672:
668:
665:
662:
658:
655:
649:
647:
643:
638:
637:
629:
626:
624:
621:
619:
616:
615:
613:
612:
607:
601:
598:
596:
593:
591:
588:
587:
585:
584:
579:
573:
571:
570:
564:
557:
550:
546:
543:
539:
538:
537:
530:
524:
520:
516:
512:
506:
501:
499:
495:
488:
484:
480:
478:
474:
470:
469:
468:
464:
456:
450:
446:
441:
435:
433:
432:
428:
424:
416:A Clear Error
415:
413:
412:
408:
404:
403:67.188.213.31
395:
393:
392:
388:
384:
383:173.13.153.50
378:
376:
372:
368:
367:69.34.181.212
364:
353:
351:
350:
346:
342:
341:96.90.200.185
330:
326:
322:
318:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
311:
307:
303:
299:
291:
289:
288:
284:
280:
279:173.13.153.50
264:
260:
256:
251:
250:
249:
245:
241:
236:
235:
233:
229:
225:
224:
223:
219:
215:
211:
210:
209:
208:
207:
206:
202:
198:
190:
188:
187:
183:
179:
174:
173:
165:
163:
161:
157:
153:
149:
139:
137:
136:
132:
128:
127:173.13.153.50
119:
117:
115:
111:
107:
103:
95:
89:
87:
86:
82:
78:
69:
62:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
4152:
4148:
4075:
4072:
4052:
4033:
3933:
3908:
3906:
3867:
3848:
3837:
3836:
3833:
3830:
3825:
3821:
3817:
3813:
3797:
3794:
3774:
3664:
3562:
3558:
3553:
3529:
3528:
3511:
3442:
3428:
3424:
3380:
3363:
3345:
3322:
3211:
3134:
3119:
3095:TonyTheTiger
3059:TonyTheTiger
3028:
2951:
2929:
2914:WP:Ownership
2910:
2891:
2875:
2874:
2837:
2817:
2760:TonyTheTiger
2718:
2647:TonyTheTiger
2610:
2506:TonyTheTiger
2471:
2398:TonyTheTiger
2378:
2373:
2369:
2255:TonyTheTiger
2141:TonyTheTiger
2020:TonyTheTiger
1944:TonyTheTiger
1896:TonyTheTiger
1798:TonyTheTiger
1738:
1660:
1652:
1638:
1627:
1618:
1601:Cite error:
1583:
1552:
1532:
1512:
1481:
1478:
1448:
1418:
1384:
1381:
1370:
1331:
1250:
1245:
1204:
1198:
1146:
1132:
1060:
1023:
1005:
986:
966:
960:
935:
902:
901:
811:Isolationism
674:
663:
653:
652:
639:
628:Instructions
554:
529:source check
508:
502:
497:
493:
491:
442:
439:
423:85.76.168.47
419:
399:
379:
357:
337:
302:Stonemason89
295:
275:
194:
175:
170:
169:
143:
123:
100:— Preceding
96:
93:
73:
60:
43:
37:
4170:Hob Gadling
4149:The Octopus
4078:Hob Gadling
2792:WP:OPENPARA
2536:Include. --
2315:Include. --
2185:Include. --
2064:Include. --
1977:WP:LEADCITE
870:Paragraph 5
836:Paragraph 4
826:Paragraph 3
816:Paragraph 2
801:Paragraph 7
772:Paragraph 4
756:Paragraph 2
740:Paragraph 1
722:Paragraph 3
709:Paragraph 2
699:Paragraph 1
684:Paragraph 1
642:transcluded
396:False Lines
361:—Preceding
321:Jimintheatl
255:Jimintheatl
228:Jimintheatl
214:Jimintheatl
191:Anti-semite
152:65.89.68.24
146:—Preceding
90:2nd husband
36:This is an
3822:I replied
3076:WP:CHICAGO
2814:References
2777:WP:CHICAGO
2664:WP:CHICAGO
2523:WP:CHICAGO
2415:WP:CHICAGO
2272:WP:CHICAGO
2158:WP:CHICAGO
2037:WP:CHICAGO
1961:WP:CHICAGO
1913:WP:CHICAGO
1815:WP:CHICAGO
1584:References
1247:minister."
595:Authorship
581:GA toolbox
4036:Zigzig20s
3969:Zigzig20s
3939:Zigzig20s
3080:WP:WAWARD
2855:sections.
2781:WP:WAWARD
2668:WP:WAWARD
2584:Signedzzz
2527:WP:WAWARD
2419:WP:WAWARD
2276:WP:WAWARD
2162:WP:WAWARD
2050:Include.
2041:WP:WAWARD
1965:WP:WAWARD
1917:WP:WAWARD
1819:WP:WAWARD
1609:help page
1328:Checklist
654:Reviewer:
618:Templates
609:Reviewing
574:GA Review
549:this tool
542:this tool
61:Archive 1
4131:Pincrete
4117:Pincrete
4094:Pincrete
3998:Pincrete
3872:Pincrete
3778:Pincrete
3637:Pincrete
3610:support.
3582:Pincrete
3563:the most
3538:Pincrete
3473:Pincrete
3368:Pincrete
3362:actions.
3327:Pincrete
3295:Pincrete
3231:Pincrete
3198:Pincrete
3169:Pincrete
2857:Pincrete
2630:Pincrete
2495:Pincrete
2287:Pincrete
2173:Pincrete
2052:Pincrete
1830:Pincrete
1688:only to
1565:only to
1354:Illinois
939:Carbrera
907:Carbrera
667:contribs
657:Carbrera
623:Criteria
555:Cheers.—
455:cbignore
363:unsigned
148:unsigned
140:Untitled
102:unsigned
70:Heritage
4054:Judaism
3930:Infobox
3072:WP:FOUR
2954:an RFC?
2932:WP:Lede
2898:WP:Lede
2796:WP:LEAD
2773:WP:FOUR
2752:WP:LEAD
2721:WP:Lede
2660:WP:FOUR
2519:WP:FOUR
2411:WP:FOUR
2268:WP:FOUR
2154:WP:FOUR
2033:WP:FOUR
1957:WP:FOUR
1909:WP:FOUR
1887:WP:LEAD
1811:WP:FOUR
1663:WP:Lede
1661:As per
1377:Chicago
1350:Chicago
1064:WP:Lede
903:On hold
565::Online
494:checked
449:my edit
178:Falange
39:archive
3665:aren't
3412:GRuban
2643:WP:ICs
2538:GRuban
2370:before
2317:GRuban
2187:GRuban
2066:GRuban
1891:WP:ICs
1622:Dye, 2
1006:before
970:Best,
961:Hello
463:nobots
240:Soxwon
197:Soxwon
120:Franco
77:SNDLLN
4184:Jayjg
4157:Jayjg
4108:Jayjg
3967:read.
3909:think
3798:exact
3029:first
2952:after
2756:WP:IC
2611:no-no
2379:first
2374:first
1400:"the
987:after
967:after
644:from
16:<
4174:talk
4168:. --
4151:and
4135:talk
4121:talk
4098:talk
4082:talk
4040:talk
4017:talk
4002:talk
3987:talk
3973:talk
3958:talk
3943:talk
3921:talk
3891:talk
3876:talk
3856:talk
3844:WP:V
3838:soon
3806:talk
3782:talk
3751:talk
3734:talk
3720:talk
3706:talk
3691:talk
3673:talk
3641:talk
3601:talk
3586:talk
3571:talk
3542:talk
3520:talk
3496:talk
3477:talk
3450:talk
3435:talk
3416:talk
3388:talk
3372:talk
3352:talk
3331:talk
3313:talk
3299:talk
3281:talk
3235:talk
3220:talk
3202:talk
3187:talk
3173:talk
3158:talk
3142:talk
3127:talk
3104:talk
3037:talk
3018:talk
3004:talk
2989:talk
2975:talk
2960:talk
2941:talk
2922:talk
2882:talk
2861:talk
2845:talk
2825:talk
2804:talk
2741:talk
2733:here
2731:and
2729:here
2715:Lede
2701:talk
2693:here
2683:talk
2634:talk
2620:talk
2592:talk
2574:talk
2566:here
2556:talk
2542:talk
2499:talk
2485:talk
2472:does
2452:talk
2444:here
2434:talk
2388:talk
2353:talk
2345:here
2335:talk
2321:talk
2305:talk
2291:talk
2248:talk
2223:talk
2215:here
2205:talk
2191:talk
2177:talk
2131:talk
2102:talk
2094:here
2084:talk
2070:talk
2056:talk
2010:talk
1986:talk
1933:talk
1873:talk
1856:talk
1834:talk
1788:talk
1772:talk
1746:talk
1723:talk
1711:here
1709:and
1707:here
1697:talk
1675:talk
1657:Lede
1645:talk
1575:talk
1559:talk
1544:talk
1524:talk
1504:talk
1489:talk
1470:talk
1455:talk
1440:talk
1425:talk
1410:talk
1391:talk
1362:talk
1339:talk
1312:talk
1298:talk
1277:talk
1262:talk
1251:why?
1228:talk
1213:talk
1205:your
1201:here
1183:talk
1169:talk
1154:talk
1139:talk
1120:talk
1101:talk
1087:talk
1072:talk
1046:talk
1032:talk
1014:talk
995:talk
976:talk
948:talk
927:talk
911:talk
856:talk
791:talk
679:Lead
661:talk
498:true
427:talk
407:talk
387:talk
371:talk
345:talk
325:talk
306:talk
283:talk
259:talk
244:talk
232:talk
218:talk
201:talk
182:talk
172:1944
156:talk
131:talk
110:talk
81:talk
4013:zzz
3983:zzz
3954:zzz
3887:zzz
3852:zzz
3846:.
3747:zzz
3716:zzz
3687:zzz
3661:zzz
3597:zzz
3567:zzz
3554:why
3516:zzz
3492:zzz
3446:zzz
3431:zzz
3384:zzz
3348:zzz
3309:zzz
3277:zzz
3216:zzz
3183:zzz
3138:zzz
3123:zzz
3093:Hi
3014:zzz
2985:zzz
2956:zzz
2904:or
2695:).
2568:).
2446:).
2347:).
2217:).
2125:".
2096:).
1784:zzz
1555:zzz
1485:zzz
1451:zzz
1421:zzz
1387:zzz
1294:zzz
1273:zzz
1224:zzz
1165:zzz
1135:zzz
1028:zzz
1024:not
991:zzz
944:zzz
923:zzz
852:zzz
787:zzz
523:RfC
485:to
475:to
4176:)
4155:.
4137:)
4123:)
4100:)
4084:)
4042:)
4019:)
4004:)
3989:)
3975:)
3960:)
3945:)
3923:)
3893:)
3878:)
3858:)
3808:)
3784:)
3753:)
3736:)
3722:)
3708:)
3693:)
3675:)
3643:)
3603:)
3588:)
3573:)
3544:)
3522:)
3498:)
3479:)
3452:)
3437:)
3418:)
3390:)
3374:)
3366:.
3354:)
3333:)
3315:)
3301:)
3283:)
3237:)
3222:)
3204:)
3189:)
3175:)
3160:)
3144:)
3129:)
3106:)
3078:/
3074:/
3070:/
3066:/
3039:)
3031:.
3020:)
3006:)
2991:)
2977:)
2962:)
2943:)
2924:)
2884:)
2863:)
2847:)
2827:)
2806:)
2779:/
2775:/
2771:/
2767:/
2743:)
2703:)
2685:)
2666:/
2662:/
2658:/
2654:/
2636:)
2622:)
2594:)
2576:)
2558:)
2544:)
2525:/
2521:/
2517:/
2513:/
2487:)
2454:)
2436:)
2417:/
2413:/
2409:/
2405:/
2390:)
2355:)
2337:)
2323:)
2307:)
2293:)
2274:/
2270:/
2266:/
2262:/
2250:)
2225:)
2207:)
2193:)
2179:)
2160:/
2156:/
2152:/
2148:/
2133:)
2104:)
2086:)
2072:)
2058:)
2039:/
2035:/
2031:/
2027:/
2012:)
1988:)
1963:/
1959:/
1955:/
1951:/
1935:)
1915:/
1911:/
1907:/
1903:/
1875:)
1858:)
1836:)
1817:/
1813:/
1809:/
1805:/
1790:)
1774:)
1748:)
1725:)
1699:)
1677:)
1647:)
1611:).
1591:^
1577:)
1546:)
1526:)
1506:)
1491:)
1472:)
1457:)
1442:)
1427:)
1412:)
1393:)
1364:)
1352:,
1341:)
1314:)
1300:)
1279:)
1264:)
1253:).
1230:)
1215:)
1185:)
1171:)
1156:)
1141:)
1122:)
1103:)
1089:)
1074:)
1048:)
1034:)
1016:)
997:)
978:)
950:)
929:)
917:.
913:)
858:)
793:)
669:)
536:.
531:}}
527:{{
461:{{
457:}}
453:{{
429:)
409:)
389:)
373:)
347:)
327:)
308:)
285:)
261:)
246:)
234:)
220:)
203:)
184:)
158:)
133:)
112:)
83:)
4172:(
4133:(
4119:(
4096:(
4080:(
4038:(
4015:(
4000:(
3985:(
3971:(
3956:(
3941:(
3919:(
3889:(
3874:(
3854:(
3835:"
3804:(
3780:(
3749:(
3732:(
3718:(
3704:(
3689:(
3671:(
3639:(
3599:(
3584:(
3569:(
3557:"
3540:(
3518:(
3494:(
3475:(
3448:(
3433:(
3414:(
3386:(
3370:(
3350:(
3329:(
3311:(
3297:(
3279:(
3233:(
3218:(
3200:(
3185:(
3171:(
3156:(
3140:(
3125:(
3102:(
3082:)
3068:C
3064:T
3062:(
3035:(
3016:(
3002:(
2987:(
2973:(
2958:(
2939:(
2920:(
2888:'
2880:(
2859:(
2843:(
2823:(
2802:(
2783:)
2769:C
2765:T
2763:(
2739:(
2699:(
2681:(
2670:)
2656:C
2652:T
2650:(
2632:(
2618:(
2590:(
2572:(
2554:(
2540:(
2529:)
2515:C
2511:T
2509:(
2497:(
2483:(
2475:"
2450:(
2432:(
2421:)
2407:C
2403:T
2401:(
2386:(
2351:(
2333:(
2319:(
2303:(
2289:(
2278:)
2264:C
2260:T
2258:(
2246:(
2221:(
2203:(
2189:(
2175:(
2164:)
2150:C
2146:T
2144:(
2129:(
2100:(
2082:(
2068:(
2054:(
2043:)
2029:C
2025:T
2023:(
2008:(
1984:(
1967:)
1953:C
1949:T
1947:(
1931:(
1919:)
1905:C
1901:T
1899:(
1871:(
1854:(
1832:(
1821:)
1807:C
1803:T
1801:(
1786:(
1770:(
1744:(
1721:(
1695:(
1673:(
1643:(
1573:(
1557:(
1542:(
1522:(
1502:(
1487:(
1468:(
1453:(
1438:(
1423:(
1408:(
1389:(
1360:(
1348:"
1337:(
1310:(
1296:(
1290::
1286:@
1275:(
1260:(
1226:(
1211:(
1181:(
1167:(
1152:(
1137:(
1118:(
1099:(
1085:(
1070:(
1044:(
1030:(
1012:(
993:(
974:(
946:(
941::
937:@
925:(
909:(
854:(
789:(
664:·
659:(
551:.
544:.
425:(
405:(
385:(
369:(
343:(
323:(
304:(
281:(
257:(
242:(
230:(
216:(
199:(
180:(
154:(
129:(
108:(
79:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.