1431:
article. If at some future point the article becomes excessively long the issue may need to be reconsidered, but only in the context of everything else that will have been added in the interim. What happens on the Ken
Jennings article, or on that of any other Jeopardy contestant has no relevance here, particularly since it cannot be assumed that any of us now contributing to this discussion participated there; we are not here addressing the inclusion of such material in those articles. The obsession that some have to apply their "expert" opinion to the determination of what is trivial is more damaging to the project than the alleged trivia themselves. They effectively turn one sentence factoids into major dramatic productions. Making the future of this detail depend on the input of a non-existent 18th century monarch is very generously identified as a facetious effort.
1491:
calls" are not identified. Now I'm sure there are some people who will argue this article is about
Larissa, not Arianna, and additional explanation about these "questionable calls" would be out of place here. If that's the case, then I think any mention of Arianna should be deleted or at least modified so that readers aren't given half the story. This is the opinion of a reader, not an editor, and yes, there is a difference. Editors get caught up with all the rules and regulations and guidelines and tend to forget that average readers use Knowledge as a resource, and if they're given some of the facts but not all of them, it's not doing its job. Until I read this article I didn't know Larissa had a sister who had appeared on the show before her. As long as the article is giving me that information, I think it should do it as completely as possible.
1036:
WP (e.g., I saw one recently that listed the names of the person's pets). That is because that's a part of the celebrity status--people care about the trivia. If you have an article about a "serious" person, such as the leader of a country, such trivia would not be as appropriate. I think that the amount of words and time expended over this issue and the number of edit and reverts in the history of the article (by different people) shows that there are fans do care about this tidbit of trivia. I think the discussion would be much less tedious if we just admit that this is trivia and instead focus on a more interesting question: whether it's really that bad to have trivia on a "celebrity" article. -
562:
541:
439:
1358:
exclude her correct response of "Anubis" from the semifinals that earned her a win there, and we're headed down the slippery slope. Regarding the
Jennings article, I'm not convinced that it's appropriate to have that level of detail there, either, but it's not really a parallel situation: losing after 74 wins versus losing a tournament final. We don't have information on his UToC games and why he didn't win those. The
634:
1086:
an abdication of real editorial discretion. In any case, the arguments against this have been nothing more than variations of "it's trivia", which is not convincing without also making the case for why trivia is verboten. And as I already noted earlier, I don't care if this particular bit of info is included or excluded; I just want to see things take a form other than rehashing claims that it's trivia.
332:
314:
509:
429:
402:
283:
190:
1059:
it might be interesting to someone somewhere? Considering the degree to which WP covers topics that may not be "serious" to many people, and considering that this approach basically says we should not exercise any kind of editorial discretion about what information receives weight in our articles, I don't think that this is a path we want to go down.
342:
1463:
Who said the difference of opinion is over whether trivial information in an encyclopedia is harmless? That might be your assessment, but I don't see it that way at all. I think the difference of opinion is whether or not the information about the incorrect answer in Final
Jeopardy! is trivial, which
1415:
This is not a long article. This discussion is longer than the article! There is no need to be trimming down excess information yet. Maybe we should give more information regarding her other Final
Jeopardy performances. In other articles maybe it would be, but at this point possibly too detailed info
1276:
Why is Kelly's Final
Jeopardy! category question considered unnecessary information but the trivia about her sister Arianna being defeated in her initial Jeopardy! appearance, in part due to questionable calls that prompted Standards and Practices to bring her back for a second appearance, is thought
1085:
There is a difference between "not exercise any kind of editorial discretion" (which I agree is folly) and "a different standard of editorial discretion that is more appropriate to the nature of the article". Trying to frame things in terms of absolute extremes avoids the slippery slope, but is also
971:
I'm actually not convinced that in the Obama hypothetical, we would report on his comment, but if we did, it would be because we're interested in what the
President of the United States says about WP. Whatever you think about Larissa Kelly, she doesn't have quite that stature. And if we're going to
917:
We should at least say on this talk page that this is about the question asked by Alex Trebek during the chat session about her
Knowledge page, and that she remarked that some persons here sought to suppress it because she was not important enough. I saw the program, and heard her comments; I likely
883:
Well I think that's BS that you can say there are no reliable sources to back it up. It did happen, and you can cite the TV show; it doesn't have to come from being repeated in the news. I see no reason why it can't be included, and we don't have to ignore it just because it's a self-reference to us.
813:
is that there is no way anyone would be able to find reliable source for it, thus putting it to rest for good. As far as the press template goes, I still object to it being put on this talk page (the article was mentioned by a game show contestant, not a media organization), but obviously that's just
1490:
appearance, in part due to questionable calls that prompted
Standards and Practices to bring her back for a second appearance" has been included in this article for a long time, so it appears there are those who feel this information is relevant. What I find frustrating is the fact the "questionable
1357:
I think that my general issue is that I don't see what anyone learns about
Larissa Kelly from information about details about any of her matches. I suppose that the loss in FJ is "more worthy" of inclusion than the average detail from a game, but if that's going to go in, then it seems difficult to
898:
It does hurt because it's trivial, just as noting what color shirt she wore on the show would be trivial. It also makes us look like a rinky dink organization if we feel the need to say "hey! we got a shout-out! WP represent!" within our encyclopedia articles every time someone mentions that they
726:, maybe a dozen others. (Where is the article on Chuck Forrest?) Larissa Kelly is at least as deserving as the lesser of those luminaries. I wouldn't want to clutter up Knowledge with an entry for every 5-time winner, but I think Kelly stands out above the crowd, and not only because she is a woman.
1058:
It sounds like you're basically saying that if an article subject is not "serious" (which is a rather troubling judgment in the first place--I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find a bunch of people who'd describe, say, George W. Bush as a joke), then literally any information can go in the article if
1035:
I really don't care which way this debate falls, but after seeing this same back-and-forth, I thought that I'd weigh in as the devil's advocate: yes, it's trivia, but is trivia necessarily bad? She is a minor television celebrity, and trivial information is quite common among celebrity articles in
1193:
I'm sure that you don't mean this literally, as, say, the number of times she clicked the buzzer for the fifth double jeopardy clue would not be especially relevant. I think that specific content of questions is probably an inappropriate level of detail, as it starts to approach a game summary or
944:
I never would have thought she had a Knowledge article if she hadn't mentioned it during the interview. I agree that noting what color shirt she wore on the show would be trivial, but there is nothing trivial about her stating she wasn't sure why it was determined she was notable enough to warrant
1116:
Well, your argument for inclusion was "fans do care," so by that logic, anything that fans care about should go in. I think that there is a general acknowledgment that encyclopedias should contain significant information and exclude trivial information, so I don't think I really have to make the
1294:
Croctotheface says "We link to her j-archive profile, and readers can get that same kind of information there." Why should a reader have to go to a different Knowledge section to find out information that can be found here? I agree with 209.247.22.164 that the question she missed is a lot more
1430:
Details of the missed question are at worst trivially harmless, something that might be said about anything originating from a television show. If someone found the detail interesting enough to add, others will find it interesting enough to read. That's enough to justify the presence in the
763:
It doesn't detail anything important about the subject of this biography. Although I see references to "find reliable/secondary sources" in the edit summaries, I'd still be opposed if there did exist such sources, as this content is trivial and does not deserve any weight in the article.
1366:
only references the Wendy Wasserstein FJ, and that seems to be because she took him to dinner as a result, not because of any connection to the games. The dinner makes it a more relevant part of his biography. In any case, I've changed the "failure" language as I share Rey's concerns.
1016:
Trivia doesn't somehow become significant because of the medium in which it is presented. Spending two years in the Peace Corps would be a relevant part of her biography--that is, not trivia. Making a self-effacing joke about her WP article is trivia, so it doesn't belong.
1506:
I wouldn't necessarily object to more detail over her sister's appearance, but I don't think anyone knows what the "objectionable calls" were. It was discussed during one of the little 'interviews' that Trebek does with contestants, and no details were given.
1381:
Croctotheface summed up my feelings on the subject quite nicely. I'll also add that Ken Jennings's incorrect answer led to at least talks of him doing a commercial for Fed-Ex (I don't know if they ever got it worked out, though they did run
1239:
There is NO logical reason why the Final Jeopardy! question she failed to answer, causing her to lose the championship, should not be mentioned. I don't understand why some people think they own this article and can control its content.
1330:
I concur with Reywas92. If the information about Kelly's incorrect Final Jeopardy! answer is considered "unnecessary," then the same logic should be applied to the Ken Jennings article. I vote to allow it to remain.
153:
518:
412:
210:
864:
or by Wolf Blitzer on CNN. Surely for purposes of this template, those would be considered mentions "by a media organization" even though strictly speaking they are just mentions by one person. --
1890:
789:
template. If a particular Knowledge article is mentioned (in any context) on a national television program, then that qualifies as mention by a media organization. However, Faithlessthewonderboy
918:
would not have looked at the page otherwise. It's ridiculous now that some people want to censor out the slightest criticism of the deletionists even on a talk page. Being trivial alone does
1178:
champion, I think anything about her appearance on the show is worth mentioning, so I added the subject matter of the question she missed in the Final Jeopardy! round of the championship.
1001:
is worth mentioning. If she had said she was in the Peace Corps for two years, I'm sure that would be included here. It seems the objection is solely because the reference was Knowledge.
692:
KEEP she has proven that by being the all time leader for female contestants she belongs. she has also become the third highest money winner and anyone not wanting her listed in jealous.
1312:
I see absolutely no reason why this information should not be included in the article. I'm not sure I like the wording "failing to identify", but this is perfectly useful information.
1607:
I think that we can say "questionable calls" if they used that kind of term on the show, but I agree with Faithless that we can't decide for ourselves which calls were questionable.
1942:
523:
860:
a media organization (even though the game show is distributed by a media organization). But you could make the same point about a Knowledge page mentioned by a columnist in the
262:
1947:
147:
1977:
1937:
1889:
Matea Roach is on her 15th time, as of 04/ 28/ 2022... Can't recall her $ $ $ Winings. Hope she stays !!! Like her personality as well!!! A smart Canadien lady!!!
1213:$ 100,000 for finishing second". This makes it sound like she kept the winnings from the two earlier games in the championship, which isn't the case, so I removed
1962:
1801:
1797:
1783:
1691:
1687:
1673:
1449:
The difference of opinion is over whether trivial information in an encyclopedia is harmless. Your opinion that it is is certainly not universally agreed upon.
612:
602:
741:
220:
1258:
removed this, calling it "unnecessary information." WHY would this be unnecessary? This should be open to discussion before deleting it without justification.
1912:
267:
1972:
1932:
1277:
to be relevant when it has no bearing on Larissa? And why is it Croctotheface constantly deletes other editor's contributions without discussing it first?
499:
489:
250:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
1117:
case for that here. You may want to take this discussion up somewhere else if you want to argue in favor of covering trivial information in Knowledge.
79:
838:
I'm fine with noting it on the talk page, and we may as well use the template, even if it's not 100% accurate, for tracking or whatever else purposes.
1390:
featuring Jennings). Unless Philip II approaches Kelly with a similar proposal (unlikely at best), I don't think the situations are very comparable.
1952:
578:
1957:
1922:
1859:
Larissa Kelly attended the Williams elementary school. A harbinger of her Jeopardy success was her outstanding performance in the Geography Bee.
779:
I agree that the Knowledge reference should not be mentioned in the article text. But I believe it should be mentioned on this Talk page with the
360:
242:
972:
say that what she says about herself should go in, then anything she's ever said in any medium, including one-on-one conversation, can go in.
461:
85:
44:
1769:
1927:
1492:
1465:
1296:
1278:
1087:
1037:
1002:
946:
465:
364:
1659:
1967:
1917:
1874:
1344:
569:
546:
1894:
1259:
1241:
1226:
1221:
is supposed to mean in addition to what she won the first time she was on, then the sentence should read "Kelly added to her previous
1179:
945:
having a Knowledge article. Surely if Barack Obama publicly commented about his Knowledge article that fact would be mentioned in it.
368:
1779:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1669:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1155:
359:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
1571:
I have no problem with keeping the mention of her sister, but unless we know for certain which were the "questionable calls," we
452:
407:
1583:
1515:
1398:
822:
355:
319:
99:
30:
104:
20:
168:
135:
74:
1844:
1734:
1010:
892:
773:
294:
65:
1576:
1543:
1508:
1391:
856:
asking for criteria on use of the template. Faithless argues that mention by someone on a game show is not mention
815:
1194:
other such material. We link to her j-archive profile, and readers can get that same kind of information there.
561:
540:
1316:
has info about the final that he missed. This is a very short article so we do not need to be trimming anything.
196:
1800:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1690:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1496:
1469:
1282:
1006:
950:
642:
129:
1300:
1091:
1041:
1870:
1835:
1761:
1725:
1645:
1612:
1454:
1436:
1372:
1340:
1199:
1122:
1064:
1022:
977:
927:
904:
843:
769:
749:
251:
109:
1159:
1757:
1263:
1245:
1230:
1183:
697:
125:
1770:
https://web.archive.org/web/20081204113636/http://www.jeopardy.com/announcement_20080528_larissakelly.php
1866:
1819:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1807:
1709:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1697:
1530:
is the J-Archive of Arianna's first game, so you can see multiple questions that could be questionable (
1383:
574:
300:
1760:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1660:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090328161523/http://www.strangehorizons.com/2008/20081222/engines-f.shtml
1644:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1862:
1151:
869:
814:
one man's opinion. If there arises a consensus that it is warranted, by all means put it back. Best,
798:
693:
261:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
175:
1558:
in tin cans). I think that the info about Arianna should definitely be kept, though maybe reworded.
282:
189:
853:
727:
161:
55:
577:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1773:
1608:
1564:
1450:
1432:
1422:
1368:
1334:
1322:
1255:
1195:
1118:
1060:
1018:
973:
923:
900:
890:
839:
765:
745:
731:
660:
265:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see
70:
1804:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1694:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1820:
1710:
1663:
1146:
1363:
719:
444:
51:
347:
1827:
1717:
141:
865:
794:
673:
457:
258:
1786:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1676:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
783:
1826:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1716:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1906:
1753:
1637:
1559:
1527:
1417:
1317:
885:
723:
24:
438:
1572:
1359:
1313:
810:
715:
707:
1653:
1793:
1683:
1535:
711:
460:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can
1225:
winnings by receiving $ 100,000 for placing second" which makes it very clear.
331:
313:
1792:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1682:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1547:
1539:
633:
434:
337:
1531:
652:
199:. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
809:
Croctotheface, I agree with you completely. The only reason I brought up
456:, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Knowledge articles about
508:
1145:
As mentioned on Jeopardy, Larissa has written a science fiction story:
1898:
1878:
1849:
1739:
1616:
1590:
1566:
1522:
1500:
1473:
1458:
1440:
1424:
1405:
1376:
1348:
1324:
1304:
1286:
1267:
1249:
1234:
1203:
1187:
1163:
1126:
1095:
1068:
1045:
1026:
981:
954:
931:
908:
873:
847:
829:
802:
753:
735:
701:
428:
401:
884:
The article is not long, and a sentence mentioning it doesn't hurt.
367:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
1551:
706:
I too would vote to KEEP. Other Jeopardy! winners have articles:
1555:
997:
contestant, it stands to reason whatever she says about herself
758:
1774:
http://www.jeopardy.com/announcement_20080528_larissakelly.php
1486:
The statement "Her sister Arianna was defeated in her initial
628:
276:
257:
from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
234:
184:
15:
1664:
http://www.strangehorizons.com/2008/20081222/engines-f.shtml
1362:
article does not reference any specific clues; our entry on
1147:
http://www.strangehorizons.com/2008/20081222/engines-f.shtml
759:
We shouldn't put the Knowledge reference in the article text
507:
1764:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1648:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1641:
790:
160:
1174:
Since Kelly's only claim to fame is her status as a
573:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1796:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1686:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
740:Guys, just so you know, I've moved your comment to
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
1654:http://www.er.doe.gov/sidebar/sci_bowl/bio6.htm
464:. To improve this article, please refer to the
1782:This message was posted before February 2018.
1672:This message was posted before February 2018.
1943:Low-importance Television game shows articles
993:Since her only notability is her status as a
742:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Larissa Kelly
174:
8:
1416:is, in my opinion, not hurting the article.
1295:important than the trivia about her sister.
1860:
1752:I have just modified one external link on
535:
396:
308:
1948:Television game shows task force articles
1636:I have just modified 2 external links on
744:. That's the place for them, not here.
1170:Level of detail regarding final jeopardy
1978:Knowledge pages referenced by the press
537:
398:
310:
280:
1938:C-Class Television game shows articles
1891:2600:1700:C3A0:F40:2DF9:7AE6:437C:B974
669:
658:
1963:Low-importance Women writers articles
7:
567:This article is within the scope of
519:the Television game shows task force
450:This article is within the scope of
353:This article is within the scope of
1913:Biography articles of living people
587:Knowledge:WikiProject Women writers
299:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1973:WikiProject Women writers articles
1933:Low-importance television articles
590:Template:WikiProject Women writers
14:
1756:. Please take a moment to review
1640:. Please take a moment to review
1209:Also, the article said, "She won
643:mentioned by a media organization
632:
560:
539:
474:Knowledge:WikiProject Television
437:
427:
400:
340:
330:
312:
281:
240:This article must adhere to the
188:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1953:WikiProject Television articles
1652:Corrected formatting/usage for
607:This article has been rated as
494:This article has been rated as
477:Template:WikiProject Television
377:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography
195:This article was nominated for
1958:C-Class Women writers articles
1923:WikiProject Biography articles
380:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
1850:05:28, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
581:and see a list of open tasks.
516:This article is supported by
243:biographies of living persons
42:Put new text under old text.
365:contribute to the discussion
1928:C-Class television articles
255:must be removed immediately
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1994:
1968:WikiProject Women articles
1918:C-Class biography articles
1899:15:29, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
1813:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1749:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1703:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1633:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1544:Windows Millennium Edition
1235:13:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
1204:17:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
1188:13:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
1164:03:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
932:08:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
909:18:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
893:18:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
874:01:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
848:18:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
830:01:07, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
803:00:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
774:22:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
613:project's importance scale
500:project's importance scale
1879:00:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
1617:03:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
1591:00:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
1567:23:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1523:22:34, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1501:16:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1474:16:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1459:19:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
1441:18:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
1425:22:08, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1406:21:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1377:19:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1349:17:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1325:14:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1305:13:34, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1287:13:18, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
1268:14:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
1250:14:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
1127:01:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
1096:00:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
1069:05:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
1046:05:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
1027:04:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
1011:04:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
982:03:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
955:03:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
606:
570:WikiProject Women writers
555:
515:
493:
422:
325:
307:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1740:17:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
922:make something hurtful.
754:18:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
736:17:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
702:02:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
1745:External links modified
1629:External links modified
1464:I don't believe it is.
793:from this Talk page. --
209:, 11 October 2010, see
1885:How about Matea Roach?
1217:from the sentence. If
641:This article has been
593:Women writers articles
512:
453:WikiProject Television
289:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
511:
468:for the type of work.
356:WikiProject Biography
100:Neutral point of view
1794:regular verification
1684:regular verification
1573:can't go speculating
791:deleted the template
105:No original research
1784:After February 2018
1674:After February 2018
854:Template talk:Press
480:television articles
462:join the discussion
458:television programs
219:, 27 May 2008, see
1838:InternetArchiveBot
1789:InternetArchiveBot
1728:InternetArchiveBot
1679:InternetArchiveBot
1546:, iconoclasty vs.
1256:User:Croctotheface
513:
383:biography articles
295:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1881:
1865:comment added by
1814:
1704:
1588:
1520:
1403:
1364:Frank Spangenberg
1154:comment added by
827:
720:Frank Spangenberg
685:
684:
668:Missing or empty
627:
626:
623:
622:
619:
618:
534:
533:
530:
529:
445:Television portal
395:
394:
391:
390:
275:
274:
233:
232:
229:
228:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1985:
1848:
1839:
1812:
1811:
1790:
1738:
1729:
1702:
1701:
1680:
1587:
1584:
1581:
1562:
1519:
1516:
1513:
1420:
1402:
1399:
1396:
1338:
1320:
1166:
888:
852:I put a note at
826:
823:
820:
788:
782:
677:
671:
666:
664:
656:
655:. 19 March 2009.
636:
629:
595:
594:
591:
588:
585:
564:
557:
556:
551:
543:
536:
482:
481:
478:
475:
472:
466:style guidelines
447:
442:
441:
431:
424:
423:
418:
415:
404:
397:
385:
384:
381:
378:
375:
361:join the project
350:
348:Biography portal
345:
344:
343:
334:
327:
326:
316:
309:
292:
286:
285:
277:
263:this noticeboard
235:
201:
200:
192:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1993:
1992:
1988:
1987:
1986:
1984:
1983:
1982:
1903:
1902:
1887:
1857:
1842:
1837:
1805:
1798:have permission
1788:
1762:this simple FaQ
1747:
1732:
1727:
1695:
1688:have permission
1678:
1646:this simple FaQ
1631:
1585:
1577:
1560:
1517:
1509:
1484:
1418:
1400:
1392:
1332:
1318:
1172:
1149:
1143:
1141:Science Fiction
886:
824:
816:
786:
780:
761:
690:
681:
680:
667:
657:
650:
646:
592:
589:
586:
583:
582:
549:
479:
476:
473:
470:
469:
443:
436:
416:
410:
382:
379:
376:
373:
372:
346:
341:
339:
293:on Knowledge's
290:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1991:
1989:
1981:
1980:
1975:
1970:
1965:
1960:
1955:
1950:
1945:
1940:
1935:
1930:
1925:
1920:
1915:
1905:
1904:
1886:
1883:
1856:
1853:
1832:
1831:
1824:
1777:
1776:
1768:Added archive
1746:
1743:
1722:
1721:
1714:
1667:
1666:
1658:Added archive
1656:
1630:
1627:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1622:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1493:209.247.22.164
1483:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1466:209.247.22.164
1461:
1444:
1443:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1352:
1351:
1309:
1297:172.130.75.156
1292:
1291:
1290:
1289:
1279:209.247.22.164
1271:
1270:
1207:
1206:
1171:
1168:
1142:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1088:71.111.226.123
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1038:71.111.226.123
1030:
1029:
1003:209.247.22.164
991:
990:
989:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
947:209.247.22.164
937:
936:
935:
934:
912:
911:
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
876:
862:New York Times
833:
832:
806:
805:
760:
757:
689:
686:
683:
682:
679:
678:
647:
640:
639:
637:
625:
624:
621:
620:
617:
616:
609:Low-importance
605:
599:
598:
596:
579:the discussion
565:
553:
552:
550:Low‑importance
544:
532:
531:
528:
527:
524:Low-importance
514:
504:
503:
496:Low-importance
492:
486:
485:
483:
449:
448:
432:
420:
419:
417:Low‑importance
405:
393:
392:
389:
388:
386:
352:
351:
335:
323:
322:
317:
305:
304:
298:
287:
273:
272:
268:this help page
252:poorly sourced
238:
231:
230:
227:
226:
225:
224:
214:
193:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1990:
1979:
1976:
1974:
1971:
1969:
1966:
1964:
1961:
1959:
1956:
1954:
1951:
1949:
1946:
1944:
1941:
1939:
1936:
1934:
1931:
1929:
1926:
1924:
1921:
1919:
1916:
1914:
1911:
1910:
1908:
1901:
1900:
1896:
1892:
1884:
1882:
1880:
1876:
1872:
1868:
1867:Walter.bender
1864:
1854:
1852:
1851:
1846:
1841:
1840:
1829:
1825:
1822:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1809:
1803:
1799:
1795:
1791:
1785:
1780:
1775:
1771:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1763:
1759:
1755:
1754:Larissa Kelly
1750:
1744:
1742:
1741:
1736:
1731:
1730:
1719:
1715:
1712:
1708:
1707:
1706:
1699:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1681:
1675:
1670:
1665:
1661:
1657:
1655:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1638:Larissa Kelly
1634:
1628:
1618:
1614:
1610:
1609:Croctotheface
1606:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1592:
1589:
1582:
1580:
1574:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1565:
1563:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1521:
1514:
1512:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1489:
1482:Arianna Kelly
1481:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1462:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1451:Croctotheface
1448:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1442:
1438:
1434:
1433:Eclecticology
1429:
1428:
1427:
1426:
1423:
1421:
1407:
1404:
1397:
1395:
1389:
1385:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1374:
1370:
1369:Croctotheface
1365:
1361:
1356:
1355:
1354:
1353:
1350:
1346:
1342:
1337:
1336:
1335:LiteraryMaven
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1323:
1321:
1315:
1310:
1307:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1288:
1284:
1280:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1237:
1236:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1216:
1212:
1211:an additional
1205:
1201:
1197:
1196:Croctotheface
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1169:
1167:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1153:
1148:
1140:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1119:Croctotheface
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1061:Croctotheface
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1034:
1033:
1032:
1031:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1019:Croctotheface
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1000:
996:
983:
979:
975:
974:Croctotheface
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
956:
952:
948:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
933:
929:
925:
924:Eclecticology
921:
916:
915:
914:
913:
910:
906:
902:
901:Croctotheface
897:
896:
895:
894:
891:
889:
875:
871:
867:
863:
859:
855:
851:
850:
849:
845:
841:
840:Croctotheface
837:
836:
835:
834:
831:
828:
821:
819:
812:
808:
807:
804:
800:
796:
792:
785:
778:
777:
776:
775:
771:
767:
766:Croctotheface
756:
755:
751:
747:
746:Croctotheface
743:
738:
737:
733:
729:
725:
724:Eddie Timanus
721:
717:
713:
709:
704:
703:
699:
695:
687:
675:
662:
654:
649:
648:
644:
638:
635:
631:
630:
614:
610:
604:
601:
600:
597:
584:Women writers
580:
576:
575:women writers
572:
571:
566:
563:
559:
558:
554:
548:
547:Women writers
545:
542:
538:
525:
522:(assessed as
521:
520:
510:
506:
505:
501:
497:
491:
488:
487:
484:
467:
463:
459:
455:
454:
446:
440:
435:
433:
430:
426:
425:
421:
414:
409:
406:
403:
399:
387:
370:
369:documentation
366:
362:
358:
357:
349:
338:
336:
333:
329:
328:
324:
321:
318:
315:
311:
306:
302:
296:
288:
284:
279:
278:
270:
269:
264:
260:
256:
253:
249:
245:
244:
239:
237:
236:
222:
218:
215:
212:
208:
205:
204:
203:
202:
198:
194:
191:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
25:Larissa Kelly
22:
18:
17:
1888:
1861:— Preceding
1858:
1836:
1833:
1808:source check
1787:
1781:
1778:
1751:
1748:
1726:
1723:
1698:source check
1677:
1671:
1668:
1635:
1632:
1578:
1510:
1487:
1485:
1414:
1393:
1387:
1360:Jerome Vered
1333:
1314:Ken Jennings
1311:
1308:
1293:
1260:67.79.157.50
1242:67.79.157.50
1238:
1227:67.79.157.50
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1208:
1180:67.79.157.50
1175:
1173:
1144:
998:
994:
992:
919:
882:
861:
857:
817:
762:
739:
716:Jerome Vered
708:Ken Jennings
705:
691:
608:
568:
517:
495:
451:
354:
301:WikiProjects
266:
254:
247:
241:
216:
206:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1536:Timber line
1156:75.4.225.55
1150:—Preceding
999:on the show
899:have one.
712:Dave Madden
148:free images
31:not a forum
1907:Categories
1845:Report bug
1735:Report bug
1548:iconoclasm
1540:Windows ME
1219:additional
1215:additional
866:Mathew5000
795:Mathew5000
694:Ducatigary
471:Television
413:Game shows
408:Television
221:discussion
211:discussion
1855:Education
1828:this tool
1821:this tool
1718:this tool
1711:this tool
1579:faithless
1532:Tree line
1511:faithless
1488:Jeopardy!
1394:faithless
1388:USA Today
1223:Jeopardy!
1176:Jeopardy!
995:Jeopardy!
818:faithless
661:cite news
653:Jeopardy!
374:Biography
320:Biography
259:libellous
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1875:contribs
1863:unsigned
1834:Cheers.—
1724:Cheers.—
1561:Reywas92
1419:Reywas92
1319:Reywas92
1152:unsigned
887:Reywas92
728:Patzer42
688:Untitled
197:deletion
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1758:my edit
1642:my edit
1345:contrib
670:|title=
611:on the
498:on the
291:C-class
154:WPÂ refs
142:scholar
1550:, and
297:scale.
126:Google
1552:steel
1384:an ad
811:WP:RS
784:press
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1895:talk
1871:talk
1613:talk
1556:iron
1554:vs.
1542:vs.
1534:vs.
1528:This
1497:talk
1470:talk
1455:talk
1437:talk
1373:talk
1341:talk
1301:talk
1283:talk
1264:talk
1246:talk
1231:talk
1200:talk
1184:talk
1160:talk
1123:talk
1092:talk
1065:talk
1042:talk
1023:talk
1007:talk
978:talk
951:talk
928:talk
905:talk
870:talk
844:talk
799:talk
770:talk
750:talk
732:talk
698:talk
674:help
363:and
217:Keep
207:Keep
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1802:RfC
1772:to
1692:RfC
1662:to
1386:in
920:NOT
603:Low
490:Low
248:BLP
176:TWL
1909::
1897:)
1877:)
1873:•
1815:.
1810:}}
1806:{{
1705:.
1700:}}
1696:{{
1615:)
1586:()
1575:.
1538:,
1518:()
1499:)
1472:)
1457:)
1439:)
1401:()
1375:)
1347:)
1343:•
1303:)
1285:)
1266:)
1248:)
1233:)
1202:)
1186:)
1162:)
1125:)
1094:)
1067:)
1044:)
1025:)
1009:)
980:)
953:)
930:)
907:)
872:)
858:by
846:)
825:()
801:)
787:}}
781:{{
772:)
752:)
734:)
722:,
718:,
714:,
710:,
700:)
665::
663:}}
659:{{
651:.
526:).
411::
156:)
54:;
1893:(
1869:(
1847:)
1843:(
1830:.
1823:.
1737:)
1733:(
1720:.
1713:.
1611:(
1495:(
1468:(
1453:(
1435:(
1371:(
1339:(
1299:(
1281:(
1262:(
1244:(
1229:(
1198:(
1182:(
1158:(
1121:(
1090:(
1063:(
1040:(
1021:(
1005:(
976:(
949:(
926:(
903:(
868:(
842:(
797:(
768:(
748:(
730:(
696:(
676:)
672:(
645::
615:.
502:.
371:.
303::
271:.
246:(
223:.
213:.
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
