Talk:Mountaintop removal mining

1689:

rate at which it changes and the effects, if any, of said change. Scientists will state that erosion will eventually reduce the mountains in the eastern USA to lower elevations. Is this "lowering of elevations" through "erosion" bad? No, we live in a dynamic system (the universe), and we can not stop these processes. Humans tend to like things to "stay the same" and generally are, for some reason, scared of change. Let us at least describe the reason opposition to mountaintop mining exists and stay away from describing it as being concerned with the "physical alteration of the landscape." The landscape will change--when the temperatures rise, when sea-level rises, etc... I'd follow facts--does it degrade water quality, reduce habitat, provide jobs, and others so that people can reach a decision--on their own. I don't think Knowledge should "preach." Rather, I'd like to see Wiki provide honest facts.

1125:, are often stored nearby in open-air pools isolated from natural waterways by earthen dams. This procedure allows any usable coal particles to separate from the water and settle to the bottom. Once coal removal is completed, the mining operators back stack spoil from the next area to be mined into the now empty pit. After backstacking and grading of spoil has been completed topsoil (or a topsoil substitute) is layered over the spoil layer. Next grass seed is spread in a mixture of seed, fertilizer, and mulch made from recycled newspaper. Dependant on mostly surface owner wishes the land will then be further reclaimed by adding trees if the post mining land use is forest land or wildlife habitat. If the land owner has requested other post mining land uses the land can reclaimed to be used as pastor land, economic development or other uses specified in the SMCRA. 1975:

arguments made to say that mountaintop mining is "wrong" or "bad" due simply to the topographical alteration. Since "natural" erosion will eventually lead to lower elevations, it isn't the change in elevation that is alarming or controversial. It may be the rate of said change is a problem, but nobody is suggesting we go build Mount Saint Helens back up to its "pre-blow" dimensions--and that was a big change. Rather it is "man" that is changing the mountain top. I'd simply describe "changes in topography are often cited as ..... but that nobody complains when natural process alter topography (give examples if you want)."

2045: 482: 1066:

MTR mines utilize small hollow fills in combination with back stacking on bench. Trying to confuse the MTR mining and the valley fill issues is an attempt paint all surface mining on the top of a ridge with the more controversial practice of valley filling. Using the word “extreme topographic destruction and deforestation of the summit” ” is inflammatory. Would these same terms seem appropriate in the description of what happens when a contractor starts building a new housing sub-division.

461: 200: 678: 355: 657: 334: 1182:", while technically factual (though unsourced), still reeks of POV. Unless some direct mention is made of environmental concerns in the Introduction, shouldn't this be moved to the Criticism section? Editing this to read "It is most closely associated with coal mining in the Appalachian Mountains, located in the eastern United States" would leave the clarity of location untouched, while removing the unexpected and out-of-place reference to ecological concerns. 876: 2046:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ohvec.org/galleries/mountaintop_removal/008/10.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ohvec.org/galleries/mountaintop_removal/008/index.html&usg=__guTK_Xuaq6w1781p53zKF7abz4I=&h=394&w=525&sz=30&hl=en&start=15&sig2=hpXp6ZW7L7L6Xg3iYUw3Cw&tbnid=qOhmcl8AeTPpqM:&tbnh=99&tbnw=132&ei=P6wpSZzbHqDMefe8vMQC&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmartin%2Bcounty%2Bcoal%2Bimpoundment%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den

365: 834: 2472:

concerns about a POV fork. I ask you to please discuss moving the content with other editors because I don't think this is a non-controversial move. The reason I reverted you is that when you created the new article, you violated the terms of the GFDL by not referring to the fact that you had copied the text from this page, but rather it was presented as though it was all your own work. This is a violation of the

784: 254: 688: 233: 573: 963: 906: 552: 583: 191: 2196:

overburden from each strip placed in the excavation produced by the previous strip. As far as I know, mountaintop removal mining is not done in long strips, and so more resembles open-pit mining (paradoxically, however, without the pit) than strip mining. I'm not a coal miner, but there are probably some out there who can correct any errors in my statement.

3095:), but it looks like the current title was chosen as a compromise between "Mountaintop removal" (skews anti-industry) and "Mountaintop mining" (skews pro-industry). It seems we're all agreed that the topic in question is literally mining after the removal of a mountaintop, so I see no compelling reason to change. -- 3427:"Critics contend that...", this transition sentence comes across as ambiguous. The opposing groups pertinent to this topic are not clear. I also do not think that a "Critics" section is necessary or helpful. Would a section providing historical context of opposing groups that have been involved be more effective? 2544:, they would be justified if the enclosed terms were being used in an unconventional or unattrubatble manner, but given that they appear to all be cited through reliable sources, use of double-quotes is unjustified. In such cases, because the purpose is to mention the word rather than use it, the Manual of Style 3407:

Hi Knowledge, I added a reference to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to the section on reclamation of Mountaintop Removal mine sites. I also included links to other relevant pages from within the section, including the wiki pages on erosion and reforestation. I felt that it was

2898:

Mountain Top mining always involves the removal of the mountain top. The process described in the article is not disputed. Explosives are used to take off the summit ridge, the waste is dumped in the valleys, etc etc. It is a form of surface mining... Surface mining does not involve shafts.

2823:

The aforementioned source describes their anger that the government has not adopted their terminology. The continued use of MTRM instead of MTM is a continued demonstration on the blatant POV of this article. MTR/MTRM will still be referenced in the article and it will be done in a way to remain

2651:

This is possibly the worst offender in terms of POV in the article. Beginning with "Some artists have been leaders in the fight against the process of mountaintop removal," it reads right off as more or less a direct advertisement for a cause. That section should not even exist, at least as named and

2601:

It appears that this article, which is about an apparently passionate subject matter, has had a lot of non-neutrality built into the content. Avoiding bias in an encyclopediac article is relatively simple; for a subject like this, the article should discuss the definition of the subject, its context,

2570:

While it appears that prior attempts have cleaned some of these up, I notice some still remain. One quote that stands out is "According to SMCRA, the topsoil is supposed to be removed and set aside for later reclamation." The sentence is cited with what appears to be a good, reliable source. Were the

2373:

groups who oppose MTR or videos by them, some were EPA stuff (the two i kept are). Not sure if they were the right ones to keep but something had to be done. I also added the no more links tag, so if links are to be added, they should be discussed here first, subjects like this tend to draw lots of

2325:

I will remove the reference to them in the "Process" section - which itself needs much further amplification. The "sludge pond" section really doesn't belong in this article at all but needs to be in a separate article or as an expansion to the (currently incomplete) Tailings pond article. I'll let

1855:

Coal's mining and use as a fuel have long been controversial amongst environmentalists due to potential environmental impact and coal burning's potential role in global warming. Much of the controversy over MTR ,however, stems from both the extreme topological and ecological changes that the mining

1803:

the controversy is over. If the statement doesn't entirely cover the controversy (implied by the some) than it seems we can put what else is controversial. Not to mention I've heard few lamer resons than this"Some people just don't like coal and oppose MTR as a way to incrementally kill all mining"

1177:

OK, so maybe I should just go ahead and make the edit, but this is my first time actually making any kind of a contribution (not quite the first time I've wanted to, though :-) ). It seems to me that, in the Introduction, the phrase, "It is most closely associated with coal mining in the Appalachian

1132:

seams, miners can often repeat the blasting process to mine over a dozen seams on a single mountain, increasing the mine depth each time. This can result in a vertical descent of hundreds of extra feet into the earth. Many of these seams mined in the MTR method are to thin to be mined using any other

2992:

Baffling. How exactly is this a POV title when you concede that "Mountain Top mining always involves removal of the mountain top."? You're on slightly firmer ground with the precision argument, but I had never heard your proposed title, so I decided to play the hits game (phrases in quotation marks,

2525:

Though it appears to have been discussed in years past, I took a look at this article, and it only took a moment or two for it to reek of bias to me. I've found numerous places where both the writing and the content appear to have a conspicuous lack of neutrality, earning a flag for each. To go over

2195:

Strip mining is so named, not because it "strips" off the overlying rock, but because the mining is done in long strips. In contour stripping (in mountainous terrain), mining is done in long strips along the outcrop. In area stripping (in flat ground), mining is again done in long strips, with the

2114:

If you want the full shpeel see the US tag talk portion of the page. In short its not that this page isn't centered on the US, its that all evidence points to MTR being centered in the US. If we can get some references on global MTR sites or something like that than I think the tag could be placed

1974:

I'd highlight the contradiction that people who oppose mountaintop mining do not oppose "natural" erosion that will reduce the elevations of the mountains. Simply expose a flaw in that argument does not mean that mountaintop mining is any more "acceptable." Rather, it simply removes a flaw in many

1945:

Because of the physically destructive nature of the practice, MTR mining is controversial, and is disparaged by environmentalists, local residents, and others. Controversy over the practice stems from both the extreme topological and ecological changes that the mining site undergoes, as well as from

1887:

Because of the destructive nature of the practice, Mountaintop removal mining is controversial among environmentalists, local residents, and others; controversy over the practice stems from both the extreme topological and ecological changes that the mining site undergoes, as well and the storage of

1320:

Reverted back to include Toxic West Virginia reference. This is not link spam, this is an actual documentary that is directly related to this article. Thus this is a related to this piece and needs to be included. Also, you do not gain anything from google as wiki marks all links do not follow!

1136:

I have spent many years of my life working in the design and planing of MTR mines. I have retired from the industry for 15 years and love the mountains of East KY and WV. I have a healthy respect for the emotions that this subject brings out in good people on both sides. Wiki is not the place for

2644:

For the most part, this sections problems are NOT neutrality-related, but amidst the poor organization of it, it also placed some more undue weight on "critics contend"s. This section is on impacts, not "critics," so it should follow a clear structure that reflects this, based around a small number

2612:

The first half is allright. "Peer-reviewed studies show that mountaintop mining has serious environmental impacts..." however, is apparently un-cited, only sourcing the "adverse human health impacts." That level of detail doesn't belong in the introduction; mention of criticism can be warranted, if

2485:

Also, I reverted the page move to a capitalised title because this article describes a mining process and doesn't appear to be a proper noun. The article itself doesn't use capitals except for when using acronyms and both the websites used as external links use lower case. So I can't understand why

1688:

I get concerned when the page reads the "main issue has been over the physical alteration of the landscape." Actually, nature will erode the mountains anyway. Since nobody is seeking to stop "natural" erosion, I don't think the controversy is the "alteration" of the landscape so much as it is the

1449:

I just did some major re-edits to the page, but my main point for writing on the discussion page is that I removed a US-centric tag from the page. The reason I removed it is that, while this page does concentrate on the US primarily, the practice takes place almost exclusively, as far as I've ever

1109:

seams beneath. The overburden is then moved by various mechanically means to areas of the ridge previously mined. These areas are the most economical area of storage as they are located close to the active pit of exposed coal. If the ridge topography is to steep to adequately handle the amount of

1065:

This is the worse POV I have ever discovered on Wiki. From the first sentence the inflammatory and prejudice words flow. “often referred to as mountaintop mining/valley fills (MTM/VF),” Not all MTR mines involves valley fills. Some mines use the excess spoil to reclaim older pre-law mines. Other

2260:

It is not stated in the article that either of the two sludge ponds mentioned, either at Marsh Fork Elementary School, or the Martin County Sludge Spill, are related to MTR. If they are related to MTR, this fact should be stated and documented. If not, they should be moved to the article on coal

2179:

Isn't this just a kind of strip mining? Isn't the main difference that this tends to remove more surface layers (and are not expected to restore them)? In theory a strip mine might be shallow and could work its way beyond the horizon, by having one working trench and placing the removed surface

2679:

I agree with a lot of what you say and have made some changes to the article. The "Community action" section has been cut back a lot, and the title changed to "Books and films". I'm removing the tags, and ask that you edit the article in the usual way to make any further changes that are needed.

2580:

Similarly, "Critics contend that MTR is a destructive and unsustainable practice..." doesn't appear to be cited, and is another classic example of weasel words? Who, precisely, are the critics? It should either have a reliable source cited right there that echoes the same statement, or should be

2471:

I was asked to review what you've done here and I've reverted you and deleted the criticism page. I don't really have much of an opinion about this article because I know nothing about this subject but shunting the criticism off to the side on an article that isn't excessive in length does raise

2663:

Overall, I see that this article DOES have the potential to be neutral, but it's got a long way to go. And right now, the lack of neutrality is almost certainly the biggest single detriment to the article: normally lack of solid content and inline citations/sources are the biggest hurdle toward

2321:

I work for MSHA in a Division responsible for slurry/tailings ponds. The Shumate Prep Plant and Impoundment (near Marsh Fork school) and the Brushy Fork Prep Plant and Impoundment up the valley, both have received almost all their coal from underground mines. This will change a bit as the MTR

1528:

So, the links section is too big, and I'm having difficulty whittling it down because so many of the different links are so similar (community groups against MTR). For most of them it would be difficult to justify which ones are more important, but I don't advocate deleting all of them because

1096:

is supposed to be removed and set aside for later reclamation. however, coal companies are often granted waivers and instead reclaim the mountain with "topsoil substitute." The waivers are granted if adequate amounts of topsoil are not naturally present on the rocky ridge top. Once the area is

2389:

The external links section had indeed become overgrown, but such a mass deletion of all links except the government's seems slightly suspect, especially for an article about a controversial practice. Perhaps rather than leaving those references absent from the page, we could summarize the main

1821:

I don't have a good draft for how it should read but here's my two cents on the big picture. Some people don't like energy, period. They're called luddites and rarely operate in the open because their ideals are so ugly once you work out the math (90%+ human death rates to get to a sustainable

1387:

Below is text I removed which I believe to be too biased or promotional. I think it would be good to have a summary of movements that are fighting against MTR, which summary could include a lot of material from this addition, but a laundry list of musicians who released albums and wrote books

2305:

The photo shown in the link above does not show a MTR mine above the impoundment. I live in the center of the MTR area and have worked on MTR jobs. Most MTR mines do not have sludge ponds. Sludge ponds are used in conjunction with "coal washer plants" that primarily porcess coal mined from

2856:

for this article to have a so-called neutral POV. With the word "removal", it is "biased" in favor of environmentalists, without the word "removal" it is biased in favor of industry. As long as both are covered in the lead sentence, what's the big deal? The only way Knowledge could remain

1152:

The coal slurry impoundments mentioned in the "process" section have nothing to do with MTR mining. They are for disposal of waste materials from coal washing operations, which is done regardless of the mining method. Most pre-date the MTR mining going on in their vicinity. Mention of the

2619:

Although it's not until the "process" section right thereafter where it's even explained how deforestation directly comes into play, the fourth paragraph of the "overview" section switches right from describing the location of MRM, and then launching into a well-cited series of notes on the

2881:, "titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but no more precise than that." So if "mountaintop mining" unambiguously defines the fact that the mountain top is removed, then perhaps the word "removal" is over-precision and can be removed. 2421:

in the appropriate section, using in-line citations to reference them. The content of the links is far more valuble if included in the body of the article, rather than as a bulk list at the end of the article. I may have been a little excessive in my external link removal, but IMO the

1355:

In the Economics section a reference is needed for the sentence "Proponents argue that in certain geologic areas, MTR and similar forms of surface mining allow the only access to thin seams of coal that traditional underground mining would not be able to mine. MTR is some times the most

2555:

uses of double-quotes are unjustified, though, as some properly fulfil the use of scare quotes, such as the term "fill material", as it is in reference to the term being ill-defined. The quotes are unjustified merely when the term has a well-cited or consensus definition that is being

1752:

My question is, how should it read? I think we should say what the controversy over MTR is, and not wishy-washy around it. If there is something besides the issues listed that is controversial about MTR, it seems like it should be added to make this page all the more encyclopedic.

2967:. I see that the acronyms used in the article are either MTR or MTM, there is no MTRM acronym in the article. I suppose "mountaintop removal" unambiguously defines a mining operation, unless one might remove a mountain for some reason other than resource extraction. Maybe, per 1829:

And then there's the crowd that have no problem with energy, no problem with coal, yet find MTR to be a bad idea. This is the most attractive of the opposition positions and all three factions will tend to make public statements on these grounds to maximize their popularity and

2238:

While the Buffalo Creek Flood illustrates the danger of slurry ponds, this particular dam wasn't a result of mountaintop removal, but rather another type of coal mining. Of course, the article doesn't directly attribute it to MTR, but perhaps another example would be better.

2819:– WP:POVTITLE WP:PRECISION. Mountaintop Removal Mining is "new speak" used by environmental groups. MTM is the name used in text books, non-agenda publications, the US Goverment, etc. To illustrate this point I refer to one of the POV references used in the article: 2656:

in order for the article to be neutral. But to lay it out as if it's accepted consensus that opposing MRM is "the good fight" is downright bias. Some of the contents could be worked into a proper "criticism" section where appropriate, but by and large the section needs to be

2602:(history, legal environment, etc.) and then its impacts, (economic, ecological, health) including any reception/response/criticism arising from it; even with the apparent majority being critical of the subject, it's still possible to maintain neutrality while not giving 3269:

It's Hobet, not Hobit, you ignorant, murderous environmental liberals. As for POV, this entire article is written from one that paints all capitalists and workers as some kind of demonic entity. It's skewed so far left that it's nothing more than socialist propaganda.

2501:

I removed the forced image size of the two pictures in the article heading, they were pretty big, and overlapped (on was centred). They maybe should be a little bigger and moved somewhere further down the article (or not). Also there is an image of a Dragline at the

2452:) and the see also links that were to opponents of MTR mining, as they are more related to the criticism of MTR than to MTR itself. The leading two paragraphs are still in this article, but the criticism is large enough to warrent its own. The criticism section of 1403:

Writers in the region have been active in the fight against mountaintop removal. In 2005, 16 Kentucky writers released a public statement condemning the mining practice, which led to the issue being widely discussed in the state media for the first time. Those

1360:. I do not know how to add citation. Someone please add this site. Click "employment" on left margin and then "employment/ wages by county" for detailed informaition. This same site also has some great information of reclamationa and post mining land uses. 1822:

luddite world) that few actually openly adhere to the ideology. Other people don't like coal because they perceive it as dirty and ecologically unsound. Any technique that enhances the economic viability of coal is going to get dumped on by these greens.

1642:

Hmmm, I like that idea, I think it'll certainly helps us all work on inevitable POV battles on a one by one basis, as well as laying the criticisms out better, for all to see. The biodiversity section and sludge ponds are already starting to look good

1507:

I don't like the specification "in the U.S." because I think it is unneccesary. As stated elsewhere on this page no references have been found to MTR outside the U.S. I'll give it a few days, but if no references can be found I think they should be

204: 2590:

Lastly, I see mention of "desired geological material," which strikes me as an unusual way to describe mineral resources. This feels like it could be another example of weasel-wording, in a manner as to try and distance it from more "accepted"

2070:

Has there been any progress on getting a free photo of a valley fill? There are a lot at Flickr; it's just a question of sending a Flickr Mail to the photographer and requesting that they change their license on that photo to Creative Commons.

2533:

This isn't quite as serious a problem as the POV one, but it still further compounds things. Many of the issues here might not be the result of deliberate bias, but nonetheless exemplify what to strive to avoid when writng a neutral article.

975: 1436:, a group of concerned citizens that has been one of the leaders in the fight against mountaintop removal mining. In 2006, West Virginia writers released a similar authors statement and in 2000 one of West Virginia's best known authors, 1656:(leaving a summary and a link to the main article). Only two of the sections above are stated in the main article and that section already takes up 1/2 of the page, although I think the sludge pond should be considered an issue with 1946:

the storage of waste material generated from the mining and processing of the coal. Advocates of MTR point out its efficiency, its ability to provide jobs, and the resulting increase of flat land in areas where there is often little.

2486:

it was capped and there doesn't appear to be any discussion here. I don't have any personal objection to it being capitalised if it is decided that is appropriate but it doesn't seem consistent with the MOS or with its usual usage.

2869:) 12:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC) Another thought: Do mining operations ever put an underground mine shaft on the top of a mountain, mine at the top of the mountain by extracting coal up the shaft, leaving the mountaintop intact, and 1725:"Some controversy over the practice stems from both the extreme topological and ecological changes that the mining site undergoes, as well and the storage of waste material generated from the mining and processing of the coal." 1780:"Some controversy over the practice stems from both the extreme topological and ecological changes that the mining site undergoes, as well and the storage of waste material generated from the mining and processing of the coal." 3489: 1114:

or “hollow fill”. A front-end loader or excavator then removes the coal, where it is transported to a an often on-site processing plant. and washed. Millions of gallons of by-product from this coal processing, called coal

153: 2402:

reveals that most were critical of the practice, so I suggest (see also my suggestion under the "Criticism" heading of this discussion page) we put those two subheaders under the Criticism section of the article.

2008:

Anyone have a quality photo of a valley fill? The article refers to these over and over, but the textual description is difficult to convey what one actually is. Please include a photo thumbnail if you have one.

1454:

located in the US. While I've heard about plenty of strip mining in other countries, and a few MTR sites out west, but I've never heard of an MTR site in another country, so basically MTR is as American as

1861:

My guess is (observing some of your statements) you might not like the GW tie in. The reason I inserted it is to get a full view of what the controversy is over, and, like you said, go general to specific.

3479: 1664:

either), not just MTR, but that is a whole other kettle of fish. Maybe once Social causes (defiantly part of the criticism portion) and health concerns are added a split should take place...thoughts?--

2249:

Inclusion of the Buffalo Creek disaster in the mountaintop removal article is highly misleading, as it implies that the disaster was connected to mountaintop removal. This example whould be removed.

1341:

about the many documentaries or public awareness boosts that mountaintop removal has received recently (Appalachian Voices' "ilovemountains.org" would be another example for such a section), and move

3494: 2873:

removing it? If so, then perhaps this article needs the word "removal" to disambiguate this type of mining from the underground shaft type which is done on a mountaintop. If mountain top mining

1156:

Also, draglines are used to excavate the blasted overburden, above the coal - not the coal. The coal is removed with front-end loaders and trucks, or shovels and trucks if the seam is thick.

3554: 758: 748: 2706:

Additionally, the proper name is Mountain Top Mining. MTR is only used by environmentalists... Google: "Mountain Top Removal Mining" the only results are from environmentalist sites.

1835:

I believe a good open would recognize the anti-coal and anti-energy aspects of MTR controversy while concentrating on those opponents who are merely upset about this specific technique.

3559: 2398:(Media and Organizations were the two main subheadings of the former external links) somewhere else in the article -- in an encyclopaedic style, of course, rather than listing links! 2275:

There are MTR mines above both the Marsh Fork School and at Martin County Coal, where the Oct 2000 spill occurred. I have personally seen both of these mine sites and photos are here

1623:... this is obviously a huge deal (if this sounds PoV, just look at the "External Links" section), in my opinion "newsworthy" enough to have its own section in an encyclopedic article. 1363:

Also please add a section on Reclamation and Post mining land uses. A wonderful citation for this section would be the video from the state of Kentucky's web site on Coal Education.

1601:

My vote would be to keep Controversy as part of the MTR core article, but to further break up this section into distinct sub-sections. I could easily see the following subheaders:

2026:.org has some good images on their flickr site. I'm currently in contact with someone at the organization in an attempt to be allowed to use the images b/c they are copyrighted. 724: 3549: 3388:

Hello, I have added informaiton to the legislation section. Some information pertained to what was previously posted, but I have added the most recent information I could find.

1345:

there. I'd feel much more comfortable about including the link within the article if the advocate for doing so wasn't a representative of the company who produced the film...

147: 2645:

of core, well-established facts, such as the previously-mentioned section on deforestation. Then it should follow up with more specific supporting notes on each major point.

2631: 44: 3133:

Both terms are used, both are used to advocate a POV position, so neutrality and commonname don't help us much here. However in the form described here, mountaintops are

2571:

statement a known lie, the use of the phrase "according to" would be justified. However, as the exception is based on the granting of waivers, which aren't gauranteed.

918: 701: 662: 1081:

Unless someone can make serious corrections I will change the section on "Process" to the following in order to remove POV comments and add more detailed facts: : -->

2824:

NPOV and certainly not how MTM is currently referenced. Precision: As discusssed below, MTM is surface mining and always requires the removal of the mountaintop.

2180:

layers behind it as it progressed. Removing a mountain top implies not gluing together a replacement (which is not practical with current costs and materials). --

1031:

I added citation needed flags to the criticism section. This needs attention from an experienced Wikipedian who can correct the weasel words and poor formatting.

3330: 3326: 3312: 1210: 2664:

getting to B/GA+ status, but this article already has way, way more good sources listed than any other Start-class I've seen. It just needs stronger neutrality.

2624:

is problematic, again applying undue weight. Rather, it should be further down the article, as one of the core statements of the "environmental impacts" section.

1481:

I tried to include "U.S." where sentences related specifically to the U.S. I also added a reference to Peru's Yanacocha gold mine, which appears to use MTR.

3529: 3519: 524: 443: 433: 534: 79: 3298: 3564: 3474: 1406:

writers were also active in getting more national coverage for the topic, placing editorials in nationally-read newspapers such as The Washington Post

991: 938: 3534: 2613:

included in a neutral manner. As is, it appears to give undue weight to criticism, as this article is not "Criticism of Mountaintop mining removal."

2861:

though doesn't the operation in fact "remove" a mountain top, i.e., after the mining is done, is not the surveyed elevation of the mountain lower?

3544: 3504: 3484: 639: 629: 316: 306: 1428:. In 2006, Kentucky musicians banded together to create a compact disc of music that opposed mountaintop removal. The result was the bestselling 1050:

really seems to cite the burning of coal as Environmental Enemy #1; not the industry, and certainly not MTR. I moved this fact to the article

409: 2638:

the article, it also could be construed to try and minimize the weight of this piece of legislation which is core and critical to the article.

2620:

deforestation taking place there. Such sentences are well-sourced and written in a manner that on its own is satisfactorally neutral, but its

2322:

operations nearby start up - but the slurry imprisonments have nothing to do with MTR - they would be needed regardless of the mining method.

3514: 85: 3524: 3509: 2746:

Agreed the article should be titled mountaintop mining and mounaintop removal mining should simply link to this page, and not be the title.

1545: 282: 2963:

in the title, rather than one or the other, is a fair compromise? But checking out Wiktionary, since 14 January 2007, the entry has been

3447: 3115: 1368: 2333: 2307: 1982: 1696: 1163: 1138: 1067: 3308:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2476:

which requires the original authors be credited with their work. Please don't move it again without a consensus with other editors.

2235:

NOTE: The thread about the Buffalo Creek Flood was moved from another section of the Discussion page to here, for semantic cohesion.

605: 382: 339: 278: 3114:

per BDD, further, you can mine at the top of the mountain by tunneling without removal, so it becomes ambiguous with the rename --

713:

articles on limnology- or oceanography-related topics, as well as to ensure that limnology and oceanography articles are properly

168: 3539: 3499: 1433: 490: 466: 135: 3469: 2294: 1356:

cost-effective method of extracting coal and provides high paying jobs." A good reference can be found on the web at the site

706: 391: 99: 30: 2449: 1741:

Despite a lack of evidence to the contrary I edited in the poorly worded statement "More generally many object to the use of

1653: 104: 20: 2634:, the article provides no inline linking or any case where it even provides the full name. While mostly an error of writing/ 2214:

article to redefine Mountaintop Removal Mining as a type of strip mining. Perhaps you should consult with others first.

1661: 1337:

section, rather than the article text? If you don't approve of this, then maybe we could move create a new subsection of

74: 1472:

by far most common in the US, so yeah, its not much help focusing on another country that hardly practices MTR at all. --

3373: 2820: 2138: 2104: 1918: 596: 557: 377: 274: 261: 238: 213: 3227:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

3091:

As you can see, it's very mixed usage. I agree with Wbm that both possibilities are POV (cf. the repeated clashes over

2779:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

2426:

of the external links section in any article should be about the subject itself, not about opposition to the subject.--

65: 3238:

Is there a specific term for mining on the summit of a hill instead of a mountain or are they called the same thing?

129: 3299:

https://web.archive.org/web/20081120041942/http://westvirginia.sierraclub.org/newsletter/archives/2007/09/a_002.html

1529:

methinks they are an important part of the MTR debate. Any help i could get in this area would be...well...helpful.

3282: 3138: 2948: 2810: 1583: 853: 792: 720: 405: 24: 2730: 1420:, and Mary Ann Taylor-Hall. The book was surprisingly popular within the region and included an introduction by 882: 3329:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1856:

site undergoes, and well and the storage of waste material generated from the mining and processing of the coal.

503:. If you would like to participate, go to the project page to see a list of related articles needing attention. 125: 2408: 1486: 2540:

Starting right with the introduction, I see heavy use of double-quotes around various terms. According to the

1549: 3451: 1738:

for this reason "Some people just don't like coal and oppose MTR as a way to incrementally kill all mining."

3364: 3302: 3290: 3239: 3189: 3119: 2756: 2337: 2134: 2100: 1986: 1914: 1889: 1781: 1700: 1372: 1167: 1120: 109: 2652:

structured. Certainly, there's room for "criticism," and with a topic this controversial such a section is

1612:...which would contain the "coal-dust" paragraph, as well as perhaps info about well/groundwater pollution. 175: 3146: 2311: 1579: 1142: 1071: 710: 395: 273:

and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the

3408:

important to include the legislation the laid the groundwork for how MTR mine sites are reclaimed today.

2404: 2240: 2010: 1628: 1482: 1346: 1110:

spoil produced then additional storage is used in a nearby valley or hollow, creating what is known as a

1057: 1023: 3432: 3348:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3336: 1473: 1451: 1230: 500: 266: 219: 3289:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2712:

Deletion of article, merging under surface mining, renaming to its proper name: Mountain Top Mining.

3393: 3251: 3210: 2968: 2909: 2829: 2801: 2719: 2669: 2511: 2461: 2431: 2379: 2329: 2282: 2015: 1978: 1692: 1669: 1541: 1159: 1047: 1014:

This is a quite POV article -- at the very least, the mining industry's position should be cited. --

788: 714: 399: 398:

articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly

190: 3413: 2878: 2503: 2290: 2076: 2053: 481: 460: 387: 161: 55: 3160:, although I think it's not all that important, for the sake of NPOV I agree with the renaming as 2964: 705:

to improve Knowledge's coverage of the inland waters and marine environments. The aim is to write

604:

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

3185: 3179: 3173: 2953:

This name is used in the article and is more accurate. It also matches what is used in wictionary

2752: 2581:

removed in favor of a more list-like organization detailing specific examples of these "critics."

999: 966:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

946: 909:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

886: 370: 141: 70: 3333:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

1364: 677: 656: 354: 333: 3349: 3142: 2980: 2925: 2886: 2866: 2685: 2354: 2185: 1652:

I think that the Controversy/Criticism section is getting pretty large and should be moved to

1559:

Why was the Mountaintop Removal Mining Index link removed? Seems like the kinda link we want.

1290: 51: 2606:

to any potential counter-viewpoints. Here's some examples I spotted where things went wrong:

2039:

Good valley fill pix here - sorry Im a new user and cant add them - these are not copyrighted

3428: 2635: 2266: 2219: 2201: 2023: 1498: 1417: 1412:. In 2006 the authors group released a book of their collected writing on the topic called 922: 364: 3356: 2857:"neutral" is to change the title back and forth on some regular schedule. As per point of 2276: 3389: 3244: 3206: 2905: 2825: 2797: 2734: 2715: 2665: 2603: 2507: 2487: 2477: 2457: 2427: 2418: 2375: 2160: 2120: 1957: 1665: 1591: 1564: 1513: 1437: 1303: 1243: 983: 930: 846: 1357: 2703:

This article was added as a subset to the "Surface Mining" article. Where it belongs.

1578:

I'm thinking about creating a seperate page for the controversy over MTR per pages like

3455: 3436: 3417: 3409: 3397: 3378: 3315:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 3259: 3214: 3202: 3193: 3150: 3123: 3104: 2984: 2971:"use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language 2929: 2913: 2900: 2890: 2833: 2805: 2793: 2760: 2737: 2723: 2709:

By allowing the name to stay this article remains a POV issues and furthers an agenda.

2689: 2673: 2515: 2490: 2480: 2465: 2435: 2412: 2383: 2358: 2341: 2315: 2298: 2286: 2270: 2253: 2243: 2223: 2205: 2189: 2164: 2142: 2124: 2108: 2080: 2072: 2057: 2049: 2030: 1990: 1961: 1922: 1892: 1865: 1839: 1808: 1784: 1757: 1746: 1704: 1673: 1647: 1631: 1595: 1568: 1553: 1533: 1517: 1502: 1476: 1463: 1456: 1392: 1389: 1376: 1349: 1261: 1171: 1146: 1075: 1060: 1035: 1022:

I added sections on legislation and economics of MTR, which should accomplish this. --

1003: 979: 950: 833: 3355:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

1913:

Since I posted this two days ago and nobody has responded, I'm going to edit the page.

1493:

Yanacocha is open pit, not mountaintop removal. I removed the reference to Yanacocha.

3463: 3100: 2821:

http://www.grist.org/article/epa-sleep-in-lisa-jacksons-fundamental-misunderstanding/

2545: 2541: 2456:

article should not make up half the content, even if it is a controversial subject.--

1425: 1085: 1043: 995: 942: 693: 588: 2877:

removes the mountaintop, then I suppose this disambiguation is unnecessary, and per

2976: 2972: 2921: 2882: 2862: 2681: 2369:

I reduced the number of external links (~30 down to 2). Most of the links were to

2350: 2181: 1836: 1735: 1015: 687: 2630:

While I was able to go and readily find out that the article was referencing the

1092:

is either sold or burned. According to the federal surface mining law SMCRA, the

3322: 2262: 2250: 2215: 2197: 1657: 1494: 1421: 1322: 1137:

debating POV for either side. This page should be factual and informative only.

1032: 962: 905: 253: 232: 3321:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 3092: 2370: 2349:

I will (temporarily) blank it pending moving it to a more appropriate place.--

2156: 2116: 2027: 1953: 1862: 1805: 1754: 1644: 1587: 1560: 1530: 1509: 1460: 1098: 926: 683: 578: 496: 360: 2306:

underground mines. The sludge spills should not be allowed in this article.

582: 1660:

in general (although there is nothing referencing it in that article or in

1225:

Mitchell, John G. (March 2006). "When Mountains Move". National Geographic.

1153:

impoundments should be removed as that are a topic for a separate article.

572: 551: 2506:, is that an MTR mine, the mine's article doesn't say anything about it.-- 2417:

Agreed the content of the external links section could be summerised into

3303:

http://westvirginia.sierraclub.org/newsletter/archives/2007/09/a_002.html

3096: 2903:. Agreed on MOS:CAPS, I have adjusted to address your (correct) concern. 2844: 3162:

the most authoritative publications on the process use MTM and not MTRM

1129: 1102: 1093: 2729:

Than I would suggest attempting to improve it and submitting a formal

2211: 1180:

the most biologically diverse temperate hardwood forests in the world

1089: 1046:

recently labeled the coal industry 'Environmental Enemy No. 1.'" ...

601: 270: 2773:

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal.

1888:

waste material generated from the mining and processing of the coal.

1459:

and the tag seems as aptly placed here as it would be on that page.

3221:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.

2955:. Moving more in an "industry-friendly" direction. Keeping both 1937:

In an attempt to include both sides I edited the paragraph to read

1850:

Advocating for a lack of POV, How about this as a last statement?

1440:, campaigned as governor on a ticket to stop mountaintop removal. 2473: 1742: 1106: 1052: 3490:

Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences

1538:

Maybe add a subsection for the dozen-odd grass roots groups?

870: 774: 184: 15: 3180:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212153119.htm

3174:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110623090001.htm

1365:

http://www.coaleducation.org/miningtv/Elk_in_KY/Elk_in_KY.htm

3293:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

1275: 2277:

http://www.appvoices.org/images/MarshForkAerial_full.jpg

1133:

method of mining. <<< End of "process" changes

881:

On 30 August 2012, it was proposed that this article be

3480:

Knowledge vital articles in Society and social sciences

3286: 2943: 2815: 2399: 2210:

I also see that you have taken it upon yourself in the

1256:"When Mountains Move" by John G. Mitchell, March 2006, 816: 810: 804: 798: 2326:

someone else remove this section and take the flack.

1358:

http://www.coaleducation.org/Ky_Coal_Facts/default.htm

277:, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the 160: 3495:

B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences

2997:

for the general search, keyword search for WorldCat):

2796:Article move request has been cancelled. WP:SNOW 2526:

a few of the more prominent examples that stuck out:

2155:

Not a problem, never hurts to reiterate these things.

957:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

900:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

2348:

Agree that the sludge pond section is misplaced: -->

1262:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0603/feature5/

600:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 3325:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 3555:Mid-importance Limnology and Oceanography articles 3183:Cumulative Impact of Mountaintop Mining Documented 2632:Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 2733:rather than outright proposing it for deletion.-- 2448:I copied the criticism section in a new article ( 1178:Mountains, located in the eastern United States, 1097:cleared, miners use explosives to blast away the 495:, a collaborative effort to increase coverage of 1767:To be honest, I think that this is pretty clear: 1367:. Please add this to help balance this article. 854:legislation affecting mountaintop removal mining 733:Knowledge:WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 3560:WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography articles 2133:Okay, got it, thanks. Sorry for the oversight. 1276:"Appalachian Regional Reforestation Initiative" 736:Template:WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography 3311:This message was posted before February 2018. 1721:How do ya'll think this statement should read. 1088:prior to mining operations and the resultant 174: 8: 269:to organize and improve articles related to 3550:B-Class Limnology and Oceanography articles 3205:Article move request has been cancelled. 2700:This article is still as biased as it was. 2400:A cursory glance at those links you removed 3281:I have just modified one external link on 3170:Birth Defects Seen Near Mountaintop Mining 2018:was added at 18:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 841:Here are some tasks awaiting attention: 651: 546: 455: 328: 227: 992:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 939:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 3137:, so clarity favours the current nameat 3002: 1432:. Both book and album were produced by 1128:Because coal usually exists in multiple 2450:Criticism of mountaintop removal mining 2099:the reason for removing the global tag? 1654:Criticism of mountaintop removal mining 1209:was invoked but never defined (see the 1198: 1196: 1194: 1190: 990:Above undated message substituted from 937:Above undated message substituted from 653: 548: 457: 386:to improve Knowledge's coverage of the 330: 229: 188: 2649:The entire "Community Action" section: 1745:as an energy source." which was rv by 1299: 1288: 1239: 1228: 702:WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography 3234:Also called "hilltop removal mining"? 7: 2538:Potential over-use of double-quotes: 1799:Why wouldn't you want to state what 1468:Well, the thing is that really, MTR 594:This article is within the scope of 487:This article is within the scope of 259:This article is within the scope of 3530:High-importance Appalachia articles 3520:Mid-importance Environment articles 3242:does not redirect to this article. 2847:, Mining should not be capitalized. 2610:Improper/poorly-cited introduction: 1201: 889:. The result of the discussion was 739:Limnology and Oceanography articles 218:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 3442:Mountaintop removal mining in urdu 971: 967: 914: 910: 14: 3285:. Please take a moment to review 418:Knowledge:WikiProject Environment 3565:Knowledge pages with to-do lists 3475:Knowledge level-5 vital articles 3384:Legislation in the United States 1434:Kentuckians for the Commonwealth 974:. Further details are available 961: 917:. Further details are available 904: 874: 832: 782: 686: 676: 655: 581: 571: 550: 509:Knowledge:WikiProject Appalachia 480: 459: 421:Template:WikiProject Environment 363: 353: 332: 252: 231: 198: 189: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 3535:WikiProject Appalachia articles 2784:The result of the proposal was 2521:Neutral writing/NPOV nomination 1416:, edited by Kristin Johannsen, 753:This article has been rated as 634:This article has been rated as 529:This article has been rated as 512:Template:WikiProject Appalachia 438:This article has been rated as 311:This article has been rated as 3545:Low-importance energy articles 3505:Mid-importance Mining articles 3485:B-Class level-5 vital articles 3437:03:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC) 3379:08:25, 10 September 2017 (UTC) 2690:19:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC) 2674:18:32, 10 September 2010 (UTC) 2244:03:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC) 723:and leave any messages at the 408:and leave any messages at the 1: 3456:08:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC) 2617:Early focus on deforestation: 2516:21:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC) 2491:08:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC) 2481:08:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC) 2466:06:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC) 2436:14:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC) 2413:13:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC) 2299:19:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC) 2095:Since you mentioned it, what 2058:19:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC) 1962:23:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC) 1674:20:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC) 1662:environmental effects of coal 1596:01:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 1569:02:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC) 1554:12:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 1534:21:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC) 1477:19:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC) 1388:doesn't seem appropriate. -- 1061:00:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC) 608:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 3515:B-Class Environment articles 2384:20:58, 24 October 2008 (UTC) 2175:Just a kind of strip mining? 2165:19:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC) 2143:00:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC) 2125:00:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC) 2109:06:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC) 2081:19:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC) 2031:06:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 1991:20:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC) 1923:04:56, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 1893:16:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 1866:06:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 1840:22:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC) 1809:01:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 1785:00:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 1758:21:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 1716:On avoiding future edit wars 1705:20:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC) 1648:06:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 1632:18:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC) 1464:00:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC) 1393:18:40, 18 October 2007 (UTC) 1004:04:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 951:01:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC) 699:This article is part of the 614:Knowledge:WikiProject Energy 291:Knowledge:WikiProject Mining 3525:B-Class Appalachia articles 3510:WikiProject Mining articles 3215:16:17, 31 August 2012 (UTC) 3194:14:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC) 3151:09:20, 31 August 2012 (UTC) 3124:04:45, 31 August 2012 (UTC) 3105:20:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 2985:18:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 2930:16:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 2914:16:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 2891:12:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 2834:06:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC) 2806:16:17, 31 August 2012 (UTC) 2761:11:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC) 2738:07:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC) 2724:07:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC) 2551:I would also note that not 1036:14:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC) 1018:14:45:35, 2005-09-06 (UTC) 617:Template:WikiProject Energy 294:Template:WikiProject Mining 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 3581: 3418:17:42, 25 April 2019 (UTC) 3398:23:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC) 3342:(last update: 5 June 2024) 3283:Mountaintop removal mining 3278:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 3260:07:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC) 3168:See here Large Numbers of 3139:Mountaintop removal mining 3029:Mountaintop removal mining 2949:Mountaintop removal mining 2811:Mountaintop removal mining 2546:recommends italics instead 2374:external link attention.-- 2271:13:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC) 1731:"The controversy over..." 1584:Global Warming controversy 793:Mountaintop removal mining 759:project's importance scale 730:Limnology and Oceanography 721:Knowledge:Contributing FAQ 663:Limnology and Oceanography 640:project's importance scale 535:project's importance scale 444:project's importance scale 406:Knowledge:Contributing FAQ 317:project's importance scale 25:Mountaintop removal mining 2359:18:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC) 2342:23:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 2316:21:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC) 2224:20:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC) 2206:19:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC) 2190:19:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC) 1621:Social Causes against MTR 1518:03:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC) 1503:23:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC) 1430:Songs for the Mountaintop 1377:15:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC) 1350:15:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC) 1172:22:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 1147:05:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 1076:02:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC) 752: 671: 633: 566: 528: 475: 437: 348: 310: 247: 226: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 3224:Please do not modify it. 2965:wikt:mountaintop removal 2899:Refer to the article: 2776:Please do not modify it. 2642:Messy "impacts" section: 2254:01:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC) 3540:B-Class energy articles 3500:B-Class Mining articles 3274:External links modified 1734:but it was reverted by 1130:geologically stratified 383:WikiProject Environment 380:article is part of the 3470:B-Class vital articles 3240:Hilltop removal mining 1580:Free trade controversy 1238:Cite journal requires 852:Add information about 491:WikiProject Appalachia 390:. The aim is to write 75:avoid personal attacks 2852:Regarding POV, it is 1952:Approve / Disapprove? 1452:appalachian mountains 1398:Artists Fighting Back 978:. Student editor(s): 921:. Student editor(s): 501:Appalachian Mountains 205:level-5 vital article 100:Neutral point of view 3323:regular verification 2941:On 20 January 2007, 1728:I edited it to read 1424:and an afterword by 1258:National Geographic 1205:The named reference 424:Environment articles 105:No original research 3313:After February 2018 2944:Mountaintop removal 2504:Centralia Coal Mine 1343:Toxic West Virginia 1331:Toxic West Virginia 1329:What if we put the 1265:(3 September 2008) 515:Appalachia articles 378:environment-related 3367:InternetArchiveBot 3318:InternetArchiveBot 3172:Operations 2011- 3060:Mountaintop mining 2816:Mountaintop mining 2135:Athene cunicularia 2101:Athene cunicularia 2004:Valley Fill Photo? 1915:Athene cunicularia 1890:Athene cunicularia 1782:Athene cunicularia 1410:The New York Times 1298:Unknown parameter 976:on the course page 929:. Peer reviewers: 919:on the course page 887:Mountaintop mining 822:Updated 2017-06-08 597:WikiProject Energy 371:Environment portal 265:, a collaborative 262:WikiProject Mining 214:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 3343: 3086: 3085: 2920: 2904: 2628:What's the SMCRA? 2332:comment added by 2302: 2285:comment added by 2019: 1981:comment added by 1749:, as NPOV issue. 1695:comment added by 1556: 1544:comment added by 1414:Missing Mountains 1162:comment added by 897: 896: 869: 868: 863: 862: 773: 772: 769: 768: 765: 764: 725:project talk page 650: 649: 646: 645: 545: 544: 541: 540: 454: 453: 450: 449: 410:project talk page 327: 326: 323: 322: 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 3572: 3377: 3368: 3341: 3340: 3319: 3256: 3249: 3226: 3003: 2973:reliable sources 2946: 2918: 2897: 2818: 2778: 2344: 2301: 2279: 2013: 1993: 1707: 1539: 1418:Bobbie Ann Mason 1316:Reference Source 1308: 1307: 1301: 1296: 1294: 1286: 1284: 1282: 1272: 1266: 1254: 1248: 1247: 1241: 1236: 1234: 1226: 1222: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1208: 1200: 1174: 1006: 973: 969: 965: 953: 916: 915:20 December 2020 912: 911:1 September 2020 908: 878: 877: 871: 836: 829: 828: 823: 786: 785: 775: 741: 740: 737: 734: 731: 696: 691: 690: 680: 673: 672: 667: 659: 652: 622: 621: 620:energy articles 618: 615: 612: 591: 586: 585: 575: 568: 567: 562: 554: 547: 517: 516: 513: 510: 507: 484: 477: 476: 471: 463: 456: 426: 425: 422: 419: 416: 373: 368: 367: 357: 350: 349: 344: 336: 329: 299: 298: 295: 292: 289: 283:join the project 256: 249: 248: 243: 235: 228: 211: 202: 201: 194: 193: 185: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 3580: 3579: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3571: 3570: 3569: 3460: 3459: 3444: 3425: 3405: 3386: 3371: 3366: 3334: 3327:have permission 3317: 3291:this simple FaQ 3276: 3267: 3252: 3245: 3236: 3231: 3222: 2942: 2814: 2774: 2768: 2698: 2542:Manual of Style 2523: 2499: 2446: 2367: 2327: 2318:Reed@setel.com 2280: 2261:sludge ponds. 2232: 2177: 2093: 2006: 1976: 1718: 1690: 1610:Health Concerns 1576: 1526: 1447: 1438:Denise Giardina 1400: 1385: 1379:reed@setel.com 1318: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1297: 1287: 1280: 1278: 1274: 1273: 1269: 1255: 1251: 1237: 1227: 1224: 1223: 1219: 1206: 1204: 1202: 1192: 1157: 1149:reed@setel.com 1101:, the rock and 1078:reed@setel.com 1012: 989: 968:14 January 2019 959: 936: 902: 875: 865: 864: 859: 797: 783: 738: 735: 732: 729: 728: 711:well-referenced 692: 685: 665: 619: 616: 613: 610: 609: 587: 580: 560: 531:High-importance 514: 511: 508: 505: 504: 470:High‑importance 469: 423: 420: 417: 414: 413: 396:well-referenced 369: 362: 342: 297:Mining articles 296: 293: 290: 287: 286: 241: 212:on Knowledge's 209: 199: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 3578: 3576: 3568: 3567: 3562: 3557: 3552: 3547: 3542: 3537: 3532: 3527: 3522: 3517: 3512: 3507: 3502: 3497: 3492: 3487: 3482: 3477: 3472: 3462: 3461: 3443: 3440: 3424: 3421: 3404: 3401: 3385: 3382: 3361: 3360: 3353: 3306: 3305: 3297:Added archive 3275: 3272: 3266: 3263: 3235: 3232: 3230: 3229: 3166: 3165: 3154: 3153: 3127: 3126: 3108: 3107: 3088: 3087: 3084: 3083: 3080: 3075: 3070: 3067: 3064: 3061: 3057: 3056: 3051: 3048: 3045: 3040: 3035: 3030: 3026: 3025: 3022: 3019: 3016: 3013: 3010: 3007: 2999: 2998: 2987: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2932: 2901:surface mining 2894: 2893: 2782: 2781: 2769: 2767: 2766:Requested move 2764: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2741: 2740: 2697: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2646: 2639: 2625: 2614: 2599:Point-of-View: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2522: 2519: 2498: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2483: 2445: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2405:Doubleplusjeff 2366: 2365:External links 2363: 2362: 2361: 2259: 2257: 2256: 2241:Doubleplusjeff 2237: 2231: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2208: 2176: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2128: 2127: 2092: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2062: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2034: 2033: 2024:ilovemountains 2011:Doubleplusjeff 2005: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1965: 1964: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1939: 1938: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1882:How about this 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1852: 1851: 1843: 1842: 1832: 1831: 1830:effectiveness. 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1723: 1722: 1717: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1629:Doubleplusjeff 1625: 1624: 1618: 1613: 1607: 1575: 1572: 1546:152.10.180.196 1525: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1505: 1483:Doubleplusjeff 1457:Mount Rushmore 1450:heard, in the 1446: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1399: 1396: 1384: 1381: 1353: 1352: 1347:Doubleplusjeff 1335:External Links 1317: 1314: 1310: 1309: 1267: 1249: 1217: 1189: 1188: 1184: 1058:Doubleplusjeff 1041: 1039: 1038: 1028: 1027: 1024:doubleplusjeff 1011: 1008: 958: 955: 901: 898: 895: 894: 879: 867: 866: 861: 860: 858: 857: 840: 838: 837: 825: 780: 778: 771: 770: 767: 766: 763: 762: 755:Mid-importance 751: 745: 744: 742: 718: 698: 697: 681: 669: 668: 666:Mid‑importance 660: 648: 647: 644: 643: 636:Low-importance 632: 626: 625: 623: 606:the discussion 593: 592: 576: 564: 563: 561:Low‑importance 555: 543: 542: 539: 538: 527: 521: 520: 518: 485: 473: 472: 464: 452: 451: 448: 447: 440:Mid-importance 436: 430: 429: 427: 403: 375: 374: 358: 346: 345: 343:Mid‑importance 337: 325: 324: 321: 320: 313:Mid-importance 309: 303: 302: 300: 257: 245: 244: 242:Mid‑importance 236: 224: 223: 217: 195: 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: 3577: 3566: 3563: 3561: 3558: 3556: 3553: 3551: 3548: 3546: 3543: 3541: 3538: 3536: 3533: 3531: 3528: 3526: 3523: 3521: 3518: 3516: 3513: 3511: 3508: 3506: 3503: 3501: 3498: 3496: 3493: 3491: 3488: 3486: 3483: 3481: 3478: 3476: 3473: 3471: 3468: 3467: 3465: 3458: 3457: 3453: 3449: 3448:202.47.55.103 3446:Translate it 3441: 3439: 3438: 3434: 3430: 3422: 3420: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3402: 3400: 3399: 3395: 3391: 3383: 3381: 3380: 3375: 3370: 3369: 3358: 3354: 3351: 3347: 3346: 3345: 3338: 3332: 3328: 3324: 3320: 3314: 3309: 3304: 3300: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3292: 3288: 3284: 3279: 3273: 3271: 3264: 3262: 3261: 3258: 3257: 3255: 3250: 3248: 3241: 3233: 3228: 3225: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3212: 3208: 3204: 3200: 3196: 3195: 3191: 3187: 3186:Boundarylayer 3184: 3181: 3176: 3175: 3171: 3163: 3159: 3156: 3155: 3152: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3129: 3128: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3116:76.65.128.252 3113: 3110: 3109: 3106: 3102: 3098: 3094: 3090: 3089: 3081: 3079: 3076: 3074: 3071: 3068: 3065: 3062: 3059: 3058: 3055: 3052: 3049: 3046: 3044: 3041: 3039: 3036: 3034: 3031: 3028: 3027: 3023: 3020: 3017: 3014: 3011: 3008: 3005: 3004: 3001: 3000: 2996: 2991: 2988: 2986: 2982: 2978: 2974: 2970: 2969:WP:COMMONNAME 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2950: 2945: 2940: 2937: 2936: 2931: 2927: 2923: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2902: 2896: 2895: 2892: 2888: 2884: 2880: 2876: 2872: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2855: 2851: 2848: 2846: 2842: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2831: 2827: 2822: 2817: 2812: 2808: 2807: 2803: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2787: 2780: 2777: 2771: 2770: 2765: 2763: 2762: 2758: 2754: 2753:Boundarylayer 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2739: 2736: 2732: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2721: 2717: 2713: 2710: 2707: 2704: 2701: 2696:7 Years Later 2695: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2671: 2667: 2655: 2650: 2647: 2643: 2640: 2637: 2633: 2629: 2626: 2623: 2618: 2615: 2611: 2608: 2607: 2605: 2600: 2597: 2596: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2569: 2568:Weasel words: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2554: 2550: 2549: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2536: 2535: 2532: 2529: 2528: 2527: 2520: 2518: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2496: 2492: 2489: 2484: 2482: 2479: 2475: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2467: 2463: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2444:article split 2443: 2437: 2433: 2429: 2425: 2420: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2410: 2406: 2401: 2397: 2396:organizations 2393: 2388: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2381: 2377: 2372: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2323: 2319: 2317: 2313: 2309: 2303: 2300: 2296: 2292: 2288: 2284: 2278: 2273: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2255: 2252: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2242: 2236: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2217: 2213: 2209: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2187: 2183: 2174: 2166: 2162: 2158: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2149: 2144: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2126: 2122: 2118: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2106: 2102: 2098: 2090: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2060: 2059: 2055: 2051: 2047: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2032: 2029: 2025: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2017: 2012: 2003: 1992: 1988: 1984: 1980: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1936: 1935: 1924: 1920: 1916: 1912: 1911: 1910: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1894: 1891: 1886: 1881: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1867: 1864: 1860: 1854: 1853: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1841: 1838: 1834: 1833: 1828: 1827: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1810: 1807: 1804:for editing. 1802: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1786: 1783: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1756: 1750: 1748: 1744: 1739: 1737: 1732: 1729: 1726: 1720: 1719: 1715: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1646: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1633: 1630: 1627: 1626: 1622: 1619: 1617: 1614: 1611: 1608: 1606: 1603: 1602: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1585: 1581: 1573: 1571: 1570: 1566: 1562: 1557: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1543: 1536: 1535: 1532: 1524:Outside links 1523: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1506: 1504: 1500: 1496: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1488: 1484: 1479: 1478: 1475: 1474:66.32.252.104 1471: 1466: 1465: 1462: 1458: 1453: 1444: 1439: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1426:Wendell Berry 1423: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1402: 1401: 1397: 1395: 1394: 1391: 1383:Fighting Back 1382: 1380: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1369:199.43.48.149 1366: 1361: 1359: 1351: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1336: 1332: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1324: 1315: 1305: 1292: 1277: 1271: 1268: 1263: 1259: 1253: 1250: 1245: 1232: 1221: 1218: 1212: 1199: 1197: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1181: 1175: 1173: 1169: 1165: 1161: 1154: 1150: 1148: 1144: 1140: 1134: 1131: 1126: 1124: 1123: 1118: 1113: 1108: 1104: 1100: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1079: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1063: 1062: 1059: 1055: 1054: 1049: 1045: 1044:The Economist 1037: 1034: 1030: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1017: 1009: 1007: 1005: 1001: 997: 993: 987: 985: 981: 977: 964: 956: 954: 952: 948: 944: 940: 934: 932: 928: 924: 920: 907: 899: 892: 888: 884: 880: 873: 872: 855: 851: 849: 848: 843: 842: 839: 835: 831: 830: 827: 824: 821: 818: 815: 812: 809: 806: 803: 800: 796: 794: 790: 779: 777: 776: 760: 756: 750: 747: 746: 743: 726: 722: 716: 712: 708: 704: 703: 695: 694:Oceans portal 689: 684: 682: 679: 675: 674: 670: 664: 661: 658: 654: 641: 637: 631: 628: 627: 624: 607: 603: 599: 598: 590: 589:Energy portal 584: 579: 577: 574: 570: 569: 565: 559: 556: 553: 549: 536: 532: 526: 523: 522: 519: 502: 498: 494: 493: 492: 486: 483: 479: 478: 474: 468: 465: 462: 458: 445: 441: 435: 432: 431: 428: 411: 407: 401: 397: 393: 389: 385: 384: 379: 372: 366: 361: 359: 356: 352: 351: 347: 341: 338: 335: 331: 318: 314: 308: 305: 304: 301: 284: 280: 276: 272: 268: 264: 263: 258: 255: 251: 250: 246: 240: 237: 234: 230: 225: 221: 215: 207: 206: 196: 192: 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: 22: 18: 17: 3445: 3426: 3406: 3387: 3365: 3362: 3337:source check 3316: 3310: 3307: 3280: 3277: 3268: 3253: 3246: 3243: 3237: 3223: 3220: 3198: 3197: 3182: 3177: 3169: 3167: 3161: 3157: 3143:Andy Dingley 3134: 3130: 3111: 3077: 3072: 3053: 3042: 3037: 3032: 2994: 2989: 2960: 2956: 2952: 2938: 2879:WP:PRECISION 2874: 2870: 2858: 2853: 2849: 2840: 2839: 2809: 2789: 2785: 2783: 2775: 2772: 2751: 2731:move request 2714: 2711: 2708: 2705: 2702: 2699: 2662: 2653: 2648: 2641: 2627: 2621: 2616: 2609: 2604:undue weight 2598: 2567: 2552: 2537: 2530: 2524: 2500: 2453: 2447: 2423: 2395: 2391: 2368: 2351:Pete Tillman 2334:72.95.166.92 2324: 2320: 2308:199.43.32.81 2304: 2274: 2258: 2234: 2233: 2230:Sludge ponds 2178: 2096: 2094: 2061: 2044: 2007: 1983:98.67.86.101 1944: 1800: 1751: 1740: 1733: 1730: 1727: 1724: 1697:98.67.86.101 1620: 1616:Sludge Ponds 1615: 1609: 1605:Biodiversity 1604: 1586:. Thoughts? 1577: 1558: 1537: 1527: 1480: 1469: 1467: 1448: 1429: 1413: 1409: 1405: 1386: 1362: 1354: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1333:link in the 1330: 1321:(comment by 1319: 1300:|dateformat= 1281:September 5, 1279:. Retrieved 1270: 1257: 1252: 1231:cite journal 1220: 1203:Cite error: 1185: 1179: 1176: 1164:72.95.166.92 1155: 1151: 1139:66.63.211.79 1135: 1127: 1121: 1116: 1111: 1105:, to expose 1080: 1068:66.63.211.79 1064: 1051: 1040: 1013: 988: 960: 935: 903: 890: 845: 844: 826: 819: 813: 807: 801: 787: 781: 754: 700: 635: 595: 530: 489: 488: 439: 381: 312: 275:project page 260: 220:WikiProjects 203: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 3429:Morgan.emma 3403:Reclamation 2328:—Preceding 2281:—Preceding 2014:—Preceding 1977:—Preceding 1691:—Preceding 1658:coal mining 1574:Controversy 1540:—Preceding 1422:Silas House 1323:User:Vicebs 1158:—Preceding 1112:valley fill 923:Morgan.emma 715:categorized 415:Environment 400:categorized 388:environment 340:Environment 148:free images 31:not a forum 3464:Categories 3390:Camisasn28 3374:Report bug 3207:PeterWesco 3093:Pink slime 2995:-wikipedia 2951:, reason: 2906:PeterWesco 2854:impossible 2826:PeterWesco 2798:PeterWesco 2735:kelapstick 2716:PeterWesco 2666:Nottheking 2591:resources. 2508:kelapstick 2497:Image size 2458:Kelapstick 2428:Kelapstick 2394:works and 2376:Kelapstick 2371:grassroots 2091:Global tag 1666:Kelapstick 1186:References 1099:overburden 1086:deforested 1048:The source 1026:2006-27-08 984:Camisasn28 972:2 May 2019 931:Tlaloc0011 856:since 2008 789:To-do list 506:Appalachia 497:Appalachia 467:Appalachia 279:discussion 3410:SandersJR 3357:this tool 3350:this tool 3199:Cancelled 3024:WorldCat 2947:moved to 2790:Cancelled 2786:withdrawn 2654:necessary 2636:wikifying 2622:placement 2287:Flashdark 2073:Badagnani 2050:Flashdark 1753:Opinions? 1747:Djoeyd114 1390:Rschmertz 1339:Criticism 1302:ignored ( 1240:|journal= 1211:help page 980:SandersJR 891:withdrawn 208:is rated 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 3363:Cheers.— 3265:Spelling 3018:GScholar 2939:Comment. 2850:Comment. 2845:MOS:CAPS 2680:Thanks. 2657:deleted. 2531:Writing: 2424:majority 2330:unsigned 2295:contribs 2283:unsigned 2115:back in. 1979:unsigned 1693:unsigned 1542:unsigned 1508:removed. 1291:cite web 1160:unsigned 1084:Land is 996:PrimeBOT 943:PrimeBOT 499:and the 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 3287:my edit 3247:Volcano 3203:WP:SNOW 3135:removed 3063:110,000 3033:184,000 2977:Wbm1058 2957:removal 2922:Wbm1058 2883:Wbm1058 2863:Wbm1058 2794:WP:SNOW 2682:Johnfos 2182:SEWilco 2016:comment 1837:TMLutas 1736:TMLutas 1103:subsoil 1094:topsoil 1016:Jaysbro 817:refresh 805:history 757:on the 707:neutral 638:on the 533:on the 442:on the 392:neutral 315:on the 267:project 210:B-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 3178:& 3131:oppose 3112:Oppose 3012:GBooks 3009:Google 2990:Oppose 2961:mining 2919:Noted. 2875:always 2841:Oppose 2263:Plazak 2251:Plazak 2216:Plazak 2212:Mining 2198:Plazak 1495:Plazak 1445:US Tag 1122:slurry 1117:sludge 1090:lumber 1033:Durova 847:Update 611:Energy 602:Energy 558:Energy 288:Mining 271:mining 239:Mining 216:scale. 126:Google 3158:Agree 3066:2,920 3038:3,340 3021:JSTOR 3015:GNews 2556:used. 2488:Sarah 2478:Sarah 2419:prose 2392:media 2157:D-rew 2117:D-rew 2028:D-rew 1954:D-rew 1863:D-rew 1806:D-rew 1755:D-rew 1645:D-rew 1588:D-rew 1561:D-rew 1531:D-rew 1510:D-rew 1461:D-rew 1264:: --> 1207:burns 1083:: --> 1082:: --> 927:RenLK 883:moved 811:watch 719:Read 404:Read 376:This 281:, or 197:This 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 3452:talk 3433:talk 3423:Bias 3414:talk 3394:talk 3211:talk 3201:per 3190:talk 3147:talk 3120:talk 3101:talk 3082:100 3006:Term 2981:talk 2959:and 2926:talk 2910:talk 2887:talk 2867:talk 2859:fact 2843:per 2830:talk 2802:talk 2792:per 2757:talk 2720:talk 2686:talk 2670:talk 2512:talk 2474:GFDL 2462:talk 2432:talk 2409:talk 2380:talk 2355:talk 2338:talk 2312:talk 2291:talk 2267:talk 2220:talk 2202:talk 2186:talk 2161:talk 2139:talk 2121:talk 2105:talk 2077:talk 2054:talk 1987:talk 1958:talk 1919:talk 1743:coal 1701:talk 1670:talk 1592:talk 1582:and 1565:talk 1550:talk 1514:talk 1499:talk 1487:talk 1408:and 1373:talk 1304:help 1283:2006 1260:< 1244:help 1168:talk 1143:talk 1107:coal 1072:talk 1053:Coal 1000:talk 970:and 947:talk 913:and 799:edit 791:for 709:and 525:High 394:and 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 3331:RfC 3301:to 3254:guy 3097:BDD 3073:711 3069:104 3054:135 3047:572 3043:157 2975:." 2871:not 2553:all 2454:any 1801:all 1119:or 1056:. 1010:POV 994:by 941:by 885:to 749:Mid 630:Low 434:Mid 307:Mid 176:TWL 3466:: 3454:) 3435:) 3416:) 3396:) 3344:. 3339:}} 3335:{{ 3213:) 3192:) 3149:) 3122:) 3103:) 3078:39 3050:33 2983:) 2928:) 2912:) 2889:) 2832:) 2813:→ 2804:) 2788:. 2759:) 2722:) 2688:) 2672:) 2548:. 2514:) 2464:) 2434:) 2411:) 2403:-- 2382:) 2357:) 2340:) 2314:) 2297:) 2293:• 2269:) 2222:) 2204:) 2188:) 2163:) 2141:) 2123:) 2107:) 2097:is 2079:) 2056:) 2048:-- 1989:) 1960:) 1921:) 1703:) 1672:) 1594:) 1567:) 1552:) 1516:) 1501:) 1489:) 1470:is 1375:) 1325:) 1295:: 1293:}} 1289:{{ 1235:: 1233:}} 1229:{{ 1213:). 1193:^ 1170:) 1145:) 1074:) 1002:) 986:. 982:, 949:) 933:. 925:, 156:) 54:; 3450:( 3431:( 3412:( 3392:( 3376:) 3372:( 3359:. 3352:. 3209:( 3188:( 3164:. 3145:( 3141:. 3118:( 3099:( 2979:( 2924:( 2908:( 2885:( 2865:( 2828:( 2800:( 2755:( 2718:( 2684:( 2668:( 2510:( 2460:( 2430:( 2407:( 2378:( 2353:( 2336:( 2310:( 2289:( 2265:( 2218:( 2200:( 2184:( 2159:( 2137:( 2119:( 2103:( 2075:( 2052:( 1985:( 1956:( 1917:( 1699:( 1668:( 1643:. 1590:( 1563:( 1548:( 1512:( 1497:( 1485:( 1371:( 1306:) 1285:. 1246:) 1242:( 1166:( 1141:( 1070:( 1042:" 998:( 945:( 893:. 850:: 820:· 814:· 808:· 802:· 795:: 761:. 727:. 717:. 642:. 537:. 446:. 412:. 402:. 319:. 285:. 222:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

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