Talk:Tawana Brawley rape allegations/Archive 1

757:, 157 A.D.2d 244, 555 N.Y.S.2d 851, N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. (Decided May 21, 1990) According to the opinion he was not disbarred for either, but rather for failing to appear at a disciplinary hearing which was to investigate three separate complaints regarding unprofessional conduct in the Brawley case. The underlying allegations mentioned in the opinion include "unknowingly making a false statement of fact in the representation of a client, counseling a client to refuse a lawful mandate of a Grand Jury, and rendering assistance to that client in order to evade arrest," however, it was failing to appear before the Grievance Committee that resulted in his disbarment. 1920:

WAS very early on that her story was questions and people were looking at her as at best a pawn in Shartpon's racially, and politically motivated hoax, and at worst, the racist herself. It was within a couple months of the story breaking that it became clear to anyone but racist black people that her story was a lie. And it was all over the news that there was not a single shred of evidence backing her story up, and tons and tons of evidence proving she was lying. That is notoriety...and it happened with months. It it was within a few weeks when there was already PLENTY of doubts. To me, that is "soon."

928:

illustrations of how people who refuse to abide by ground rules sabotage the overall project. Perhaps we might envision a grade-school group project where every student is assigned the task of cutting out a different US state out of posterboard, and one student decides that the state where he used to live is so important and special that it should be drawn at three times the scale of all the others. By refusing to keep his representation to the same scale, that student has sabotaged any chance that the individual efforts can be brought together to make an accurate representation of the whole.)

1308:{{cite news |title= Evidence Points to Deceit by Brawley |url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE0D81E3FF934A1575AC0A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all |publisher=] |quote=A seven-month New York State grand jury inquiry has compiled overwhelming evidence that Tawana Brawley fabricated her story of abduction and sexual abuse by a gang of racist white men last year, according to investigators, witnesses and official summaries of evidence presented to the panel.|date=] |accessdate=2008-01-20}} 31: 845:, there appears to be a great deal of confusion between what happened to Alton Maddox and what happened to C. Vernon Mason. Whether the misunderstanding started here and spread elsewhere or started elsewhere and spread here, it seems to be all over the place: the first page of a Google search turned up many results falsely indicating that Maddox was disbarred due to misconduct with clients, which is what actually happened with Mason. 1878:

negative quality possessed by one whom the public thinks is a bad person for something horrible they have done. Tawana Brawley has indeed earned the label of being notorious, but in the early days (as the article points out quite clearly and accurately) she was a sympathetic figure, not a notorious one. It was only after it became clear that she was a slanderous piece of crap that she was seen as notorious, and this was

1867:

her notoriety, which was inflamed by Brawley's advisers (including the Reverend Al Sharpton and attorneys Alton H. Maddox and C. Vernon Mason), the statements of various public officials, and intense media attention. After hearing evidence, a grand jury concluded in October 1988 that Brawley had not been the victim of a forcible sexual assault and that she herself may have created the appearance of an attack.

3020: 2999: 2978: 2938: 2912: 2888: 2867: 2841: 2820: 2803: 2774: 2742: 2705: 2576: 368:

defamed innocent people based on her false allegations, what is particularly important about Al Sharpton's declaration that he still believes her allegations were true? He is not an especial authority on the case, and his declaration is quite literally self-serving; while it certainly belongs in the article, there seems no reason to give it special prominence. --

1125:

lede does not seem to add to the lede. It's hard to tell exactly what she was referring to, since her views are not brought out in the body of the article, and her book is not brought into the discussion. She could have been saying Brawley was abused by her mother and stepfather. There is little indication of whether she may have later modified her views.--

2101: 3614:

Generally most pages in this arena would carry the more neutral "allegations", title but doing so here would rob accuracy. Moreover, a hoax often requires multiple person either believing or conspiring to advance false allegations or allegation and this scandal would not have existed without the noted intervention of several adult activists.

1462: 1527:

guess Knowledge does. Or at least editors that don't care about facts and just want to protect one of their own, no matter how much of an embarrassment she is. (Seriously...as a Muslin, YOU should hate Brawley as much as anyone. She gives you a bad name. And sticking up for her gives you a bad name direcly.)

1866:

Tawana Glenda Brawley (born 1972) is an African-American woman from Wappingers Falls, New York. In 1987, at the age of 15, she received national media attention in the United States for falsely accusing six white men, some of whom were police officers, of having raped her. The accusations soon earned

1783:

After the NY Post found her working as a nurse in Virginia under an assumed name to avoid justice, Steve Pagone tracked her down and got a court order against her. She will likely have between 10-25% of her wages garnished to pay off the judgment against her, which, after interest, is about $ 400,000

1248:

Rape Case. Tawana's claims were thrown out in court so technically there was never a case of rape. The title as it reads now libels Steven Pagonnes and the other men wrongfully accused to have commited this act. I tried to change it myself but I just garbled everything and got technical message. Will

3628:

Then request a move and open discussion. Make your case and see what the consensus is. The discussion here is not an official move proposal - it's nothing more than a suggestion and ensuing discussion. Go to the "More" menu at the top of the article page and select "Move" to open a proposal. Then

1877:

earned her notoriety" (emphasis obviously added), it is simply an incorrect usage of the word. I suspect that the person inserting that into this paragraph may have mistaken "notoriety" for something akin to "fame" or "celebrity" or even just "being notable". That is not correct. "Notoriety" is a

1077:

Thanks, and I see his name is now a link. However, this Brawley article still refers to Abrams only once and only by his last name. The standard practice is to refer to someone by his full name at least once before using only his surname. A phrase or a sentence or two introducing the former attorney

311:

Grand Jury released its extensive and thorough 170-page report concluding Tawana Brawley had not been abducted, assaulted, raped and sodomized as had been claimed by Brawley and her advisors. The report further concluded that the "unsworn public allegations against Dutchess County Assistant District

2535:

It's always best to use phrases such as "as of 2010" instead of "yet" or "to date", so readers know when the information in the article was current. If newer sources say that Brawley has paid some or all of the moneys she owes, we should definitely include that. When updating the article, please be

1391:

In both cases, what turned out to be unfounded charges were widely given credit and generated immense publicity; celebrities and politicians rallied to the cause of the alleged victims, lengthy and costly legal investigations followed, and at last it emerged that the accusations were groundless. In

1160:

I copied some material from the lead to put it in the article, as issues of criticism of initial media treatment of Brawley, as well as the custody issue (whether NY should have found a different arrangement for her rather than leaving her with advisers) was not treated at all. The source quoted in

1124:

With an article like this, in which many of the sources are daily papers that tend to write in the most dramatic way, it's important not to adopt their approach. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not another tabloid. In addition, having the quote from the Columbia University professor in the

1038:

The one and only occurrence of the word "Abrams" in the article appears in this sentence: "On October 6, 1988, the Abrams Grand Jury released its extensive and thorough 170-page report concluding Tawana Brawley had not been abducted, assaulted, raped and sodomized as had been claimed by Brawley and

918:

At best, it's a false promise: telling people that if they read on, they're going to get a detailed explanation of a particular aspect of the subject -- a detailed explanation that does not exist. At worst, it's a blatant violation of every rule Knowledge has against giving undue weight: placing

891:

A common aphorism on the subject of effective speaking is "tell them what you're gonna tell them, tell them, and then tell them what you've told them." With the difference that we have no part which equates to "tell them what you've told them", this is good advice for Knowledge: we tell them what

545:

considered reliable sources, and I see nothing that makes Wikinews an exception. How do we know that what a Wikinews interview quotes the subject correctly? Where is the verification if I challenge the quote? No... I have to agree with Crossmr on this... not reliable. I could see Wikinews being

2191:

and some of the other sources, I came to the conclusion that Brawley may not have specified how many men "assaulted" her. After one or two statements, one of which was made by motioning with her hands and head and writing a few words in a police officer's notebook, she stopped cooperating with law

1919:

This depends on your definition of "soon." AS someone who lived through this racially motivated hoax with the racist pro-Brawley protesters hurling rocks and bottles at me and my friends for doing nothing but trying to walk to an armory near my high school so we could go to basketball practice, it

1526:

It is not about privacy. Knowledge is (well...WAS since she has been found and is going to have to answer to her crimes) protecting what was essentially a fugitive. She was not after privacy. She was avoiding the financial judgment against her. Never realized that fugitives deserve privacy. But I

259:

Fraud and hoax are not mutually exclusive. Per wikipedia: "A hoax is an attempt to trick an audience into believing that something false is real." Brawley attempted to trick an audience that she was raped. Per wikipedia: "a fraud is a deception made for personal gain." Brawley's motivations

244:

this is categorised as a hoax at all? The case and evidence do seem to suggest that her claims were false but it's not particularly unbiased to simply say that this is certainly a hoax (no, I don't consider a jury's findings as absolute, conclusive scientific proof). Could someone please explain?

3613:

I know that I am revisiting an issue that appears to have languished and is likely volatile but I must agree with the proposal that this page be moved to "Tawana Brawley rape hoax". Had her claims not been objectively disproven I would not take this position even if evidence was lacking heavily.

818:

Furthermore, the version to which I had originally reverted contained not much more than the NEGATIVE info which I mentioned above. That being the case, a person might actually conclude that I included ONLY unfavorable things about him. Of course, a person would need some objectivity about the

663:

was a Nobel Prize winner; that didn't make his views on vitamin C as a cancer treatment the majority view. Yes, there are still people out there who think that the grand jury got it wrong. The fact of their existence does not mean that their beliefs should be given special treatment -- such as

3264:"The case exposed mistrust in the black community about winning justice from legal institutions." It took me several tries to understand this; I wonder if it could be rephrased? Also, "exposed" doesn't seem the best choice of words here; that is a term you would use for something inappropriate. 1820:

The article I've just read did not mention that Tawana Brawley moved out of New York State and changed her name. It mentions that she converted to Islam, but... Didn't she also join the Nation of Islam? That is a political group, and I think it's worth mentioning that she joined it (IF that's

1397:

HAving gotten caught up in the middle of a Sharpton rally with them throwing objects at myself and my teammates on my way to a high school basketbal practice sinply becuase we were white, I can say with certainty, that even at the time, Tawana Brawley's claims were not "widely given credit" for

367:

Frankly, I don't think there's a reason to have a pull quote there at all. To put information in a pull quote suggests that it is particularly important information. When the verdict of multiple juries and of history is overwhelmingly that Brawley was a hoaxster and Sharpton, Maddox and Mason

165:

I modified portions of this article to increase readability, particularly in the intro. Dropped in some new facts and dates as well. I am working on citations for some of the claims. Also modified segments that talked about Sharpton and co's "outrageous" behavior--I think to maintain a NPOV the

730:

During the arguments, Stanton told jurors that Mason, Brawley's former lawyer, was disbarred for stealing from clients. Mason was disbarred in 1995 for price gouging, theft and abandoning clients. He has claimed his disbarment was an act of revenge by state officials angry over his role in the

395:

Knowledge and OR is encouraged at Wikinews (such as interviews); it has already been established it can be a source. Additionally, Sharpton's quote shows that he still believes there was enough evidence to go to trial, nothing more, nothing less. The quote is perfectly fine, creates a bridge

320:

On October 6, 1988, the Abrams Grand Jury released its extensive and thorough 170 page report concluding that Tawana Brawley ("Brawley") had not been abducted, assaulted, raped and sodomized as had been claimed by Brawley and her advisors. The report further concluded that the "unsworn public

2480:

None of sources 4, 5, or 6 state that Brawley "gained notoriety" in November 1987, and in fact no source says so. Brawley was first reported to the police on Saturday, November 28, 1987. Her claims were not widely known until December 1987. Even then, she was widely regarded sympathetically.

927:

instead is like responding to a request for the thumbnail of a image with the full-sized image itself. (No, not a perfect analogy, but it's hard to find a good clear analogy: there are relatively few collaborative projects out there that are so familiar to everyone that they can be used as

329:! I can't imagine why anyone would think that it improves the article to duplicate the exact same text, and I would hope that everyone would see why it doesn't improve the article to insert a quote when the quote does not significantly increase understanding of the point being cited. -- 1276:

Not quite. There was never a trial. There was a grand jury investigation that concluded there was no good evidence to charge anyone with the crime of rape and abduction. However, Brawley and her supporters have remained vocal about their side of the story, so the term allegation remains

3584:

It seems that yes, you do think that. However, your thoughts are evidently not based on a viewpoint which is grounded in the actual historical facts... The truth, based on all the extant reliable source factual histories, is that the allegations were 100% false. Thus, this was a hoax.

587:

The use of Wikinews interviews is currently under discussion; regardless Al Sharpton's perspective in this issue as a major player is not a "minority" view and even if it was, "Minority views" aren't given any less credence than "majority views" when it comes to perspectives.

2023:

Thank you, I am adding it now. It is especially helpful to have this source, as the article only linked to CourtTV for the Grand Jury Report. CourtTV was a good reference, but it has been offline, television and internet, since 2009 or so, and all the article links to it are

3196:

Better, but the article still doesn't say who's responsible for that quote other than "critics", which is vague. You could say "...rather than being given protection by the state. An opinion piece in the New York Times..." etc (or however you wish to describe

2192:

enforcement entirely, and I don't remember her giving interviews to the press either. I left the change as it was because I couldn't say that six was a better number than four, but it sounds like you found a source that supports a rewrite to "about six". —

638:

weight than majority views. Does putting something in a pull quote represent giving it undue weight? Again, let's look at the policy. "Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text,

3460:. In the Brawley case, the distinction between the way the mainstream media covered the case and the way black-owned media covered it—and the mainstream media's coverage of it—was particularly divergent. See the "Public response" section of the article. — 1011:

The quotes you would like to include in the lede are significant. But dropping them in the lede without any context makes them practically meaningless. They belong in the body of the article, with appropriate introductions to put them in context. —

1942:

First of all, you are absolutely right that it depends on your definition of "soon". People often become famous "overnight", whereby literally, one day 99% of the country has not heard of them, and then, less than a week later, 90% of the country

3405:

on Knowledge... I opened an account just for this purpose. I did as much reading of the Wiki Help pages as I could stand (and I feel no closer to knowing if I've done this properly). If I did something wrong trying to ask this question, I'm sure

3228:

Is there any material about the apparent inconsistency between paragraphs one and two of the "possible motives" subsection? As in, if King played a part in faking the scene, Brawley could hardly have been using it to avoid punishment at King's

935:

the correct way to balance the differing viewpoints that still remain about the Tawana Brawley case. And hopefully, where there is reasonable disagreement, there can be reasonable debate that may resolve the reasonable disagreement. However,

3397:

While seeing the term MAY help some WP readers to acclimate - it is also an emotion laden term that only adds to an already touchy subject. History should be viewed in the context of its time, and saying "mainstream media" deflects from that.

1387:

The recent case of the lacrosse players at Duke University accused of raping a young black woman brings to mind the case of Tawana Brawley, the black teenager who in 1988 made similar charges against a group of white men in Wappinger Falls ,

74:

Hey Tawana went to my high school (not at the same time). I wonder if there should be some more said about the media circus. I remember this being a HUGE deal at the time and for a while all people knew Poughkeepsie for was Tawana Brawley.

1827:

Where is she now? In 2013, she is over 40 years old. Is she married? Does she have children? When was the last time she appeared on TV, or granted any interviews? Has she had any contact with Sharpton, Mason, or Maddox in recent years?

1311:{{cite news |title= Evidence Points to Deceit by Brawley |url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE0D81E3FF934A1575AC0A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all |publisher=New York Times |date=] |accessdate=2008-01-20}} 260:

remain unclear. It cannot be said with certainty she did it for personal gain, as opposed for attention, or to make some sort of political statement. (although, lets not kid ourselves, it was probably a ham-fisted way to get some $ $ $ )

321:

allegations against Dutchess County Assistant District Attorney Steven Pagones" were false and had no basis in fact. To issue the report, the Grand Jury heard from 180 witnesses, saw 250 exhibits and recorded over 6,000 pages of testimony.

1885:

I will go ahead and fix it up, but I'm sure something who shares my antipathy for her will mistakenly think this change was made by someone sticking up for her, when in fact it is only the English language I am sticking up for.

783:

I believe that some people are getting Mason and Maddox confused. If you look up information on why C. Vernon Mason was disbarred, "billing and abandoning clients in an unrelated series of incidents" seems to match it pretty

2270:

Tawana Glenda Brawley (born December 1971 or b. 1972) (sources differ) is an African-American woman from Wappingers Falls, New York, who gained notoriety in November 1987 for falsely accusing four white men of having raped

956:

in the case -- all of this with the admonition in the edit summary "quotes dont go in lead". Even if "quotations don't go in the introduction" were an established rule (which it is not, being specifically contradicted by

710:

Maddox was suspended from the practice of law in May 1990 amid his representation of Rev. Al Sharpton in a 67-count indictment ostensibly because he failed and refused to disclose files involving Tawana Brawley and Rev. Al

865:, but so far (I didn't suspect this error until about an hour ago) I've yet to find a reliable source which says it. Moreover, the date that is given in this article for Maddox's disbarment is actually, according to 3249:

There's multiple uses of "claims" and "claimed" in the article. While that's appropriate for Brawley's own statements, under the circumstances, it should be avoided otherwise; "said", "stated", etc, are better, per

852:

if does indeed turn out to be an error. Namely, I can find indications that Maddox was suspended from the practice of law in New York State (an exception made so that he could continue to represent Al Sharpton)

565:

to the minority view. Pull quotes are good in newspapers because they not only attract attention, they help to sell the "angle" of the story. However, an "angle" is exactly what Knowledge articles should be

484:

That's not at all what it says, and if you have a question about it then you should raise it there. Wikinews interviews are reliable sources for the words of what someone says. This issue has been raised on

3065:

The article, while generally well written, slips into journalese in a few places. Examples include "racial tensions climbed" and "the case quickly took on an explosive edge", but the whole thing could use a

1973:

I'm sorry you went through all that, and I'm glad that at least eventually the truth came out. I've also been hurt by racially motivated false accusations, and I'm still waiting for the truth to come out.

1951:

this woman had instantly recognized for the notorious liar that she is, but from the perspective of someone in the Midwest, it was many weeks before the media finally switched sides on this case, which did

114:

says that "On July 29, 1998 the jury awarded Pagones $ 345,000 in damages. Sharpton was found liable for $ 65,000 of the total damages, Maddox for $ 95,000 and Mason for $ 185,000." Which one is correct?

3320:

One final point; the quotations in the references are helpful, but are somewhat excessive. Can you look at pruning them, and keeping extensive quotations only when we're looking at particularly sensitive

517:

Its a wiki, it can be edited by anyone and is self-published with no editorial oversight in regards to fact checking. Its no more reliable than a random blog, forum, or any other self-published source.--

2581: 2485:

It was only as the evidence against her claims began to mount in early 1988 that public sympathy turned against her. To say that she "gained notoriety" in November 1987 is untrue and absurd on its face.

803:

The version I inserted mentioned that Maddox was disbarred, what he was disbarred for, and the civil judgement against him. Somehow that doesn't qualify as 'information unfavorable to Maddox' to you.

3110:"the African-American press and leaders" this seems grammatically off to me. Also, we should be careful about positing a monolithic "African-American press", unless that's exactly what the source says. 2151:

The lede has long said six men were accused. This has now been changed to four, but elsewhere in the article we say three. So, which is it, and is there a source in the article for the correct number?

1194:

I'll get some sources for that later today. Eg, see "Legacies of Lynching: Racial Violence and Memory" by Jonathan Markovitz, which has some info, and the book the NY Times reporters wrote, "Outrage."

1392:

both incidents, the charges were seized upon as self-evident, incontrovertible proof of the incorrigible and ineradicable racism that continues to permeate and infect every pore of American society.

561:

Even apart from the issue of sourcing, which is clearly not so clear-cut as David Shankbone had assured us it was, I still cannot see what formatting that content as a pull quote does except to give

1635:. This morning, I wrote that it was a problem because of the word "reportedly" in the source and added the quote "BLPs must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy" from 3350: 295:

reason to put the quote in the citation. To give just one blatant example, here is a paragraph from the article that had a citation at the end, and then the quote included in the citation:

94:

plausible that one person (TB) lied than "several", but without knowing how many, we don't know how much more plausible, and verification is a higher standard than plausibility in any case.

312:

Attorney Steven Pagones" were false and had no basis in fact. To issue the report, the Grand Jury heard from 180 witnesses, saw 250 exhibits and recorded more than 6,000 pages of testimony.

910:

Attempting to put new material directly in the introduction, by contrast, is an indicator that you either a) don't really understand what you're doing vis-a-vis introductions, or b) would

1430:

It is also a bunch of BS that someone who changes their name for the SOLE purpose of avoiding a court judgment against her is protected by a website that supposedly wants to be factual.

3294:"many black leaders who showed no degree of skepticism or disbelief of the teenager and her story." This does not read neutrally, because it's implying (in Knowledge's voice) that they 1176:

Also, the only citation "for widespread criticism of the mainstream press by African American press" is a newspaper in Bluffton, SC. There needs to be more support for the statement. --

789:

BTW, someone needs to keep an eye on Maddox's article; it seems to be visited regularly by someone from New Jersey who's determined to rip out any information unfavorable to Maddox. --

2266:

Tawana Glenda Brawley (born 1972) is an African-American woman from Wappingers Falls, New York, who gained notoriety in 1987–88 for falsely accusing four white men of having raped her.

1901:

Actually, I think I've come up with a version that successfully incorporates the use of "notoriety" without damaging the timeline, and also provides a better-written opening sentence.

1862:

I have no problem identifying Tawana Brawley as a person of notoriety. However, that word is misused in the opening paragraph of the article. Here's how it reads at present:

1301:, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 86:'s opinion, stating our opinions is not the purpose of WP articles. It is a verifiable fact that the 3 advocates were discredited in court. Verifying what unnamed associates 617:"An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject." 2586: 125:

I'll look into it when I have more time, but as I recall Pagones was originally awarded something like $ 150 million, but it was later greatly reduced, as often happens. -

1506:

I have read it and I didnt see any justification for your revert. Are you implying that her notability stems largely or entirely from being victims of another's actions?

980:

is a fair and truthful representation. Perhaps Patricia J. Williams' puzzling idea that Tawana Brawley's status as "the victim of some unspeakable crime" is irrefutable

1594:

violation involving her notability and privacy. Tawana Brawley is most certainly notable enough to have her own article and quite frankly, I don’t know why she doesn’t.

2167: 1552:"Knowledge contains biographical material on people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, exercise restraint and include 743:

Maddox own article is just a stub at this time. While googling for his name it seems to me that he's whining a lot, that its all a white conspiracy against him, etc. --

1824:

I seem to recall that she ran into legal trouble after her move out of state, but I don't recall the details. I cannot attest to the correctness or veracity of that.

3086:

We've gone from public response being sympathetic to 85% of white people thinking she was lying; the transition is a bit abrupt, and it's unclear why it took place.

2732: 2614: 110:

This article says, "In 1998 Pagones was awarded $ 150 million in suit for a defamation of character that he brought against Sharpton, Maddox, and Mason." However,

570:, to adhere to the NPOV policy. There are frankly few occasions on which pull quotes are appropriate in Knowledge. I'm going to remove it from the article. -- 988:. Perhaps. But that it should be shoehorned into the introduction, while far more important material clarifying what the two juries determined, a matter that 3163:

Well, it wasn't the concept of a black press, but that of a monolithic black press, which bothered me; but if that's what the sources say, let's roll with it.

1590:. The name was reverted at first its because it wasn’t sourced, then it was because the source used the word “reportedly”, and now its because of a perceived 2604: 541:

As one who participates at WP:RS extensively... I can say for sure that Wikinews has NOT been "approved" by the community there. Wikis by their nature are

181:

In 1998 Pagones was awarded $ 345,000 (he sought $ 150 million) in suit for a defamation of character that he brought against Sharpton, Maddox, and Mason.

3121:

the prior wording because it better represents what the sources, which refer to the black press, say. Specifically, they're referring to the black-owned

2968: 2470:.) An editor cannot jump to the conclusion that the captions those websites have for their photos of Brawley are applicable to the photo in the article. 2393: 1549:"When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced." 2797: 2736: 2728: 2632: 2454:) published the photo in the article (although both sources have their own photos that appear to show Brawley wearing the same or a similar shirt). 2367: 1335:

The earliest NY Times news reports all seemed to refer to Wappingers Falls. The two are very close, but is there documented support for Wappinger?

721:

Maddox later was disbarred in New York, but not because of his role in the Brawley affair; it turns out he had engaged in false billing of clients.

2078: 325:

Except for the wikification of "Abrams" and the parenthetical note indicating that subsequent usages of "Brawley" will refer to Tawana Brawley --

2207:

Thanks for looking at it. That source was already in the article and it is a very early in the event's history, before Brawley had much to say.

2720: 459: 151:

It was a whim of someone who read the article and didn't agree with it. I remember seeing that tag addition and then forgot to follow-up. --

2792:, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or 1398:

nearly as long as the Duke accuser. Within weeks, most of the rational media were already thoroughly questioning Brawley's side of the case.

2260:

Brawley during a press conference in Newark, New Jersey on September 29, 1988 shortly after a grand jury ruled that her story was "untrue".

820: 805: 665: 571: 471: 413: 369: 330: 47: 17: 2513:

Article states that she hadn't paid anything on the defamation claims yet, this 2013 article notes her wages were being garnished to pay

2419: 3586: 3560: 3482: 3466: 3375: 3147: 2550: 2499: 2467: 2198: 1834: 1805: 1769: 1699: 1660: 1565: 1493: 1360: 1079: 1060: 1023: 873: 790: 2514: 948:

quotes from the two juries which evaluated the evidence (which was perhaps the most important role played by anyone in the case) while

2683: 997: 872:, the date of his suspension. Would others please look at this and see if they can find reliable sources that clarify the matter? -- 3354: 2544:, in particular, likes to print names and addresses it alleges are Brawley's; we hold ourselves to a higher standard than they do. — 3141:

and the network affiliates. I agree that the phrasing is awkward. Would "the black press and African-American leaders" be better? —

2793: 2653: 1921: 1785: 1528: 1437: 1399: 1278: 1460: 614:"We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by a small minority deserved as much attention as a majority view." 470:

despite not meeting most of the criteria that are required for such sources; no one else agrees but David Shankbone persists." --

360:

had conducted a personal interview with Al Sharpton and tried to use it directly as a source for a Knowledge article, it would be

206:

Shouldn't this be changed to Tawana Brawley Case, as this is what the contents of the article about. This certainly is not a bio.

3531:

OK, I've moved the page as per the agreement here and as in accordance with those who previously wanted the move (in 2008) too.--

2724: 2246:

made the following changes to the article that are not supported by the sources cited and in my opinion, represent impermissible

261: 2609: 2050: 1053: 455: 431: 3284:"were given widespread media attention in part" is odd just after discussing "National media attention" in the same paragraph. 1852: 2814: 152: 2518: 611:"Articles that compare views should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views ..." 396:

between twenty years, and is more than pertinent considering Sharpton was, aside from Brawley, the key figure involved. --

353: 895:

This means that if you are introducing material which is new to the article, you should either be putting it in the body,

3239:

Please look into how Al Sharpton's title is used in other articles about him; at the moment, it reads like an honorific.

659:

dog that won't hunt: just because a view has a prominent adherent does not prevent it from being a minority viewpoint.

647:

of a pull quote is to "pull" the eye, no one can seriously attempt to claim that putting a minority view in a pull quote

3415: 1259:

Right. this is not an allegation. this case was tried in an American court of law. Brawley's allegations were a hoax.

881: 3218:"To issue the report, the grand jury heard" this reads strangely to me. Shouldn't it be "Before issuing the report..."? 2341: 1849:

She was tracked down in Virginia, using the name Tawana Gutierrez and working as an LPN at a nursing home in Richmond.

3445: 1264: 1140:

I don't believe Prof Williams changed that view, although it's been quoted in a number of sources (often critically).

183:

What things were said and done that were considered defamation of character? I would like to know more about this. --

2315: 1418:

If CourtTV can mention her new name, so can wikipedia; plus, she still owes $ 185,000 plus interest to her victim. --

690:

Maddox was later disbarred after being accused of billing and abandoning clients in an unrelated series of incidents.

961:) there is obviously no reason for anyone to follow it when the very person who cited it broke it in the same edit. 866: 143:

displayed on the article page when there seems to be nothing in the talk page to suggest it might not be neutral? --

3517:

I also agree completely, the current title is completely inappropriate. Thanks for raising such an important point.

2972: 38: 489:'s page, as well as reliable sources, etc. In fact, of the thirty-five people I have interviewed (most recently, 2989: 2785: 2716: 1587: 737: 695: 2458:

of the photo in the article is unknown; it is not either of those sources. (Indeed, if the photo in the article

2960: 2079:

https://web.archive.org/20070418204443/http://www.courttv.com:80/archive/legaldocs/newsmakers/tawana/part1.html

824: 809: 669: 575: 475: 417: 373: 334: 3096:"as one of the rapists, and called him a racist, among other accusations." This reads funny, because they are 462:

there is a long thread which, it seems, can be summarized as follows: "David Shankbone insists that Wikinews

3411: 3100:

accusing him of rape, but you can't charge someone with racism in court; that is a description of character.

1838: 1083: 903:

detailed summary of it in the introduction. These are the two ways to do it which are (or, more accurately,

356:. I do not believe this is a source that meets Knowledge's standards for reliability and fact-checking. If 3590: 3536: 3522: 3486: 3450: 3123: 2964: 2882: 2756: 1199: 1145: 1064: 1017: 877: 794: 3645: 3623: 3608: 3594: 3579: 3564: 3540: 3526: 3512: 3490: 3470: 3429: 3419: 3379: 3358: 3172: 3151: 3034: 2672: 2657: 2554: 2529: 2503: 2473:

Source 3 does not provide Brawley's date of birth. It states that she receives birthday cards in December.

2216: 2202: 2178: 2160: 2141: 2033: 2015: 1983: 1929: 1910: 1895: 1842: 1809: 1793: 1773: 1741: 1703: 1664: 1603: 1569: 1536: 1515: 1497: 1473: 1445: 1422: 1407: 1381: 1364: 1344: 1325: 1286: 1268: 1253: 1225: 1203: 1185: 1170: 1149: 1134: 1109: 1087: 1068: 1046: 1027: 1005: 828: 813: 798: 774: 761: 747: 673: 599: 579: 555: 526: 512: 479: 445: 421: 407: 377: 338: 269: 254: 235: 210: 193: 170: 155: 129: 119: 2878: 2861: 2628: 1556:

material relevant to their notability, focusing on high quality secondary sources." (emphasis in original)

1260: 1001: 968:

introduction to this article contain a lot of lengthy quotes from the two juries? Perhaps it wouldn't.

3604: 3555: 3461: 3435: 3370: 3168: 3158: 3142: 3030: 2668: 2647: 2545: 2494: 2193: 2133: 2113:

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

2082: 1979: 1925: 1906: 1891: 1800: 1789: 1764: 1694: 1655: 1560: 1532: 1488: 1441: 1403: 1355: 1282: 1043: 1013: 976:

so much information about what the juries determined that someone might read it and actually think that

2455: 848:

I think that this basic error has led to another error, one which should be corrected both here and at

232: 3274:

The parenthetical "he sought 395 million" appears in a strange place; and it needn't be parenthetical.

1250: 931:

Now, to turn from the general to the specific, there is room for reasonable disagreement on just what

622:

I don't know how you are defining "credence", but unless you are specifically meaning by it something

364:. I don't think the situation is different because it is being used indirectly rather than directly. 3641: 3575: 3346: 2835: 2831: 2011: 2007: 1433: 593: 506: 439: 401: 357: 265: 191: 2515:

https://nypost.com/2013/08/04/pay-up-time-for-brawley-87-rape-hoaxer-finally-shells-out-for-slander/

3615: 2029: 1737: 1599: 1511: 1469: 1221: 1181: 1166: 1130: 1105: 3343:

there is no evidence to prove that she falsely accused them, so the "falsely" should be removed.

3619: 3532: 3518: 2993: 2932: 1626: 1340: 1321: 1195: 1141: 551: 116: 83: 454:

which deems Wikinews to be a suitable source for Knowledge. There is no mention of Wikinews at

2796:, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the 2767:

A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with

2517:

We've just passed the 30th anniversary and there's some follow up with her & Sharpton here

2114: 713:(I wonder what the word "ostensibly" means here - does it mean that it is his interpretation?) 3507: 3440: 2525: 2060: 758: 522: 3600: 3327: 3307: 3164: 3026: 2952: 2664: 2643: 2451: 2212: 2174: 2156: 2129: 1975: 1902: 1887: 1393: 1354:, I'm not sure on what basis. If you think it should be Wappingers Falls, change it back. — 250: 3366: 2188: 2121: 2001: 1853:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/brawley_defiant_life_in_hiding_E9DV7S9hJAvGW6qmrISeaL

3630: 3571: 3251: 2687: 2663:

I see no reason to quick fail this, so I will review it in detail over the next few days.

2490: 2474: 2243: 2068: 1760: 1690: 1647: 1640: 184: 144: 103: 2540:

issues involving the privacy of a minor who has tried to drop out of the public eye. The

2519:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/booming/revisiting-the-tawana-brawley-rape-scandal.html

2394:"25 years after her rape claims sparked a firestorm, Tawana Brawley avoids the spotlight" 412:"it has already been established it can be a source." Established by whom, and when? -- 90:

is not possible, and we can far less establish whether their statements are true. It is

1161:

the citation does not deal with the custody issue, so it seems relatively unsupported.--

2909:

It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

2902: 2768: 2025: 1733: 1595: 1507: 1465: 1371: 1217: 1177: 1162: 1126: 1101: 958: 717: 562: 494: 111: 2120:

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

706: 3426: 2537: 2247: 2236: 1651: 1636: 1632: 1591: 1484: 1480: 1336: 1317: 1056: 660: 547: 308: 207: 166:

article should cite criticisms from existing sources, not draw unique judgements. --

126: 651:

giving it "prominence of placement". As for the claim that Al Sharpton's viewpoint

3551: 3498: 3456: 3129: 2789: 2521: 2463: 2447: 1378: 849: 604:

First, I think you should take another look at the NPOV policy, to see if what you

546:

acceptable as an External Link (or since it is a sister project, a See Also link).

518: 490: 467: 361: 3076:

If Brawley didn't name her assailants, on what basis were specific people accused?

700:

for failure and refusal to disclose files involving Tawana Brawley and Al Sharpton

3434:

You may think there was nothing but the mainstream media in 1987, but there were

501:. That's the extent of it. You don't have much of an argument here. Sorry. -- 2208: 2170: 2152: 1419: 990:

we have already witnessed firsthand is subject to severe mistaken interpretation

771: 744: 726: 630:

give minority views less credence than majority views. One thing we definitely

498: 246: 46:

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

3208:

Link or explain district attorney, attorney general, sodomized, and grand jury.

2368:"Tawana Brawley alleges being raped after she was found in a trash bag in 1987" 2289: 1763:

seems to be that her conversion can be mentioned but her new name stays out. —

1078:

general will give some clarity to readers who don't already know who he is. --

770:

I'm even more confused now. Someone else should make appropriate changes :-) --

3570:

I think the current title of "rape allegations" is more NPOV than "rape hoax"

1732:

I saw the BLPN notice and some more people can weigh in. Good enough for now.

842: 486: 349: 100: 2702:

A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

655:

a minority view because he was a prominent player in the affair, that is yet

198:

They accused him of raping a 15 year old girl! With no evidence whatsoever!

2943:

Some disruption from IPs, but not enough to prevent this reaching GA status.

2420:"Crime - 1987 - A media controversy ignites over the case of Tawana Brawley" 1779:

Anyone wan to add that she has been found and will have to pay up after all?

1631:

Please re-read my edit summaries: all of my objections have been because of

300: 167: 2635:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. 2477:

jumped to the conclusion that this means Brawley was born in December 1971.

892:

we're gonna tell them (the introduction) and then we tell them (the body).

493:, President of Israel), the only place where it has been a question was on 3425:

You're right. The article isn't protected; you're welcome to correct it.

3390:

In 1987 there was only "the media" - it was, for all practical purposes,

451: 427: 2065:

after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add

3184:"she was used as a pawn" to what end? That's a bit confusing otherwise. 2931:

It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing

1216:

Also, there was nothing further about the custody issue with Brawley.--

2108:

An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

1831:

Are her mother and stepfather still living? Are they still together?

2083:

http://www.courttv.com/archive/legaldocs/newsmakers/tawana/part1.html

1479:

You don't. Just like you don't incorporate her new name. Please read

3052: 3629:

you can find out if there is consensus for or against renaming it.

2483:

Public response to Brawley's story was at first mostly sympathetic.

643:, and juxtaposition of statements." (emph. added) Since the whole 426:

By the Knowledge community. It's a Wikimedia Sister project. See

2073:

to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

229: 225: 3599:

Either way, the page should not be moved without consensus here.

2493:

will not fix her or his own edits, I will revert them shortly. —

1100:

I've added his full name and title to make the reference clear.--

3134: 2169:

says "about six white men" but that's certainly not definitive.

1693:. Hopefully we'll get some independent editors' advice there. — 978:"Grand Jury said not enough evidence to go to trial. That's it." 608:

it says is actually what it says. I read the policy and I see:

304: 221: 140: 1646:

By the way, the reason Brawley doesn't have her own article is

1350:

The article was changed from Wappingers Falls to Wappingers in

291:

information that is not already included in the text, there is

3481:

Calling it anything else helps perpetuate the original fraud.

919:

text that is written at a level of detail appropriate for the

25: 3386:

Why use the phrase (and accompanying link) "mainstream media"

2342:"20 years later, Tawana Brawley has turned back on the past" 2088:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the

899:

putting a detailed version of it in the body and putting a

2466:

for an invalid fair-use claim in violation of Knowledge's

2462:

come from either of those sources, it would be subject to

857:

I cannot find reliable sources indicating that Maddox was

3477:

This article should be called "Tawana Brawley rape hoax"

3312:

Are you satisfied with the current state of the article?

2049:

I have just added archive links to one external link on

2002:

https://archive.org/details/TawanaBrawleyGrandJuryReport

1042:

This raises a question: What does "Abrams" refer to? --

984:

of what the facts may be, deserves to go in the article

3118: 2054: 1351: 1298: 977: 937: 287:

information that illuminates the point being cited, or

79: 78:

As the article states, there is no unanimity as to the

1956:

seem "soon" to me at all. But again, as you say, it

753:

The cite for the opinion and order disbarring him is

460:

Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Wikinews redux

279:

The "quote=" argument in citation templates does not

887:

The correct, and incorrect, usage of an introduction

391:

it would be original research; in fact, Wikinews is

3189:

The quotation definitely needs attribution in-text.

3051:Image licenses seem okay, but the file description 996:? Ridiculous and monstrous. And unacceptable. -- 3133:and several black-owned radio stations, including 736:So, whatever the truth is, either this article or 2983:Licensing checks out to the best of my abilities. 2187:I saw that change earlier. After reading through 916:There is just simply no way that it can be right. 283:to be used. In particular, when the quote gives 1459:Not surprisingly, she joined the Nation of Islam 3394:the Internet - there was no alternative media. 684:Contradiction in "Aftermath" segment re: Maddox 497:regarding a quote about him by a third party, 3193:rewording & added new sources & info 2256:Tawana Brawley at a press conference in 1987. 1998:The Grand Jury report can now be found here: 8: 2917:All issues with language have been addressed 2254:The caption of the picture was changed from 2231:so what did he say when the truth came out? 2881:without going into unnecessary detail (see 3344: 3243:I removed his title; it is not useful here 2564: 1377:Some commentators have drawn parallels. -- 176:please add defamation of character details 1293:Bot report : Found duplicate references ! 2633:Talk:Tawana Brawley rape allegations/GA1 2316:"Photos: Today in History, September 29" 1691:WP:BLP/N#Tawana Brawley rape allegations 2595: 2567: 2281: 1156:Material in lede not covered in article 3004:No issues with relevance and captions. 2482: 2269: 2265: 2259: 2255: 1652:WP:BLP#Presumption in favor of privacy 1485:WP:BLP#Presumption in favor of privacy 837:The actual fate of Maddox's law career 733:(Note that this is Mason, not Maddox) 348:In the "Aftermath" section there is a 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3351:2003:F2:93D1:C100:F8A2:9EFC:C2A1:49F1 819:subject to reach that determination. 7: 2264:The first sentence was changed from 18:Talk:Tawana Brawley rape allegations 3025:All issues fixed: passing shortly. 2950:Is it illustrated, if possible, by 2166:This early source (which we cite) 1586:This line of rationale looks like 952:a quote from a scholar who played 664:placement inside a pull quote. -- 24: 3550:And I moved it back. Please read 2779:Reference issues have been fixed. 2053:. Please take a moment to review 1249:someone please change this title. 1120:Tone of article and use of quotes 352:from Al Sharpton. The source is 3018: 2997: 2976: 2936: 2910: 2886: 2865: 2839: 2818: 2801: 2772: 2740: 2703: 2099: 354:original reporting from Wikinews 29: 2051:Tawana Brawley rape allegations 1799:It's in the article already. — 1054:New York State Attorney General 456:Knowledge talk:Reliable sources 432:Knowledge talk:Reliable sources 97:For that reason i am reverting. 3055:really needs to be cleaned up. 2872:Short, but no significant gaps 2798:scientific citation guidelines 2710:All issues have been addressed 2034:08:58, 11 September 2015 (UTC) 1882:something that happened soon. 1871:When it says the "accusations 1331:Wappinger or Wappingers Falls? 1254:20:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC) 626:"weight", then yes in fact we 240:Would someone like to explain 1: 3646:13:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC) 3624:12:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC) 3565:03:43, 20 February 2019 (UTC) 3541:23:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC) 3527:12:01, 19 February 2019 (UTC) 3513:11:31, 19 February 2019 (UTC) 3491:13:40, 18 February 2019 (UTC) 3471:03:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC) 3430:00:25, 22 February 2019 (UTC) 3420:17:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 3380:05:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC) 3359:13:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC) 2808:Source reliability looks okay 2555:23:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC) 2530:07:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC) 2509:30th anniversary info updates 2504:03:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC) 2290:"The Tawana Brawley Incident" 1984:03:25, 6 September 2013 (UTC) 1960:a matter of one's definition. 1858:The proper use of "notoriety" 1843:03:50, 26 February 2013 (UTC) 1408:07:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC) 1365:19:01, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1345:13:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC) 1186:14:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC) 1171:14:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC) 1135:14:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC) 1110:13:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC) 1088:21:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC) 1069:18:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC) 1028:07:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC) 1006:05:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC) 799:06:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC) 674:20:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC) 600:18:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC) 580:18:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC) 556:20:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 527:20:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 513:17:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 480:17:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 446:16:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 422:15:55, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 408:15:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 378:15:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC) 327:they're exactly the same text 270:14:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC) 3580:19:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC) 3019: 2998: 2977: 2937: 2911: 2887: 2866: 2846:Excessive quotations trimmed 2840: 2819: 2802: 2773: 2741: 2704: 2142:18:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC) 1810:05:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC) 1794:05:04, 1 February 2013 (UTC) 1537:04:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC) 1446:04:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC) 1382:21:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC) 748:21:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC) 387:we cite to on Knowledge was 339:15:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC) 255:23:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC) 236:06:47, 11 October 2006 (UTC) 228:is the more correct term is 211:21:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC) 130:17:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC) 120:01:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 3609:00:45, 6 January 2021 (UTC) 3595:20:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC) 3137:—not to black employees of 2825:Spotchecks reveal no issues 1930:05:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC) 1774:03:59, 14 August 2011 (UTC) 882:02:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC) 829:16:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC) 814:17:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC) 738:List of disbarred attorneys 696:List of disbarred attorneys 344:Pull quote from Al Sharpton 156:06:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3670: 2769:the layout style guideline 2071:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} 2046:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1911:21:17, 5 August 2013 (UTC) 1896:21:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC) 1742:17:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1704:17:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1665:17:34, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1604:17:27, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1570:17:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1516:17:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1498:17:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1474:16:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1423:15:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 1326:18:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC) 1299:the last revision I edited 1269:14:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC) 1047:21:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 944:reasonable or acceptable: 836: 775:15:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 762:05:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 171:04:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC) 3365:No evidence? Try reading 2969:valid fair use rationales 2468:non-free content criteria 1244:read, The Tawana Brawley 1236:The Title of this Article 1226:17:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC) 1204:14:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC) 1150:14:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC) 940:is an example of what is 220:This is categorized as a 153:That Guy, From That Show! 106:06:30, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC) 3173:02:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC) 3152:01:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC) 3035:14:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC) 2715:B. It complies with the 2673:10:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC) 2658:10:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC) 2442:Here are my objections: 2217:23:23, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 2203:23:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 2179:22:31, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 2161:22:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC) 2016:23:30, 5 July 2014 (UTC) 1639:. I'm prepared to go to 1052:"Abrams" refers to then 972:it would definitely not 861:. I can find plenty of 251:talk to me - I'll listen 224:but it seems to me that 194:00:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC) 3451:New York Amsterdam News 2992:to the topic, and have 2893:No extraneous material. 2794:likely to be challenged 2042:External links modified 1845:Greg P., New York City 1287:01:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC) 641:prominence of placement 634:is give minority views 316:and here is the quote: 3446:black-owned newspapers 3436:alternative newspapers 3339:" who falsely accused" 2147:How many were accused? 1869: 1464:. How to incorporate. 688:The article tells us: 147:02:30 GMT, 3 Jan 2006 2855:broad in its coverage 2189:the grand jury report 1864: 740:should be corrected. 139:Why is the tag about 42:of past discussions. 3496:That seems alright. 3298:have been skeptical. 2935:or content dispute: 2879:focused on the topic 2860:A. It addresses the 2832:copyright violations 2815:no original research 2762:no original research 2450:) nor source 2 (the 2296:. September 29, 1988 2096:to let others know. 2057:. If necessary, add 1305:"Evidence Points" : 705:Maddox own homepage 450:There is nothing at 358:User:David Shankbone 275:Quotes in references 82:, and while i share 2747:All issues resolved 2400:. December 23, 2012 2374:. November 27, 2015 2346:New York Daily News 2092:parameter below to 2006:please add, someone 1650:, which is part of 624:much different than 3412:IWasAliveAtTheTime 3401:{This is my first 3139:The New York Times 3080:Fixed this problem 2830:D. It contains no 2737:list incorporation 2446:Neither source 1 ( 1588:WP:Policy shopping 1034:Abrams Grand Jury? 843:noted on this page 3441:The Village Voice 3361: 3349:comment added by 2994:suitable captions 2971:are provided for 2786:in-line citations 2623: 2622: 2320:My Record Journal 2248:original research 2237:original research 2140: 1994:Grand jury report 1816:Where is she now? 1759:The consensus at 1630: 1436:comment added by 1271:Thomas Babbington 1261:Thomas Babbington 389:done on Knowledge 362:original research 84:User:Can'tStandYa 67: 66: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3661: 3638: 3637: 3634: 3510: 3506: 3504: 3501: 3331: 3311: 3162: 3022: 3021: 3001: 3000: 2980: 2979: 2973:non-free content 2965:copyright status 2940: 2939: 2914: 2913: 2890: 2889: 2869: 2868: 2843: 2842: 2822: 2821: 2805: 2804: 2790:reliable sources 2776: 2775: 2744: 2743: 2707: 2706: 2577:Copyvio detector 2565: 2452:Associated Press 2435: 2434: 2432: 2430: 2416: 2410: 2409: 2407: 2405: 2390: 2384: 2383: 2381: 2379: 2364: 2358: 2357: 2355: 2353: 2338: 2332: 2331: 2329: 2327: 2322:. AP Photo. 1988 2312: 2306: 2305: 2303: 2301: 2286: 2136: 2135:Talk to my owner 2131: 2106: 2103: 2102: 2072: 2064: 1624: 1448: 755:Matter of Maddox 596: 591: 509: 504: 442: 437: 404: 399: 189: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3669: 3668: 3664: 3663: 3662: 3660: 3659: 3658: 3635: 3632: 3631: 3563: 3508: 3502: 3499: 3497: 3479: 3469: 3410:will tell me.} 3388: 3378: 3341: 3325: 3305: 3156: 3150: 3047: 2813:C. It contains 2719:guidelines for 2717:manual of style 2680: 2627:This review is 2619: 2591: 2563: 2553: 2511: 2502: 2464:speedy deletion 2440: 2439: 2438: 2428: 2426: 2418: 2417: 2413: 2403: 2401: 2392: 2391: 2387: 2377: 2375: 2366: 2365: 2361: 2351: 2349: 2340: 2339: 2335: 2325: 2323: 2314: 2313: 2309: 2299: 2297: 2288: 2287: 2283: 2240: 2229: 2201: 2149: 2139: 2134: 2104: 2100: 2066: 2058: 2044: 1996: 1860: 1818: 1808: 1781: 1772: 1702: 1663: 1568: 1496: 1457: 1431: 1416: 1375: 1363: 1333: 1295: 1238: 1158: 1122: 1039:her advisors." 1036: 889: 839: 686: 594: 589: 507: 502: 468:reliable source 458:. However, at 440: 435: 402: 397: 346: 277: 218: 216:Fraud not Hoax? 204: 185: 178: 72: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3667: 3665: 3657: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3559: 3548: 3547: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3543: 3478: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3465: 3448:, such as the 3432: 3387: 3384: 3383: 3382: 3374: 3340: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3317: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3291: 3290: 3289: 3281: 3280: 3279: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3246: 3245: 3244: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3186: 3181: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3146: 3124:Amsterdam News 3107: 3106: 3105: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3046: 3043: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3017:Pass or Fail: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3006: 3005: 2988:B. Images are 2986: 2985: 2984: 2959:A. Images are 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2898: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2864:of the topic: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2847: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2782: 2781: 2780: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2729:words to watch 2713: 2712: 2711: 2679: 2676: 2662: 2638: 2637: 2621: 2620: 2618: 2617: 2612: 2607: 2601: 2598: 2597: 2593: 2592: 2590: 2589: 2587:External links 2584: 2579: 2573: 2570: 2569: 2562: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2549: 2510: 2507: 2498: 2487: 2486: 2478: 2471: 2437: 2436: 2411: 2385: 2359: 2333: 2307: 2280: 2279: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2262: 2239: 2233: 2228: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2197: 2182: 2181: 2148: 2145: 2132: 2126: 2125: 2118: 2086: 2085: 2077:Added archive 2043: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 1995: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1947:know them. I 1935: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1914: 1913: 1859: 1856: 1848: 1817: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1804: 1780: 1777: 1768: 1757: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1698: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1659: 1644: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1564: 1557: 1550: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1501: 1500: 1492: 1456: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1415: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1395: 1389: 1374: 1372:Duke rape case 1369: 1368: 1367: 1359: 1332: 1329: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1309: 1294: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1273: 1272: 1237: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1189: 1188: 1157: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1121: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1072: 1071: 1035: 1032: 1031: 1030: 914:do it wrong. 888: 885: 869:New York Times 841:As previously 838: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 821:130.156.31.148 816: 806:130.156.29.112 786: 785: 780: 779: 778: 777: 765: 764: 685: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 666:192.250.34.161 620: 619: 618: 615: 612: 572:192.250.34.161 559: 558: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 531: 530: 529: 495:Paul Wolfowitz 472:192.250.34.161 414:192.250.34.161 370:192.250.34.161 345: 342: 331:192.250.34.161 323: 322: 314: 313: 276: 273: 217: 214: 203: 200: 177: 174: 163: 161: 159: 158: 137: 135: 133: 132: 112:Steven Pagones 108: 98: 80:non-factuality 71: 68: 65: 64: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3666: 3647: 3643: 3639: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3592: 3588: 3587:98.118.62.140 3583: 3582: 3581: 3577: 3573: 3569: 3568: 3567: 3566: 3562: 3557: 3556:Malik Shabazz 3553: 3542: 3538: 3534: 3533:Shakehandsman 3530: 3529: 3528: 3524: 3520: 3519:Shakehandsman 3516: 3515: 3514: 3511: 3505: 3495: 3494: 3493: 3492: 3488: 3484: 3483:98.118.62.140 3476: 3472: 3468: 3463: 3462:Malik Shabazz 3459: 3458: 3453: 3452: 3447: 3443: 3442: 3437: 3433: 3431: 3428: 3424: 3423: 3422: 3421: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3404: 3399: 3395: 3393: 3385: 3381: 3377: 3372: 3371:Malik Shabazz 3368: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3360: 3356: 3352: 3348: 3338: 3329: 3324: 3323: 3322: 3318: 3309: 3304: 3303: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3297: 3292: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3282: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3272: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3262: 3257: 3256: 3255: 3253: 3247: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3237: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3226: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3216: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3206: 3201: 3195: 3194: 3192: 3191: 3190: 3187: 3185: 3182: 3174: 3170: 3166: 3160: 3159:Malik Shabazz 3155: 3154: 3153: 3149: 3144: 3143:Malik Shabazz 3140: 3136: 3132: 3131: 3126: 3125: 3120: 3117:Apologies. I 3116: 3115: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3108: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3099: 3094: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3084: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3074: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066:read-through. 3063: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3054: 3049: 3048: 3044: 3036: 3032: 3028: 3024: 3023: 3016: 3015: 3013: 3010: 3003: 3002: 2995: 2991: 2987: 2982: 2981: 2974: 2970: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2957: 2955: 2954: 2949: 2942: 2941: 2934: 2930: 2929: 2927: 2923: 2916: 2915: 2908: 2907: 2905: 2904: 2899: 2892: 2891: 2884: 2883:summary style 2880: 2876: 2871: 2870: 2863: 2859: 2858: 2856: 2852: 2845: 2844: 2837: 2833: 2829: 2824: 2823: 2816: 2812: 2807: 2806: 2799: 2795: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2778: 2777: 2770: 2766: 2765: 2763: 2759: 2758: 2753: 2746: 2745: 2738: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2721:lead sections 2718: 2714: 2709: 2708: 2701: 2700: 2698: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2689: 2686:review – see 2685: 2677: 2675: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2660: 2659: 2655: 2652: 2649: 2645: 2642: 2636: 2634: 2630: 2625: 2624: 2616: 2613: 2611: 2608: 2606: 2603: 2602: 2600: 2599: 2594: 2588: 2585: 2583: 2580: 2578: 2575: 2574: 2572: 2571: 2566: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2547: 2546:Malik Shabazz 2543: 2542:New York Post 2539: 2536:sensitive to 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2527: 2523: 2520: 2516: 2508: 2506: 2505: 2501: 2496: 2495:Malik Shabazz 2492: 2484: 2479: 2476: 2472: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2457: 2453: 2449: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2425: 2421: 2415: 2412: 2399: 2398:New York Post 2395: 2389: 2386: 2373: 2372:Ny Daily News 2369: 2363: 2360: 2347: 2343: 2337: 2334: 2321: 2317: 2311: 2308: 2295: 2291: 2285: 2282: 2278: 2272: 2267: 2263: 2261: 2257: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2249: 2245: 2238: 2234: 2232: 2226: 2218: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2200: 2195: 2194:Malik Shabazz 2190: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2158: 2154: 2146: 2144: 2143: 2137: 2130: 2123: 2119: 2116: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2097: 2095: 2091: 2084: 2080: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2070: 2062: 2056: 2052: 2047: 2041: 2035: 2031: 2027: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2004: 2003: 1999: 1993: 1985: 1981: 1977: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1959: 1955: 1950: 1946: 1941: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1912: 1908: 1904: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1883: 1881: 1876: 1875: 1868: 1863: 1857: 1855: 1854: 1850: 1846: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1835:74.101.61.202 1832: 1829: 1825: 1822: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1802: 1801:Malik Shabazz 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1778: 1776: 1775: 1771: 1766: 1765:Malik Shabazz 1762: 1743: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1705: 1701: 1696: 1695:Malik Shabazz 1692: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1666: 1662: 1657: 1656:Malik Shabazz 1653: 1649: 1645: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1628: 1627:edit conflict 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1589: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1571: 1567: 1562: 1561:Malik Shabazz 1558: 1555: 1551: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1517: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1504: 1503: 1502: 1499: 1495: 1490: 1489:Malik Shabazz 1486: 1483:, especially 1482: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1461: 1454: 1447: 1443: 1439: 1435: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1421: 1413: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1396: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1380: 1373: 1370: 1366: 1362: 1357: 1356:Malik Shabazz 1353: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1330: 1328: 1327: 1323: 1319: 1310: 1307: 1306: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1300: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1275: 1274: 1270: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1252: 1247: 1243: 1235: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1196:Boodlesthecat 1193: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1168: 1164: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1142:Boodlesthecat 1139: 1138: 1137: 1136: 1132: 1128: 1119: 1111: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1080:63.145.26.194 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1061:68.174.27.198 1058: 1057:Robert Abrams 1055: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1045: 1044:63.145.26.194 1040: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1022: 1019: 1015: 1014:Malik Shabazz 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1003: 999: 995: 991: 987: 983: 979: 975: 971: 967: 964:Now, would a 962: 960: 955: 951: 947: 943: 939: 934: 929: 926: 922: 917: 913: 908: 906: 902: 898: 893: 886: 884: 883: 879: 875: 874:209.6.177.176 871: 870: 864: 860: 856: 851: 846: 844: 830: 826: 822: 817: 815: 811: 807: 802: 801: 800: 796: 792: 791:209.6.177.176 788: 787: 782: 781: 776: 773: 769: 768: 767: 766: 763: 760: 756: 752: 751: 750: 749: 746: 741: 739: 734: 732: 731:Brawley case. 727: 723: 722: 718: 716:Another page 714: 712: 707: 703: 701: 697: 693: 691: 683: 675: 671: 667: 662: 661:Linus Pauling 658: 654: 650: 646: 642: 637: 633: 629: 625: 621: 616: 613: 610: 609: 607: 603: 602: 601: 598: 597: 586: 585: 584: 583: 582: 581: 577: 573: 569: 564: 557: 553: 549: 544: 540: 528: 524: 520: 516: 515: 514: 511: 510: 500: 496: 492: 488: 483: 482: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 461: 457: 453: 449: 448: 447: 444: 443: 433: 429: 425: 424: 423: 419: 415: 411: 410: 409: 406: 405: 394: 390: 386: 382: 381: 380: 379: 375: 371: 365: 363: 359: 355: 351: 343: 341: 340: 336: 332: 328: 319: 318: 317: 310: 306: 302: 298: 297: 296: 294: 290: 286: 282: 274: 272: 271: 267: 263: 257: 256: 252: 248: 243: 238: 237: 234: 231: 227: 223: 215: 213: 212: 209: 201: 199: 196: 195: 192: 190: 188: 182: 175: 173: 172: 169: 162: 157: 154: 150: 149: 148: 146: 142: 136: 131: 128: 124: 123: 122: 121: 118: 113: 107: 105: 102: 95: 93: 89: 85: 81: 76: 69: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3549: 3480: 3457:The City Sun 3455: 3449: 3439: 3407: 3402: 3400: 3396: 3391: 3389: 3345:— Preceding 3342: 3319: 3295: 3293: 3283: 3273: 3263: 3248: 3238: 3227: 3217: 3207: 3188: 3183: 3138: 3128: 3122: 3109: 3097: 3095: 3085: 3075: 3064: 3050: 3011: 2951: 2925: 2901: 2877:B. It stays 2862:main aspects 2854: 2761: 2755: 2697:well written 2696: 2690:for criteria 2682: 2681: 2661: 2650: 2640: 2639: 2626: 2615:Instructions 2541: 2512: 2488: 2459: 2448:Getty Images 2441: 2429:December 19, 2427:. Retrieved 2423: 2414: 2404:December 19, 2402:. Retrieved 2397: 2388: 2378:December 19, 2376:. Retrieved 2371: 2362: 2352:December 18, 2350:. Retrieved 2345: 2336: 2326:December 18, 2324:. Retrieved 2319: 2310: 2300:December 18, 2298:. Retrieved 2294:Getty Images 2293: 2284: 2276: 2241: 2235:Addition of 2230: 2150: 2127: 2107: 2098: 2093: 2089: 2087: 2048: 2045: 2005: 2000: 1997: 1957: 1953: 1948: 1944: 1884: 1879: 1873: 1872: 1870: 1865: 1861: 1851: 1847: 1833: 1830: 1826: 1823: 1819: 1782: 1758: 1553: 1458: 1432:— Preceding 1417: 1376: 1352:October 2009 1334: 1316: 1296: 1245: 1241: 1239: 1159: 1123: 1041: 1037: 1020: 998:65.78.13.238 993: 989: 985: 981: 973: 969: 965: 963: 953: 949: 945: 941: 932: 930: 925:introduction 924: 920: 915: 911: 909: 904: 900: 896: 894: 890: 868: 862: 858: 854: 850:Alton Maddox 847: 840: 754: 742: 735: 729: 724: 720: 715: 709: 704: 699: 694: 689: 687: 656: 652: 648: 644: 640: 635: 631: 627: 623: 605: 592: 567: 563:undue weight 560: 542: 505: 491:Shimon Peres 466:usable as a 463: 438: 400: 392: 388: 384: 366: 347: 326: 324: 315: 292: 288: 284: 280: 278: 258: 241: 239: 233:211.10.18.77 219: 205: 197: 186: 180: 179: 164: 160: 138: 134: 109: 96: 91: 87: 77: 73: 70:This Article 60: 43: 37: 3601:Sundayclose 3328:Vanamonde93 3308:Vanamonde93 3090:Rearranging 2963:with their 2644:Vanamonde93 2629:transcluded 2424:History.Com 2242:This week, 1976:HuskyHuskie 1922:74.67.106.1 1903:HuskyHuskie 1888:HuskyHuskie 1786:74.67.106.1 1643:about this. 1529:74.67.106.1 1438:74.67.106.1 1400:74.67.106.1 1279:204.15.6.99 1251:204.15.6.99 992:, is being 907:) correct. 499:Craig Unger 281:always need 202:Name change 36:This is an 3572:Beauxlieux 3438:, such as 3427:--jpgordon 2836:plagiarism 2757:verifiable 2582:Authorship 2568:GA toolbox 2491:T.D. Hoxey 2475:T.D. Hoxey 2456:The source 2277:References 2244:T.D. Hoxey 2008:VennerRoad 1240:The title 982:regardless 728:tells us: 719:tells us: 708:tells us: 698:tells us: 487:User:Jimbo 350:pull quote 262:74.8.8.142 187:geekyßroad 145:cockneyite 3332:Finished. 3302:Reworded 3165:Vanamonde 3114:Reworded 3027:Vanamonde 2788:are from 2678:Checklist 2665:Vanamonde 2641:Reviewer: 2605:Templates 2596:Reviewing 2561:GA Review 2128:Cheers. — 2122:this tool 2115:this tool 2026:FeralOink 1734:ZHurlihee 1596:ZHurlihee 1508:ZHurlihee 1466:ZHurlihee 1218:Parkwells 1178:Parkwells 1163:Parkwells 1127:Parkwells 1102:Parkwells 986:somewhere 923:into the 859:disbarred 711:Sharpton. 632:do not do 595:Shankbone 508:Shankbone 464:should be 441:Shankbone 403:Shankbone 301:October 6 61:Archive 1 3616:OgamD218 3552:WP:RM#CM 3403:anything 3347:unsigned 3288:Reworded 3278:Reworded 3268:Reworded 3258:Reworded 3252:WP:CLAIM 3202:Reworded 3130:City Sun 3119:restored 3104:Reworded 3045:Comments 2990:relevant 2933:edit war 2688:WP:WIAGA 2654:contribs 2610:Criteria 2061:cbignore 1761:WP:BLP/N 1648:WP:BLP1E 1641:WP:BLP/N 1434:unsigned 1414:new name 1379:Uncle Ed 1337:Danchall 1318:DumZiBoT 1277:correct. 1024:contribs 974:withhold 946:removing 568:avoiding 548:Blueboar 452:Wikinews 428:Wikinews 385:anything 208:Jasper23 127:R. fiend 3408:someone 3098:legally 3012:Overall 2903:neutral 2784:B. All 2733:fiction 2522:JamesG5 2138::Online 2090:checked 2055:my edit 2024:dead.-- 1821:true). 1784:by now. 1246:Alleged 994:removed 966:perfect 959:WP:LEAD 954:no role 863:sources 657:another 645:purpose 519:Crossmr 39:archive 3633:Butler 3503:umbolo 3444:, and 3392:before 3321:stuff? 3296:should 3229:hands. 2967:, and 2961:tagged 2953:images 2926:stable 2924:Is it 2900:Is it 2853:Is it 2754:Is it 2735:, and 2725:layout 2695:Is it 2538:WP:BLP 2348:. 2007 2209:Meters 2171:Meters 2153:Meters 2069:nobots 1637:WP:BLP 1633:WP:BLP 1592:WP:BLP 1481:WP:BLP 1420:Tilman 1242:should 950:adding 912:rather 905:can be 772:Tilman 745:Tilman 309:Abrams 307:, the 247:Zyxoas 117:silsor 3561:Stalk 3467:Stalk 3376:Stalk 3222:Fixed 3212:Fixed 3148:Stalk 3070:Fixed 3059:Fixed 2760:with 2631:from 2551:Stalk 2500:Stalk 2227:cosby 2199:Stalk 1806:Stalk 1770:Stalk 1700:Stalk 1661:Stalk 1566:Stalk 1494:Stalk 1361:Stalk 1059:. -- 784:well. 653:isn't 649:isn't 606:think 590:David 503:David 436:David 434:. -- 398:David 230:fraud 226:fraud 101:Jerzy 16:< 3642:talk 3636:Blog 3620:talk 3605:talk 3591:talk 3576:talk 3554:. — 3537:talk 3523:talk 3487:talk 3454:and 3416:talk 3369:. — 3367:this 3355:talk 3197:it). 3169:talk 3135:WLIB 3127:and 3053:here 3031:talk 2834:nor 2669:talk 2648:talk 2526:talk 2431:2017 2406:2017 2380:2017 2354:2017 2328:2017 2302:2017 2271:her. 2213:talk 2175:talk 2157:talk 2094:true 2030:talk 2012:talk 1980:talk 1949:wish 1945:does 1926:talk 1907:talk 1892:talk 1874:soon 1839:talk 1790:talk 1738:talk 1689:See 1654:. — 1600:talk 1554:only 1533:talk 1512:talk 1487:. — 1470:talk 1442:talk 1404:talk 1341:talk 1322:talk 1283:talk 1265:talk 1222:talk 1200:talk 1182:talk 1167:talk 1146:talk 1131:talk 1106:talk 1084:talk 1065:talk 1018:talk 1002:talk 938:here 921:body 901:less 878:talk 867:the 825:talk 810:talk 795:talk 725:CNN 670:talk 636:more 576:talk 552:talk 523:talk 476:talk 418:talk 374:talk 335:talk 305:1988 266:talk 222:hoax 168:Izau 141:NPOV 92:more 88:said 3509:^^^ 2885:): 2489:If 2460:had 2268:to 2258:to 2081:to 1954:not 1880:not 1455:NOI 1388:NY. 1297:In 970:But 942:not 855:but 759:NTK 543:not 430:or 393:not 383:If 299:On 242:why 104:(t) 3644:) 3622:) 3607:) 3593:) 3578:) 3539:) 3525:) 3489:) 3418:) 3357:) 3233:No 3171:) 3033:) 3014:: 2996:: 2975:: 2956:? 2928:? 2906:? 2857:? 2838:: 2817:: 2800:: 2771:: 2764:? 2739:: 2731:, 2727:, 2723:, 2699:? 2684:GA 2671:) 2656:) 2528:) 2422:. 2396:. 2370:. 2344:. 2318:. 2292:. 2250:: 2215:) 2177:) 2159:) 2067:{{ 2063:}} 2059:{{ 2032:) 2014:) 1982:) 1958:is 1928:) 1909:) 1894:) 1841:) 1792:) 1740:) 1602:) 1559:— 1535:) 1514:) 1472:) 1444:) 1406:) 1343:) 1324:) 1285:) 1267:) 1224:) 1202:) 1184:) 1169:) 1148:) 1133:) 1108:) 1086:) 1067:) 1026:) 1004:) 933:is 897:or 880:) 827:) 812:) 797:) 702:. 692:. 672:) 628:do 588:-- 578:) 554:) 525:) 478:) 420:) 376:) 337:) 303:, 293:no 289:no 285:no 268:) 253:) 99:-- 3640:( 3618:( 3603:( 3589:( 3574:( 3558:/ 3535:( 3521:( 3500:w 3485:( 3464:/ 3414:( 3373:/ 3353:( 3330:: 3326:@ 3310:: 3306:@ 3254:. 3167:( 3161:: 3157:@ 3145:/ 3029:( 2667:( 2651:· 2646:( 2548:/ 2524:( 2497:/ 2433:. 2408:. 2382:. 2356:. 2330:. 2304:. 2211:( 2196:/ 2173:( 2155:( 2124:. 2117:. 2105:Y 2028:( 2010:( 1978:( 1924:( 1905:( 1890:( 1837:( 1803:/ 1788:( 1767:/ 1736:( 1697:/ 1658:/ 1629:) 1625:( 1598:( 1563:/ 1531:( 1510:( 1491:/ 1468:( 1440:( 1402:( 1358:/ 1339:( 1320:( 1281:( 1263:( 1220:( 1198:( 1180:( 1165:( 1144:( 1129:( 1104:( 1082:( 1063:( 1021:· 1016:( 1000:( 876:( 823:( 808:( 793:( 668:( 574:( 550:( 521:( 474:( 416:( 372:( 333:( 264:( 249:( 50:.

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

Index