1051:
the title, and also specifically contain all the words of my sentence and specifically states the specifically same connection between the words, despite that it was about an unprovable suggestion - it was a truly otherwordly experience) and the general aggressively negative attitude towards inexperienced editors. Often I hear the justification that "we do not have the time to be polite", "we do not have the time to cooperate", "we do not have the time to explain", of course not by using these words but acting like that. Happens way too often here around, and I am handling just a few OTRS help request of people not understanding what they have done wrong that their sourced and seemingly acceptably written article was deleted. I do a lot of explanations in the background.
510:
489:
929:; I have got various versions about the editor who created it and some non-specific suggestion about "advertisement-likeness" which I was not able to connect to the actual state of the article. My comments about the subject meeting various minimum requirements were ignored. (Deletion guidelines are pretty clear about possible reasons and there is no part which say that articles can be deleted due to created by "bad" editors.)
421:
400:
812:. As far as I am able to judge (which is admittedly not much since I am not really involved in motor sports) this young lady has been winning a lot of races, has been in the first few places of championships since a pretty young age, has been national champion and female champion of various races and seems to have collected numerous accolades throughout. The facts seem to be backed up by almost a hundred
228:
294:
270:
520:
134:
176:
356:
190:
165:
21:
368:
993:
language wikipedias, and so what might be ok on the
Hungarian page may well not be ok here. If editors are coming across here from there, they may need to be careful not just to assume that what is accepted there will be accepted here. My personal opinion is that there would be no reason to significantly expand this article.
304:
972:
As for the state of the article: the
Hungarian version has way more details and I am sure the original editor would wanted to expand it, provided his account was not banned. Possibly other Hungarian editors may come and help to expand it based on the sources in Hungarian. (I can understand why she is
842:
Repeated re-creation of content that's promotional in effect and, clearly, intent. We've got very accustomed to people who do this, on
Knowledge (XXG), because a Knowledge (XXG) article has such an effect on a google search, and that's why we've needed to develop very streamlined and efficient means
1050:
I am unfortunately deeply familiar with the bad mood and strange attitude on enwp, the massive pressure from deletionists, the often unacceptably stated requirements (a while ago I was demanded to provide a source which not only states exactly what was just a minor update, but it does not contain in
936:
I do not subscribe to the "article content is bad since the editor made mistakes" narrative. What you mention (now) as reasons for deletion (like excessive repetitive lists and statistics) are partially responses to the people wanting to delete the article and the editor have visibly tried to comply
867:
Thank you. I will use this "discussion" (including the fact that you have started an AfD instead of discussion) as a great example in the CoC discussion and the general unacceptable behaviours of editors, the lack of cooperation, lack of will of discussion and general lack of civil behaviour. Have a
1169:
What I meant on responding on expansion is that Vivien had more events in the meantime which shall be included (and it is ongoing), and probably some relevant stats (not all, probably!) could be included to show her performance. I meant those, but also meant with help from editors familiar with the
1220:
Thank you for this message. That editor accused me of being "suspicious" and didn't even bother to notify me. He made accusations of sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry against multiple other people who commented on the AfD as well, and he likely dd not notify them either. Anyone who commented on the
883:
I'm not sure if there is a language issue here or just misunderstanding without tone, but it may be that the so-called "rudeness" is seen to go both ways. The initial question I was asked was "where and who were those multiple editors disputing facts" which I attempted to clearly answer. I thought
598:
An old article on this person was deleted for being promotional. This is apparently a newly created version, and yet many of the references are old and out of date, with "access dates" up to seven years old, despite the article being created less than 3 months ago. I have taken out a bunch of dead
1115:. Even the constant comparing of her to people like Senna, Maradona, or Hamilton causes similar responses in me. If one day she reaches the same level of achievement and fame as those people have, obviously the article on her will reflect that, because there will be much more written about her by
1082:
to improve or expand any article. Knowledge (XXG) is not paper and articles can use as much space as justified. If there are things worth telling (and I mean here above threshold of various expected minimum) they should be included, especially for a living and active person who generates new live
1074:
and see what I mean when I say "it is widespread and accepted". This young lady can't show up F1 charts — yet, so the article contains whatever she have achieved until now. When she gets into the mainstream this probably will get filtered down; sports loving editors can probably tell you way more
1170:
topic and who's able to pick which races have no relevance for international public. But I think we have no further disagreement here. Thank you for your responses, it seems to me that the article has been saved (and now I am aware that she exists :-) amazing new things to learn all the time). --
888:
of the article. I have not commented on the AfD as I really have no informed opinion on that, but what is not ok is consistent addition of promotional commentary and excessive repetitive lists and statistics. If the article is kept as seems likely, I would not like to see it back to that kind of
640:
Hello! We got an email in OTRS about this article and I try to help the person seemingly fight with you about the article content. First, I need your help! Could you please tell me where and who were those multiple editors disputing facts, and what those facts were? The email mentioned that the
1144:
This is what I completely agree with! Unnecessary bloat, praise and quotes are really material to be deleted. It often happens due to lack of clear view of the difference between a promotional material and an encyclopedic article, and I am aware that this is a tough distinction for most of the
992:
that has been disputed in the past and I am suggesting should not be added to the article again. It might also be worth noting what seems to be a common issue between editors of different language wikis: the policies, guidelines, and practices for
English wikipedia differ from those for other
960:
It is unacceptable for me, being here around since 2003 and it would be extremely unacceptable if used against a new editor, visibly lacking the knowledge about some basic behavioural expectations but with visibly no bad intents. I could quote a half dozen guidelines from "assume good faith",
801:. (You are probably aware as well that people unfamililar with Knowledge (XXG) often think that repeatedly inserting anything without a discussion is acceptable, and things happen like it did here. I do not have time now to teach them how to edit - I am here to help with the article content.)
1054:
I know the problem with "promotionalism" but we (in that small country) almost never delete an article with a notable subject just because it's not well written, it is preferred to be improved, and only get deleted if nobody was stepped in for a long time. (Incidentally enwp has the
1243:
Apart from saying "yes" repeatedly there's not much I could add, really. Editors with 10+ years of editing and admins are sockpuppets, that's a new level of approach for me even here on enwp. Kind of making me wanting to discuss the whole approach with the wider community. Someday.
1038:
Thank you for the clarification. I have started the whole thread since I was asked for help, and I have examined the article history and the related communication and I have not been able to establish any reason for its deletion based on its content, so I came here and started a
599:
and irrelevant links, but there probably needs more work done on this. Alongside this, some of the claims in the article are unclear. Just for one, the opening paragraph says she has "won three touring car championship titles" - neither of the supporting references seem to
924:
If anyone believes that it is a language barrier on my side then I would expect them to take extreme care to phrase a repply after carefully understanding what I might wanted to tell. Nevertheless, I do not believe anyone actually succeeded to detail me the
1149:
article then it have to be deleted. This is a really bad attitude: articles shall be deleted based on subject and content, not the behaviour of the editor. The editors are not important! I am not important, my work is. If I am an evil serial killer
1221:
AfD may wish to follow that link to see whether or not we count as "good faith editors" according to an admin. Also, isn't it a requirement for him to have posted something either on the article or this talk page about that deletion review?
937:
with "get more justification of
Notability" by including details. Also I observe lot of sports related articles with "excessive amount of statistics", which is not fitting my taste either but by no means justification for deletion.
1075:
details about this. Until then I do not think it would be a kind of problem requiring fighting over or forcibly removed, despite I am sure some people would happily start quoting various guidelines justifying the unjustifiable.
644:
I would like to prevent an unnecessary friction with editors who may not be able to read foreign language (Hungarian) sources, or editors who are not familar with the
Knowledge (XXG) guidelines. Thank you for your help!
1110:
editors have done, trying to "puff it up" with promotional quotes about how amazing the subject and her achievements are. The current page allows the facts to speak for themselves, which is what we are aiming for in
674:
61:
51:
41:
828:
of the article meets the guidelines then I see no reason not to keep it, apart from any possible de-advertisement cleanup (though I have skimmed through and I see no obvious problems in the article). Thank you!
641:
removed information was sourced but there are so many criss-cross changes in the article that I cannot figure out exactly what was disputed by whom and on what basis, and what its original sources may have been.
1296:
1119:. For now, those are unhelpful comparisons, and particularly when coming from so many editors who are connected to her, just get neutral editors like me concerned that wikipedia is being used for purposes
988:
Just to clarify, I have not given "reasons for deletion" as you said, I have made no comment on deletion of the article at all. I am noting the promotionalism and excessive lists as the kind of
1291:
682:
1166:
Advertisement tone text can be removed, rewritten, deletion shall be the last resort. Even people who love the topic can be asked to fix it up for their own pride. Happens all the time.
201:. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
973:
popular: it is fantastic that a female, and at such a young age reach so much success, and
Hungary has no large pool of motorcar racers. ;-) Indeed seems to be a National Pride .) --
843:
of shutting such people down. We won't engage in a detailed conversation about what's wrong and how to fix it because there are hundreds of thousands of these, and we just can't.—
113:
670:
71:
381:
280:
1276:
969:
instead of administrative actions for almost two decades you can take my word with a bit more weight than you seem to do (and indeed that is calling the "seniority" card).
1205:
965:, which is a direct summary of various guidelines) which were not followed and thus the behaviour shall be called "rude". As coming from someone who has been keeping
118:
471:
202:
197:
170:
1301:
1266:
1316:
461:
101:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
576:
322:
93:
1326:
1311:
566:
437:
1306:
1286:
326:
1331:
1321:
884:
explaining that would make obvious the kind of content that has been in dispute here, but if you're looking for a specific example how about
603:(they certainly don't use that wording); the infobox lists one, the results section of the article says nothing of the sort, and her current
542:
321:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge (XXG)'s articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
808:. I am not interested in the behaviour of the editors making any or all of the edits, nor their intents; I specifically asked about the
962:
428:
405:
330:
317:
275:
1281:
1271:
1154:
but my articles are good then they shall be kept; same goes with people who take a good subject but write a not-so-good article.
854:
742:
533:
494:
145:
252:
175:
753:
I do not see this as meting the objections in the last AfD, so it might qualify for speedy as a unimproved re-creation.
27:
1204:
Just informing whoever follow the page that the same editor who started the last deletion started a deletion review
1145:
non-involved people. My ongoing conflict here (in enwp) seems to be that some editors think that if someone write a
961:"practice empathy", "civility" and "no abuse of seniority" (incidentally these were all quotes from the in-progress
102:
151:
133:
666:
541:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
436:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
690:
1226:
850:
738:
698:
694:
669:, who disclosed they were someone from her "team" and written like an advertisement, as recounted at
112:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
20:
246:
116:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see
109:
1128:
998:
894:
722:
616:
309:
1120:
1112:
1107:
686:
662:
1238:
1222:
844:
785:
710:
1116:
1098:, again you seem to be misreading what I have said. I did not say there is no reason to
509:
488:
1248:
1212:
1174:
1087:
1067:
977:
872:
833:
702:
649:
525:
600:
1260:
816:
sources. I am quite puzzled about how this article can't hit either
Notability (like
760:
665:
editing on this article which is available if you look. It was originally created by
373:
242:
1139:
1124:
1071:
1033:
994:
919:
890:
778:
732:
718:
678:
635:
612:
604:
1047:: if a subject meets the guidelines it shall not be deleted but rather improved.
681:
who has since been blocked for sock puppetry for behaviour on this article: see
420:
399:
355:
293:
269:
714:
515:
433:
363:
299:
227:
1245:
1209:
1171:
1095:
1084:
985:
974:
880:
869:
830:
685:. Since those 3 editors of the article were blocked in December 2020, 3 new
658:
646:
30:. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
1251:
1230:
1215:
1177:
1132:
1090:
1002:
980:
898:
875:
858:
836:
764:
746:
726:
673:. It was deleted in February 2020 as both promotional and non-notable: see
652:
620:
792:
755:
706:
675:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Vivien Keszthelyi (3rd nomination)
538:
797:
I am well aware of the editor attitude and please note that this was
889:
version and I personally see no problem with it as it currently is.
804:
My question was - and I think it is a rather important difference -
189:
164:
329:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
127:
108:
from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
85:
15:
822:(deletion was voted by the specific two persons we have here)
683:
Knowledge (XXG):Sockpuppet investigations/HigyFlyer6/Archive
354:
226:
1078:
I am surprised that anyone would say that there would be
1066:
As for the lists: try to remove the statistics from, say
1297:
Unknown-importance biography (sports and games) articles
629:„This content has been disputed here by mutiple editors”
885:
717:
who were involved in the previous deletion discussion.
671:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Vivien Keszthelyi
237:
701:, all making exactly the same kinds of edits. Pinging
1164:
and whether it meets all the requirements to be kept.
1102:
the article, but that I do not think it needs to be
537:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
432:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1292:Start-Class biography (sports and games) articles
820:1, 3 and 5), Verifiability (50+ sources) or else
211:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Articles for creation
1160:without actually taking a moment to think about
1156:Escpecially sad to see that some editors wrote
1106:, which in my opinion is what all the previous
1208:, making statements about the people voted. --
8:
1059:guidelines and policies, it's just not the…
131:
932:While I clearly see the problems with the
483:
394:
264:
214:Template:WikiProject Articles for creation
195:This article was reviewed by member(s) of
159:
1277:AfC submissions by date/02 September 2020
824:, so this is why I ask you here. If the
927:problems with the content of the article
677:. It was then recreated in June 2020 by
485:
396:
266:
161:
594:Outdated references and unclear claims
446:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Motorsport
1043:to clarify, since I am definitely no
806:what was the problem with the content
339:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Biography
7:
1302:Sports and games work group articles
531:This article is within the scope of
426:This article is within the scope of
315:This article is within the scope of
1267:Biography articles of living people
551:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Hungary
150:It is of interest to the following
1317:Low-importance motorsport articles
705:who blocked the previous SPs, and
14:
198:WikiProject Articles for creation
518:
508:
487:
419:
398:
366:
302:
292:
268:
241:on 2 September 2020 by reviewer
188:
174:
163:
132:
91:This article must adhere to the
19:
1327:Low-importance Hungary articles
1312:Start-Class motorsport articles
731:We need AfD, delete, and salt.—
571:This article has been rated as
466:This article has been rated as
449:Template:WikiProject Motorsport
382:the sports and games work group
235:This article was accepted from
26:This article was nominated for
1307:WikiProject Biography articles
1287:Start-Class biography articles
1200:Another "deletion" page opened
1083:events as time goes by! :-) --
342:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
1332:All WikiProject Hungary pages
1178:08:19, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
1133:00:36, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
1091:16:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
1003:11:31, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
981:09:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
899:09:09, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
876:22:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
859:11:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
837:10:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
765:18:46, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
747:18:24, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
727:08:55, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
661:, there is a long history of
653:08:34, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
621:08:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
545:and see a list of open tasks.
440:and see a list of open tasks.
379:This article is supported by
94:biographies of living persons
1322:Start-Class Hungary articles
950:starting a deletion process
810:objections about the content
799:specifically not my question
554:Template:WikiProject Hungary
327:contribute to the discussion
958:discussion is unacceptable.
106:must be removed immediately
1348:
577:project's importance scale
472:project's importance scale
1252:08:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
1231:03:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
1216:18:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
1121:other than what it is for
1063:to follow them this way.)
611:. What is going on here?
570:
503:
465:
414:
362:
287:
234:
183:
158:
38:no consensus (procedural)
1282:Accepted AfC submissions
1272:Start-Class AfC articles
1152:(but don't tell anyone)
689:editors have appeared:
1104:significantly expanded
667:User:Vivien Keszthelyi
429:WikiProject Motorsport
359:
231:
140:This article is rated
1113:wikipedia biographies
358:
318:WikiProject Biography
230:
208:Articles for creation
205:for more information.
171:Articles for creation
144:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1108:conflict of interest
663:conflict of interest
607:says she has had 3
534:WikiProject Hungary
452:motorsport articles
360:
345:biography articles
232:
146:content assessment
70:, 2018-08-22, see
60:, 2018-12-20, see
50:, 2020-02-17, see
40:, 2021-03-06, see
1153:
857:
823:
745:
591:
590:
587:
586:
583:
582:
482:
481:
478:
477:
393:
392:
389:
388:
263:
262:
259:
258:
126:
125:
84:
83:
80:
79:
1339:
1242:
1151:
1143:
1117:reliable sources
1037:
934:editor behaviour
923:
849:
821:
796:
789:
782:
737:
691:User:Justive4535
639:
605:W Series profile
559:
558:
557:Hungary articles
555:
552:
549:
528:
523:
522:
521:
512:
505:
504:
499:
491:
484:
454:
453:
450:
447:
444:
423:
416:
415:
410:
402:
395:
376:
371:
370:
369:
347:
346:
343:
340:
337:
323:join the project
312:
310:Biography portal
307:
306:
305:
296:
289:
288:
283:
281:Sports and Games
272:
265:
240:
219:
218:
215:
212:
209:
192:
185:
184:
179:
178:
177:
167:
160:
143:
137:
136:
128:
114:this noticeboard
86:
32:
31:
23:
16:
1347:
1346:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1257:
1256:
1236:
1202:
1137:
1031:
940:But as for the
917:
790:
783:
776:
699:User:Cruffsneck
695:User:Kcmejcena2
633:
631:
609:podium finishes
596:
556:
553:
550:
547:
546:
524:
519:
517:
497:
451:
448:
445:
442:
441:
408:
372:
367:
365:
344:
341:
338:
335:
334:
308:
303:
301:
278:
236:
216:
213:
210:
207:
206:
173:
141:
12:
11:
5:
1345:
1343:
1335:
1334:
1329:
1324:
1319:
1314:
1309:
1304:
1299:
1294:
1289:
1284:
1279:
1274:
1269:
1259:
1258:
1255:
1254:
1201:
1198:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1167:
1076:
1068:Diego Maradona
1064:
1061:popular custom
1052:
1048:
1016:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1005:
970:
938:
930:
906:
905:
904:
903:
902:
901:
862:
861:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
630:
627:
625:
595:
592:
589:
588:
585:
584:
581:
580:
573:Low-importance
569:
563:
562:
560:
543:the discussion
530:
529:
526:Hungary portal
513:
501:
500:
498:Low‑importance
492:
480:
479:
476:
475:
468:Low-importance
464:
458:
457:
455:
438:the discussion
424:
412:
411:
409:Low‑importance
403:
391:
390:
387:
386:
378:
377:
361:
351:
350:
348:
314:
313:
297:
285:
284:
273:
261:
260:
257:
256:
233:
223:
222:
220:
193:
181:
180:
168:
156:
155:
149:
138:
124:
123:
119:this help page
103:poorly sourced
89:
82:
81:
78:
77:
76:
75:
65:
55:
45:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1344:
1333:
1330:
1328:
1325:
1323:
1320:
1318:
1315:
1313:
1310:
1308:
1305:
1303:
1300:
1298:
1295:
1293:
1290:
1288:
1285:
1283:
1280:
1278:
1275:
1273:
1270:
1268:
1265:
1264:
1262:
1253:
1250:
1247:
1240:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1228:
1224:
1218:
1217:
1214:
1211:
1207:
1199:
1179:
1176:
1173:
1168:
1165:
1163:
1159:
1148:
1141:
1136:
1135:
1134:
1130:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1089:
1086:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1062:
1058:
1053:
1049:
1046:
1042:
1035:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1004:
1000:
996:
991:
987:
984:
983:
982:
979:
976:
971:
968:
964:
959:
957:
953:
947:
943:
939:
935:
931:
928:
921:
916:
915:
914:
913:
912:
911:
910:
909:
908:
907:
900:
896:
892:
887:
882:
879:
878:
877:
874:
871:
866:
865:
864:
863:
860:
856:
852:
848:
847:
841:
840:
839:
838:
835:
832:
827:
819:
815:
811:
807:
802:
800:
794:
787:
780:
766:
762:
758:
757:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
744:
740:
736:
735:
730:
729:
728:
724:
720:
716:
712:
708:
704:
700:
696:
692:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
668:
664:
660:
657:
656:
655:
654:
651:
648:
642:
637:
628:
626:
623:
622:
618:
614:
610:
606:
602:
593:
578:
574:
568:
565:
564:
561:
544:
540:
536:
535:
527:
516:
514:
511:
507:
506:
502:
496:
493:
490:
486:
473:
469:
463:
460:
459:
456:
439:
435:
431:
430:
425:
422:
418:
417:
413:
407:
404:
401:
397:
384:
383:
375:
374:Sports portal
364:
357:
353:
352:
349:
332:
331:documentation
328:
324:
320:
319:
311:
300:
298:
295:
291:
290:
286:
282:
277:
274:
271:
267:
254:
251:
248:
244:
239:
229:
225:
224:
221:
204:
200:
199:
194:
191:
187:
186:
182:
172:
169:
166:
162:
157:
153:
147:
139:
135:
130:
129:
121:
120:
115:
111:
107:
104:
100:
96:
95:
90:
88:
87:
73:
69:
66:
63:
59:
56:
53:
49:
46:
43:
39:
36:
35:
34:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
1219:
1203:
1161:
1157:
1155:
1146:
1103:
1099:
1079:
1072:Ayrton Senna
1060:
1056:
1044:
1040:
989:
966:
955:
951:
949:
945:
941:
933:
926:
886:this version
868:nice day! --
845:
825:
817:
813:
809:
805:
803:
798:
775:
754:
733:
679:User:Monapop
643:
632:
624:
608:
597:
572:
532:
467:
427:
380:
316:
249:
217:AfC articles
203:project page
196:
152:WikiProjects
117:
105:
98:
92:
67:
57:
47:
37:
1162:the subject
1045:deletionist
967:discussions
818:motorsports
814:independent
601:verify that
142:Start-class
1261:Categories
1239:Hyperion35
1223:Hyperion35
1158:"and salt"
1147:marketingy
1041:discussion
954:having an
846:SÂ Marshall
786:S Marshall
734:SÂ Marshall
711:S Marshall
443:Motorsport
434:Motorsport
406:Motorsport
238:this draft
72:discussion
62:discussion
52:discussion
42:discussion
1080:no reason
963:UCoC text
942:specifics
703:Callanecc
336:Biography
276:Biography
110:libellous
946:rudeness
253:contribs
243:Primefac
28:deletion
1140:Melcous
1125:Melcous
1100:improve
1034:Melcous
995:Melcous
990:content
956:ongoing
920:Melcous
891:Melcous
826:content
779:Melcous
719:Melcous
636:Melcous
613:Melcous
575:on the
548:Hungary
539:Hungary
495:Hungary
470:on the
697:, and
687:WP:SPA
148:scale.
48:delete
952:while
761:talk
715:78.26
1246:grin
1227:talk
1210:grin
1206:here
1172:grin
1129:talk
1096:grin
1085:grin
1057:same
999:talk
986:grin
975:grin
944:of "
895:talk
881:grin
870:grin
831:grin
723:talk
713:and
659:grin
647:grin
617:talk
325:and
247:talk
68:keep
58:keep
1070:or
948:":
793:DGG
756:DGG
707:DGG
567:Low
462:Low
99:BLP
1263::
1244:--
1229:)
1131:)
1123:.
1001:)
897:)
829:--
763:)
725:)
709:,
693:,
645:--
619:)
279::
255:).
1249:✎
1241::
1237:@
1225:(
1213:✎
1175:✎
1142::
1138:@
1127:(
1088:✎
1036::
1032:@
997:(
978:✎
922::
918:@
893:(
873:✎
855:C
853:/
851:T
834:✎
795::
791:@
788::
784:@
781::
777:@
759:(
743:C
741:/
739:T
721:(
650:✎
638::
634:@
615:(
579:.
474:.
385:.
333:.
250:·
245:(
154::
122:.
97:(
74:.
64:.
54:.
44:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
