576:, which itself gives little or no guidance about "tone". There's a case for listing articles for cleanup to draw in help, and this can usefully be done with tags on the talk pages of articles, but this tag on the article itself is at best an irritation and insult to editors who have put considerable effort into improving the article. If you see faults in the article, the best things to do are to edit it, or draw attention on the talk page to exactly what problem you find. Knowledge (XXG) can have a problem with knowledgeable or expert editors being driven away by the stress and tediousness of dealing with vandalism and pov pushing. Use of this tag, while no doubt well intentioned, has the same effect and can be more damage than help. I'll try to think of ways of rewording this tag, possibly along the more neutral lines of cleanup with an indication that it should go on the talk page. It should perhaps be added that this came up in the context of it being added to articles which arguably are lively and interesting, but which had been admired as an improvement or asset by very experienced editors. ...
614:
succinctly winning an argument with someone who is comparatively (or supposedly) ignorant deserves to be considered an "expert" - I find the suggestion that expert users are being forced out of wikipedia by pov pushing ludicrous for this very reason. With regard to how this issue became an issue i agree wholeheartedly with JW1805 that the vast majority of wikipedians would not take this tag as a personal insult - and that there are those who do/would is a condemnation of their character rather than of the tag itself. As for improving the tag i certainly think this is possible. It should probably be expected that anytime the tag is placed it is accompanied by a detailed explanation of exactly
99:
1763:
matters. At the very least the tagger should give guidance about what he finds problematic. I often come across this tag and can only see that the article is somewhat conversational yet may be entirely satisfactory in conveying information. So yes, more detail should always be associated with this tag. Sorry about all that! An article I had a bit to do with was tagged and I wish the tagger had put in the effort to do something about it.
3033:
1734:
may not seem at all obvious to another (especially, as often seems to be the case with these templates, if there is some POV conflict). Clarifying the language as Ben advocates here is a start, but we should also attach a parameter to all of these maintenance templates in order to link directly to a talk page section. I would even go so far as to create a warning message if the parameter is not used, but that's likely a minority idea.
3026:
3012:
3002:
3019:
2840:
2594:
2490:
2319:
591:
an older public-domain source (like the 1911 encyclopedia) that used more florid language than is customary for today's encyclopedias. It doesn't mean the content is bad, just that the language or writing style should be worked on. The vast majority of
Knowledge (XXG) editors are not going to take this template as a personal insult and be driven from the project. I agree, the
148:
130:
698:
the other agreed that "the
Knowledge (XXG):Guide to writing better articles page can be expanded to provide more details and help about this". So far such expansion has not been made or even discussed. Your objection is noted, and in the interim I've adjusted the tag to make the guidance situation clear. My proposed tag is shown below for discussion. ...
1907:
1592:
2905:
2701:
1655:
1540:
1459:
2564:
1334:
1270:
513:
Non-editors should not have to scroll past one or more ugly tags before they get to the actual article. As I see it this kind of tag often makes more damage than the "problem" the tag is pointing out. The tag is confusing and scary for non-editors and as such very detrimental. The only "benefit" this
1762:
Well, the minority is at least two! I find this template far more problematic for the encyclopedia than any improvements it seems to engender. It is useless remarking about "tone" unless someone is going to do something about it. In my view the tagger is just as well placed as anyone else to improve
1733:
I've been noticing more and more that maintenance tags are being used without explaination, and occasionally as a form of "scarlet letter" against articles\other editors whith whom the attaching editor has some sort of grievance against. Regardless of that though, what may seem obvious to one person
772:
Oppose – this does not mention the main problem this template is all about – not the “quality” of the article in general, but specifically its style itself. A humoristic science fiction novel might have its style perfected, nevertheless, it does not fit into an encyclopedia. This template should say
1704:
This statement ought to serve two purposes - advice to the reader, but also advice to the person who places the template. As such, might it be better to say "should be listed" instead of "may be found". Because often, templates like this get placed without a list of concerns being put on the talk
590:
I disagree. There are many templates like this that are placed in articles to call attention to specific things that need to be addressed. It is quite useful, especially for an encyclopedia that everyone is allowed to edit. I have used it before on articles with content that has been pasted from
3042:
My favorite is probably a tie of #1 and #3. All but 1 are perhaps too literally musical and maybe the .svg broom could be added to the corner like in first proposal, but idk. The last depicts more of a "falling tone" too suggesting a poorer article, but also looks harsher. I just believe this, and
1096:
issues. In those that do have problems with tone, often the issue has nothing at all to do with formality. The tone may be essay-like, yet perfectly formal. Often the template is used to mark the kind of style that you get in older scholarship or reference works like the 1911 Britannica; above,
757:
In my opinion this proposed tag alerts editors to the opinion that improvement is needed in a positive way, and as discussed above editors who have a particular issue with "tone" can add a comment to the talk page clarifying their concern rather than leaving authors to hunt in vain for guidance or
697:
section two editors disagreed with my description of the problem, hardly surprising as they had added the tags in the incident which drew this to my attention. Of them, one agreed that "As for improving the tag i certainly think this is possible" without commenting either way on my proposal, while
651:
As various editors have pointed out, there is no guidance as to the mysterious "tone" or official requirement for this "tone" to meet some editor's tastes. This is something that can be discussed on the talk page of the guide to writing better articles, not a vague label to stick on articles where
613:
I also disagree. Any problem with the 'Tone' tag has, in my admittedly limited (1 example) experience, been based more with the character of an editor in an unreasonable reaction to the placing of the tag than in any flaw based within the tag itself. Frankly, no editor who is incapable of quite
688:
can't see what the problem is by reading the article, they're hardly likely to share that taste and they're not going to be in a position to mind read the editor who added the tag: As siarach says, "It should probably be expected that anytime the tag is placed it is accompanied by a detailed
2421:
I don't have a proposal yet, so I wonder what to do with this template. The essay that was linked within this template is neither a policy nor guideline nor considered to be recommended. Are there any policy, how-tos, guideline, or any other consensus-accepted ones related to this template?
1104:
In some cases -- about a third of those I looked at -- I was unable to figure out why the tag had been placed at all, even after digging around in history to find out what the article looked like when it was placed. The editors who tagged these articles presumably thought
1116:
I suggest changing the text of this tag to better reflect actual usage, to encourage explaining the issues in talk, and to avoid the impression that it represents a judgment from some impartial authority (rather than one editor's possibly idiosyncratic view). How about:
1715:
IMO that's because frequently there's no need to elaborate; the issue is evident from a cursory look at the article. If the problem is more subtle, for instance the occasional but still fairly heavy use of sympathetic phrasing, it can be discussed on talk. Thoughts?
666:
I think it is rather clear; it is certainly much clearer than "improvement in writing style", which could mean just about anything. Encyclopedic tone does not mean simply "well-written". Don't revert to implement a change that everyone but you has disagreed with.
278:
Where? In the style guide lines, I couldn't find anything on the inappropriateness of using formal tone! Please, be more specific when you refer to guide lines. Don't refer to just a general category of many, many style guide pages. I almost feel like tagging
2044:
What is the correct flag when an article says "recently" about something that is now months or years old? How about when a paragraph begins with "later" (or "earlier") and there is no clear time period for this to refer to? The best tag I have found is
632:
will be welcome, though such a change should of course be carefully discussed to reach consensus. The problem of getting editors placing the tag to clarify their concerns on the talk page has not been addressed: suggestions for this would be welcome.
1844:
I think that the only thing missing was a pipe character in the #if statement. I'm certainly no expert on template syntax, but I have at least read through (most of) the template and parser functions documentation, and I think that what is
517:
My experience is that people who slab this kind of tag on an article often do not write an explanation on the talk page what they find is the problem and don't ever bother to fix the problem. I find that lazy, to complain but not
311:
badly written". And, in effect, the template could have been understood in the exact opposite sense. I tried to reformulate it (although I think the best idea would be to drop the excessive politeness), take a look at it, please.
788:
This article, like so many editors of
Knowledge (XXG), is a sore need of a sense of humor. Please add wry comments, witty asides, knock-knock jokes and hilarious anecdotes from your misspent youth. Thank you and have a nice day.
797:
I would like to request that the "article or section" language be updated with optional data field parameter. Most cleanup templates provide this option. Specifically, should be "{{{1|article or section}}}". Thank you,
1092:, and it seems that only a minority of them are actually written in an excessively informal tone. Some have problems that aren't really about tone as such -- they're written like instruction manuals, or have some
325:
Ha, funny, a case of incorrect grammar changing the meaning. User:ActiveSelective interpreted "may not be" in the sense of permission as in "you may do this". What the sentence meant to say was that the article
1211:
I just copy-edited the template to remove the fluff. The word "may" is sufficient, not to mention the obvious fact that an editor would have had to express concern to place the tag in the first place. —
850:
Articles and other encyclopedic content should be written in a formal tone. The standards for formal tone will vary depending on the subject matter, but should follow the style typically used by
2346:
This template contains a link to an essay which may not be mandatory nor be reliable to be obeyed. It is neither a guideline nor policy. I wonder if there are other alternatives to an essay. --
433:
It still seems to convey the message "what you've written is rubbish, but I can't be bothered even discussing how to improve it". Here's my suggestion for a tag to be added to the talk page:
2546:
Haven't even noticed that word was linked; it could even be unlinked if necessary. From a user experience point of view, we should improve the one link that users are being told to follow.
447:
My particular concerns are indicated below, please add your own comments to discuss proposed changes or try editing to improve the article. This tag automatically adds the article to
1952:
It's to do with the way that Wiki sytax uses the # for numbered lists. I'm sure there is a way to fix this; perhaps by using the ASCII code for # instead, whatever that is. — Martin
3039:
Yes, it's kind of a visual pun, but also more elegant and eye-catching for users to perhaps notice slightly more and thus help the "tone" of the article. Plus, beauty matters.
2783:
example results from an editing error, I'm deleting the latter. But since I don't know what, if anything, is supposed to be in its place, I'm bringing the question here. Please
448:
290:
Also, no further reason whatsoever is given why specifically 'this article' is not allowed to be formal of tone, and why you make exceptions to your rule for other articles.
1109:
was wrong with them, but we may never know what that was. The tag will sit there until someone gets around to removing it, annoying the editors who wrote the article (as
2463:
I don't really mind so much. The wording of the template "see...for suggestions" doesn't imply that that the page has any weight so I'm happy to just leave it as it is.
2365:
and since then, people have mentioned updating the essay in response to concerns raised on this talk page in the past. Many people seem to have been involved in editing
1101:
gave this as an example of what the tag ought to be used for. Yet this kind of writing is actually very formal and scholarly -- it's just dated in most people's view.
628:
Glad to see general agreement that the tag had problems: I've made a minimal modification to make it match the guidance it links to: improved guidance on "tone" in the
2629:, the template appears in an abbreviated form and does not include any links to relevant policies or guidelines. This suggested link has already been included in
2437:
Seems no-one has commented so... what's your preference? Do you want to keep it how it is, have the link taken out, or did you find anything else to replace it?
2153:
Thus rather than using the generic I-don't-like-it term of "not appropriate", we're saying why it doesn't work as it stands, and saying what the proper use is.
1432:
This will add a space after the period and before the date, and it will show the date italicized rather than bold, to conform with the other cleanup templates.
684:
Unfortunately your thought that is is rather clear is not matched by any guidance as to what is meant, and in practice this is a matter of individual taste. If
1130:
1061:
1040:
887:
828:
750:
712:
If the editor cleaning up thinks it is in an encyclopedic tone, they can just remove the tag. A whole policy page is not needed for every little quality tag. —
629:
592:
565:
454:
407:
74:
835:
section. This should help address the fact that this template sent people on a wild goose chase looking for guidance. It basically just says to follow
2369:
as well. So I think that to remove the link could be controversial and it would need more of a consensus. Hence, I'll deactivate the request for now.
2396:
303:
Well, (IIANM) the template tries to say that the article is not written in a formal tone, and how is that a problem, not that the problem is that it
1291:
This template should have a mandatory talk page section parameter. Otherwise it's just another pastel box that doesn't help anyone fix the problem.
402:
Knowledge (XXG) articles should use a clear, informative, and unbiased writing style. Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the
2293:
for having the grace and intelligence of humanity to record the original traditional dalang (tongue) of the elder people of Sydney
Darugule-wayaun.
80:
483:
I think, as an comment to editors of a page and not to the readers, this template ought to go at the top of the talk page not the article page. --
395:
155:
135:
514:
kind of tag has is that it puts the article in a clean-up category, but for that purpose it works just as well to put a tag on the talk page.
39:
1794:
Please add a "section" parameter to the talk page portion of the message, in order to link directly to a talk page section (ie.: ]). Thanks.
2969:
This is normal; to avoid overloading the top of the article, many of the warning templates display in an abbreviated form when used inside
2366:
1925:
1917:
689:
explanation of exactly why it has been placed upon the talk page of an article for starters." The change was proposed in principle in the
368:
I've removed the cleanup template to avoid potential ambiguity: if this template is transcluded to an article, it won't be clear that the
330:
not be such-and-such, meaning that "it seems to be" so-and-so. Fortunately, as of now the sentence has been revised to avoid this goof.
1824:
1615:
1573:
3074:
2816:
This is a courtesy to other editors to ease annoyance of navigation. I would already have added it myself but the template is locked.
2002:
1509:
Specific concerns may be found on the ]. See
Knowledge (XXG)'s ] for suggestions. {{#if:{{{date|}}}|''({{{date}}})''}}</small: -->
1934:
1370:
Since that's already a redirect, I think it's okay to leave it as it is. In fact, this template has nine different redirects to it
242:
20:
510:
Yes, this kind of tag do not belong in the articles. Articles should be discussed on the talk page, not in the articles them self.
1319:
2655:
I think this would read better with the wikilink in the middle of the bolded text, rather than at the beginning: This article's
739:
458:
441:
415:
411:
69:
1121:
An editor has expressed a concern that the tone or style of this article or section may not be appropriate for an encyclopedia.
110:
564:
This tag advertises at the head of the article the editor's vague personal opinion that the style isn't right, and links to
60:
2146:
2125:
920:
164:
2140:
2119:
2049:
307:
formal. But it also tries to be very polite, so it does not say "the article is badly written", it says "the article is
2517:
where it is: Knowledge (XXG):Writing better articles please replace with: Knowledge (XXG):Writing better articles#Tone
2171:
1086:
382:
2747:
has the following sequence at and just after the end of the top section (with the TOC between them in reading view):
867:
1498:
Specific concerns may be found on the ]. See
Knowledge (XXG)'s ] for suggestions. {{#if:{{{date|}}}|<small: -->
1387:
2846:
2737:
2600:
2496:
2325:
160:
2984:
2868:
2821:
2810:
2713:
2668:
484:
1248:
263:
What's the point of adding the cleanup part? It just nullifies the use since we could just use regular cleanup.
2973:
2940:
1163:. This has a problematic tone, yes, but the problem is not really one of formality; it's more a matter of non-
982:
116:
2943:. Should that be added to the template's documentation? (Or maybe I was just doing something incorrectly...)
1386:
I know it has a redirect. That's no reason not to rename something. The main issue is which name shows up in
2879:
1608:
342:
Not a single word in the style guides does mention any "formal tone". The single instance of "tone" is in "
1789:
1673:
1565:
1485:
1410:
1311:
972:
546:
543:
This article or section does not seem to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry.
50:
2875:
2630:
2551:
2522:
2300:
2205:
1721:
1636:
1581:
1240:
997:
538:"This article or section seems not to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry."
372:
331:
284:
246:
2395:
Yeah, either of those would probably get some more participation. It's also worth raising the issue on
65:
3052:
2980:
2817:
2709:
2679:
2664:
2574:
2537:
2271:
2245:
2215:
2189:
2179:
2158:
2062:
1706:
1375:
1234:
1199:
1181:
1145:
953:
899:
800:
773:
the style of this article is… well… different from that you are used to in a serious encyclopedia. --
763:
703:
657:
638:
581:
498:
470:
294:
854:
in the subject area. Formal tone does not mean that the article should be written in unintelligible
233:
2916:
2467:
2454:
2441:
2427:
2403:
2386:
2373:
2351:
1524:
1443:
1217:
2949:
2023:
1988:
1868:
1813:
1753:
1601:
1296:
1244:
1172:
Unless there are any objections to the above language, I'll place an editprotected request soon.
1011:
693:
section above to meet concerns expressed by other editors, and no objections were raised. In the
522:
1167:
tone. The template, as it stands, would probably just confuse the person who wrote the article.
1247:
from the see also section as they redirect to other listed templates. additionally please use
2779:
Those can't both be right. On the assumption that the explicit instruction is correct and the
2744:
1768:
1664:
1391:
1361:
1257:
358:
bind itself to pseudo-informed formalism. So this template as a whole is complete nonsense. --
46:
2658:
2622:
1164:
1093:
1051:
This article or section is not written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article
937:
913:
891:
2792:
2689:
2638:
2547:
2518:
2296:
2111:
Seems we need to clarify the wording on this template. The first sentence currently reads:
2096:
1717:
1632:
1577:
993:
813:
717:
672:
602:
3046:
2570:
2533:
2267:
2241:
2211:
2185:
2154:
2076:
2057:
1195:
1176:
1140:
1110:
949:
895:
871:
759:
699:
653:
634:
619:
577:
494:
466:
851:
836:
3032:
2287:
I changed "formal" to "encyclopedic". I just tagged an article for being overly formal:
1827:
but it's not working yet. Perhaps you can fix it and then replace the request? — Martin
1194:
Looks good to me, and given the lack of objections so far will implement the change. ..
3025:
2912:
2892:
2450:
2423:
2382:
2347:
2085:
1959:
1877:
Yes, the pipe is certainly needed, but unfortunately it still doesn't work. For example
1834:
1515:
1434:
1344:
1277:
1214:
359:
213:
2144:
This article's tone or style may not reflect the formal tone used on
Knowledge (XXG).
3068:
3043:
similar cleanup templates that share the generic broom, need to change. Yea or Nay?--
2964:
2944:
2784:
2532:
The word "tone" already links to there. Do we really need both links to point there?
2449:
I don't know. I have lost interest, and essays may be good advices. What is yours? --
2235:
2007:
1972:
1852:
1797:
1737:
1547:
1466:
1292:
1069:
1008:
774:
758:
possibly giving the impression that a critic is attacking their writing abilities. ..
424:
313:
273:
This article may not be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry.
226:
206:
24:
3011:
3001:
2935:
field of this template is only displayed properly in the banner if this template is
2806:{{Redirect|Template:Magazine|the template for magazines|Template:Infobox magazine}}
2626:
1764:
1252:
940:
927:
875:
3018:
1371:
863:
388:
tag and not the article. I propose the following rewrite to address your concern:
2788:
2685:
2650:
2634:
2092:
1160:
1098:
859:
713:
668:
597:
2733:
1323:
573:
551:
440:
to fully achieve the clear, informative, and unbiased approach set out in the
2289:
Darug people recognise Sir
William Dawes of the first fleet and flagship the
2884:
1955:
1830:
1416:
Format the date just like the other cleanup templates. To do this, replace:
855:
888:
Knowledge (XXG):Guide to writing better articles#Information style and tone
2464:
2438:
2400:
2370:
2123:
This article's tone or style may not be appropriate for
Knowledge (XXG).
394:
does not seem to be written in the tone recommended by
Knowledge (XXG)'s
2809:"Template:Magazine" redirects here. For the template for magazines, see
3060:
2988:
2956:
2920:
2897:
2825:
2796:
2717:
2693:
2672:
2642:
2578:
2555:
2541:
2526:
2470:
2458:
2444:
2431:
2406:
2390:
2376:
2355:
2304:
2275:
2249:
2219:
2193:
2162:
2100:
2068:
2027:
1992:
1964:
1872:
1839:
1817:
1772:
1757:
1724:
1709:
1680:
1639:
1622:
1584:
1552:
1531:
1471:
1450:
1394:
1381:
1364:
1349:
1333:
1326:
1300:
1280:
1269:
1262:
1221:
1202:
1189:
1153:
1072:
1014:
1001:
956:
943:
930:
902:
878:
816:
806:
777:
766:
723:
706:
678:
660:
641:
622:
606:
584:
554:
545:
or something less awkward? The current wording really makes me mad. --
525:
501:
487:
473:
453:
Further suggestions for improvement can be found at Knowledge (XXG)'s
427:
362:
334:
316:
297:
250:
236:
216:
2055:, but I would rather something that clearly said it's a time issue.
1030:
is not written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article
595:
page can be expanded to provide more details and help about this. --
2381:
In other words, either RFC or "Village pump (proposal)", correct? --
147:
129:
618:
it has been placed upon the talk page of an article for starters.
2802:
Someone with admin permission, please add this navigation hatnote
870:; it simply means that the English language should be used in a
2867:
This seems like a template that should really need one. It has
912:
Would an admin please edit this protected template to wikilink
2834:
2588:
2484:
2313:
2137:
2116:
1900:
745:
Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the
694:
92:
15:
2295:
Way too formal for an encyclopedia: it read like a treaty. —
1113:
pointed out above) while accomplishing nothing constructive.
1047:
The lack of boldness is off-putting. It should probably be:
568:
which only mentions tone once, in the context of the option
1969:
Works now. I\We just left an axtra pipe character in there.
2738:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Teahouse # To subst or not to subst
1082:
I've been looking through some of the pages tagged with
2362:
1846:
1572:
I've made some tweaks to the template style in the new
449:
Category:Knowledge (XXG) articles needing style editing
163:
process and reduce the number of edit requests in the
159:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s
827:
I added a generic description of formal tone to the
2399:to get input from people involved with that page.
890:now gives the needed guidance, with the shortcut
2361:I just had a quick look - the link was added in
2003:User:Ohms law/Sandbox/Template talk section link
630:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to writing better articles
593:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to writing better articles
566:Knowledge (XXG):Guide to writing better articles
3006:(asterisk denoting a pause in musical notation)
2633:, so it should added in this template as well.
2481:Template-protected edit request on 14 July 2014
1576:to match similar templates. Just needs synced.
1251:for the non-template content of this template.
109:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
2585:Template-protected edit request on 7 July 2015
1513:To get the same font size as other templates.
793:Requested edit: "article or section" parameter
436:In my opinion this article could benefit from
2751:Note: This template is a self-reference, and
1427:suggestions. {{#if:{{{date|}}}|<small: -->
8:
2397:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Writing better articles
1419:suggestions.{{#if:{{{date|}}}|<small: -->
1056:Please improve it or discuss changes on the
1035:Please improve it or discuss changes on the
948:Good thinking, have done the latter. ......
1320:Category:All articles needing style editing
2931:Through experimentation, I found that the
2736:'s suggestion, I'm copying this here from
2202:Actually, no - let's make the move target
2001:works. I created a test implementation at
1885:{{Inappropriate tone/sandbox|section=foo}}
1159:I ran into another one of these recently:
695:#Unwelcome annoyance without useful advice
354:news style". Indeed: Knowledge (XXG) does
124:
2684:Yes, this would be easier to understand.
1935:Learn how and when to remove this message
560:Unwelcome annoyance without useful advice
173:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Edit requests
2874:I've made the associated changes in the
2621:It is necessary to add another link to
2367:Knowledge (XXG):Writing better articles
652:you personally don't like the style. ..
126:
2168:And done. Now suggesting a move from
1322:between the includeonly tags. Thanks.
1125:Specific concerns may be found on the
1078:Changing the template to reflect usage
738:to reach the quality described in the
2927:When used in Template:Multiple issues
1360:to {{cleanup-tone}} for consistency?
690:
153:This page is the within the scope of
98:
96:
7:
1373:that should cover all the bases. —
894:linking to the tone subsection. ...
740:guide to writing the perfect article
442:guide to writing the perfect article
416:guide to writing the perfect article
1631:Re-enabling for a few more tweaks.
866:, or that it should be filled with
541:Can we change it to something like
115:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
2882:pages. Requesting copy and paste.
2657:tone or style may not reflect the
1916:tone or style may not reflect the
176:Template:WikiProject Edit requests
14:
1420:'''({{{date}}})'''</small: -->
1318:Please add the tracking category
936:Please wikilink "formal tone" to
45:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
3031:
3024:
3017:
3010:
3000:
2903:
2838:
2699:
2592:
2562:
2488:
2317:
1926:guide to writing better articles
1905:
1653:
1590:
1538:
1457:
1332:
1268:
1131:guide to writing better articles
1062:guide to writing better articles
1041:guide to writing better articles
829:Guide to writing better articles
751:guide to writing better articles
734:This article could benefit from
455:guide to writing better articles
408:guide to writing better articles
146:
128:
97:
40:Click here to start a new topic.
2995:New icon for template proposals
1783:Parameter for talk page section
1499:''({{{date}}})''</small: -->
1428:''({{{date}}})''</small: -->
2028:19:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
1993:18:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
1965:15:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
1873:00:16, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
1840:10:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
1818:06:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
1758:06:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
1718:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
1633:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
1578:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
1281:16:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
1263:14:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
886:Thanks. Just for information,
778:16:46, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
767:10:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
724:17:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
707:10:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
679:21:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
661:19:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
642:17:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
1:
2432:00:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
2407:14:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
2391:10:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
2377:09:06, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
2356:02:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
2069:20:20, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
1773:21:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
1725:10:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
1681:22:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
1640:18:09, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
931:02:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
251:01:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
217:06:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
37:Put new text under old text.
1823:I've added some code to the
1710:05:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
1623:21:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
1585:15:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
1301:21:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
1249:Knowledge (XXG):Transclusion
879:11:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
817:00:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
807:17:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
736:improvement in writing style
526:05:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
438:improvement in writing style
237:00:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
2861:to reactivate your request.
2849:has been answered. Set the
2615:to reactivate your request.
2603:has been answered. Set the
2511:to reactivate your request.
2499:has been answered. Set the
2340:to reactivate your request.
2328:has been answered. Set the
1068:Could an admin fix this? --
647:What is inappropriate tone?
623:21:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
607:19:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
585:12:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
502:12:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
474:13:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
451:to request additional help.
428:10:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
363:09:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
3091:
3061:17:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
2921:17:16, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
2898:04:38, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
2826:14:03, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
2808:
2471:21:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
2459:21:43, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
2445:20:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
2250:19:16, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
2220:19:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
2194:12:57, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
2163:08:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
1388:Category:Cleanup templates
1350:12:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
1327:08:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
1025:The text presently reads:
753:gives further suggestions.
346:... Encyclopedia articles
298:08:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
3075:WikiProject Edit requests
2811:Template:Infobox magazine
2797:21:17, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
2753:should not be substituted
2579:03:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
2556:03:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
2542:03:26, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
2527:23:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
2101:21:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
1553:19:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
1532:19:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
1472:03:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
1451:03:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
1395:03:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
1382:14:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
1365:03:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
1287:Link to talk page section
1222:16:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
1129:. See Knowledge (XXG)'s
1015:22:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
1002:20:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
944:00:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
555:14:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
488:20:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
459:article development guide
412:article development guide
335:09:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
317:08:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
156:WikiProject Edit requests
141:
123:
75:Be welcoming to newcomers
2941:Template:Multiple issues
2728:To subst or not to subst
2718:05:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
2694:05:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
2673:05:44, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
2643:03:22, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
2305:01:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
1203:08:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1190:02:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1154:00:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
1060:. See Knowledge (XXG)'s
1039:. See Knowledge (XXG)'s
1028:This article or section
957:09:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
903:09:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
784:Proposed archnemesis tag
406:. See Knowledge (XXG)'s
392:This article or section
2989:07:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
2957:20:34, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
2774:{{Tone|{{subst:DATE}}}}
2661:used on Knowledge (XXG)
2417:Changing this template?
2276:14:19, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
1920:used on Knowledge (XXG)
1073:11:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
992:as it is deprecated. –
2631:the template's sandbox
2240:, to keep it simple.
2184:for the same reason.
1924:See Knowledge (XXG)'s
1702:
232:has the same effect --
179:Edit requests articles
70:avoid personal attacks
1694:
1241:Template:Not verified
1094:neutral point-of-view
686:an editor cleaning up
493:Completely agree. ..
2831:Add reason parameter
921:Inappropriate person
749:. Knowledge (XXG)'s
730:Proposed revised tag
485:Philip Baird Shearer
202:Can this be renamed
2625:. On pages such as
2310:Linked to an essay?
2232:Even better - just
2050:unencyclopedic tone
378:tag applies to the
2172:inappropriate tone
1696:Specific concerns
1245:Template:Unsourced
1239:please remove the
1087:Inappropriate tone
383:inappropriate tone
165:edit request queue
111:content assessment
81:dispute resolution
42:
3058:
2865:
2864:
2787:me to discuss. --
2745:Template:Tone/doc
2659:encyclopedic tone
2619:
2618:
2515:
2514:
2344:
2343:
2151:
2150:
2130:
2129:
1963:
1945:
1944:
1937:
1918:encyclopedic tone
1838:
1478:Correct font size
1306:Tracking category
1261:
1021:Bolding weirdness
1000:
691:#Reference please
605:
570:(NOT requirement)
241:well I think not
195:
194:
191:
190:
187:
186:
91:
90:
61:Assume good faith
38:
3082:
3059:
3045:
3035:
3028:
3021:
3014:
3004:
2978:
2972:
2968:
2954:
2947:
2934:
2907:
2906:
2896:
2889:
2887:
2856:
2852:
2842:
2841:
2835:
2782:
2775:
2771:
2770:
2754:
2707:
2703:
2702:
2683:
2654:
2610:
2606:
2596:
2595:
2589:
2566:
2565:
2506:
2502:
2492:
2491:
2485:
2335:
2331:
2321:
2320:
2314:
2239:
2209:
2183:
2175:
2138:
2117:
2090:
2084:
2080:
2065:
2060:
2054:
2048:
2020:
1985:
1953:
1940:
1933:
1929:
1928:for suggestions.
1909:
1908:
1901:
1865:
1847:in this revision
1828:
1810:
1793:
1750:
1705:page. Regards,
1700:on the talk page
1679:
1676:
1667:
1661:
1657:
1656:
1620:
1613:
1606:
1597:
1594:
1593:
1569:
1550:
1546:
1542:
1541:
1530:
1527:
1518:
1510:
1501:
1500:}}</span: -->
1490:
1484:
1469:
1465:
1461:
1460:
1449:
1446:
1437:
1429:}}</span: -->
1421:}}</span: -->
1415:
1409:
1380:
1347:
1339:
1336:
1272:
1255:
1238:
1228:General Clean up
1188:
1184:
1179:
1152:
1148:
1143:
1134:
1133:for suggestions.
1091:
1085:
1065:
1064:for suggestions.
1044:
1043:for suggestions.
996:
987:
981:
977:
971:
925:
919:
852:reliable sources
805:
754:
601:
549:
462:
419:
418:for suggestions.
396:style guidelines
387:
381:
377:
371:
267:Reference please
231:
225:
212:or something? —
211:
205:
181:
180:
177:
174:
171:
150:
143:
142:
132:
125:
102:
101:
100:
93:
16:
3090:
3089:
3085:
3084:
3083:
3081:
3080:
3079:
3065:
3064:
3057:
3044:
2997:
2981:John of Reading
2976:
2974:Multiple issues
2970:
2962:
2950:
2945:
2939:grouped within
2932:
2929:
2904:
2890:
2885:
2883:
2869:29 invalid uses
2854:
2850:
2839:
2833:
2818:Quercus solaris
2814:
2804:
2780:
2773:
2768:
2767:
2763:
2752:
2730:
2710:John of Reading
2700:
2698:
2680:John of Reading
2677:
2665:John of Reading
2663:. Thoughts? --
2648:
2608:
2604:
2593:
2587:
2563:
2504:
2500:
2489:
2483:
2419:
2333:
2329:
2318:
2312:
2233:
2203:
2177:
2169:
2109:
2088:
2082:
2074:
2063:
2058:
2052:
2046:
2042:
2008:
1973:
1941:
1930:
1923:
1914:This article's
1910:
1906:
1886:
1853:
1798:
1787:
1785:
1738:
1693:
1674:
1665:
1663:
1654:
1652:
1616:
1609:
1602:
1595:
1591:
1563:
1561:
1548:
1539:
1537:
1525:
1516:
1514:
1507:
1496:
1488:
1482:
1480:
1467:
1458:
1456:
1444:
1435:
1433:
1430:
1422:
1413:
1407:
1405:
1403:Format the date
1374:
1358:
1345:
1337:
1308:
1289:
1232:
1230:
1182:
1177:
1173:
1146:
1141:
1137:
1135:
1124:
1111:User:dave souza
1089:
1083:
1080:
1066:
1055:
1045:
1034:
1023:
985:
983:potentialvanity
979:
975:
969:
967:
923:
917:
910:
825:
799:
795:
790:
786:
755:
744:
732:
649:
562:
547:
536:
481:
463:
446:
420:
401:
385:
379:
375:
369:
295:ActiveSelective
269:
261:
229:
223:
209:
203:
200:
178:
175:
172:
169:
168:
87:
86:
56:
12:
11:
5:
3088:
3086:
3078:
3077:
3067:
3066:
3051:
3037:
3036:
3029:
3022:
3015:
3008:
2996:
2993:
2992:
2991:
2928:
2925:
2924:
2923:
2863:
2862:
2843:
2832:
2829:
2803:
2800:
2781:{{subst:Tone}}
2777:
2776:
2769:{{subst:Tone}}
2765:
2761:
2757:
2756:
2742:
2729:
2726:
2725:
2724:
2723:
2722:
2721:
2720:
2617:
2616:
2597:
2586:
2583:
2582:
2581:
2560:
2559:
2558:
2513:
2512:
2493:
2482:
2479:
2478:
2477:
2476:
2475:
2474:
2473:
2418:
2415:
2414:
2413:
2412:
2411:
2410:
2409:
2342:
2341:
2322:
2311:
2308:
2285:
2284:
2283:
2282:
2281:
2280:
2279:
2278:
2257:
2256:
2255:
2254:
2253:
2252:
2225:
2224:
2223:
2222:
2197:
2196:
2149:
2148:
2145:
2142:
2135:
2128:
2127:
2124:
2121:
2114:
2108:
2107:Wording change
2105:
2104:
2103:
2059:Randall Bart
2041:
2038:
2037:
2036:
2035:
2034:
2033:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2005:
1995:
1970:
1943:
1942:
1913:
1911:
1904:
1899:
1898:
1897:
1896:
1895:
1894:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1850:
1795:
1784:
1781:
1780:
1779:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1775:
1735:
1728:
1727:
1692:
1689:
1688:
1687:
1686:
1685:
1684:
1683:
1645:
1644:
1643:
1642:
1626:
1625:
1560:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1508:<small: -->
1479:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1426:
1418:
1404:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1398:
1397:
1357:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1315:
1307:
1304:
1288:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1205:
1169:
1168:
1123:
1119:
1079:
1076:
1054:
1049:
1033:
1027:
1022:
1019:
1018:
1017:
978:Please remove
966:
963:
962:
961:
960:
959:
909:
906:
884:
883:
882:
881:
848:
824:
821:
820:
819:
794:
791:
787:
785:
782:
781:
780:
743:
733:
731:
728:
727:
726:
682:
681:
648:
645:
626:
625:
610:
609:
561:
558:
535:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
523:David Göthberg
519:
515:
511:
505:
504:
480:
477:
452:
445:
435:
431:
430:
400:
391:
390:
389:
352:have to follow
340:
339:
338:
337:
320:
319:
276:
275:
268:
265:
260:
257:
256:
255:
254:
253:
199:
196:
193:
192:
189:
188:
185:
184:
182:
151:
139:
138:
133:
121:
120:
114:
103:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
72:
63:
57:
55:
54:
43:
34:
33:
30:
29:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3087:
3076:
3073:
3072:
3070:
3063:
3062:
3056:
3055:
3050:
3049:
3040:
3034:
3030:
3027:
3023:
3020:
3016:
3013:
3009:
3007:
3003:
2999:
2998:
2994:
2990:
2986:
2982:
2975:
2966:
2961:
2960:
2959:
2958:
2955:
2953:
2948:
2942:
2938:
2926:
2922:
2918:
2914:
2910:
2902:
2901:
2900:
2899:
2894:
2888:
2881:
2877:
2872:
2870:
2860:
2857:parameter to
2848:
2844:
2837:
2836:
2830:
2828:
2827:
2823:
2819:
2812:
2807:
2801:
2799:
2798:
2794:
2790:
2786:
2766:
2764:
2759:
2758:
2750:
2749:
2748:
2746:
2741:
2739:
2735:
2727:
2719:
2715:
2711:
2706:
2697:
2696:
2695:
2691:
2687:
2681:
2676:
2675:
2674:
2670:
2666:
2662:
2660:
2652:
2647:
2646:
2645:
2644:
2640:
2636:
2632:
2628:
2624:
2614:
2611:parameter to
2602:
2598:
2591:
2590:
2584:
2580:
2576:
2572:
2569:
2561:
2557:
2553:
2549:
2545:
2544:
2543:
2539:
2535:
2531:
2530:
2529:
2528:
2524:
2520:
2510:
2507:parameter to
2498:
2494:
2487:
2486:
2480:
2472:
2469:
2466:
2462:
2461:
2460:
2456:
2452:
2448:
2447:
2446:
2443:
2440:
2436:
2435:
2434:
2433:
2429:
2425:
2416:
2408:
2405:
2402:
2398:
2394:
2393:
2392:
2388:
2384:
2380:
2379:
2378:
2375:
2372:
2368:
2364:
2360:
2359:
2358:
2357:
2353:
2349:
2339:
2336:parameter to
2327:
2323:
2316:
2315:
2309:
2307:
2306:
2302:
2298:
2294:
2290:
2277:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2264:
2263:
2262:
2261:
2260:
2259:
2258:
2251:
2247:
2243:
2237:
2231:
2230:
2229:
2228:
2227:
2226:
2221:
2217:
2213:
2207:
2201:
2200:
2199:
2198:
2195:
2191:
2187:
2181:
2173:
2167:
2166:
2165:
2164:
2160:
2156:
2143:
2139:
2136:
2133:
2122:
2118:
2115:
2112:
2106:
2102:
2098:
2094:
2087:
2078:
2073:
2072:
2071:
2070:
2067:
2066:
2061:
2051:
2039:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2019:
2015:
2011:
2004:
2000:
1996:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1968:
1967:
1966:
1961:
1957:
1951:
1950:
1949:
1948:
1947:
1946:
1939:
1936:
1927:
1921:
1919:
1912:
1903:
1902:
1892:
1891:
1890:
1889:
1888:
1887:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1864:
1860:
1856:
1848:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1836:
1832:
1826:
1822:
1821:
1820:
1819:
1815:
1811:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1791:
1790:editprotected
1782:
1774:
1770:
1766:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1755:
1751:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1726:
1723:
1719:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1708:
1701:
1699:
1690:
1682:
1677:
1671:
1670:
1660:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1648:
1647:
1646:
1641:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1624:
1621:
1619:
1614:
1612:
1607:
1605:
1600:
1589:
1588:
1587:
1586:
1583:
1579:
1575:
1570:
1567:
1566:editprotected
1558:
1554:
1551:
1545:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1528:
1522:
1521:
1511:
1505:
1502:
1497:<span: -->
1494:
1491:
1487:
1486:editprotected
1477:
1473:
1470:
1464:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1452:
1447:
1441:
1440:
1425:
1417:
1412:
1411:editprotected
1402:
1396:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1379:
1378:
1372:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1366:
1363:
1355:
1351:
1348:
1342:
1335:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1325:
1321:
1316:
1313:
1312:editprotected
1305:
1303:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1286:
1282:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1259:
1254:
1250:
1246:
1242:
1236:
1227:
1223:
1220:
1219:
1216:
1210:
1209:
1204:
1201:
1197:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1187:
1186:
1185:
1180:
1171:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1144:
1132:
1128:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1112:
1108:
1102:
1100:
1095:
1088:
1077:
1075:
1074:
1071:
1063:
1059:
1052:
1048:
1042:
1038:
1031:
1026:
1020:
1016:
1013:
1010:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
984:
974:
973:editprotected
964:
958:
955:
951:
947:
946:
945:
942:
939:
935:
934:
933:
932:
929:
922:
915:
907:
905:
904:
901:
897:
893:
889:
880:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
849:
847:
844:
843:
842:
841:
840:
838:
834:
830:
822:
818:
815:
811:
810:
809:
808:
804:
803:
792:
783:
779:
776:
771:
770:
769:
768:
765:
761:
752:
748:
741:
737:
729:
725:
721:
720:
715:
711:
710:
709:
708:
705:
701:
696:
692:
687:
680:
676:
675:
670:
665:
664:
663:
662:
659:
655:
646:
644:
643:
640:
636:
631:
624:
621:
617:
612:
611:
608:
604:
600:
599:
594:
589:
588:
587:
586:
583:
579:
575:
571:
567:
559:
557:
556:
553:
550:
544:
539:
533:
527:
524:
520:
516:
512:
509:
508:
507:
506:
503:
500:
496:
492:
491:
490:
489:
486:
478:
476:
475:
472:
468:
460:
456:
450:
443:
439:
434:
429:
426:
422:
421:
417:
413:
409:
405:
398:
397:
384:
374:
367:
366:
365:
364:
361:
357:
353:
351:
345:
336:
333:
332:24.19.184.243
329:
324:
323:
322:
321:
318:
315:
310:
306:
302:
301:
300:
299:
296:
291:
288:
286:
282:
274:
271:
270:
266:
264:
258:
252:
248:
244:
240:
239:
238:
235:
228:
221:
220:
219:
218:
215:
208:
197:
183:
170:Edit requests
166:
162:
158:
157:
152:
149:
145:
144:
140:
137:
136:Edit requests
134:
131:
127:
122:
118:
112:
108:
104:
95:
94:
82:
78:
76:
73:
71:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
52:
48:
47:Learn to edit
44:
41:
36:
35:
32:
31:
26:
22:
18:
17:
3053:
3048:~Sıgehelmus♗
3047:
3041:
3038:
3005:
2951:
2936:
2930:
2908:
2886:· • SUM1 • ·
2873:
2866:
2858:
2847:edit request
2815:
2805:
2778:
2760:
2743:
2731:
2704:
2656:
2620:
2612:
2601:edit request
2567:
2516:
2508:
2497:edit request
2420:
2345:
2337:
2326:edit request
2292:
2288:
2286:
2206:cleanup-tone
2152:
2134:
2131:
2113:
2110:
2056:
2043:
2017:
2013:
2009:
1998:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1931:
1915:
1862:
1858:
1854:
1807:
1803:
1799:
1786:
1747:
1743:
1739:
1703:
1698:may be found
1697:
1695:
1691:may be found
1668:
1658:
1617:
1610:
1603:
1598:
1571:
1562:
1559:Style tweaks
1543:
1519:
1512:
1506:
1503:
1495:
1492:
1481:
1462:
1438:
1431:
1423:
1406:
1376:
1359:
1340:
1317:
1309:
1290:
1276:. Cheers. --
1273:
1231:
1213:
1175:
1174:
1139:
1138:
1136:
1126:
1120:
1115:
1106:
1103:
1081:
1067:
1057:
1050:
1046:
1036:
1029:
1024:
989:
968:
911:
885:
872:businesslike
845:
833:Other issues
832:
826:
801:
796:
756:
746:
735:
718:
685:
683:
673:
650:
627:
615:
596:
569:
563:
542:
540:
537:
482:
464:
437:
432:
403:
393:
373:not verified
355:
349:
347:
343:
341:
327:
308:
304:
292:
289:
285:not verified
280:
277:
272:
262:
201:
161:edit request
154:
117:WikiProjects
106:
19:This is the
2732:(Following
2548:Fgnievinski
2519:Fgnievinski
2266:And done.
2180:formal tone
2132:I propose:
2040:time issues
1707:Ben Aveling
1235:editprotect
1161:Simon Mayor
994:Tivedshambo
914:formal tone
860:doublespeak
846:Formal tone
823:Formal tone
814:Luna Santin
243:68.80.2.130
2851:|answered=
2605:|answered=
2571:Jackmcbarn
2534:Jackmcbarn
2501:|answered=
2330:|answered=
2268:SchuminWeb
2242:SchuminWeb
2212:SchuminWeb
2186:SchuminWeb
2155:SchuminWeb
2077:Barticus88
1849:will work.
1377:Satori Son
1196:dave souza
950:dave souza
896:dave souza
802:Satori Son
760:dave souza
700:dave souza
654:dave souza
635:dave souza
578:dave souza
574:News style
495:dave souza
467:dave souza
344:News style
2913:Jonesey95
2880:testcases
2871:already.
2451:George Ho
2424:George Ho
2383:George Ho
2348:George Ho
2024:talk to Ω
1989:talk to Ω
1893:produces:
1869:talk to Ω
1814:talk to Ω
1754:talk to Ω
1356:Rename...
1346:Nihiltres
1278:MZMcBride
1127:talk page
1107:something
1058:talk page
1037:talk page
747:talk page
572:of using
479:Talk page
404:talk page
360:Jhartmann
234:FlareNUKE
214:Omegatron
83:if needed
66:Be polite
27:template.
21:talk page
3069:Category
2965:Schazjmd
2946:Schazjmd
2785:{{Ping}}
2627:this one
1825:/sandbox
1662:Thanks,
1549:Soxπed93
1493:Change:
1468:Soxπed93
1070:Elyscape
1009:Garion96
990:see also
965:See also
874:manner.
864:legalese
775:Mormegil
425:Muchness
314:Mormegil
283:with {{
281:this tag
259:Cleanup?
222:writing
107:template
51:get help
2876:sandbox
2623:WP:Tone
1765:Thincat
1669:Symonds
1611:Helpful
1574:sandbox
1392:Stevage
1362:Stevage
1293:Shinobu
1253:Jeepday
1215:Deckill
1183:ithemis
1165:neutral
1147:ithemis
941:Dhaluza
938:WP:TONE
928:Dhaluza
892:WP:TONE
876:Dhaluza
831:in the
620:siarach
534:Grammar
2952:(talk)
2933:|talk=
2789:Thnidu
2686:Jarble
2651:Jarble
2635:Jarble
2468:(Talk)
2442:(Talk)
2404:(Talk)
2374:(Talk)
2291:Sirius
2093:Thnidu
2064:Talk
1424:With:
1099:JW1805
1012:(talk)
1007:Done,
998:(talk)
916:as in
868:jargon
812:Done.
714:Centrx
669:Centrx
603:(Talk)
598:JW1805
414:, and
198:Rename
113:scale.
3054:(Tøk)
2855:|ans=
2845:This
2762:Usage
2734:Nthep
2609:|ans=
2599:This
2505:|ans=
2495:This
2334:|ans=
2324:This
2297:kwami
2086:as of
1666:Peter
1324:MER-C
988:from
856:argot
837:WP:RS
328:might
309:maybe
105:This
79:Seek
2985:talk
2917:talk
2909:Done
2893:talk
2878:and
2822:talk
2793:talk
2714:talk
2705:Done
2690:talk
2669:talk
2639:talk
2575:talk
2568:Done
2552:talk
2538:talk
2523:talk
2455:talk
2428:talk
2387:talk
2363:2005
2352:talk
2301:talk
2272:Talk
2246:Talk
2236:tone
2216:Talk
2190:Talk
2159:Talk
2097:talk
2091:. --
2081:See
1997:OK,
1960:talk
1956:MSGJ
1835:talk
1831:MSGJ
1769:talk
1722:talk
1675:talk
1659:Done
1637:talk
1599:Done
1582:talk
1544:Done
1526:talk
1520:King
1517:Gary
1504:To:
1463:Done
1445:talk
1439:King
1436:Gary
1341:Done
1297:talk
1274:Done
1258:talk
1243:and
1200:talk
1178:—Cel
1142:—Cel
954:talk
908:Tone
900:talk
764:talk
719:talk
704:talk
674:talk
658:talk
639:talk
582:talk
552:-Day
518:fix.
499:talk
471:talk
457:and
247:talk
227:tone
207:tone
68:and
25:Tone
2979:--
2937:not
2853:or
2772:or
2740:.)
2708:--
2607:or
2503:or
2465:Tra
2439:Tra
2401:Tra
2371:Tra
2332:or
2210:.
2176:to
1999:now
1618:One
1604:The
616:why
356:not
350:not
348:do
293:--
287:}}
3071::
2987:)
2977:}}
2971:{{
2919:)
2911:–
2859:no
2824:)
2795:)
2716:)
2692:)
2671:)
2641:)
2613:no
2577:)
2554:)
2540:)
2525:)
2509:no
2457:)
2430:)
2422:--
2389:)
2354:)
2338:no
2303:)
2274:)
2248:)
2238:}}
2234:{{
2218:)
2208:}}
2204:{{
2192:)
2182:}}
2178:{{
2174:}}
2170:{{
2161:)
2147:”
2141:“
2126:”
2120:“
2099:)
2089:}}
2083:{{
2053:}}
2047:{{
2026:)
2016:*
2012:=
2006:—
1991:)
1981:*
1977:=
1971:—
1958:·
1871:)
1861:*
1857:=
1851:—
1833:·
1816:)
1806:*
1802:=
1796:—
1792:}}
1788:{{
1771:)
1756:)
1746:*
1742:=
1736:—
1720:-
1635:-
1580:-
1568:}}
1564:{{
1489:}}
1483:{{
1414:}}
1408:{{
1390:.
1343:-
1314:}}
1310:{{
1299:)
1237:}}
1233:{{
1218:er
1198:,
1090:}}
1084:{{
986:}}
980:{{
976:}}
970:{{
952:,
926:.
924:}}
918:{{
898:,
862:,
858:,
839::
789::P
762:,
722:•
702:,
677:•
656:,
637:,
633:..
580:,
521:--
497:,
469:,
465:--
423:--
410:,
386:}}
380:{{
376:}}
370:{{
312:--
305:is
249:)
230:}}
224:{{
210:}}
204:{{
49:;
2983:(
2967::
2963:@
2915:(
2895:)
2891:(
2820:(
2813:.
2791:(
2755:.
2712:(
2688:(
2682::
2678:@
2667:(
2653::
2649:@
2637:(
2573:(
2550:(
2536:(
2521:(
2453:(
2426:(
2385:(
2350:(
2299:(
2270:(
2244:(
2214:(
2188:(
2157:(
2095:(
2079::
2075:@
2022:(
2018:R
2014:I
2010:V
1987:(
1983:R
1979:I
1975:V
1962:)
1954:(
1938:)
1932:(
1922:.
1867:(
1863:R
1859:I
1855:V
1837:)
1829:(
1812:(
1808:R
1804:I
1800:V
1767:(
1752:(
1748:R
1744:I
1740:V
1678:)
1672:(
1596:Y
1529:)
1523:(
1448:)
1442:(
1338:Y
1295:(
1260:)
1256:(
1053:.
1032:.
742:.
716:→
671:→
667:—
548:D
461:.
444:.
399:.
245:(
167:.
119::
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
