Knowledge:Requests for comment/Watchlist survey

2639:

follow Knowledge politics so as to take part in this kind of survey or discussion. (Call us the Silent Majority. I only stumbled on this discussion because I wanted to find out how to turn off the green "updated since my last visit" annoyance.) Those who do want the change appear to be the most active Wikipedians - those who have hundreds or thousands of watchlisted pages, have the technical ability to customize their settings, and are in the habit of participating in RfCs and other obscure discussions. If you make this change opt-in, the clued-in tech-savvy minority who like this change can implement it, and the more-casual-user majority won't be bothered by it. --

2544:. This isn't at that level of nuisance, obviously, but I think as editors become more familiar with Knowledge, the options also open up, which will keep interest in the internal workings of this site—not just editing text and pictures. At least for me, it's been nice discovering the hidden jewels of Knowledge. But these options should be just that: options. And it took me quite a while to get used to the bolded unchecked pages over at Commons. I really did prefer the plainer en.wikipedia watchlist, though now I know I have the option, I'm definitely an opt-in (and have done so already)! – 1763:

different appearances (for me, italics, for others, other choices), and there is no reason why anyone should not be able to choose what (if anything) they prefer. That said, having installed the italic view for my own use, I have come to really like it! For me personally, it is very helpful to be able to see quickly what I have and have not reviewed already, and I personally do not find it to be visually disruptive. In fact, I'm getting to where I feel as though I would never want to be without it! --

384:

preferences; there should in fact be a note about it on the watchlist tab as well). Ideally the message would appear precisely when someone's watchlist is starting to reach the stage where the grouping would be beneficial. Also I don't remember if expanded watchlist (shows all changes not only the most recent) is now the default, but if it isn't, it definitely should be. Sorry to be off-topic, but this is a rare situation where there's a chance the right person is listening.

4185:

changes might be found. Newbies don't need to know about these options, any more than they "need" to know about the various gadgets and skins. If they are interested in possible alternatives, they will ask. It works; leave it alone. If you can't leave it alone, please remember that many, many editors are not computer experts, and opting back into this format should be a box tick or something equally simple. As soon as you write, "insert the following in. . . ", we panic.

685:

with virtually no notice, as that one was, will cop massive opposition, simply because it's a change. Garnering earlier responses from a tiny subset of Knowledge editors won't ever work. So, please introduce the change again, but before you do, go away and learn something about change management. It's a serious and quite large area of study. It's not just a nerd/geek thing. In fact, nerds and geeks are probably the worst people for managing change. Naturally enough

3643:. Instead, a tooltip bar should be added with links to Help page(s), and a list of the different Watchlist styles. This list should also have instructions on how to opt-in to one of them (with the concern of retaining new editors, this would help them come up to speed faster). If the opt-in could be automated to clicking a link that would be awesome. A link to opt-out going back to the default would also be useful. I also see no consideration for editors: 1938:, including one of my own, I would prefer for the default to be the "normal" one that I had come to know over my 2.5-year Knowledge service. Personally, I also feel that it is more my responsibility to know where I left off with checking pages on my watchlist than an automatic system's. Promote the availability of the new option to Knowledge newcomers, but don't force it upon them or Knowledge's valued longtime contributors. — 6059: 3567:

enough demonstration of consensus is represented by the 20 support votes for this high-profile change to an essential tool used by every editor nearly every time they edit; and that some did so on the condition that a preference switch accompany implementation, which the proposer did not make it clear he saw no need for and wouldn't be requesting. That's just a "quick" rundown though.

794:

realize that if we left it alone (no matter what the watchlist styling was) for a month, nearly everyone would be used to it and quit complaining. We should not kill a useful feature (especially a feature useful to new users) so that a couple of power users can have it "their" way. The power users can go edit their CSS pages. The rest of us should get to use this feature.

1337:

worked out the Knowledge jargon, the usernames of bots and regular editors, etc., and need to check most or all of the changes on their watchlists to work out what is going on. Experienced editors can always just turn the feature off if they don't like it. I think newbies would prefer the subtle underline to the default bold style, hence I'm commenting in this section. —

5612: 5274: 5115: 1877:) 08:55, 16 May 2012 (UTC) Oh, and another thing: if it's not going to be Opt-in for some reason, then Opt-out must be implemented for those of us with accessibility issues. Otherwise I, for one, won't be able to use the Watchlist, and thus will likely have to stop editing. It is not simply a visual preference issue, it is a visual accessibility issue. — 4417:

non-subtle, easily-viewable color changes would be less aggravating, but still add another level of complexity to the color scheme: What colors would we default to so that a recently-visited (normally purple) but newly-changed link can be immediately understandable as visited, as opposed to one that is both newly-changed and unvisited (normally blue)?) --

3272:. - The stars are just awful. The bolding is awful. It is tolerable (but annoying) on the commons because I follow hardly anything there. Here I've got 1,000s on my watchlist almost all of which, except for a tiny winy bit, have been edited after me. So the whole darn list is filled with stars and bolding, making it useless for my purposes. 2995:

number of AfD topic lists, a couple of project pages, and some vandal targets that I watch. The sea of bold made it hard to scan for the changes where I needed to hit diff - I missed some things, in fact. What I am using to determine whether I need to visit the page again is the color of the diff link and/or the page link. What I would

3873:- I know that familiarity can be an obstacle to change, but I do not like this feature at Commons and I did not like it when it appeared (briefly) here. My reasons for disliking it have been better expressed by practically every other of the previous comments in this "opt in" section, so I'll resist the broken record syndrome. - 3725:- but allow users to choose from any of the options below, in "Preferences: Watchlist", and without having to fiddle around with CSS. (But if by any chance it is introduced as a default, then offer an explanation on-screen - the mystery blast of bolding was unexpected and unexplained, as well as unwelcome.) 5991:

I would like to throw in that we use something that involves more than just a color change. I am color blind and most of the time I cannot see the difference between the color changes for a link that has or has not been visited... or changing from red to green... Something that also (or an option for

5368:

The functionality is useless and distracting for anyone using the watchlist to decide which, relatively few, changes need to be visited. This is the least distracting of the options but would give usable information to anyone who wanted it. The visual semantics are similiar to the change of colour of

5353:

I like this too. Plain black text is the most readable font--otherwise we'd all use bold or subtle underline or orange or whatever for body text. And it seems to me that the unreviewed change listings are precisely the ones we most want to read easily, not the listings of changes that we have already

1497:

anything more subtle than bolding, e.g. italics, an icon or letter. Which is easier- for newbies to opt out of a default or for experienced users to opt out? Clearly it's less hassle for experienced users to customise the look (gagdets and customisation are some of the most newbie-unfriendly areas of

1336:

New users may not get around to looking at their account preferences page for quite a while, so if this feature is not turned on by default it may be a significant amount of time before they find it. This would be a waste, in my opinion, as it is likely to be most useful for new users who haven't yet

684:

The new style was terrific. The one problem with it was the way it was introduced. Technical people tend to think they know what's best for everyone. Sometimes they do, but even then they need to be aware of the psychological aspects of change management. Even a perfect change introduced to all users

439:

I suppose I agree with what Bruce1ee said, though I haven't bothered to modify my own css regarding this yet; not terribly torn up one way or another so long as nothing too terribly silly is implemented. Frankly I haven't the foggiest why people seem to care so much about this in the first place, but

146:

The highlighting default present on some of Knowledge's sister sites can be turned back on for every Knowledge user across the board. This style setting is shown to the right. In this scenario, it would still be possible for editors to customize their own watchlists to look different from this, using

109:

Among other things, this new functionality allows users to differentiate pages in their watchlist that they haven't visited since the last change, from pages that they have already visited. You may find this a very useful feature—it will make a watchlist similar to most email clients and forum pages,

5636:

faded. As a quick glance for recent changes, this option is excellent. But once I've visited the page and I need to return to a previously viewed page via my watchlist, I'm finding that it actually does get difficult to read with a list of faded pages in a row. Something I hadn't thought of. I still

4416:

a foreground color change: Particularly, if Knowledge defaults to grey-fading or subtle color changes, I can just about guarantee we will get a loud and unpleasant education about how many people don't have the eyes and/or computer display settings that some people were sure "most people" had. (And

4401:

I can't see much to complain about with bold vs. non-bold for Latin or Cyrillic text; that's relatively unobtrusive. Most e-mail programs and webmail sites now use bold for new e-mail; so much that a new user, who is familiar with e-mail but not Knowledge, would probably understand immediately that

4381:

Consistent with other wikis and both easy to spot (distinct) and easy to ignore (inobtrusive). The perfect alteration for the feature. It is so inoffensive that I didn't notice the change, at first, during the initial rollout. After I spotted it (and figured out what it was), it was informative, but

3152:

The watchlist is a personal feature; a user's preference has no bearing on any other part of Knowledge. Thus, having nothing enabled and allowing a user to opt-in is the least invasive. If people are worried about new users, there would be no problem with having an options link on the watchlist page

2261:

Also, just because it's made opt-in now doesn't mean it can't be made opt-out in the future, once something more broadly accepted is fleshed out and it's been proven popular enough. That's generally how things are done here. Someone might suggest a new option be enabled by default somewhere down the

2247:

if they aren't already or they could be made part of a totally separate and new "Tutorial". There are all manner of things that newbies won't know about when they start editing and this one is not any more or less important than than any others. Heck there are still things in "My Preferences" that I

1146:

Perhaps some actual research should be done, but it seems to me a new user is going to be looking at their watchlist asking "What changed in this stuff that I'm interested in since the last time I looked at it?". This feature makes determining which pages changed much easier. We shouldn't make every

590:

Comment for those wwho think that this in needless change, because they did not need it before and they do not see immediately its value: Wait until You will come back from short holiday or wait until you have job, when You can no more check the watchlist everyday... Or at least wait for few days of

309:

But a) once you read an email, it generally isn't rebolded five minutes later, b) you can delete an individual email, but it's harder to "ignore" a single change in a watchlist item, c) you generally have to open an email or forum post to read it, but with the use of pop-ups that isn't necessary for

5931:

Stop fiddling with things that are not broken and focus on more essential tasks (database delays, file moves are glitching with 50/50 chances on Commons, etc, etc). The old watchlist was fine. The wikimedia software was glitching too often in the past few weeks, and those experiments with switching

4184:

Too much bold loses its impact and becomes visual noise. What we have works for most of us. Those who need a change, a different visual organization or a different approach have been around long enough to know about changes and where to make requests or just know enough to ask. where information on

2573:

The change makes the watchlist much harder to read. And making it the default means that you're changing something without asking first, and then leaving it to users to work out for themselves what was changed and how to change it back if they don't like it. Making it opt-in at least means that the

2521:

I feel that Knowledge needs more proactive editors. Being proactive is a habit. If an editor takes an effort to customize his watchlist, then this editor will likely be proactive enough to read Knowledge policies and guidelines. A well-informed editor is likely to be a good editor. So yeah! Opt in.

1650:

Okay, I just tried to turn the option back on for myself and realized that it involves pasting code. I can't imagine that it isn't possible for the change to be done with a radio button in the Preferences menu, and it is imperative that that be done as soon as possible. If that can't be done (and

1606:

I understand the objections to making the bolded option the default, but that can be fixed by making the default style something very unobtrusive, like the green stars or the subtle underlining, can it not? And while I'm sure a better technical implementation can be installed down the road, coding

1307:

I never knew you could change your watchlist to show unread changes until it was turned on for everyone. There should be an option to turn it off in preferences, not by having to add code to your .css page. I think having the dotted lines is the best, because it isn't too bold. That way, newbies (I

4402:

bold items have somehow become "new" or updated, without having to be told. (I could see how it bold might make Middle Eastern/Asian fonts look ugly to those languages' native readers, though. Also, I once saw a couple of computers that had some font confusion and would show bold by substituting

3566:

Of course, since Anomie has a tendency to bring this up repeatedly without also mentioning the counter-arguments that have been stated in response, I'll have to do that for him again. Those who oppose the feature and/or the manner in which it was implemented would point out that not nearly a broad

2994:

Support opt-in. Some editors liked it when it was implemented; and if it were opt-in, it would then be more intuitive for the user to be able to choose between different options. I have a large watchlist - all the articles I've written, many articles I've expanded or otherwise majorly rewritten, a

2699:

I believe he means to use "default" to mean the long-standing status quo at Knowledge. That should be fairly obvious, and it would be a big mistake to start responding to opposition by nitpicking their chosen words, as if that should somehow indicate something about the validity of their opinions.

2668:

Keep the default - and a whole watchlist full of bold is a strange use of bold. Bold should be used to pick out the unusual - having it the norm for most pages (unless I have opened them) just gives me a bold watchlist. I probably look at 20% (if that) of my watchlist - I check edits on some pages

2334:

This, I think, is the better option. The watchlist changes things really works only for users who edit a lot and are on frequently. I check in a few times a day and there is little point in my seeing a sea of bold or some other "marked as changed" mechanism. Frequent users can easily opt in to use

1905:

I use the preference that adds everything I edit to my watch list. I scan my watchlist several times a day and have my own methods for deciding which edits to check. Bolding or italics would make it much harder for me to do these scans and make me much less effective. A green star with plain text

1530:

Not making it available by default is silly as it means many editors who would find it useful would never find that this is available. But making everything bold on first visit is almost as bad as putting everything in upper case - a more subtle way of differentiating between visited and unvisited

793:

I don't much care what the style is, but I don't see any good reason to have the default be different from the default at any other project—and that goes for both "whether the feature is enabled by default" as well as "what it looks like on the watchlist". I realize that change is bad, but I also

342:

I shouldn't have to create a css page to turn this on, this should be a checkbox on the preference page, and enabling something like this should be the default setting there. What I need on the watchlist is more than this one small change. In addition to the edit comment I need a snippet view of

166:

The purpose of this page is to obtain feedback from you, the user. It is not a binding vote. It is a survey. What do you prefer? Do you have accessibility issues? Are you not bothered one way or the other? Do you tend to customize everything anyway? Whatever the final outcome, it will have to work

156:

It is also possible to turn the feature on for all users, but with a different style than the one in use at the other sites. A new default style would need to be chosen as the default. In this scenario, it would still be possible for editors to customize their own watchlists to look different from

2999:

like is for the colors of visited and unvisited links to be more different! That would accomplish the same purpose - and would also help on article pages, by indicating if a link is piped to a link I've already visited. Bold is way overkill; but those with small watchlists or who want it for some

2772:

You didn't correct them. You suggested they should be voting on something else by jumping on their use of the word "default", when it was clear what they meant. That's not a correction, it's a strawman argument, and it's not helpful. A lot of people disagree with you, and it's not because they're

1783:

tag in an odd location, when it should've been done purely with classes. Styling a feature like this using an HTML tag is so very 1999. This is old code and shouldn't have been newly implemented on an additional wiki before it was updated. Rather than merely making it invisible, this entire thing

1762:

After a couple of days of living with this, I'd like to add to what I said before. I continue to prefer that everyone be able to opt-in, rather than be put in a position of opting out of something that they would prefer not to have. I also see from the discussion below that different users prefer

1562:

Opt out is the right way to go. With opt-out, old users who have strong preferences against this will be able to figure out how to opt out, but new users (who are unlikely to find opt-in features) will benefit from it, most of them will appreciate it, and most will never know that it didn't exist

896:

This is a really good MediaWiki feature that I regularly use in several other wikis. I cannot remember anyone complaining about it on these wikis either, it's simply the normal software behavior that everyone is used to. So I suspect that a lot of the opposition can be attributed to just the fact

5946:

FYI, it's two different groups of people. The watchlist-bolding system has been in place for a long time, it was just disabled here on enwiki because of concerns the high level of activity here might blow up the database. But I guess the sysadmins decided it wouldn't be a problem and flipped the

5231:

Hd a bit of a think about it.. I definately do not want a few of them, such as the "c" and the fading of ones you already been to, but I'm quite content with whichever of the other options are chosen. I do think this one is the best though (based on examining the samples and imagining it is full

2638:

I favor leaving the default the way it is, which works fine for most users. The "improvement" proposed is not an improvement for most of us - namely, those of us who have only a few dozen watchlist pages, are not tech-savvy enough to know how to code changes into our preferences page, and do not

584:

I was waiting for this feature so long! I support the reasoning lTopGunl - "If it is left off, the newbies will never find out about it. Those who don't like it can however simply turn it off." Not only newbies wouldn't know. How the older users who would like it would find that out? That from

383:

feature is excellent and should be better publicized; maybe not made the default, but there should be a dismissable notice at the top of everyone's watchlist informing them about the option (and about the daft wikilogical decision to place the option somewhere other than the "watchlist" tab of

997:

Hard to express how little I care, really. Current style is great and I am used to it and proposal looks good. But if there is a new and potentially more functional option, please just implement it. With or without an opt-out surely we can cope. And yes I think there are more important issues.

374:

Enhanced functionality should be put to use once it's developed; the main "problem" established users have with it is that it differs from what they're used to, but that isn't an issue for the new users on whom the default is effectively imposed (they don't know they can change it, whereas the

1131:

There are many features newbies don't know about, I don't see why this or any other feature in the preference page should be turned on by default just to cater to them. I suggest that if standard features available directly via Knowledge are becoming too overwhelming or complex for newbies to

808:

I'm fine with turning on this style, on the condition I can easily turn it off if I want. I don't want to be dealing with CSS code - Having say a dropdown list (to say, choose between all the styles - the current default, the bolded and the various others shown on this page) would be perfect.

2723:

that people are confused about what the default actually is, and I thought I would correct them. There are enough people posting in this sections with selfish or silly reasons that I can't see this ending very well no matter which way the RFC is closed. What would be the point in trying to

3594:

The question was "did the developers engage with editors?", not "did the developers ensure that a major RFC with at least 1000 participants was held about something that is already enabled on Commons and other-language wikis, and was only disabled on enwiki due to technical concerns?".

126: 3677:

The bolding and stars would only be beneficial to some editors and would be non-beneficial to the rest, with it also having no effect on the readers. Therefore, it should be opt-in for those users that would find it beneficial, don't subject it to everyone and force them to opt-out.

2539:

per SoWhy, but with high visibility in the proper My Preferences section (not necessarily gadgets). In general, I'm against opting out options on any website; Facebook took it too far by actually invading privacies (facial recognition—if they're still doing that) unless one opted

5580:

This is my first choice. Most of the other options add visual clutter to the watchlist, but this one makes it easier to spot the changes without adding adding any distracting clutter to the page. Also, I agree with the other users who like it for being both subtle and intuitive.

1239:

The green star option as a default looks best to me. It stands out enough without taking over the page. Ideally you'd be able to tweak this in the preferences but enabling it via scripts is OK as a short-term solution because the green star is hard for anyone to object to.

3607:

Ever the pedant; there are ways to answer questions so that the question is answered, and there are ways that ensure the person asking isn't mislead -- yes, even if it means adding something they didn't (explicitly) ask for. Friendly advice that might make you more likeable.

2808:

interest in switching to Vector). I appreciate the possibility of enhanced functionality but would much prefer to opt in on that if a genuine improvement (i.e., one that employs good typographic design) becomes available. In the meantime, it ain't broke, so don't fix it.

958:

Useful feature, new users will never find out about it if it's off by default (so Nay on option 3), and inconsistency within wikimedia sites is bad (so Nay on option 2). However, the change should be noted for existing users in a site-wide banner, and there should be a

4222:

per Bielle. Distractions make things harder for me. Most pages on my watchlist I haven't been the last one to edit so they will all show up bolded and with stars. No! Please! (fortunately I have the CSS in my file that gets rid of the whole darn thing.)

2319:

I vote for opt-in. Frankly this whole thing seems like gilding the lily. I've been perfectly fine with how the Watchlist looks and operates in my years here and see no need for any changes period. Just because we can make changes doesn't mean we should.

3760:, might be acceptable. (Please note that if colors are used, an accessibility survey must be performed, to ensure that, as in the diff change, the new version is usable by people with normal or slightly impaired vision, as well as the color-blind.) — 3638:

Changing current practice is rude to all the editors who use it. Particularly when different editors prefer different styles. To do this based on a consensus of the small fraction of editors who have the time to respond to this RFC is an example of the

1651:

until it is done), the feature must be opt-out -- and, furthermore, someone should answer for why the change was turned on when it lacked this basic feature. Still, my preference remains for opt-out to be made possible on the Preferences menu. --

2653:

And for goodness sake, next time a sudden change like this is implemented, start by "telling people what's going on?" (per Ravenswing). I couldn't figure out what the bold/starred/bold/starred stuff meant until I came across discussions about it.

1631:

A further comment: I note that many of the !votes for option #3 are specifically opposing the bolded option. The closing admin should note that many votes for #3 should be interpreted as anti-bolding, and not opposed to the feature in general.

4619:

I love this one. I saw the stars appear a few days ago, liked it, but the bolding is exceptional, obvious, and easy on the eyes. If this can't be default, at least it should always be an option—though I'm also open to changing the color of the

765:

The foundation can change the styles as much as they want in the name of accessibility, as long as they make it easy for me to not participate. I'd hope they give us more warning in the future, like they did for making vector skin the default.

4138:

I love the "Faded Old" and "Highlight" options, but if we're picking a default, it should be a plain watchlist. Not every user views every single edit made on their watched articles, so this should be an option you can choose if you desire.

4782:

Non intrusive. And less likely to push away newbies who don't know where to go and ask what it means before they find it out by visiting the pages. I'm using a lime underline, that is even less intrusive than the grey and minimally visible.

1225:. People need to be more open to change, especially when that change is in the form of progress. TopGun made a good point as well. Not having this enabled by default is basically the same as robbing newbies of knowledge about the feature. -- 2002:

SHould be opt-in just like anything in this world, if it opt-out wikipedia is becomign liek goverment forcing stuff onto people and makign them opt-out if they dnt want it, everything ina person life should be opt-in they choose they want

5132:

To address the concerns about accessibility and intrusiveness that have caused many people to oppose the change in general, this option needs to be made as unobtrusive as possible. The subtle underlining seems to me to fit that bill.

5070:

This is the only implementation I've seen so far which I would be happy to opt into. Italics aren't really clear enough, colours could be problematic for the colourblind, and some of the other implementations are a bit too distracting.

1052:

At first I liked the bolding idea, however now that global CSS had it removed, I decided to try out the stars. They are awesome with the exception of a few bugs I'm going to put in the star section. As well, I believe it should be

3036:

the visited/unvisited link colors in page content are generally not set by Knowledge, so they're going according to your browser settings (default blue/purple, usually). In Firefox 12 for example, you can change them in Tools -:

5774:

Least obscure. Best for both color-blind and totally-blind editors. With the tooltip, this is also the most understandable for new editors - the easier and friendlier we make it for new editors to come up to speed the better.

5967:

Yes, but Materailscientist is correct, these things are tampering. There are bugs that stop pages being parsed properly, and break stuff. Tampering with settings unless the project requests it is a waste of everyone's time.

2363:

as opt-out is available in the Preferences menu, either by default or as a gadget. I don't care that it can be done using CSS in a user's common.css, all users should be able to turn it off easily without such technicalities.

3192:

I liked the stars, hated the bold, and was generally confused when this change happened suddenly. Opt-in is the simplest way to make the majority happy. Hopefully the opt-in allows for the variety of choices shown below. —

2378:

People who want it can buy into it. People who don't won't. (And, in the future, if Knowledge makes a highly visible change to a fundamental part of the interface, how about the designers put in something just as visible

1788:

a style is chosen by the community. Even then, the new feature cycle generally starts with opt-in, then after a while someone might propose turning it on by default across the board. That would be the cycle to follow here.

294:

This is the default email for emails and many forums, it makes no sense to hide from new users. Making it opt out is very easy and people who cannot deal with the default behavior of most email readers can check of a box.

977:

It's a lot harder to opt-in if you've never seen it and don't know it's available. But if it's there and you don't like it, the first thought is always to check your prefs. Users should always be able to opt out, though.

4114:

simple, agree. My watchlist is set for only the past week's activities so it's easier to keep track of. If I really need to see others that I have worked on, I look at My Contributions. No bells or whistles necessary. —

5637:

think I prefer this over bolding, so I'm merely making a comment that this option could still be improved some. In addition, maybe the font shrinkage shouldn't occur (would help with reading grayed out text as well). –

398:

Bold style on by default with the option to turn it off in Special:Preferences. I currently have it turned on via css. I prefer this to option 3 because, as has been pointed out by others, newbies won't know about it.

2928:

I am surprised that it was not opt-in ONLY from the very start. Otherwise it is like painting a bulls-eye between your eyes and being surprised for a millisecond or so that someone shot at it before you end up dead!

4431:

I like the Commons functionality and agree with Closeapple that bolding is relatively unobtrusive and is both intuitive and a "normal" thing that people used to other areas of the internet will already be used to.

4314:

While Emerson did point out that "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines," in this case I'm for keeping it consistent across the projects.

1047:

Turn it on for everyone, but with a different style (pick the style you like best below). Users who prefer something different, or prefer the feature turned off, can do so by customizing their own watchlists.

4895:

Undecided about required opt-in vs opt-out. In terms of formatting, I'd prefer underscored as it is less 'in your face', particularly for those articles/pages I am not worried about reviewing all the time.

2853:...it would be especially unhelpful to copy/paste the same pedantic reply to everyone who makes the same "error" in wording. If you decide to remove your comments here, feel free to also remove my responses. 2740:

doing thusly, allow me to correct you: The technical default they haven't been privy to for years is not what these people are concerned with when they say things like "let's keep the default", I assure you.

2669:(depending on who the editor is) - but not on things like the admin noticeboards. The intro to this page is clearly partisan as well - it's telling me how great the change was - which was not the consensus.. 2027:

Seems like the most reasonable solution: business as usual for those who don't care about this option (including yours truly), while those who do get to pick their favorite style in the process of opting-in.

1308:

was one not a long time ago) can decide if they like it or not. Anyways, the people for which this is annoying are mostly people with large watchlists—people who would know how to turn it off in preferences.

2042:

If you want to use it, use it. But don't bother the rest of us with it. All Gadgets work that way - I see no reason why this one shouldn't. That said, I think it should be integrated into My Preferences =:

2175:

For me and the way I use my watchlist it's just annoying, and I don't see why I should have to opt out of it. If possible it should be set up so that the opt-in can be done through preferences or gadgets.

1706:--Since most people don't like the bolding, and the default is all or nothing, I would suggest to leave it invisible and then let people who like the bolding to add the script to their preferences page. -- 1350:

I'm for a small 'c' indicating the change and a pop-up explaining what does this letter means, much like how bot edits are currently presented. Bold, underline or different color are not obvious at all.---

3807:- Please leave this to the individual user. No one needs the computer to tell him what he has seen; he may choose to take the computer's assistance: but he, I am sure, will find that he does not need it. 1016:

enabled on en.wiki. It does help me pick out what still pending easily, particularly with the "Mark all pages visited" button that clears the bolding on everything once you're done reviewing changes. --

3908:

If it is decided that the new function will be switched on by default for all users, but with a different style, a new style will have to be chosen to use as the default. Here are the current options:

1607:

aesthetics hardly seem like a rational basis for depriving the masses of a useful tool. I would have never known about this option if it hadn't been made opt-out, and I am very grateful that I do. --

1012:

The bold thing is pretty reasonable. I work on both en.wiki and Commons — watchlist of over 8000 items on each — and Commons has had it for quite a while. Indeed, I think I sort of forgot that bold

162:

The feature can also be left invisible across-the-board for all users by default. In this scenario, it would still be possible for editors to switch the feature back on in whichever style they choose.

106:. It introduced a default style of watchlist highlighting for all users. Following a number of complaints about the style, the change has been temporarily reversed so that this survey may take place. 1965:

Right now it seems it's a bit complicated to opt out, so until that's fixed, please make it opt-in, i.e. leave it disabled by default. (I didn't like it when I saw it, either, way too much bold.) --

461:

I hated it at first, but now find it immensely useful. I've added it to my css file. It adds a very helpful feature. There will always be people who want the old way, for understandable reasons.

1906:

would be the least annoying option, but I don't see the advantage as my browser changes colors for the links I recently visited anyway. And no, thank you, I don't want to mess with CSS scripts.--

703:

Support. But it should be more obvious how to customize your watchlist. Perhaps a link on the Watchlist page itself? For the two years I've been here, I certainly didn't know until just today!

5609:

I like this better than anything else. Maybe there could be choices between them in preferences, but I think this should be the default. Easier to recognize new changes than anything else. –

2453:

Opt-in is the best way for most people. Those who want milk and sugar in their coffee can easily add them, while those of us who like it plain don't have to make a special order, you know?

6025:

I would actually prefer it how Google does 'priority inbox' -- I'd like a section at the top with all the changed pages, and then below that in a separate section, all the unchanged pages.

2596:

in the previous RfC - why are we having another? - If certain people don't get the result they want in this RfC, will we have a series of RfCs until they eventually "win" due to fatigue? -

2423:

it. UserPreferences have watchlist settings options listed for pages edited, moved, and created. If anyone wishes to add an article of interest that they visit, they can still "opt in". —

3289:

The current watch list (bare and simple as it is) is an essential tool. Additional bells and whistles can be added per preference but the default should be stripped down and simple. --

5444:

After trying "Faded old changes" for a while, along with experimenting with bold and stars and all that, I find this one to be the cleanest and most intuitive. You also don't have to

3240: 1480:

If this feature is not provided as default (opt-out), very few new users will ever know about it. Veterans who dislike it will be savvy enough to figure out how to turn it off. --

5498:

for the subtle underscoring (above choice). because the text remains the same. Here, one swift glance tells you, boom, you have three changes. Works for my eyes, at any rate. –

2841:, shouldn't you be posting in Option 1? That's the MediaWiki default; the enabling of this feature brought enwiki in line with the default after a long time of being different. 2687:, shouldn't you be posting in Option 1? That's the MediaWiki default; the enabling of this feature brought enwiki in line with the default after a long time of being different. 1383:

I found the bolding obnoxious and distracting but the feature makes sense overall and opt-out with some more subtle style so that it's available to newbies makes sense to me. --

180: 3946: 1065:

and flip it on. In fact, until this fiasco, I used user script for this functionality because nobody knew about CUSTOMWATCH. Proof positive that this should be implemented. --

1849: 1512:

I support this, please. I shall pick my favored option below. Moreover, I echo number five (Nikkimaria) above: for this to be controlled by preferences, not by script/css.

5448:

for any signs of changes. You know instantly what's been changed and what hasn't, without the messiness of bold or the difficulty of underscoring. Best of the bunch, imo. –

4830:

This seems like the most acceptable default, if this is the route taken. The bolding, changing colors and adding stars - way too intrusive for a relatively minor feature. --

3378:

opt-in. As was pointed out above, bold should call out unusual activity, and if you have a huge watchlist and only check a few of the articles, this is very distracting. --

5085:

the non-viewed changes and fading the viewed changes causes the viewed changes to fade away. Colors (and enhanced links) may be invisible to the colorblind; stars and/or

640:

It has worked well for me on Commons. People shouldn't have to edit their .CSS files so it should be a preference for those that don't have web design background like me.

559:

mild preference for this. Whatever the decision is, the option to turn off/on should probably be a checkbox in preferences, for those of us who don't know much about CSS.

880:

The number of commentators to the contrary below (not to mention at the Village Pump) would seem to put the lie to the assumption that "most people would appreciate it".

4719:

Typography. (Fallbacks through Subtle underscore, and Colour change (if colours are worked on prior to implementation, the proposed colours are dodgy), finally plain).

4492:

I love the stars, except for the fact that the don't have a "Mark all as read" button yet (most likely because the devs had to crank out these stars quick to keep the

4923:

Personally I prefer the green stars, but I think the subtle underscore would be the most acceptable default, per all the above editors who say it is non-intrusive. —

5531:

This is great, it's a more subtle change than a lot of the other suggestions so should go some way to appease those voting against enabling the feature altogether.

3991: 324:

That really depends on how active you email contacts are. Articles only became rebolded if they are edited. Of course it should be easy to opt out, "check a box".

585:

nowhere new option is now available? However The Opt out should be pretty much easy and as intuitive as possible - on the watchlist itself or in the preferences.

5948: 3544: 2804:

Aside from being implemented without clear consensus or even adequate notice, the "improvement" is ugly and very hard to read (at least in Monobook, and I have

99: 4757:

I am using this and it is not distracting and I can easily identify the pages which I haven't visited since the last change. Very accommodating to the eye. --

3231:. what-giants2008-said (I was gonna say it;). It is (was) annoying; don't be. If some want a gadget to tart things up, whatevers. Leave teh serious out of it. 4676:

Please avoid anything that only involves a color change... those of us who are color blind really struggle with the kinds of color changes that are common.

4053: 1498:

Knowledge). So, enabling this information by default and asking anyone who doesn't like it to opt out is more realistic than expecting newbies to opt in.

5827:

Note: The talk page has two additional options: Fading; and highlighting (rather than bolding); which I think should also be under consideration here. -

3401:

I actually went to check this to see if it was the correct tag to be using (as opposed to a semantics-less tag or another semantic tag). <strong: -->

3121:

per Daniel Case (and possibly others after him but I stopped reading). And for those who don't like support bolded, please opt out or close your eyes.--

5494:

How is it no good on a white background? I have a white background and I can see the grayed out text just fine. What's harder to track past changes is

4039: 2189:

Best option for those of us who keep our watchlists as small as possible. If there is to be clutter, it should be clutter I've decided I want to have.

488:

Progress is not possible if all we do is listen to the loudest minority of people instead of those people who like something and so don't speak up. --

1779:

In trying to script customizations for this feature I realized its technical implementation is exceedingly poor and very limiting. It was done with a

3930: 259:

but give it one full month switched on and there will be howls of outrage if it is withdrawn. It will be on by default, I can see this as inevitable.

3977: 5354:

reviewed. So any appearance modification should be applied to reviewed changes, not unreviewed changes, and faded seems one good way to do this.--

3916: 5740:

and thus is the least out of place looking. Plus add the little squiggly lines (which I assume is because of the tooltip) and we're in business.

4023: 1563:

forever. As a user, bold would not be my first choice (I've voted below), but it's OK -- and consistency with other wikimedia sites has value. --

4766: 3543:), although it was disabled here on enwiki due to concern over database load. If by "implementing this" you mean "turning this on for enwiki", 2488: 2218: 1861:

is helpful for quickly spotting pages since the few bold items on that meta list stand out. However, using the same formatting on the personal

1679:

Leave it invisible for everyone (no bolding or stars, etc). Users who want to use this feature can opt in by customizing their own watchlists.

1263: 4391: 1577:

Useful feature, but the boldface was absolutely horrible. A more subtle style might appease both those who like and hate this feature. Also,

987: 187: 3296: 4857: 4746: 2016: 1410:

The bolding is too much, now that I'm seeing some other possible options. Opt-in seems inappropriate for the quite useful functionality. --

3945: 1466:

I prefer this option. It can be too difficult for some people to customize. But, I prefer stars; fading is hard to see on some screens. --

3960: 4211: 4007: 3438: 3107: 1935: 1891:

I did not like the changes and prefer to have my watchlist remain as is; I think allowing an opt in - opt out mechanism makes sense...

1119:

Don't care between this and option 1. Option 3 would result in few newbies ever knowing about the feature, which IMO is unacceptable.

242:

Don't care between this and option 2. Option 3 would result in few newbies ever knowing about the feature, which IMO is unacceptable.

5992:

color blind people) that makes unvisited pages bold, or italic, or underlined... or some other visual cue would be much appreciated.

866:

The bolding seems pretty useful. Most people would appreciate it, and those who don't can go into their settings and turn it off. —

5142: 3831: 2351: 1840:

a bit more broadly so that those who do want highlighting on their watchlists can implement it easily would be a good idea, too. --

1660: 1641: 1616: 86:

Thank you for visiting this page. Its purpose is to get your opinion on changes that have the potential to affect everyone who uses

1370:

I like the style that fades the items that have been viewed, rather than bolding unviewed items. (changed support from option 1) --

452:

I liked the bolding for the few hours it was turned on. Enable this for everyone, but make it easy in the preferences to turn off.

310:

watchlist items, etc. At minimum this needs to be better designed and there needs to be a way to opt out without messing with css.

199:

Turn on the default bold style for everyone. Users who prefer something different can opt out by customising their own watchlists.

1030:

It works well at Commons, is relatively unobtrusive, and is similar to what people are already used to from many e-mail sites. --

3290: 2165: 522:

This is how the other Wikis run it, and there should be some level of consistency between the interfaces on the sister projects.

148: 134: 5632:

I already voted for this one, but I would like to add that after another week's worth of using this, perhaps the faded text is

4961: 4844:

If it has to be opt-out this is my perfer method it is the most less intrusive of all and would still achive the goal set out--

3366: 1827: 5951:). All the activity "switching on/off the watchlist features" since then has been the work of admins here messing around with 4537:

Concur with all above comments. I'll need to play with this, to find out what works best for me, but I'll start with stars. --

5764: 5072: 5053:

Not so distracting and keeps a useful feature, but could still have an opt-out for editors which even then wouldn't want it.

2628: 1360: 17: 5706:

for changed us probably better. As with the green star, this is a specific but small icon that would appear along with and

1396:

Forgot to "vote" here. Already described preferred style below (highlight with different colour, no bolding, black font). -

77:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

6052:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

4549: 3990: 3328: 2946:

I don't see why newbies would be interested in this feature, since it's only useful for those who have large watchlists.

756: 3040:

Colors. That would affect all sites though, not just Knowledge. Or you can try the customization options Elen linked to.

375:

established ones do know). Ideally, only new users' opinions should be counted towards this poll (assuming you get any).

1384: 1254:

Should be possible to set in in preferences without the need for additional scripts, as Nikkimaria points out above. --

40:. I will try to a have a gadget implemented that will make it easy to add watchlist highlighting for those who want it. 1592:

I like the flexibility of this option, and users can opt out too. Let the user adjust his/her preferences as desired. -

1099:

If it is left off, the newbies will never find out about it. Those who don't like it can however simply turn it off. --

5937: 5888: 5795: 5784: 5769: 5749: 5727: 5693: 4170:

A star should be shown if you can really tell that it is not vandalism. It would be depressing to show one otherwise.

3023: 2581: 1273: 475:

This is the common format I use on other wikis, and I prefer it for consistency. The other alternative I like most is

43: 1322:

A useful feature; default style isn't too important as long as we whiners can conveniently change styles or disable.

133:

At the moment, the change is invisible, but there are methods to make it visible right now, for yourself. Check out

5403: 4762: 4483: 4382:

it was subtle enough that it would only really register when I was actually looking for it. The perfect indicator.

3162:

Let those who want something different choose what they want. Leave the rest of us to use what we've always used!

2917: 2484: 2403: 2243:

As to the "newbies will never know about it" argument this (and other editing options) could be made a part of the

2211: 1823: 1259: 3521:

Did the developers engage with editors before working on this? While working on this? Before implementing this? --

2262:

line, but it's not done immediately, especially for changes to such an important backbone of the user experience.

6011: 5997: 5973: 4681: 4079:

If the new function is enabled for all users with a new style, I would prefer the following style as the default:

3210:– Should have been opt-in from the start. The changes basically amounted to fixing something that wasn't broken. 942:

Very useful on Commons, and surely it will be the same here. But I'd don't really care if it's this or Option 2.

734:

This feature has been very helpful to me. People are only upset because they didn't see any discussion about it.

569:

Changing to support of Option 2. I actually like the fading of the viewed links, rather than bolding unviewed. --

476: 348: 4052: 5434: 5359: 5000: 4851: 4821: 4740: 4228: 4130: 3277: 2471: 2010: 1943: 1911: 1230: 329: 300: 5714:. As I mentioned on the talk page, another option would be a black star... but I'm currently leaning towards 4412:. That's pretty ugly even on Latin/Cyrillic text.) Really, I'd be OK with any of the suggestions above that 3887:

I could live with the green stars, but not the bolding. Opting in seems to be the fairest to all concerned. --

1865:

makes that page difficult to read because nothing stands out. For me, it is a visual accessibility issue. The

4662:

I've tested it and looks better, also highlighting the new revisions that you haven't read is very useful. --

3535:

It would be hard to answer your questions, since the feature appears to have been in the code since December

3236: 6083: 6042: 6017: 6001: 5979: 5962: 5941: 5926: 5905: 5882: 5863: 5852: 5833: 5822: 5661: 5654: 5624: 5604: 5590: 5575: 5560: 5540: 5522: 5515: 5489: 5472: 5465: 5439: 5423: 5409: 5392: 5378: 5363: 5348: 5331: 5318: 5307: 5286: 5266: 5255: 5241: 5226: 5204: 5182: 5169: 5146: 5127: 5107: 5096: 5076: 5065: 5048: 5034: 5029: 5023: 5017: 5005: 4989: 4980: 4966: 4945: 4931: 4918: 4905: 4890: 4881: 4863: 4839: 4825: 4811: 4798: 4770: 4752: 4728: 4714: 4685: 4671: 4657: 4646: 4639: 4613: 4599: 4578: 4567: 4553: 4532: 4517: 4506: 4487: 4473: 4459: 4438: 4426: 4396: 4376: 4360: 4351: 4337: 4323: 4309: 4291: 4269: 4260: 4254: 4232: 4217: 4206: 4194: 4179: 4164: 4150: 4133: 4124: 4109: 4092: 3897: 3882: 3865: 3857: 3837: 3816: 3799: 3790: 3767: 3744: 3717: 3705: 3689: 3667: 3640: 3622: 3602: 3585: 3561: 3530: 3513: 3499: 3480: 3461: 3444: 3433: 3415: 3396: 3391: 3384: 3379: 3370: 3349: 3332: 3300: 3281: 3264: 3249: 3223: 3202: 3187: 3170: 3157: 3147: 3130: 3113: 3083: 3070: 3054: 3027: 3009: 2989: 2985: 2975: 2961: 2950: 2941: 2923: 2898: 2879: 2867: 2848: 2832: 2818: 2787: 2767: 2755: 2731: 2714: 2694: 2678: 2663: 2648: 2633: 2618: 2605: 2587: 2568: 2561: 2531: 2513: 2500: 2492: 2474: 2462: 2445: 2432: 2407: 2393: 2373: 2329: 2314: 2299: 2276: 2256: 2238: 2225: 2198: 2184: 2170: 2143: 2119: 2105: 2091: 2074: 2057: 2037: 2022: 1994: 1974: 1960: 1947: 1929: 1925: 1915: 1900: 1886: 1831: 1817: 1803: 1772: 1757: 1743: 1729: 1715: 1690: 1664: 1645: 1620: 1601: 1587: 1572: 1557: 1540: 1525: 1519: 1507: 1503: 1489: 1475: 1461: 1436: 1422: 1405: 1391: 1378: 1365: 1345: 1331: 1317: 1302: 1298: 1288: 1267: 1249: 1234: 1210: 1196: 1180: 1154: 1141: 1126: 1114: 1094: 1071: 1036: 1025: 1007: 992: 972: 953: 937: 933: 920: 906: 889: 875: 861: 833: 819: 803: 788: 775: 760: 729: 712: 698: 679: 665: 653: 635: 622: 609: 577: 553: 539: 517: 513: 503: 483: 470: 456: 447: 434: 421: 403: 393: 369: 352: 333: 319: 304: 287: 249: 237: 231: 218: 65: 5933: 5419: 5093: 4038: 3764: 3684: 3019: 2938: 2674: 2293: 799: 723: 2955:

Regardless of my preference, this obviously splits opinion so the old setting should remain the default.

5900: 5397: 5138: 4925: 4914: 4758: 4493: 4479: 4357: 3894: 3812: 3198: 3183: 3015: 3005: 2911: 2659: 2527: 2509: 2480: 2399: 2347: 2204: 2194: 1866: 1837: 1808:

Per typology and disability access; but, also strongly per Equazcion's criticism of the implementation.

1720: 1687: 1656: 1637: 1612: 1339: 1255: 1062: 870: 771: 480: 343:

the first few lines of new posts. Then I need a "hide" checkbox to remove the post from my watchlist.

3929: 23: 3775:

if only because the first attempt was so totally fucked up that doing it again would cause... issues.

6008: 5993: 5970: 5952: 5553: 5251: 5212: 5187:

I have been trying every possible combination of the above. My preferred (and implemented) choice is

5039:

I might actually use the feature with this option, but the others are so distracting I never would. -

4807: 4710: 4702: 4677: 4504: 4422: 4303: 4282: 3852: 3494: 3345: 3217: 2814: 2384: 2339: 2158: 2148:

I have mine bolded, but you should need to opt in not out. It was easy enough to modify my css page.

1768: 1753: 1739: 1711: 1432: 1206: 1176: 1069: 1021: 885: 829: 647: 530: 389: 385: 364: 344: 315: 216: 208: 3976: 2872:

OTOH, if people are confused about what the default actually is, it might be worth correcting them.

1201:

I think either would be fine, so long as it is made quite clear how this can be "fixed" if desired.

6076: 5919: 5847: 5572: 5429: 5355: 5061: 4995: 4956: 4941: 4845: 4817: 4734: 4563: 4530: 4224: 4155:

Leave the goshdarned default alone. Just because you can do something does not make it worth doing

3915: 3617: 3580: 3362: 3273: 3260: 3049: 2893: 2862: 2782: 2750: 2709: 2441: 2325: 2271: 2253: 2235: 2134: 2004: 1939: 1907: 1896: 1882: 1874: 1798: 1700: 1553: 1485: 1313: 1226: 968: 916: 902: 817: 417: 325: 296: 125: 58: 4697:

To my eyes, the easiest to work with. If this were available, I would enable it for my account. --

4022: 1147:

new user have to dig through their preferences to find out how to turn on such a helpful feature.

462: 5780: 5760: 5723: 5649: 5600: 5510: 5460: 5388: 5374: 5344: 5303: 5012: 4986: 4901: 4724: 4634: 4609: 4455: 4386: 4333: 4249: 4201: 4160: 4088: 3776: 3663: 3428: 3245: 3232: 3143: 2981: 2828: 2644: 2626: 2614: 2556: 2458: 2244: 1921: 1813: 1597: 1578: 1514: 1499: 1471: 1375: 1356: 1294: 1284: 1245: 1137: 982: 929: 855: 708: 574: 564: 549: 509: 496: 282: 267: 256: 226: 100:

Knowledge:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 83#Enable "Show changes since last visit" on watchlist

4265:

As it is on Commons. With bolding it's easy to see at a glance which pages have been changed. —

1845: 179:

If you want to discuss this, or have other options you think should be considered, post on the

103: 6063: 5878: 5745: 5686: 5536: 5485: 5415: 5312:

Not a fan of the green stars - they seem like just extra clutter to me. YMMV, of course : ) -

5237: 5090: 4595: 4546: 4469: 4347: 4321: 4175: 4120: 3761: 3679: 3526: 3509: 3325: 3089: 3066: 2934: 2670: 2601: 2428: 2287: 2087: 2033: 1989: 1956: 1536: 1087: 795: 752: 718: 686: 675: 663: 631: 618: 466: 87: 5565:

Agreed on this being the least intrusiv. (2nd place for underscore, 3rd for highlighting.) --

2383:

I suddenly see parts of my watchlist boldface, and think, "what the heck's happening here?")

928:; I don't much care what the style is; just show me and anyone who doesn't decide it's ugly. 6006:

No preference. And I guess I am not the only one. Hey wait! how did I get on this page....

5959: 5895: 5622: 5586: 5284: 5178: 5134: 5125: 4910: 4791: 4667: 4512: 4434: 4371: 4190: 4104: 3889: 3878: 3808: 3700: 3648:

who have poor eyesight (e.g. have trouble distinguishing bold from normal weight typefaces);

3599: 3558: 3469:– My 23,790 page watchlist would not appreciate it. (I can't stand this on Commons either.) 3457: 3194: 3179: 3167: 3001: 2947: 2876: 2845: 2764: 2728: 2691: 2655: 2523: 2505: 2343: 2190: 2115: 1920:

I prefere it as it is. The option of being able to customize your watchlist is good enough.

1724: 1684: 1652: 1633: 1608: 1568: 1327: 1193: 1151: 1123: 1107: 1032: 1003: 948: 867: 767: 694: 606: 444: 430: 246: 4238:

Keep it the same but make it so you can look at the whole week instead of three days. Nhog

2700:

This could easily get out of hand, and I'm surprised to see you resorting to this, Anomie.

6034: 5548: 5247: 5193:

strong.mw-watched a { font-weight: normal; color: #000000; background-color: PeachPuff; }

5044: 4976: 4875: 4803: 4706: 4698: 4501: 4418: 4298: 4277: 3847: 3489: 3341: 3211: 3126: 2810: 2369: 2310: 2151: 2051: 1764: 1749: 1735: 1707: 1457: 1428: 1414: 1202: 1172: 1066: 1017: 911:

Bold is fine, though I'm okay with any styling, so long as the feature isn't invisible. --

881: 825: 642: 525: 358: 311: 213: 205: 176:

Please add your name, and optionally, a brief comment, below one of the options presented.

1734:

First choice given the current implementation. If that is improved, equal choice with 2.

49:

because no one bothered to close this. Yes I'm "involved", but this is an obvious close.

6069: 5911: 5841: 5791: 5566: 5262: 5200: 5103: 5054: 4951: 4937: 4574: 4559: 4523: 3959: 3862: 3821: 3735: 3611: 3574: 3411: 3358: 3256: 3043: 2971: 2887: 2856: 2776: 2744: 2703: 2593: 2437: 2321: 2265: 2249: 2231: 2125: 2101: 2082:

What happened to the previous RfC where there was an overwhelming response for opt in?

2070: 1892: 1878: 1870: 1792: 1696: 1583: 1546: 1481: 1418: 1401: 1309: 1186: 964: 912: 898: 810: 784: 410: 95: 51: 4006: 357:

Torn between options 1 and 2. The newbes would never find out about this otherwise. --

5776: 5755: 5719: 5596: 5384: 5370: 5340: 5299: 4897: 4835: 4720: 4605: 4497: 4451: 4383: 4329: 4266: 4156: 4084: 3659: 3568: 3540: 3154: 3139: 2957: 2824: 2737: 2720: 2640: 2623: 2610: 2454: 1970: 1809: 1593: 1467: 1371: 1351: 1280: 1241: 1134: 979: 845: 704: 570: 560: 545: 489: 400: 276: 261: 5298:

I like this idea... and maybe it could be used in combination with the green star.

5874: 5812:

Briefly describe your preference. Extended descriptions should go on the talk page.

5741: 5677: 5532: 5481: 5233: 4591: 4538: 4465: 4343: 4316: 4171: 4116: 3522: 3505: 3317: 3077: 3062: 2930: 2597: 2424: 2178: 2083: 2029: 1980: 1952: 1841: 1532: 1078: 736: 671: 658: 627: 614: 453: 4083:

This poll should also be used to set the style, if this ends up an opt-in choice.

5192: 5188: 3018:

for tips on how to customise your own watchlist, if you haven't already done so.

2065:

per Sctechlaw and agr's comment. Opt-in or out should be personal preferences. --

897:

that something is being changed, rather than the actual merits of the feature. --

5956: 5617: 5582: 5279: 5174: 5120: 4785: 4663: 4366: 4186: 3874: 3695: 3596: 3555: 3453: 3403: 3308:

as the general way to introduce changes. Love the feature, and will opt in, but

3163: 2873: 2842: 2761: 2725: 2688: 2111: 1564: 1323: 1190: 1148: 1120: 1101: 999: 943: 690: 595: 441: 426: 243: 5480:. Not good on white background; further, harder to quickly track past changes. 6027: 5040: 4972: 4887: 4870: 4654: 3714: 3122: 2577: 2497: 2365: 2306: 2046: 1446: 5910:

I am opposed to using stars. These should be reserved for featured articles.

2823:

Leave the goshdarned default alone and let those who like daft styles opt in

5859: 5829: 5818: 5327: 5314: 5196: 5165: 4604:

That looks very nice and would be good for the newbies, and the rest of us.

4511:

Quite good looking and doesn't hurt my eyes with bold. Soft, does thy work.

4500:. I'd be happy with either this or stars and bold if that could be fixed. -- 3726: 3407: 2967: 2097: 2066: 1411: 1397: 780: 4342:

Support. Works well at Commons, no complaints there (that I've seen...) --

114:

items in a way different from read items. This feature has been in use at

4831: 4328:

Also support. Makes sense to me, and it also matches many email clients.

1966: 2724:"discredit" two comments out of 58 for word choice in the face of that? 1132:

discover, a video tutorial shown to them upon signing up should assist.

842:, set this up, but set up something so we don't have to tweak CSS code. 591:

your own experience and try to see how well it will fit your taste then.

186:

If you have a question on how to customize your own watchlist, post at

2574:

users know what happened and how to reverse it if they don't like it.

1545:

There are other options which should be more acceptable than bolding.

4274:

As I said above, consistency across sister projects is a good thing.

5189:

span.updatedmarker { background-color: PeachPuff; color: #000000; }

4450:

It stands out without interfering with the readability of the page.

3694:

Nothing wrong with the current list format; no reason to change it.

3357:

opt-in. Let people who want additional features add them manually. –

1293:

Per Nikimaria. If it can be turned off with a gadget, that's great.

2230:

Vastly preferable and Daniel Case has said it better than I could.

2044:

Gadgets to make it easy for people to use it if they want. Regards

167:

for most users, so it is important to find out what works for you.

115: 5089:

should be located among the other flags (m/b/N/...) if at all. —

4356:

A consistent interface across all wikis would be the best option.

4051: 4037: 4021: 4005: 3989: 3975: 3958: 3944: 3928: 3914: 204:

I love this feature. It really helps with watchlist management. --

119: 5955:

to change the styling between "no change" various other options.

1748:

Generally the best approach for changes to the user interface. --

122:

for some time, so some editors will be familiar with it already.

3890: 1979:

Opt in if editors want it, shouldn't be forced on every editor.

2966:

Definitely should be opt in. Default style is fine in my eyes.

4522:

If we do end up choosing a new style, I'd go for these stars.

4242:

Bold (default on most wikis, including Commons and Wiktionary)

5947:

master switch in the configuration to turn it on here (since

5010:

The most easily noticeable for me and visibility friendly.

4971:

Least intrusive. The bold option is a usability nightmare. --

212:

Moving my support to option 2 for reasons mentioned there. --

4069:

Note: Most of these styles are displayed in the Vector skin.

3402:

actually is, by my interpretation, the correct tag in HTML5,

3138:

opt-in. No need to change something that perfectly works. -

3312:

advertise these things better: the watch-list page was an

670:

Works well at Commons, as others have noted. My choice. --

36:

There is clear consensus to have watchlist highlighting

1223: 1220: 94:

New functionality was recently enabled for Knowledge's

5428:

It is more intuitive to have old stuff fading away. --

5414:

I think this is admirable, simple and unobjectionable.

3554:

which would IMO constitute "engagement" with editors.

1784:

should be completely disabled until it's coded better

129:

This is what the default setting looks like on Commons

5383:

Informative but non-intrusive. My pick of the bunch.

4733:

This would be my 2nd option if it has to be opt-out--

5754:

With an explanation tooltip similar to bot edits. --

4296:

Consistency with Commons - many people use Commons.

2773:

confused. They are not. You'll need to accept that.

5932:on/off the watchlist features only made it worse. 5339:, non-obtrusive, but still highlights new changes 4705:) 20:03, 14 May 2012 (UTC) In fact, I just did! -- 3178:Not sure why this wasn't done in the first place. 4478:If it must happen this is the choice I'd prefer. 961:easy, reversible, one-click method to turn it off 4103:simple. That's the reason why I'm using Modern! 2110:No bolding or stars or anything else? I'm in.-- 5887:Any except bold stars, italics, or highlight. 3405:though the default styling for <strong: --> 1272:Any except bold stars, italics, or highlight. 5081:Seems the best to me. As others have noted, 3756:change, such as the subtle underscore or the 1695:--Assuming this means no bolding or stars... 1427:Support for fading out instead of bolding. -- 102:, after which a Bugzilla report was filed at 8: 3713:per JasperDeng. I prefer to leave as-is. -- 3000:other reason, give it to em as an option. -- 3406:is apparently undesired by at least 2/3. -- 2760:All the more reason to correct them, then. 5545:Yes, it looks great to me..It'll be good. 1723:will do the get great after a few months. 689:. And there's a lot more to it than that! 4129:Simple, of course this is the right one! 2203:Absolutely the most reasonable solution. 2419:something than continuously have to opt 124: 3591:So who's jumping on who now, Equazcion? 24:User:Elen of the Roads/Watchlist survey 1043:Option 2: Opt-out with different style 5595:My only choice. Best of the bunch. -- 188:Knowledge talk:Customizing watchlists 7: 6064:User talk:Barts1a § Moved discussion 4653:Most pleasant and easy to work with 4247:To keep it consistent across wikis. 4015:(instead of highlighted new changes) 963:linked directly from that banner. -- 195:Option 1: Opt-out with default style 73:The following discussion is closed. 5028:Appears least distracting to me. -- 2479:Should always be opt-in, not out. — 1167:this is controlled by preferences, 1061:because the noobs would never find 1936:Knowledge:Village pump (technical) 1185:Is a gadget satisfactory, or must 440:that's neither here nor there. -— 31: 2359:Opt-in or opt-out, I don't care, 6057: 6048:The discussion above is closed. 5610: 5272: 5113: 4994:The bold is too intimidating. -- 3910: 824:I find the bolding very useful. 149:Knowledge:Customizing watchlists 135:Knowledge:Customizing watchlists 2381:telling people what's going on? 1934:Based on all the complaints on 408:Useful feature long overdue. — 1445:, bolding is a bit obnoxious. 98:. The change was discussed at 18:Knowledge:Requests for comment 1: 5702:for updated or unseen... but 5675: 2248:have know idea what they do. 1076: 1836:Per Equazcion. Advertising 6084:19:43, 15 August 2012 (UTC) 4985:Seems the most sensible. -- 4936:I agree, not too annoying. 3452:I see no reason to change. 3390:tag? Shirley you jest... -- 3255:I agree with SoWhy in #21. 2736:No one's confused. In case 1429:Alberto Fernandez Fernandez 544:I go with what Imzadi said 157:whatever default is chosen. 6100: 6055: 4464:This looks good as well -- 3504:I prefer the old system. 2398:Default should be opt in. 587:Not by personal scripts!!! 4439:00:30, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 3389:P.S. -- a <strong: --> 3252:) 3:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 1037:00:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC) 477:File:MwWatchedReverse.png 66:02:19, 29 July 2012 (UTC) 6050:Please do not modify it. 6043:19:31, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 6018:01:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 6002:15:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5980:01:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 5963:10:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 5942:05:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 5927:16:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 5906:18:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5891:17:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5883:14:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5864:12:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5853:09:55, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5834:09:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5823:09:57, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 5796:11:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5785:13:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 5770:12:52, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 5750:03:06, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 5736:as it has similarity to 5728:18:03, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5694:19:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC) 5662:05:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 5625:23:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5605:10:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5591:23:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC) 5576:15:08, 27 May 2012 (UTC) 5561:12:38, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 5541:10:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 5523:23:01, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 5490:20:11, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5473:18:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5440:17:29, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5424:17:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 5410:23:40, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 5393:04:58, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 5379:01:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 5364:20:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5349:20:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5332:12:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5319:12:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5308:12:07, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5287:23:39, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5267:11:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5256:20:43, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5242:06:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 5227:12:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 5205:11:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 5183:06:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 5170:12:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 5147:10:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 5128:23:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5108:11:21, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 5097:23:40, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 5077:20:45, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 5066:14:11, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 5049:01:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 5035:21:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5024:20:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 5006:17:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4990:19:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 4981:21:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 4967:21:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 4946:16:42, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 4932:16:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4919:06:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4906:04:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4891:02:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4882:12:44, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4864:11:24, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4840:10:16, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4826:02:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 4812:13:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 4799:00:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 4771:12:33, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4753:11:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4729:02:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 4715:20:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 4686:15:11, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4672:22:58, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 4658:15:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4647:04:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4614:02:21, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4600:14:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4579:11:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 4568:15:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4554:14:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4533:03:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 4518:13:16, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 4507:15:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4488:20:29, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4474:14:50, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4460:09:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4427:04:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 4397:00:58, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 4377:02:28, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 4361:14:00, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4352:13:38, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 4338:01:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 4324:16:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4310:12:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4292:00:30, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4270:11:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4261:00:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 4233:23:01, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4218:22:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 4195:17:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 4180:11:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 4165:23:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4151:02:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4134:01:47, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 4125:22:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 4110:09:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 4093:13:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 3898:15:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC) 3883:23:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 3866:22:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 3858:22:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 3842:All such changes should 3838:16:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC) 3817:19:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 3800:02:17, 27 May 2012 (UTC) 3768:23:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 3745:21:30, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 3718:19:58, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 3706:13:32, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 3690:07:17, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 3668:13:28, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 3623:20:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3603:19:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3586:17:16, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3562:16:48, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3531:11:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3514:06:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3500:03:56, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3481:03:01, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3462:00:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 3445:22:51, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3416:17:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 3397:21:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3385:21:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3371:21:22, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3350:20:39, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3333:14:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3301:12:56, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3282:11:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3265:05:09, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 3241:19:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 3224:17:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 3203:17:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 3188:16:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 3171:01:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 3158:21:21, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 3148:20:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 3131:01:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 3114:21:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 3084:18:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 3071:16:16, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 3055:12:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 3028:12:17, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 3010:12:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2990:10:43, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2976:08:02, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2962:06:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2951:03:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2942:01:52, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2924:23:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2899:02:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2880:02:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2868:01:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2849:00:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2837:If you want to keep the 2833:22:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2819:22:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2788:04:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2768:03:02, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2756:02:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2732:02:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2715:01:03, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2695:00:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 2683:If you want to keep the 2679:22:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2664:20:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2649:18:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2634:17:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2619:16:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2606:15:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2588:13:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2569:09:16, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2532:08:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2514:06:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2501:02:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2493:02:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2475:01:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2463:00:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 2446:23:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2433:22:38, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2408:20:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2394:20:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2374:16:10, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 2330:17:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2315:17:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2300:17:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2277:17:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2257:17:33, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2239:17:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2226:16:21, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2199:15:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2185:15:54, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2171:15:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2144:14:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2120:14:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2106:14:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2092:13:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2075:12:46, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2058:12:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2038:12:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 2023:11:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1995:10:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1975:10:14, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1961:09:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1948:09:33, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1930:09:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1916:20:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 1901:23:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC) 1887:09:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC) 1869:page is helpful also. — 1850:18:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 1832:05:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 1818:02:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 1804:01:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 1773:14:50, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 1758:20:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1744:13:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1730:01:20, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1716:00:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1691:19:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC) 1665:11:05, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 1646:10:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 1621:10:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 1602:20:49, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1588:11:20, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 1573:23:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC) 1558:14:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 1541:10:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 1526:20:17, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 1508:15:29, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 1490:15:14, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 1476:18:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 1462:14:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 1437:09:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 1423:16:47, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 1406:15:30, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 1392:14:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 1379:02:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 1366:20:38, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 1346:17:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 1332:06:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 1318:00:15, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 1303:21:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1289:19:29, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1276:17:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1268:12:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1250:09:36, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 1235:02:32, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 1219:Same reasons as before: 1211:02:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 1197:15:52, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1181:13:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1155:17:23, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 1142:08:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 1127:03:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1115:00:56, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 1095:19:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC) 1072:15:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 1026:04:21, 31 May 2012 (UTC) 1008:15:22, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 993:01:16, 28 May 2012 (UTC) 973:05:01, 27 May 2012 (UTC) 954:02:27, 26 May 2012 (UTC) 938:13:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 921:01:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC) 907:14:21, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 890:02:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 876:00:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC) 862:16:05, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 834:07:54, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 820:03:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 804:18:54, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 789:18:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 776:04:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 761:01:08, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 730:10:01, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 713:01:16, 20 May 2012 (UTC) 699:21:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 687:we have an article on it 680:17:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 666:16:46, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 654:12:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 636:12:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 623:12:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 610:11:10, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 578:02:43, 21 May 2012 (UTC) 567:02:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 554:02:19, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 540:00:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 518:20:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 504:18:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 484:18:47, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 471:18:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 457:17:46, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 448:16:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 435:14:21, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 422:10:50, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 404:10:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 394:10:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 370:06:25, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 353:00:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 334:06:55, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 320:02:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 305:17:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 288:16:55, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 272:09:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 250:03:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 238:00:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC) 219:15:02, 19 May 2012 (UTC) 210:16:03, 18 May 2012 (UTC) 75:Please do not modify it. 5669: 4496:people settled down at 3651:who are color blind; or 3641:Tyranny of the majority 508:Works fine on Commons. 5732:I like the thought of 5158:Highlight (not bolded) 4074:Choose a default style 4061: 4047: 4031: 4017: 3999: 3985: 3969: 3954: 3938: 3924: 3654:who are totally-blind. 130: 5698:I was thinking maybe 5670:Small "c" ('changed') 4585:Green stars with bold 4055: 4041: 4025: 4009: 3993: 3979: 3962: 3948: 3932: 3918: 3752:. An opt-out with a 2415:! I would rather opt 1824:Lothar von Richthofen 128: 5953:MediaWiki:Common.css 5875:♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 5802:Enhanced link colors 5742:♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 5031:SarekOfVulcan (talk) 4028:Enhanced link colors 3393:SarekOfVulcan (talk) 3381:SarekOfVulcan (talk) 2592:As clearly achieved 2354:) 17:55, 18 May 2012 1163:Equal choice with 3 147:the instructions at 4590:Looks quite good -- 4131:Whoop whoop pull up 3488:No bolding please. 2630:The Undertaker 20–0 2472:Whoop whoop pull up 2124:This. Please this. 1857:The bolded text on 5369:a visited link. -- 5232:scale though..).-- 4062: 4060: 4048: 4046: 4032: 4030: 4018: 4016: 4000: 3998: 3986: 3984: 3970: 3968: 3955: 3953: 3939: 3937: 3925: 3923: 3833:Operation Big Bear 1822:Per Equazcion. ~~ 1279:Per Nikkimaria. -- 381:enhanced watchlist 257:Green eggs and Ham 211: 131: 92: 76: 6021: 5983: 5934:Materialscientist 5904: 5849: 5559: 5293:Faded old changes 5225: 5064: 4868:Per Joy. Regards 4860: 4854: 4816:Non-intrusive. -- 4777:Subtle underscore 4749: 4743: 4394: 4149: 4066: 4065: 4056: 4042: 4026: 4012:Faded old changes 4010: 3994: 3982:Subtle underscore 3980: 3963: 3949: 3933: 3919: 3896: 3797: 3619: 3592: 3582: 3111: 3051: 3020:Elen of the Roads 2895: 2864: 2784: 2752: 2711: 2356: 2342:comment added by 2302: 2273: 2168: 2140: 2131: 2019: 2013: 1800: 1556: 1531:pages is needed. 990: 420: 203: 84: 74: 50: 47: 44:non-admin closure 22:(Redirected from 6091: 6086: 6081: 6074: 6061: 6060: 6041: 6039: 6032: 6016: 5978: 5949:we asked them to 5924: 5918: 5914: 5898: 5850: 5846: 5844: 5692: 5689: 5683: 5657: 5652: 5646: 5643: 5640: 5621: 5614: 5613: 5569: 5558: 5556: 5551: 5546: 5518: 5513: 5507: 5504: 5501: 5468: 5463: 5457: 5454: 5451: 5437: 5432: 5406: 5400: 5399:CharlieEchoTango 5283: 5276: 5275: 5224: 5223: 5220: 5219: 5216: 5194: 5190: 5124: 5117: 5116: 5060: 5057: 5032: 5020: 5015: 5003: 4998: 4964: 4959: 4954: 4928: 4927:Mr. Stradivarius 4878: 4873: 4858: 4852: 4848: 4797: 4759:Toshio Yamaguchi 4747: 4741: 4737: 4642: 4637: 4631: 4628: 4625: 4528: 4515: 4480:Intothatdarkness 4411: 4405: 4390: 4374: 4369: 4319: 4306: 4301: 4290: 4287: 4280: 4257: 4252: 4214: 4209: 4204: 4147: 4144: 4140: 4107: 3911: 3892: 3888: 3855: 3850: 3834: 3828: 3796: 3791: 3788: 3742: 3733: 3703: 3698: 3687: 3682: 3620: 3616: 3614: 3590: 3583: 3579: 3577: 3497: 3479: 3478: 3441: 3436: 3431: 3394: 3382: 3293: 3220: 3214: 3112: 3105: 3102: 3099: 3096: 3093: 3080: 3061:Support opt-in. 3052: 3048: 3046: 2980:Support opt in. 2920: 2914: 2913:CharlieEchoTango 2896: 2892: 2890: 2865: 2861: 2859: 2785: 2781: 2779: 2753: 2749: 2747: 2712: 2708: 2706: 2586: 2564: 2559: 2553: 2550: 2547: 2481:Strange Passerby 2400:Intothatdarkness 2390: 2355: 2336: 2296: 2290: 2286: 2274: 2270: 2268: 2223: 2216: 2209: 2166: 2150: 2141: 2136: 2132: 2127: 2054: 2049: 2017: 2011: 2007: 1992: 1987: 1801: 1797: 1795: 1782: 1727: 1675:Option 3: Opt-in 1552: 1549: 1522: 1517: 1452: 1342: 1341:Mr. Stradivarius 1256:Toshio Yamaguchi 1113: 1093: 1090: 1084: 986: 951: 946: 873: 858: 853: 850: 815: 748: 745: 742: 739: 728: 726: 721: 661: 650: 645: 601: 538: 535: 528: 499: 492: 413: 409: 367: 361: 285: 281: 270: 266: 255:Sweet ! This is 234: 229: 63: 56: 48: 41: 27: 6099: 6098: 6094: 6093: 6092: 6090: 6089: 6088: 6087: 6077: 6070: 6068: 6066: 6058: 6054: 6053: 6035: 6028: 6026: 5994:ReformedArsenal 5920: 5916: 5912: 5842: 5840: 5809: 5804: 5768: 5687: 5678: 5672: 5659: 5655: 5650: 5644: 5641: 5638: 5615: 5611: 5567: 5554: 5549: 5547: 5520: 5516: 5511: 5505: 5502: 5499: 5470: 5466: 5461: 5455: 5452: 5449: 5435: 5430: 5404: 5398: 5295: 5277: 5273: 5217: 5214: 5213: 5210: 5160: 5155: 5118: 5114: 5058: 5030: 5018: 5013: 5001: 4996: 4962: 4957: 4952: 4926: 4876: 4871: 4846: 4784: 4779: 4735: 4694: 4678:ReformedArsenal 4644: 4640: 4635: 4629: 4626: 4623: 4587: 4524: 4513: 4447: 4407: 4403: 4395: 4372: 4367: 4317: 4304: 4299: 4286: 4283: 4278: 4275: 4255: 4250: 4244: 4212: 4207: 4202: 4145: 4142: 4105: 4100: 4076: 3906: 3904:Preferred style 3853: 3848: 3836: 3832: 3822: 3792: 3785: 3781: 3777: 3736: 3727: 3701: 3696: 3685: 3680: 3612: 3610: 3575: 3573: 3495: 3477: 3472: 3470: 3439: 3434: 3429: 3392: 3380: 3291: 3218: 3212: 3110: 3100: 3097: 3094: 3091: 3088: 3078: 3044: 3042: 2939:Help me improve 2918: 2912: 2888: 2886: 2857: 2855: 2777: 2775: 2745: 2743: 2704: 2702: 2631: 2624:Armbrust, B.Ed. 2584: 2575: 2566: 2562: 2557: 2551: 2548: 2545: 2386: 2337: 2294: 2288: 2266: 2264: 2219: 2212: 2205: 2149: 2135: 2126: 2052: 2047: 2005: 1990: 1981: 1793: 1791: 1781:<strong: --> 1780: 1725: 1677: 1550: 1520: 1515: 1454: 1450: 1364: 1340: 1171:by script/css. 1100: 1088: 1079: 1057:instead of opt- 1045: 991: 949: 944: 871: 856: 846: 843: 811: 746: 743: 740: 737: 724: 719: 717: 659: 648: 643: 599: 534: 531: 526: 523: 497: 490: 411: 365: 359: 345:Unscintillating 283: 275: 268: 260: 232: 227: 197: 173: 143: 79: 70: 69: 68: 59: 52: 29: 28: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 6097: 6095: 6056: 6047: 6046: 6045: 6023: 6022: 6004: 5989: 5988: 5987: 5986: 5985: 5984: 5929: 5908: 5892: 5885: 5872: 5871: 5870: 5869: 5868: 5867: 5866: 5857:Thanks! : ) - 5808: 5805: 5803: 5800: 5799: 5798: 5787: 5772: 5758: 5752: 5730: 5696: 5671: 5668: 5667: 5666: 5665: 5664: 5648: 5607: 5593: 5578: 5563: 5543: 5529: 5528: 5527: 5526: 5525: 5509: 5459: 5442: 5431:Tea with toast 5426: 5412: 5395: 5381: 5366: 5351: 5334: 5323: 5322: 5321: 5294: 5291: 5290: 5289: 5269: 5258: 5244: 5229: 5207: 5191:combined with 5185: 5172: 5159: 5156: 5154: 5151: 5150: 5149: 5130: 5110: 5099: 5079: 5068: 5051: 5037: 5026: 5008: 4997:Tea with toast 4992: 4983: 4969: 4948: 4934: 4921: 4908: 4893: 4884: 4866: 4847:Andrewcrawford 4842: 4828: 4818:Michaeldsuarez 4814: 4801: 4778: 4775: 4774: 4773: 4755: 4736:Andrewcrawford 4731: 4717: 4693: 4690: 4689: 4688: 4674: 4660: 4651: 4650: 4649: 4633: 4602: 4586: 4583: 4582: 4581: 4570: 4556: 4535: 4520: 4509: 4494:WP:CUSTOMWATCH 4490: 4476: 4462: 4446: 4443: 4442: 4441: 4429: 4415: 4399: 4389: 4379: 4363: 4354: 4340: 4326: 4312: 4294: 4284: 4272: 4263: 4243: 4240: 4236: 4235: 4225:MathewTownsend 4220: 4197: 4182: 4168: 4153: 4136: 4127: 4112: 4099: 4096: 4075: 4072: 4064: 4063: 4049: 4034: 4033: 4019: 4014: 4002: 4001: 3987: 3972: 3971: 3956: 3941: 3940: 3935:Stars and bold 3926: 3905: 3902: 3901: 3900: 3885: 3868: 3860: 3840: 3830: 3819: 3802: 3783: 3779: 3770: 3747: 3720: 3708: 3692: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3657: 3656: 3655: 3652: 3649: 3633: 3632: 3631: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3593: 3516: 3502: 3483: 3473: 3467:Strong support 3464: 3447: 3422: 3421: 3420: 3419: 3418: 3373: 3352: 3335: 3303: 3284: 3274:MathewTownsend 3267: 3253: 3243: 3226: 3205: 3190: 3173: 3160: 3150: 3133: 3116: 3106: 3086: 3073: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3039:Content -: --> 3038:Options -: --> 3030: 3016:WP:CUSTOMWATCH 2992: 2978: 2964: 2953: 2944: 2926: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2821: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2794: 2793: 2792: 2791: 2790: 2666: 2651: 2636: 2629: 2621: 2608: 2590: 2580: 2571: 2555: 2534: 2516: 2503: 2495: 2477: 2470:per Textorus. 2465: 2448: 2435: 2410: 2396: 2376: 2357: 2332: 2317: 2303: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2228: 2201: 2187: 2173: 2146: 2122: 2108: 2094: 2077: 2060: 2040: 2025: 2006:Andrewcrawford 1997: 1977: 1963: 1950: 1940:Sgt. R.K. Blue 1932: 1918: 1903: 1889: 1867:WP:CUSTOMWATCH 1859:Recent Changes 1852: 1838:WP:CUSTOMWATCH 1834: 1820: 1806: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1746: 1732: 1721:WP:CUSTOMWATCH 1718: 1704: 1693: 1676: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1648: 1624: 1623: 1604: 1590: 1575: 1560: 1543: 1528: 1510: 1492: 1478: 1464: 1448: 1439: 1425: 1408: 1394: 1381: 1368: 1354: 1348: 1334: 1320: 1305: 1291: 1277: 1270: 1252: 1237: 1227:Michaeldsuarez 1217: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1165:if and only if 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1117: 1097: 1074: 1063:WP:CUSTOMWATCH 1044: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1028: 1015: 1010: 995: 985: 975: 956: 940: 923: 909: 894: 893: 892: 864: 836: 822: 806: 791: 778: 763: 732: 715: 701: 682: 668: 656: 638: 625: 612: 582: 581: 580: 542: 532: 520: 506: 486: 473: 459: 450: 437: 424: 406: 396: 372: 355: 340: 339: 338: 337: 336: 326:Chico Venancio 297:Chico Venancio 292: 291: 290: 240: 222: 221: 196: 193: 192: 191: 190:to get advice. 184: 177: 172: 169: 164: 163: 159: 158: 153: 152: 142: 139: 104:bugzilla:33123 82: 80: 71: 35: 34: 33: 32: 30: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6096: 6085: 6082: 6080: 6075: 6073: 6065: 6051: 6044: 6040: 6038: 6033: 6031: 6024: 6019: 6014: 6013: 6010: 6005: 6003: 5999: 5995: 5990: 5981: 5976: 5975: 5972: 5966: 5965: 5964: 5961: 5958: 5954: 5950: 5945: 5944: 5943: 5939: 5935: 5930: 5928: 5925: 5923: 5915: 5909: 5907: 5902: 5897: 5893: 5890: 5886: 5884: 5880: 5876: 5873: 5865: 5862: 5861: 5856: 5855: 5854: 5851: 5848: 5845: 5837: 5836: 5835: 5832: 5831: 5826: 5825: 5824: 5821: 5820: 5816: 5815: 5814: 5813: 5806: 5801: 5797: 5794: 5793: 5788: 5786: 5782: 5778: 5773: 5771: 5766: 5762: 5757: 5753: 5751: 5747: 5743: 5739: 5735: 5731: 5729: 5725: 5721: 5717: 5713: 5709: 5705: 5701: 5697: 5695: 5690: 5684: 5681: 5674: 5673: 5663: 5660: 5658: 5653: 5635: 5631: 5628: 5627: 5626: 5623: 5620: 5619: 5608: 5606: 5602: 5598: 5594: 5592: 5588: 5584: 5579: 5577: 5574: 5570: 5564: 5562: 5557: 5552: 5544: 5542: 5538: 5534: 5530: 5524: 5521: 5519: 5514: 5497: 5493: 5492: 5491: 5487: 5483: 5479: 5476: 5475: 5474: 5471: 5469: 5464: 5447: 5443: 5441: 5438: 5433: 5427: 5425: 5421: 5417: 5413: 5411: 5407: 5401: 5396: 5394: 5390: 5386: 5382: 5380: 5376: 5372: 5367: 5365: 5361: 5357: 5352: 5350: 5346: 5342: 5338: 5335: 5333: 5330: 5329: 5324: 5320: 5317: 5316: 5311: 5310: 5309: 5305: 5301: 5297: 5296: 5292: 5288: 5285: 5282: 5281: 5270: 5268: 5265: 5264: 5259: 5257: 5253: 5249: 5245: 5243: 5239: 5235: 5230: 5228: 5222: 5221: 5208: 5206: 5202: 5198: 5186: 5184: 5180: 5176: 5173: 5171: 5168: 5167: 5162: 5161: 5157: 5153:Colour change 5152: 5148: 5144: 5140: 5136: 5131: 5129: 5126: 5123: 5122: 5111: 5109: 5106: 5105: 5100: 5098: 5095: 5092: 5088: 5084: 5080: 5078: 5074: 5069: 5067: 5063: 5056: 5052: 5050: 5046: 5042: 5038: 5036: 5033: 5027: 5025: 5022: 5021: 5016: 5014:Fylbecatulous 5009: 5007: 5004: 4999: 4993: 4991: 4988: 4984: 4982: 4978: 4974: 4970: 4968: 4965: 4960: 4955: 4949: 4947: 4943: 4939: 4935: 4933: 4930: 4929: 4922: 4920: 4916: 4912: 4909: 4907: 4903: 4899: 4894: 4892: 4889: 4885: 4883: 4880: 4879: 4874: 4867: 4865: 4861: 4855: 4849: 4843: 4841: 4837: 4833: 4829: 4827: 4823: 4819: 4815: 4813: 4809: 4805: 4802: 4800: 4795: 4794: 4789: 4788: 4781: 4780: 4776: 4772: 4768: 4764: 4760: 4756: 4754: 4750: 4744: 4738: 4732: 4730: 4726: 4722: 4718: 4716: 4712: 4708: 4704: 4700: 4696: 4695: 4691: 4687: 4683: 4679: 4675: 4673: 4669: 4665: 4661: 4659: 4656: 4652: 4648: 4645: 4643: 4638: 4621: 4617: 4616: 4615: 4611: 4607: 4603: 4601: 4597: 4593: 4589: 4588: 4584: 4580: 4577: 4576: 4571: 4569: 4565: 4561: 4557: 4555: 4551: 4548: 4544: 4543: 4542: 4536: 4534: 4531: 4529: 4527: 4521: 4519: 4516: 4510: 4508: 4505: 4503: 4499: 4495: 4491: 4489: 4485: 4481: 4477: 4475: 4471: 4467: 4463: 4461: 4457: 4453: 4449: 4448: 4444: 4440: 4437: 4436: 4430: 4428: 4424: 4420: 4413: 4410: 4400: 4398: 4393: 4388: 4385: 4380: 4378: 4375: 4370: 4365:Consistency. 4364: 4362: 4359: 4355: 4353: 4349: 4345: 4341: 4339: 4335: 4331: 4327: 4325: 4322: 4320: 4313: 4311: 4308: 4307: 4302: 4295: 4293: 4289: 4288: 4281: 4273: 4271: 4268: 4264: 4262: 4259: 4258: 4253: 4246: 4245: 4241: 4239: 4234: 4230: 4226: 4221: 4219: 4216: 4215: 4210: 4205: 4198: 4196: 4192: 4188: 4183: 4181: 4177: 4173: 4169: 4166: 4162: 4158: 4157:Fiddle Faddle 4154: 4152: 4148: 4137: 4135: 4132: 4128: 4126: 4122: 4118: 4113: 4111: 4108: 4102: 4101: 4097: 4095: 4094: 4090: 4086: 4081: 4080: 4073: 4071: 4070: 4059: 4054: 4050: 4045: 4040: 4036: 4035: 4029: 4024: 4020: 4013: 4008: 4004: 4003: 3997: 3992: 3988: 3983: 3978: 3974: 3973: 3966: 3961: 3957: 3952: 3947: 3943: 3942: 3936: 3931: 3927: 3922: 3917: 3913: 3912: 3909: 3903: 3899: 3895: 3893: 3886: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3869: 3867: 3864: 3861: 3859: 3856: 3851: 3845: 3841: 3839: 3835: 3829: 3827: 3826: 3820: 3818: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3803: 3801: 3798: 3795: 3789: 3787: 3774: 3771: 3769: 3766: 3763: 3759: 3755: 3751: 3748: 3746: 3743: 3741: 3740: 3734: 3732: 3731: 3724: 3721: 3719: 3716: 3712: 3709: 3707: 3704: 3699: 3693: 3691: 3688: 3683: 3676: 3673: 3669: 3665: 3661: 3658: 3653: 3650: 3647: 3646: 3645: 3644: 3642: 3637: 3634: 3624: 3621: 3618: 3615: 3606: 3605: 3604: 3601: 3598: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3584: 3581: 3578: 3570: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3560: 3557: 3553: 3551: 3547: 3542: 3538: 3534: 3533: 3532: 3528: 3524: 3520: 3517: 3515: 3511: 3507: 3503: 3501: 3498: 3493: 3492: 3487: 3484: 3482: 3476: 3468: 3465: 3463: 3459: 3455: 3451: 3448: 3446: 3443: 3442: 3437: 3432: 3426: 3423: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3404: 3400: 3399: 3398: 3395: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3383: 3377: 3374: 3372: 3368: 3364: 3360: 3356: 3353: 3351: 3347: 3343: 3339: 3336: 3334: 3330: 3327: 3323: 3322: 3321: 3315: 3311: 3307: 3304: 3302: 3298: 3294: 3288: 3285: 3283: 3279: 3275: 3271: 3268: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3254: 3251: 3247: 3246:JordanKyser22 3244: 3242: 3238: 3234: 3230: 3227: 3225: 3221: 3215: 3209: 3206: 3204: 3201: 3200: 3196: 3191: 3189: 3185: 3181: 3177: 3174: 3172: 3169: 3165: 3161: 3159: 3156: 3151: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3137: 3134: 3132: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3117: 3115: 3109: 3104: 3103: 3087: 3085: 3082: 3081: 3075:Yes, please. 3074: 3072: 3068: 3064: 3060: 3056: 3053: 3050: 3047: 3035: 3031: 3029: 3025: 3021: 3017: 3013: 3012: 3011: 3007: 3003: 2998: 2993: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2979: 2977: 2973: 2969: 2965: 2963: 2960: 2959: 2954: 2952: 2949: 2945: 2943: 2940: 2936: 2932: 2927: 2925: 2921: 2915: 2910: 2900: 2897: 2894: 2891: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2878: 2875: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2866: 2863: 2860: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2847: 2844: 2840: 2836: 2835: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2825:Fiddle Faddle 2822: 2820: 2816: 2812: 2807: 2803: 2789: 2786: 2783: 2780: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2766: 2763: 2759: 2758: 2757: 2754: 2751: 2748: 2739: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2730: 2727: 2722: 2718: 2717: 2716: 2713: 2710: 2707: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2693: 2690: 2686: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2667: 2665: 2661: 2657: 2652: 2650: 2646: 2642: 2637: 2635: 2632: 2627: 2625: 2622: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2609: 2607: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2589: 2585: 2583: 2579: 2572: 2570: 2567: 2565: 2560: 2543: 2538: 2535: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2520: 2517: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2504: 2502: 2499: 2496: 2494: 2490: 2486: 2482: 2478: 2476: 2473: 2469: 2466: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2449: 2447: 2443: 2439: 2436: 2434: 2430: 2426: 2422: 2418: 2414: 2411: 2409: 2405: 2401: 2397: 2395: 2392: 2391: 2389: 2382: 2377: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2362: 2358: 2353: 2349: 2345: 2341: 2333: 2331: 2327: 2323: 2318: 2316: 2312: 2308: 2304: 2301: 2297: 2291: 2284: 2278: 2275: 2272: 2269: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2255: 2251: 2246: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2227: 2224: 2222: 2217: 2215: 2210: 2208: 2202: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2188: 2186: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2174: 2172: 2169: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2147: 2145: 2142: 2139: 2133: 2130: 2123: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2107: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2078: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2061: 2059: 2056: 2055: 2050: 2041: 2039: 2035: 2031: 2026: 2024: 2020: 2014: 2008: 2001: 1998: 1996: 1993: 1988: 1986: 1985: 1978: 1976: 1972: 1968: 1964: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1951: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1922:HandsomeFella 1919: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1904: 1902: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1868: 1864: 1860: 1856: 1853: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1805: 1802: 1799: 1796: 1787: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1766: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1731: 1728: 1722: 1719: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1702: 1698: 1694: 1692: 1689: 1686: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1674: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1649: 1647: 1643: 1639: 1635: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1622: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1605: 1603: 1599: 1595: 1591: 1589: 1586: 1585: 1580: 1576: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1561: 1559: 1555: 1548: 1544: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1529: 1527: 1524: 1523: 1518: 1516:Fylbecatulous 1511: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1500:MartinPoulter 1496: 1493: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1463: 1459: 1455: 1453: 1444: 1440: 1438: 1434: 1430: 1426: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1413: 1409: 1407: 1403: 1399: 1395: 1393: 1390: 1388: 1382: 1380: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1367: 1362: 1358: 1353: 1349: 1347: 1344: 1343: 1335: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1321: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1306: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1278: 1275: 1271: 1269: 1265: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1251: 1247: 1243: 1238: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1221: 1218: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1199: 1198: 1195: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1156: 1153: 1150: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1140: 1139: 1136: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1125: 1122: 1118: 1116: 1111: 1110: 1105: 1104: 1098: 1096: 1091: 1085: 1082: 1075: 1073: 1070: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1056: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1042: 1038: 1035: 1034: 1029: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1013: 1011: 1009: 1005: 1001: 996: 994: 989: 984: 981: 976: 974: 970: 966: 962: 957: 955: 952: 947: 941: 939: 935: 931: 930:Jim.henderson 927: 924: 922: 918: 914: 910: 908: 904: 900: 895: 891: 887: 883: 879: 878: 877: 874: 869: 865: 863: 859: 851: 849: 841: 838:I agree with 837: 835: 831: 827: 823: 821: 818: 816: 814: 807: 805: 801: 797: 792: 790: 786: 782: 779: 777: 773: 769: 764: 762: 758: 754: 750: 749: 733: 731: 727: 722: 716: 714: 710: 706: 702: 700: 696: 692: 688: 683: 681: 677: 673: 669: 667: 664: 662: 657: 655: 652: 651: 646: 639: 637: 633: 629: 626: 624: 620: 616: 613: 611: 608: 607: 604: 603: 598: 592: 588: 583: 579: 576: 572: 568: 566: 562: 557: 556: 555: 551: 547: 543: 541: 537: 536: 529: 521: 519: 515: 511: 510:Beyond My Ken 507: 505: 502: 501: 500: 493: 487: 485: 482: 478: 474: 472: 468: 464: 460: 458: 455: 451: 449: 446: 443: 438: 436: 432: 428: 425: 423: 419: 415: 407: 405: 402: 397: 395: 391: 387: 382: 378: 373: 371: 368: 362: 356: 354: 350: 346: 341: 335: 331: 327: 323: 322: 321: 317: 313: 308: 307: 306: 302: 298: 293: 289: 286: 280: 279: 273: 271: 265: 264: 258: 253: 252: 251: 248: 245: 241: 239: 236: 235: 230: 224: 223: 220: 217: 215: 209: 207: 202: 201: 200: 194: 189: 185: 182: 178: 175: 174: 170: 168: 161: 160: 155: 154: 150: 145: 144: 140: 138: 137:for details. 136: 127: 123: 121: 117: 113: 107: 105: 101: 97: 91: 89: 83: 78: 67: 64: 62: 57: 55: 45: 39: 25: 19: 6078: 6071: 6049: 6036: 6029: 6007: 5969: 5921: 5858: 5839: 5828: 5817: 5811: 5810: 5790: 5789:4th choice — 5737: 5733: 5715: 5711: 5707: 5703: 5699: 5679: 5647: 5633: 5629: 5616: 5508: 5495: 5477: 5458: 5445: 5416:Waysider1925 5336: 5326: 5313: 5278: 5261: 5260:3rd choice — 5211: 5164: 5119: 5102: 5101:1st choice — 5091:Arthur Rubin 5086: 5082: 5011: 4950:Per above. — 4924: 4869: 4792: 4786: 4655:♠♠ BanëJ ♠♠ 4632: 4618: 4573: 4572:2nd choice — 4540: 4539: 4525: 4433: 4408: 4344:Pete Tillman 4297: 4276: 4248: 4237: 4200: 4141: 4082: 4078: 4077: 4068: 4067: 4057: 4043: 4027: 4011: 3996:Color change 3995: 3981: 3964: 3950: 3934: 3920: 3907: 3870: 3846:be opt-in. 3843: 3824: 3823: 3804: 3793: 3778: 3772: 3762:Arthur Rubin 3757: 3753: 3749: 3738: 3737: 3729: 3728: 3722: 3710: 3674: 3635: 3609: 3572: 3549: 3545: 3536: 3518: 3490: 3485: 3474: 3466: 3449: 3427: 3424: 3375: 3354: 3337: 3319: 3318: 3313: 3309: 3305: 3286: 3269: 3233:Br'er Rabbit 3228: 3207: 3197: 3175: 3135: 3118: 3090: 3076: 3041: 3033: 2996: 2956: 2885: 2854: 2838: 2805: 2774: 2742: 2701: 2684: 2671:Secretlondon 2576: 2554: 2541: 2536: 2518: 2467: 2450: 2420: 2416: 2412: 2387: 2385: 2380: 2360: 2338:— Preceding 2335:the feature. 2289:Neutralhomer 2263: 2220: 2213: 2206: 2179: 2177: 2160: 2159: 2153: 2152: 2137: 2128: 2079: 2062: 2045: 1999: 1983: 1982: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1790: 1785: 1678: 1582: 1513: 1494: 1449: 1442: 1441:Support for 1389:andersnatch❩ 1386: 1385:❨Ṩtruthious 1338: 1168: 1164: 1133: 1108: 1102: 1080: 1058: 1054: 1046: 1031: 960: 925: 847: 839: 812: 796:WhatamIdoing 735: 672:Pete Tillman 641: 605: 596: 594: 589: 586: 558: 524: 495: 494: 380: 376: 277: 262: 254: 225: 198: 165: 132: 111: 108: 93: 85: 81: 72: 60: 53: 37: 5896:regentspark 5550:Brendon is 5135:BlueMoonlet 4911:Killiondude 4886:Per above. 4445:Green stars 4435:Philosopher 4406:instead of 4404:Arial Black 4279:Imzadi 1979 4199:per Bielle 4117:WylieCoyote 3967:('changed') 3921:Green stars 3891:Ohconfucius 3854:| comment _ 3849:-Scottywong 3809:Twozenhauer 3180:Angryapathy 3002:Yngvadottir 2948:Chick Bowen 2884:See above. 2721:it could be 2656:First Light 2524:PolicarpioM 2506:Killiondude 2425:WylieCoyote 2413:Team opt-in 2388:Ravenswing 2344:RegentsPark 2245:WP:TUTORIAL 2191:Daniel Case 1685:Jasper Deng 1653:BlueMoonlet 1634:BlueMoonlet 1609:BlueMoonlet 1579:WP:BIKESHED 1295:Truthkeeper 1033:Philosopher 768:Someguy1221 527:Imzadi 1979 141:The options 110:which show 6012:Farmbrough 5974:Farmbrough 5248:Olivechamp 4804:Nikkimaria 4707:Tryptofish 4699:Tryptofish 4502:Nathan2055 4419:Closeapple 4409:Arial Bold 3571:has more. 3491:Poeticbent 3342:Olivechamp 3340:opt-in. -- 3213:Giants2008 3014:Check out 2935:Talk to me 2811:Rivertorch 2167:Review me! 1765:Tryptofish 1750:Tryptofish 1736:Nikkimaria 1708:Funandtrvl 1443:fading out 1203:Nikkimaria 1189:be fixed? 1173:Nikkimaria 1067:Nathan2055 1018:Closeapple 882:Nikkimaria 826:Krystaleen 386:Victor Yus 377:Side note: 360:Guerillero 312:Nikkimaria 214:Nathan2055 206:Nathan2055 120:Wiktionary 88:watchlists 6062:Moved to 5913:BollyJeff 5843:Equazcion 5568:Trɔpʏliʊm 5271:I like – 5112:I like – 5055:CT Cooper 4938:David1217 4560:Noleander 4558:Stars. -- 4526:Anjwalker 4098:No change 4058:Highlight 3965:Small "c" 3863:Evanh2008 3825:Wizardman 3613:Equazcion 3576:Equazcion 3359:Roscelese 3316:place. -- 3314:excellent 3257:Inomyabcs 3045:Equazcion 2889:Equazcion 2858:Equazcion 2778:Equazcion 2746:Equazcion 2705:Equazcion 2438:My76Strat 2322:Sector001 2267:Equazcion 2250:MarnetteD 2232:MarnetteD 1893:Modernist 1879:Sctechlaw 1871:Sctechlaw 1863:Watchlist 1794:Equazcion 1697:Smarkflea 1547:CT Cooper 1482:Noleander 1310:David1217 965:Pfhorrest 913:Yair rand 899:Tobias K. 840:Anjwalker 813:Anjwalker 96:watchlist 5777:Lentower 5720:Yaris678 5597:M4gnum0n 5385:BlackCab 5371:Mirokado 5341:Chris857 5300:Yaris678 4987:MuZemike 4898:TreyGeek 4787:lTopGunl 4721:Fifelfoo 4606:Openskye 4550:contribs 4514:Dipankan 4452:Yaris678 4330:Jesse V. 4267:Bruce1ee 4251:Spinning 4085:Lentower 3660:Lentower 3552:to do it 3367:contribs 3329:contribs 3155:ItsZippy 3153:itself. 3140:Darwinek 3108:Contribs 2982:Weaxzezz 2641:MelanieN 2611:Wahrmund 2519:Endorse. 2455:Textorus 2352:contribs 2340:unsigned 1855:Support. 1810:Fifelfoo 1594:Fnlayson 1468:Musdan77 1281:J36miles 1242:Yaris678 1103:lTopGunl 926:Suppport 848:alaney2k 757:contribs 720:Dlrohrer 705:Jesse V. 546:Openskye 401:Bruce1ee 278:Penyulap 274:abstain 263:Penyulap 228:Spinning 181:talkpage 5901:comment 5765:contibs 5630:Comment 5533:waggers 5496:looking 5482:Kierzek 5405:contact 5337:Support 5234:Coin945 5218:Watcher 5215:Gourami 5083:bolding 4859:contrib 4748:contrib 4592:Mjs1991 4466:Mjs1991 4172:Shyamal 3951:Italics 3871:Support 3805:Support 3786:anguard 3773:Support 3750:Support 3723:Support 3711:Support 3675:Support 3636:Support 3523:Dweller 3519:Support 3506:Esoglou 3486:Support 3450:Support 3425:Support 3376:Support 3355:Support 3338:Support 3306:Support 3287:Support 3270:Support 3229:Support 3208:Support 3176:Support 3136:Support 3119:Support 3079:Spencer 3063:Bazonka 2958:joe•roe 2931:Barts1a 2919:contact 2839:default 2738:you are 2685:default 2598:Arjayay 2594:WP:SNOW 2537:Support 2468:Support 2451:Support 2361:as long 2214:Vampire 2180:Hut 8.5 2129:GRAPPLE 2084:Hasteur 2080:Support 2063:Support 2030:GregorB 2018:contrib 2000:Support 1984:Mo ainm 1953:Jafeluv 1846:call me 1533:waggers 1495:Support 1361:contibs 628:ShaPhi7 615:Ltr,ftw 463:Bgwhite 454:Acps110 366:My Talk 116:Commons 5957:Anomie 5838:Done. 5756:Dmitry 5682:dokter 5618:Teammm 5583:Orlady 5478:Oppose 5280:Teammm 5175:Kilopi 5121:Teammm 5094:(talk) 4692:Italic 4664:Hahc21 4498:WP:VPT 4414:aren't 4358:Helder 4187:Bielle 4106:mabdul 3875:Sitush 3844:always 3765:(talk) 3754:subtle 3681:Silver 3597:Anomie 3569:WP:VPT 3556:Anomie 3548:asked 3454:Dan653 3310:please 3199:tizzle 3164:MeegsC 2997:really 2874:Anomie 2843:Anomie 2762:Anomie 2726:Anomie 2689:Anomie 2421:out of 2112:Vyom25 1848:Russ) 1726:mabdul 1688:(talk) 1565:Orlady 1415:Repeat 1372:VikÞor 1352:Dmitry 1324:Kilopi 1191:Anomie 1187:T38509 1149:Anomie 1121:Anomie 1083:dokter 1014:wasn't 1000:Mcewan 691:HiLo48 571:VikÞor 561:VikÞor 491:Jayron 481:Helder 442:Isarra 427:Jc3s5h 244:Anomie 171:Survey 112:unread 38:opt-in 6072:David 5807:Other 5642:noςco 5639:Kerαu 5503:noςco 5500:Kerαu 5453:noςco 5450:Kerαu 5041:Rrius 4973:Wolbo 4888:MER-C 4627:noςco 4624:Kerαu 4620:star. 4387:Isaac 4318:Geoff 4305:broil 4300:Royal 4256:Spark 4213:Space 4143:~ ~ 3715:Alexf 3686:seren 3541:T2454 3539:(see 3471:Mitch 3440:Space 3195:Scien 3123:Bbb23 3101:üRkey 3034:think 2582:Stalk 2578:Hrafn 2549:noςco 2546:Kerαu 2498:MER-C 2366:Nageh 2307:Stryn 2221:Heart 2161:Vesey 1991:~Talk 1842:R'n'B 983:Isaac 660:Geoff 649:broil 644:Royal 414:KNOWZ 233:Spark 54:David 16:< 6079:1217 6009:Rich 5998:talk 5971:Rich 5938:talk 5922:talk 5879:talk 5860:jc37 5830:jc37 5819:jc37 5792:Ruud 5781:talk 5761:talk 5746:talk 5724:talk 5691:) — 5688:talk 5656:xies 5651:gala 5601:talk 5587:talk 5573:blah 5555:here 5537:talk 5517:xies 5512:gala 5486:talk 5467:xies 5462:gala 5446:look 5420:talk 5389:talk 5375:talk 5360:talk 5345:talk 5328:jc37 5315:jc37 5304:talk 5263:Ruud 5252:talk 5238:talk 5201:talk 5197:DVdm 5179:talk 5166:jc37 5104:Ruud 5062:talk 5045:talk 5019:talk 4977:talk 4942:talk 4915:talk 4902:talk 4853:talk 4836:talk 4832:Joy 4822:talk 4808:talk 4793:talk 4742:talk 4725:talk 4711:talk 4703:talk 4682:talk 4668:talk 4641:xies 4636:gala 4610:talk 4596:talk 4575:Ruud 4564:talk 4547:talk 4484:talk 4470:talk 4456:talk 4423:talk 4348:talk 4334:talk 4229:talk 4208:From 4203:Them 4191:talk 4176:talk 4161:talk 4121:talk 4089:talk 4044:Bold 3879:talk 3813:talk 3794:Wha? 3782:ven 3664:talk 3550:them 3537:2004 3527:talk 3510:talk 3496:talk 3458:talk 3435:From 3430:Them 3412:talk 3408:Izno 3363:talk 3346:talk 3326:talk 3297:talk 3278:talk 3261:talk 3250:talk 3237:talk 3219:Talk 3184:talk 3168:Talk 3144:talk 3127:talk 3095:üRly 3067:talk 3024:talk 3006:talk 2986:talk 2972:talk 2968:MLVD 2829:talk 2815:talk 2675:talk 2660:talk 2645:talk 2615:talk 2602:talk 2563:xies 2558:gala 2528:talk 2510:talk 2489:cont 2485:talk 2459:talk 2442:talk 2429:talk 2417:into 2404:talk 2370:talk 2348:talk 2326:talk 2311:talk 2295:Talk 2254:Talk 2236:Talk 2207:Nici 2195:talk 2154:Ryan 2116:talk 2102:talk 2098:Deor 2088:talk 2071:talk 2067:G(x) 2034:talk 2012:talk 1971:talk 1967:Joy 1957:talk 1944:talk 1926:talk 1912:talk 1897:talk 1883:talk 1875:talk 1828:talk 1814:talk 1769:talk 1754:talk 1740:talk 1712:talk 1701:talk 1598:talk 1584:Ruud 1569:talk 1554:talk 1537:talk 1521:talk 1504:talk 1486:talk 1472:talk 1458:talk 1433:talk 1419:talk 1412:Izno 1402:talk 1398:DVdm 1376:Talk 1357:talk 1328:talk 1314:talk 1299:talk 1285:talk 1246:talk 1231:talk 1207:talk 1177:talk 1138:NuMa 1135:YuMa 1109:talk 1092:) — 1089:talk 1053:opt- 1022:talk 1004:talk 969:talk 934:talk 917:talk 903:talk 886:talk 872:dude 868:Comp 857:talk 830:talk 800:talk 785:talk 781:Kvng 772:talk 753:talk 725:2003 709:talk 695:talk 676:talk 632:talk 619:talk 575:Talk 565:Talk 550:talk 514:talk 467:talk 431:talk 418:TALK 412:HELL 390:talk 379:the 349:talk 330:talk 316:talk 301:talk 118:and 61:1217 6030:Zad 5889:JJB 5718:. 5710:or 5645:pia 5634:too 5506:pia 5456:pia 5436:(話) 5356:agr 5075:— 5073:WFC 5002:(話) 4963:Lum 4958:Sat 4953:Hue 4877:Why 4767:ctb 4763:tlk 4630:pia 4541:LCE 4384:Van 4373:man 4368:Reh 4146:: ~ 3730:Pam 3702:Dom 3697:Big 3320:LCE 3037:--> 2719:Or 2552:pia 2542:out 2053:Why 2043:--> 2003:it. 1908:agr 1786:and 1581:. — 1447:JHS 1374:| 1274:JJB 1264:ctb 1260:tlk 1169:not 1055:out 980:Van 950:man 945:Reh 573:| 563:| 6067:– 6037:68 6015:, 6000:) 5977:, 5940:) 5894:-- 5881:) 5783:) 5748:) 5726:) 5676:— 5603:) 5589:) 5581:-- 5571:• 5539:) 5488:) 5422:) 5408:) 5391:) 5377:) 5362:) 5347:) 5325:- 5306:) 5254:) 5246:-- 5240:) 5203:) 5195:- 5181:) 5163:- 5145:) 5133:-- 5047:) 4979:) 4944:) 4917:) 4904:) 4896:-- 4872:So 4862:) 4856:- 4838:) 4824:) 4810:) 4783:-- 4769:) 4751:) 4745:- 4727:) 4713:) 4684:) 4670:) 4622:– 4612:) 4598:) 4566:) 4552:) 4486:) 4472:) 4458:) 4432:-- 4425:) 4392:WS 4350:) 4336:) 4231:) 4193:) 4178:) 4163:) 4123:) 4091:) 3881:) 3815:) 3666:) 3546:we 3529:) 3512:) 3475:32 3460:) 3414:) 3369:) 3365:⋅ 3348:) 3331:) 3299:) 3292:RA 3280:) 3263:) 3239:) 3222:) 3186:) 3166:| 3146:) 3129:) 3069:) 3032:I 3026:) 3008:) 2988:) 2974:) 2937:/ 2933:/ 2922:) 2831:) 2817:) 2806:no 2677:) 2662:) 2647:) 2617:) 2604:) 2530:) 2512:) 2491:) 2487:• 2461:) 2444:) 2431:) 2406:) 2372:) 2350:• 2328:) 2313:) 2305:-- 2298:• 2292:• 2285:- 2252:| 2234:| 2197:) 2118:) 2104:) 2090:) 2073:) 2048:So 2036:) 2021:) 2015:- 1973:) 1959:) 1946:) 1928:) 1914:) 1899:) 1885:) 1830:) 1816:) 1771:) 1756:) 1742:) 1714:) 1683:-- 1663:) 1644:) 1632:-- 1619:) 1600:) 1571:) 1539:) 1506:) 1488:) 1474:) 1460:) 1451:nl 1435:) 1421:) 1404:) 1330:) 1316:) 1301:) 1287:) 1266:) 1248:) 1233:) 1222:, 1209:) 1179:) 1077:— 1059:in 1024:) 1006:) 988:WS 971:) 936:) 919:) 905:) 888:) 860:) 844:ʘ 832:) 802:) 787:) 774:) 759:) 755:• 747:bl 744:ee 741:zw 711:) 697:) 678:) 634:) 621:) 593:-- 552:) 516:) 498:32 479:. 469:) 433:) 392:) 363:| 351:) 332:) 318:) 303:) 6020:. 5996:( 5982:. 5960:⚔ 5936:( 5917:| 5903:) 5899:( 5877:( 5779:( 5767:) 5763:• 5759:( 5744:( 5738:m 5734:n 5722:( 5716:c 5712:b 5708:m 5704:c 5700:u 5685:( 5680:E 5599:( 5585:( 5535:( 5484:( 5418:( 5402:( 5387:( 5373:( 5358:( 5343:( 5302:( 5250:( 5236:( 5209:- 5199:( 5177:( 5143:c 5141:/ 5139:t 5137:( 5087:c 5071:— 5059:· 5043:( 4975:( 4940:( 4913:( 4900:( 4850:( 4834:( 4820:( 4806:( 4796:) 4790:( 4765:− 4761:( 4739:( 4723:( 4709:( 4701:( 4680:( 4666:( 4608:( 4594:( 4562:( 4545:( 4482:( 4468:( 4454:( 4421:( 4346:( 4332:( 4285:→ 4227:( 4189:( 4174:( 4167:) 4159:( 4119:( 4087:( 3877:( 3811:( 3784:M 3780:S 3758:c 3739:D 3662:( 3600:⚔ 3559:⚔ 3525:( 3508:( 3456:( 3410:( 3361:( 3344:( 3324:( 3295:( 3276:( 3259:( 3248:( 3235:( 3216:( 3182:( 3142:( 3125:( 3098:T 3092:C 3065:( 3022:( 3004:( 2984:( 2970:( 2916:( 2877:⚔ 2846:⚔ 2827:( 2813:( 2765:⚔ 2729:⚔ 2692:⚔ 2673:( 2658:( 2643:( 2613:( 2600:( 2526:( 2508:( 2483:( 2457:( 2440:( 2427:( 2402:( 2368:( 2346:( 2324:( 2309:( 2193:( 2138:X 2114:( 2100:( 2096:— 2086:( 2069:( 2032:( 2009:( 1969:( 1955:( 1942:( 1924:( 1910:( 1895:( 1881:( 1873:( 1844:( 1826:( 1812:( 1767:( 1752:( 1738:( 1710:( 1703:) 1699:( 1661:c 1659:/ 1657:t 1655:( 1642:c 1640:/ 1638:t 1636:( 1617:c 1615:/ 1613:t 1611:( 1596:( 1567:( 1551:· 1535:( 1502:( 1484:( 1470:( 1456:( 1431:( 1417:( 1400:( 1387:ℬ 1363:) 1359:• 1355:( 1326:( 1312:( 1297:( 1283:( 1262:− 1258:( 1244:( 1229:( 1205:( 1194:⚔ 1175:( 1152:⚔ 1124:⚔ 1112:) 1106:( 1086:( 1081:E 1020:( 1002:( 967:( 932:( 915:( 901:( 884:( 854:( 852:ʘ 828:( 798:( 783:( 770:( 751:( 738:B 707:( 693:( 674:( 630:( 617:( 602:o 600:e 597:R 548:( 533:→ 512:( 465:( 445:༆ 429:( 416:▎ 399:— 388:( 347:( 328:( 314:( 299:( 284:☏ 269:☏ 247:⚔ 183:. 151:. 90:. 46:) 42:( 26:)

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

Knowledge

:Requests for comment/Watchlist survey - Knowledge

Index