User talk:Bantman - Knowledge

1001:

only assume that the editor or someone else in that company decided to take my essays with him when he left the company, and used the essays without my permission. That is the only explanation that I can come up with for what happened. Sarah Ferguson was accused of plagerising, so perhaps on a psychic level someone picked up on my words. It is also worth noting that patents for inventions usually all come in at around the same time, but they have to give the credit to one person even though several people submitted them at the same time. It is the nature of the universe that when people are ready to accept things several vessals will come to dissimenate that information. Of course, I am not for one minute suggesting that I am a vessel that has something really outstanding or interesting to say, but perhaps that is how the confusion started in the similarity between the articles. I don't know how that happened, but I do know that I wrote my article close to 7 years ago. I do not know how it was so similar in nature to that other article because I have not looked at the website or read the piece, and I am not about to contact the person on the website to say that I am the copyright holder for it. I do have the article on my computer and it has the date and time stamp, so if anyone wants to take me to court then perhaps I can use that as evidence. I have enough copyrighted information to my name already. Regards,--

1706:

branches, all of which hung menacingly over our deck. They completely ignored us; we spent $ 2,500 on roof repairs just last spring. One month to the day of complaining to the city about the tree and chimney, the former comes crashing down. (The city never took action, so we plan to file a claim of damages with them as well.) Even though the fallen tree was pressing against both our house and the other neighbour's, the tree's owners were not prepared to do anything about it—until the city issued them an emergency order, forcing them to. They still refuse to pay for any of the damages (caused by both the tree and the chimney), which may total c. $ 65,000. Since they've just sold their house(!) for $ 650,000, we'll have to move fast to try to put a lien on their property before the deal closes, sometime in September. Something tells me the new buyer hasn't been informed of these recent developments. (The chimney has actually been a problem for over a year, but the real estate agent said it wasn't her problem). The owners have Vermont plates and have only lived here for about two years, so we don't know how the legal situation might change if they move across the border.

331:, and I must say I've been quite impressed. I am a trained gemmologist, and although I do not specialise in diamonds, I have graded a few; I've also several reference texts which may prove useful in building up the article's currently weak citations. I'm glad to see most of my contributions to the article have been retained; my edits to the article were mostly made early last year, back when it was a featured article. Its featured status discouraged me from making any major edits (plus I'm a lazy git), and sometime in the interim the article was removed as an FA. Some text I had added apparently did not survive the test of time. I did notice the current FA nomination, but decided to leave it be until the "spotlight" had passed. I didn't want to step on your or anyone's toes (and I hate edit conflicts), and besides, you seemed to be doing an excellent job at cleaning it up. 943:

their agency. Is there no response there? I was just checking random pages, and I have never in my life heard the ad without those two words. I have not, however, watched television (more than perhaps a total of 6 hours) since I graduated high school in 1952 and I believe TV ads were allowed for some years. If the slogan was on packages rather then on radio, the assonance would mean little and space would be at a premium. Therefore, if the slogan appeared on a package (including carton), space considerations - to allow larger type, less clutter, etc) may have won over assonance (you can't hear assonance in print!) and the words deleted. I can also remember well Lucky Strike ads, with the intonations of an auctioneer rattling off bids and ending with "Sold to American". Also they had "LSMFT". Incidentally, my sister smoked, and died of cancer at age 27 in 1956.

1148:

to touch another living soul, not me. If you did not want to be acknowleged for your worth as a human being then you never would have emailed me. You would have simply ignored my email that I posted on the message board, but you had a need within youself to validate your existance in a world where you are often considered insignificant, and you reached out to me, even though you do not want to admit it. It was not I who reached out to you because I do not need to validate my existance in the world, but you reached out to me for your own justification and validation that you are a human being worthy of contact with other human beings who are quite capable of getting on with their lives without you.

459:

for now, so by all means if you want to correct or clarify anything, go for it. (I try to work in section edits, precisely to avoid edit conflicts which are odious.) I'd shy away from adding much more factual material to the article in those sections, unless it's currently really missing the point on something. Instead, I feel that the real attention needs to go to the subarticles. Almost all of those need to be completely rewritten, and as stand-alone articles many, well, don't stand alone very well. They could all be significantly expanded, and that is where your technical knowledge would be of best use, IMO. I hope we can work together on those too; it can get lonely working alone :)

855:, and now am leaning toward deleting it as a subarticle and just letting what is in the main article, stand as-is. The problem is that I don't want to delete much of what's in the main article because I think it's valuable as a part of a top-level overview of the topic, but at the same time I don't want to develop the topic into a larger article (because I don't have the desire or energy). I need to recuperate from this mental defeat for a few days before I select another subarticle to attack, although I'm leaning toward copyedit duty in the face of superior technical knowledge and sources available to others (yeah, I'm talking about you!). 1071:

people with respect, but it is difficult because his father did not raise him to respect other people, and we live in a world where people are not treated with respect. I am worried what my son would think if he was to look on my page and see all of the rude emails that people have sent to me. I still think that the people in this group should be careful of their emails. You have gone to great pains to tell me over and over again so repeatedly what high standards wikipedia has, but I have not really seen those high standards, especially in the form of emails that have been sent to me.

427:

rewrote each subarticle as I created it, I'd be weeks away from getting to where we are now on the main article.) The result is that the subarticles are basically just sections of the original article which failed so spectacularly on FAC and was, in my opinion, substandard. The intent was to weed out detailed information in the name of brevity and clarity, but in many cases what I've written is (of course I have to say this) substantially better than what is to be found in the subarticle, minus many of the technical details. I guess I'm saying that in my view, almost

335:

hard to avoid due to the subjectivity of the whole affair. For example, I'm still a bit uncertain about the insisted inclusion of the "important" maximum/minimum distance between the eye and the diamond; it's not very helpful that this factoid's only "citation" is a link to a BBS thread. This factor may be important to certain grading systems (of which I must be unfamiliar; the ones mentioned are dated 2004 and 2005), but certainly not to all of them. Diamond grading systems are notoriously inconsistent, of course; the article should say that there is no

1144:

favourate passtime of many unevolved souls who get into the internet because they can be anybody they want to be and nobody will ever be the wiser. In fact, it is a quite common game that people like to play because they can feel superior. But feel superior to who? Anybody can bash out an email telling other people what to do, but they would never do it face to face. You would never tell me face to face the things that you emailed me becuase you know that I would either walk away from you or ask you how you dare to speak to me like that.

1702:

stems from the neighbours, whose oak tree fell on our house on the 5th, and whose chimney (along with the house attached to it) continues to lean precariously against (and slice into) our house, creating a major safety hazard and inevitable water damage. The falling tree caused significant damage to the roof, as well as decimating the backyard (it knocked down two fences, damaged the deck, and flattened many expensive perennials). I now have some idea how tornado victims must feel, except that we have other people (rather than nature) to blame.

2180:

about you read that fun little sentence where I called it a misunderstanding? Too big of a strain for you? Stop trying to make me look guilty because of a mistake of mine. You're ignoring the facts so that you can say you cannot accept my actions as good faith. You made a mistake in your saying, which started this, I made a mistake in misreading that Brian guy as your name, so before you go accusing me of wrongdoing because I thought you were ignoring the request, actually consider that your statement was involved in the argument. -

997:

wikipedia and other websites for news bits to write about because it is his bread and butter and he must earn a living from it. Most of the rest of us poor slobs have regular jobs and don't get all anal about a little mistake here or there becuase after all it is a free website. People don't have to contribute to the website if they don't like the quality of it. Also, rather than saying that I did not have any courtesy, he could have sent me an email telling me the correct way to do it. That would have been more appropriate.

2040:

every single criticism, and, yes, sometimes I admit I'm wrong, and I hope that doesn't surprise you. ~~ If you took as much time looking at the evidence as you do in arguing with me, you'd be a lot more informed, and spend less time overall; I have done my part to help fellow-editors publish a high-quality page -and I took time to address every concern raised, and remaining silent only if I had already answered that question. Don't get stuck in a circular catch-22 situation; If you're that restricted on time, maybe

3654: 843:, though unfortunately I currently only have a (coloured) YAG, sphalerite, and sphene at hand. I'm also not so great at photographing cut stones, apparently. I've set my very next task to be polishing off the enhancement article with at least one more reference's worth of detail. Can't make myself too many promises as I'm in a rather changeable mood. I do know, however, that this has been the most productive collaboration I've yet been a part of on Knowledge. :) -- 2803: 1194:. I just wanted to see if you felt they'd been addressed to your satisfaction now? I think I've covered everything you suggest, except as I say, info on the submarine effects is not easy to come by. Anything particular you had in mind for that? Also, my confusion of east and west - you said you though from other context that the map arrow must be south instead of north - what was that context, because it must be wrong as well? Thanks! 527:

stand, so I dug into my jewellery/goldsmithing history texts to get a few basic facts. Someone added the tempered diatribe against DeBeers later on, and I'm glad you've relocated it. I do hope it's salvageable; could it be melded into the history section? Perhaps rename the section to "Cultural and symbolic history of diamond"? Or nix "and symbolic" altogether. We gemmologists aren't historians, unfortunately, but I tried my best. :)

993:(the one from David Brooks). I think that people need to realise that there is no excuse for sending rude emails. They would not be rude emails to a colleague or boss, so why do they send rude emails to other people on this website. I think that they need to make a policy that people who consistenty send inflammatory emails should be banned from the site. There was no excuse for that man saying that I did not have any courtesy. 1203:

where Eldfell cinder cone is marked on the map, it actually appears east or southeast of the town. In the "evacuation" section, first paragraph, it says "lava flows were already moving slowly into the western side of town"; from the map it appears that lava flows were moving into the eastern side of the town; the west end looks unaffected by lava flows. Those are the only things I noticed; love the article -- fun read! -

343:(9th edition, 2001; considered a "bible" by diamond graders) makes no mention (that I can recall; I'll have to read it cover to cover again) of eye-to-stone distance, aside from the distance being varied (when using a loupe) until the view is sharp. (It is true that the book predates the systems mentioned, but change is slow in the diamond world.) I don't quite understand why such a factor would be important in grading 671:, and your edits and expansions to it were excellent. (I'm apparently horrible at proofreading or otherwise critiquing my own work. Your expansion to the intro was perfect, and I felt like slapping my forehead for neglecting to draw the same lines.) I'm also glad to hear the symbolism text isn't a lost cause! And, as always, your edits to it were a significant improvement; as was the mother-of-all intros you wrote for 442:(This brings up an issue that is germiane not only to this article, that I'm not sure what to do about... I'm hoping you have an idea about what is right. In a summary article, is it proper to list as references all of the refs used on important subarticles, or just list them on the subs and leave them off the main article? For example, if we have a source that says a diamond scratches at 200 GPa, we site it on the 2510:") article? What are your thoughts on the matter? My initial instinct was to keep the article as is and make a new article about animal teeth for the section to refer to, but I did not know if most anatomy articles try to keep a certain format when addressing that issue. I have had one suggestion to move most of the information to a "human tooth" or "human teeth" article. I would appreciate any ideas. Thanks! - 3977: 3831: 3707: 3448: 2012:

That is also why I choose not to take you as an example of a good way to participate here at Knowledge; I believe many of your tactics are counterproductive. I have seen sufficient evidence; one's knowledge need not be encyclopedic to be able to make an informed decision. Why would I defend someone's opinion which I do not support? I defend their right to have it, just as I defend my right to attack it. -

3611: 3505: 3311: 3197: 1022:

done, but I edited what I could because I happen to know a little bit about induction having been in the USAF for 15 years as a radio relay repairman. The point is, David Brooks did not know me at all, yet he felt he had the liberty to send me offensive emails. I doubt very seriously he has even the remotist idea was induction is, yet he feels he has the right to criticise other people.

1152:

medium as the internet to correspond. If you really wanted contact with people you would do it face to face and not on a screen where you can pretend to be anybody you want to be. You caught me off guard with that little psychological game that you played, although I should have seen it coming because I have experienced it so many times in the past, over the internet and one to one.

2962: 2845: 1448:. There's definitely a good article or two to be had there somewhere. I've been thinking about taking a big stick to the various fishing related articles and trying to knock them into some sort of logical shape for a while (I might be crazy, but I don't think the best bait for catching pickerel belongs on the main fishing page!). I've just finished working on 351:

draft" (no such thing on a wiki, but you know what I mean), so I'm hesitant to add any new content before I understand the situation more. I know you're trying to keep the article's size to a manageable level by using summary sections, but I can't decide where I should best begin fleshing things out. Is there a particular area you might like assistance with?

3930: 3029: 1121:

very nice, but I must deal with them to earn a living. I therefore prefer to spend the rest of my time either in my solitary pursuits of writing, reading, crocheting, or sometimes emailing friends. I have no desire to enter into communications with people to discuss the next big article or to complain that someone put a comma in the wrong place.

2148:

appreciate being bullied, and thought you'd like to know that's how your comments were perceived, so that maybe you could choose your words and actions a little more carefully in the future. A little patience and humility would go a long way toward making your interactions with others more pleasant and your time on Knowledge more productive. -

513:

editing skills have mitigated the problem, however, as the way you've summarised the topics makes it easy to reference everything said with fewer sources (due to the low incidence of nitpicky facts or figures). I think we can get away with only referencing the most important facts on the main article (though I realise this would be arbitrary).

1075:

girl/woman did a lot to damage my relationship with my son. I hope you can appreciate, therefore, that it takes a lot more than sending a few emails to someone trying to appear to be superior to make an impression on my psyche. I suppose that I have been through too much in my life to be taken in by other people. --

1117:

until someone sent me a message, and the first time I received a message I thought, gee, I have made some friends here. Unfortunately, most of the messages have not been very nice, so I have deleted them. I don't want to clutter my page up with messages that are not very nice, so I hope that you can understand.

2715:

Further, the idea that "value is reduced" is not correct--since the possibility of a cram down is know from the beginning, the "value" is not reduced, just the payout on bankruptcy. While the payout might be less than par (or what one class of creditors wants), the debt would normally be trading at a

2340:

of that genus (when a genus is divided into a number of sections, one of the sections, the one described first, retains the genus name as its section name; the other sections get different names). I guess it could perhaps be worded a bit more clearly for those not familiar with botanical conventions,

2283:

Good catch! I looked a little further into it, and it appears to be the result of typos in the online version of the source I originally used. I added another reference that seems to have the correct dates, but will leave the original reference because it contains the citation to the original print

2179:

Idea: Read what I say. For instance, you could read that I said you edited Lakitu (which you didn't), instead of claiming I am... I dunno WHAT the Hell you thought I was plotting. I mean, of course, it's not a crime to assume that everyone is trying to plot against you, but it is plain silly. Or, how

2039:

work, but not only do I think I'm right, but also, I feel you are caught in a catch-22 loop: You won't read the page because you disagree -and you disagree because you won't read the page. Circular. You have a right to prioritize, but I think you would enjoy the personal answers that I gave to almost

1713:

I'll cut my rambling short(ish) and spare you at least a dozen more paragraphs. Thanks for asking for my input, and thanks doubly for creating the infobox! I can't promise anything, but if I catch a break from the madness, I'll take a crack at beefing up the synthetics article. I've begun to miss the

1697:

My first thought: spiffy! I honestly can't think of anything to amend; I even like the colours you've chosen. I do wonder whether the new box should be inserted before or after the mineral infobox in the properties article, but that's not a big deal for me. (Probably before, if only for consistency's

1147:

Don't forget, it is you who started this email correspondence, not me. Before a few days ago I never knew you existed, yet you reached out to me over thousands of miles becuase you had a deep primal need to let me know that you do exist. You emailed me, I did not email you, so it was you who wanted

1021:

I personally have copy-edited a lot of articles and I have never become enraged or angry. I have just done what I could. I cannot copy-edit all articles because I don't know enough about the subject. Today I did an article on induction and it was obvious that it was a presentation that someone had

696:

As for aquariums, I did indeed notice you had turned it into a feature; and bravo! (I really should frequent FAC more often, it seems.) I'll admit I haven't read it _entirely_, but I fully intend to over lunch tomorrow. Just a few months ago the subject was little more than a couple of paragraphs and

526:

I'm also a bit abashed to hear of your troubles with the symbolism section, as I wrote almost all of it (ack!). That was back when the article was much, much smaller; someone else started the section but left it at two lines of text, basically parroting DeBeer's marketing pitches. I couldn't let that

426:

As I see it the real issue, and the one that I am certain you have vastly more capability to address than I, is all of the subarticles. All that I did was move the original text to the new subarticles I created, so that I could abridge and rewrite with abandon. (This may have been foolish, but if I

2011:

You have made a choice to focus on how you perceive you are being wronged by others, and ignore the fact that you are disregarding long-held community standards. That is your decision, but that is why you are running into so much resistance, and why I don't think we can have a useful dialogue here.

1964:

I am not asking that you cart blanc accept my father as some figure of authority, but his opinion is no less important simply because he is too busy to edit here. Would you like it if I devalued your opinion? No. I disagree on merit, not because of "respect earned," although I do respect the efforts

1709:

While this is all happening, an entire circuit in this house has fried, meaning I have to wait until the evening to plug my computer in (as it's sharing power with major appliances). These days, I rarely have the energy to do more than check my mail. If worst comes to worst, we may have to sell this

1124:

Good luck in whatever it is you decide to do with your life. I would also like to point out that the internet is a vehicle where people can pretend to be whatever or whoever they like to be, but the true test in our success lies in how we relate to people in the real world and how we get on in paid

1120:

As far as I am concerned, the matter re my original grievance is resolved, so there is no need for you to email me any more if that was why you emailed me. I don't really get into non-personal issues on my free time because I have to spend so much time at work having to deal with people who are not

1112:

I spent all day thinking about you and what your motivation is for getting involved in wikipedia. I know that you have not been in wikipedia very long, according to your page. I also know that you do a lot of editing. I also know that you really like the glee club, although I cannot remember what

1074:

I would also like to say that with regard to my son, he got involved with some religious freak over the internet, and even ran off with her with my money, and as soon as the money ran out she dumped him. She sent me several emails in the same condescending, patronising manner that you did, and this

1025:

The only time I have ever been even the slightest bit critical was when someone put a post up about some writers, and the grammer was really bad. I edited it and posted about the quality of the grammer, and said I hoped it wasn't the writers who had that kind of grammer. The person who posted sent

889:

The real concern is that you are writing for the Knowledge and their style is to use AD & BC, not BCE & CE so you should follow their standard. Please take this up with the organisers of the Knowledge and leave the era identifiers as BC & AD until there is an agreement to the method that

630:

Really, great work on that first subarticle. I'm looking forward to seeing your progress... don't worry about hurrying yourself though; I myself tend to work in fits and starts, and then let things fallow for a few days (in addition to keeping things from becoming tedious, it's a great way to get a

576:

Re: the symbolism section, let me remove my foot from my mouth. My problem with it was that it's so different from the rest of the article that it's hard to find a good spot for it in the story arc of the article. On the other hand, it's too important and too good info to delete or even relocate.

415:

As you noted, the article is already quite long and I'm guessing that when I'm done it will be around 40 to 45 kb. My plan was to use this article as a summary of all the various facets (haha) of diamond as a topic, with a little heavier weighting on actual diamond characteristics (what I've called

2903:

deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Knowledge's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page

2253:

Well, I would not consider 13th century "obscure", for one :-) (Even if I know more about the 17th). I would also consider that royal marriages are significant (especially when Eleanor was the mother of the next king and he was apparently very fond of her). If I remember correctly, the marriage had

1952:

Thank you for responding. One point that seems important to me us the following the spirit of the law, which is, I think, the higher standard: For that reason, I am perplexed by the axiom: The more improved the article gets, the less support it gets: That trend has followed through all four reviews

1202:

Hi WT. I'd make these corrections myself but I'm so unfamiliar with the subject, I can't tell when what seems inuitive is right. :) In the "the eruption begins" section, third paragraph, it says "activity soon became concentrated on one vent, about 0.8 km north of Helgafell." If the main vent is

1116:

I got into wikipedia out of boredom, personally. Working in an office can be pretty tedius, so I liked to look at the site. I have also contributed a few articles, but I don't know how many people have deleted out of the sheer pleasure of it. I did not even know you could send messages to people

1000:

With regard to body language, I compiled that piece perhaps 7 years ago and sent it to Janus Publishing along with the manuscript for Blind to the Molesting Hands. The editor left soon afterward, and they said they were not going to publish my essays because it did not do the story justice. I can

992:

I really don't think there is any excuse for rude emails. In the UK most companies will sack people for sending rude emails. It is difficult enough to construct a nice email and I have been spoken to/fired from jobs for sending emails much tamer than the ones that I have received on this web site

896:

Thanks for the quote. So now back to the lack of consensenus on the article. It seems there is none as others have sided with the BC/AD rule and you still have not answered the question of redirect pages as the standard. Glad to discuss it. Please leave the page alone--I will do the same--until you

458:

So, you're making a generous offer to help, and I'm more than pleased to take you up on it. Most important to me is that there is nothing factually wrong or misleading in the main article. As you can see from my list of remaining tasks, I'm not going to tinker anymore with the properties sections

452:

Regarding the specific issue you raised re: viewing distance, I agree with you -- I think the whole topic is dubious at best. As far as I understand it from looking at the talk page, the whole thing arose out of a misunderstanding of microscopy and magnification multipes, and has nothing really to

409:

section — some of it could easily be moved to history (and I was 90% done doing that until I had second thoughts about it), but overall the section is problematic in that I'm having trouble a) imagining a way the section will flow well internally, and b) imagining a place in the overall article the

2124:

I hope we can keep this from becoming antagonistic; I fear I have offended you by some of my comments and if that is the case, I apologize. However, I do think that you could benefit from some constructive criticism on how you choose to interact with the FAC community, and I have tried to provide

1701:

I'm quite glad to see you're still actively improving these articles, because over the past few weeks I've become somewhat distant from the site due to several concurrent crises. While I am having something of an early-life crisis (trying to figure out exactly where I'm heading), most of the drama

1422:

which relates to collection of live fish for the aquarium trade which you might want to demerge and use (it's a bit of a dogs dinner of an article!). "Destructive fishing practices" might be a bit of a broad title, unless you're going to include things like dynamite fishing and bottom trawling. If

1151:

You sent me unsolicited emails and I responded in an open honest heartfelt manner. I bared just a tiny bit of my soul to you, but you are not ready to really know people, even though you made an initial attempt by emailing me and then backing down,which I suppose is why you use such an impersonal

1139:

I would like to point out for the record that you played no part whatsoever in resolving any disputes or grievances that I may have had, and in fact you just upset me even more with your unsolicited emails to me saying the things that you did. I just responded to your emails because I thought you

1044:

Thanks for stepping in with the above person. I have to take a bit of the blame since my message that wasn't exactly soothing - I should learn not to check "new pages" for more than 10 minutes at a time; I get so irritated at all the glop being dumped on wikipedia that my tone gets harsher than it

942:

Hi I am almost 70 years old and have a very good memory. Long before TV, Camels had an ad on the radio with a slogan as I quoted, including the "mild, mild". To get something more definitive, you would have to consult audio libraries or the cigarette company itself - they might have a record. Or

666:

article, and I hope to have it done sometime within the next 24 hours (or even before my head its the pillow, if I can manage). I think I may have gotten a bit carried away, because by the time I'm done it'll be near 30 KB. But like you I never want to edit anything out, and I think it's all worth

436:

subarticle; I just haven't created it yet because I have nothing to paste into it!) Ideally, we finish this (what I consider rough) redo of the main article, then redo the subs, then come back to the main article and polish it up with any new things we've learned (or errors corrected) while doing

334:

The article and most of the spin-offs (though underdeveloped) you've created cover most areas fairly well, but I can recognise several weak spots (namely enhancements and imitations). There may be some POV issues with respect to the four Cs (not in the parts I wrote, of course; *grin*), but that's

3531:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award

3279:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be

2116:

Regarding the specifics, my first edit after I received your notes was to respond to them. You made two requests, including your threat, while I was offline. Your requests were posted 6 hours 29 minutes apart, during which time I made no edits; in fact, I made only one edit between my first two

1931:

Mark is not all-powerful on FAC; he is merely the instrument of community consensus. I'm sure he would agree. If the community were to disagree with him, we could overrule him, or take away the powers that have been given him (informally; his power is due to the deference of others, and nothing

1214:

OK, the vent was indeed 0.8km north of Helgafell, which was the old volcanic cone southeast of town. I've tweaked the wording to try and make the relative locations of Helgafell, the town and the new vent clearer. And you're absolutely right that lava flows were actually moving into the east of

1096:

Also, that guy David Brooks got very personal. He verbally attacked me by making comments about my lack of courtesy, saying that I dumped articles and expected other people to clean them up, etc. That is very personal and was much more personal than me saying a few things about my son. I don't

900:

I have not agreed to stop editing the page, I have agreed stop editing to let you attempt to convince me, and you have not. I will be working on a new project to determine if your opinion has consensus or not. This fact is currently being debated on the change pages.. As for my talk pages. That's

835:

article. I've yet to expand the accompanying text, but I'll try to get around to that by the weekend (hopefully sooner). I must say I found your Argyle mine article very informative. I hadn't seen the Gems & Gemology issue you used as a source (nice of the company to make the relevant article

612:

I'm hoping to finish up what I want to do with the main article by the end of this week. The big pieces I have left are the supply chain section and the intro, with a little general copyediting to do too. Once I do that I'd like to get into the subs with you... we'll have to touch base and make

431:

the subarticles are weak points. An expert such as yourself, with definitive references in hand, could blaze a glorious path of retribution... er... I mean, judicious edits... through the subarticles. I've always thought that a summary article is only as good as its subs. (Speaking of which, I

2169:

You were trying to use my edit history as evidence supporting your position; therefore your statement that I edited Lakitu is material and goes to show that you assumed what my actions were, without checking. You were rude in your messages to me, and wrong in your depiction of the facts. All I

2147:

I have never edited Lakitu; please get your facts straight before referring to them as evidence. I made a typographical error which was corrected as soon as I was made aware of it. In my opinion, you were overzealous in 'defending' the article, and I told you so. I told you so because I don't

2112:

Combative is threatening that my objection would be striken if I didn't hop to it and clarify ASAP. I think a neutral observer could tell the difference between what you said and "encouraging", and see that the difference is vast. Threatening to have one's vote striken within such a short time

1705:

Even before the tree fell, its crown branches were leaning over and against our roof, abrading shingles and allowing squirrels and raccoons ready access to our attic. We asked the neighbours to do something about this tree last year, because it was clearly a problem; it also had quite a few dead

996:

We are all volunteers. If I did something wrong then I am open to criticism, but I do not appreciate that David Brooks saying that I did not have any coutesy. The way he acted, you would have thought he ran the place. In his page he said he is a journalist, so I can only assume that he scours

420:

titled "diamond"; and a little less weighting on industry, history, symbolism, etc. Nonetheless, I'm concerned that it will be too long once I'm done, but I don't want to cut anything. It's all so important! :) I don't think it's terrible to have an article like this at that length though, so

350:

I have a lot of technical knowledge of the subject, with references to back it up. I want to work with you, though, so that we don't end up duplicating each other's work and/or conflicting with each other's edits. I'm also not sure what you intend the structure of the article to be in its "final

306:

Great work so far, keep up the good work. But while you are adding so much info, why not take a second to cite individual facts? That makes later fact checking so much easier and helps improve the demonstrable reliability of the article. The percieved lack of reliability is about the only thing

2134:

There is nothing about what I've said that is even remotely counter-productive. I left the second response after you edited Lakitu, but I left the first one before you edited it. Unactionable objections can be stricken, you realize, and that was in no way actionable, since you yourself said the

1241:

by a whopping 26 years! I looked online for a source to no avail; do you have a reference for the datum in question? I would like to fix whichever article is in need of fixing, but I can't do it without a reference and unfortunately I can't find one myself. (Internal inconsistencies drive me

1070:

On the message of deleting the rude emails that I received, my son, who was abducted by his father, reads wikipedia. I do not have a very good relationship with my son and only speak to him on the phone. My son has a problem with treating people with disrespect,and I try to teach him to treat

512:

Speaking of references, I'm not sure what to do about the main article in this regard. I've never written a summary article, so I'm as unsure as you when it comes to deciding whether to include every single reference used in the summary sections in the main article's references. Your remarkable

1979:

Thank you for being honest. (Some wouldn't be.) However, unless you have read the evidence, you are not qualified to offer a judgment on the dispute. How would you like it if a judge simply said "I'll take so-and-so's word," but not check the evidence. Really, if you do to others, then when it

1532:

is using a bizarre scheme whereby 'articles' (template container pages, really) are built using transclusion (not unlike the FAC page). What's worse is he is using the wikipedia:namespace from WikiProject subpages to hold article prose and then linking directly to that from the headings on the

1108:

It really is difficult not to get personal with people when you strike up an email correspondence becuase that is the whole nature of the correspondence. For whatever reason, you have decided to use the internet to reach out to people, and for whatever reason you have decided to get personal.

1104:

I made a point of reading your page and you stated that you have done a lot of editing. Perhaps you should try your hand at writing a few articles. I also noted that you are in the glee club at college. Oops, that was personal. It seems that we never can get away from dealing with personal

771:

now have decent enough articles attached to them (or at least starts). I'm glad you don't mind me swooping in on your newborn, really lovely articles and sprucing them up a little bit... as they say, two heads are better than one. I'm sure you would have thought of the same things yourself;

1143:

I think you like to play mind games with people, reel them in, and then slam dunk them. I have met lots of people like you, who have sent me unsolicited emails, pretending to be my friend, and then when they got my trust to slam dunk me. The game you played is nothing new. It is probably a

577:

I did a little bit of clean up on it (really relatively minor), and I'm feeling better about it now. There's still a touch of inspecific language and grammar issues that I want to clean up, but on the whole I think it'll stand fine more or less as-is. Certainly nothing to be ashamed of! :)

499:. I think it could easily stand alone now, but I'll likely come back to it later on to improve it even further. I'll leave any main article edits til after I've done everything I want to the subarticles. I included three references (I hope my format is okay), but there's room for a few more. 494:

Hi again; and thanks! Sorry about the delay, but I was busy last night with more fish stuff (I like to write articles on subjects I'm not yet an expert on as in the process I can learn a great deal). As you've seen, I've taken your cue regarding the subarticles and started my editing with

1063:

I am also curious to know what your position in the group is because although you have not been rude to me, your emails have been very condescending, treating me as if I am a five year old. I would have been much happier with your correspondence if you had not been speaking down to me.

697:

some spammish links, and now the subject has an article to really do it justice. I have five tanks, and although they all sit empty nowadays, I was once (up til 4 years ago, when I was 18; I started at about age 10) an avid (freshwater) aquarist. I even managed to get a flock of bronze

2272:

that (1) you corrected a 30 year gap between 3330 BCE and 3300 BCE that appeared to be the result of a typo in the source document, and (2) there is a 4 year gap between the Byzantine Period, which ended in 634, and the Early Arab Period, which began in 638. Can you comment on those

1953:-this one being the fourth -and that is not logical: To follow the spirit of the law would imply that the improvements in the article would be followed by improvements in the reviews, so either the prior reviewers were wrong to praise it, or the current reviewers are wrong to dissent. 968:

that resulting in the page contents being duplicated. A number of edits had occurred by the time it was noticed, but I tried to preserve everything while removing duplicate material. Just in case, mosey on over and check if your vote stuck. If you have any questions, respond on my

946:

The fact that you got only a few hits just means memories are poor and nostalgia for old radio ads is low. Here's a link which purports to have the line (but I can't guarantee which agency did it- you could find out by the year which I would guess from nearby logs to be 1953)

366:

an expert; just a poor guy who spent his life savings on a diamond about a year ago, and did a little research to make himself feel better before doing it. And of course I am God's gift to copyediting, so I do what I can ;) Anyway... for the main article, my remaining tasks

2454:. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are 1514:

I did a little googling and looking at different Knowledge sources and couldn't determine whether they were the same or different persons. I figured a merge tag was a good way to get someone more knowledgeable to weigh in; and I figured that would be you -- thanks! -

3290:

deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Knowledge's policies and guidelines.

1483:

Oh, also, regarding contacting the people in charge, I talked with him on IRC and I think he's pretty clear on things since reading that page about school projects. If you notice someone in the future doing something that might be a class project, point them there.

410:

symbolism section "fits" into. It aslo needs rewriting, which I've been putting off because it's difficult; the April birthstone and LifeGem bits are noteworthy I suppose, but sort of strange and out of left field when it comes to integrating it into the article.

1470:

Heh, actually I've known about it almost since it started. While doing RC patrol I was noticing a lot of changes to the Puget Sound page a while back by new users. I asked on some talk pages about it and their teacher told me that it was a class project. See

1097:

have a good relationship with my son and I don't want him to read offensive material that other people have written and sent to me just to upset me. If my son was to read those things then he would feel very justified in his very negative feelings about me.

754:

Gregory, glad to see you are still on the case! I figured we were all distracted by the 24-hour-plus "read-only" wiki outage the other day. I myself have been doing things that are almost totally irrelevant, filling out decent articles for red links from

1092:

I don't usually talk about my personal issues, but I wanted you to have a little bit of understanding. My son reads wikipedia and what is he going to think if he just happens to look at my page and finds all kinds of emails from people attacking me.

446:

article; if in the main article we then use the sub as a reference to say "diamonds are hard", do we list the reference on the main article too? What if we say "diamond scratches at 200 GPa" in the main article? I'm unsure what proper procedure is

1100:

Also, wikipedia is a community, but in addition to criticising people all the time they should also try to promote an area of respect and courtesy. Do you think that guy David Brooks had any courtesy for me when he sent me that inflammatory email?

1017:

I did go back and re-read David Brooks email before I deleted it, and it was not as awful as I and originally thought, but it still wasn't very nice. He said I was dumping articles and expecting other people to clean up and all kinds of things.

1113:

the glee club is. I thought to myself, what does Bantam get out of wikipedia? The only professional reason that I can come up with is that perhaps you might want to get into publishing and see volunteering at wikipedia as a way into the door.

3367:

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to

3233:

infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of

1013:

It does not bother me re body langauge. I said from the very beginning that if people did not like it they could delete it. I have enough work of my own on the internet that I have copyrighted on the internet that it does not matter.

2859:, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the 1988:

vote on a matter, I research it properly, to show respect for the other participants, and I hope my example will encourage you: I have read the page from cover-to-cover, not because I am the nominator, but for the same reason I do so on

2905: 701:

to breed (I see you wrote that article too!). I should really start a tank up again this summer. I miss having a school of Congo tetras to gawk at (which is even more satisfying when you've grown them from plain jane juveniles, I've

594:

I think your take on the references issue sounds good; let's go with that until somebody says something different. As long as things are referenced on the subs, it will be easy to connect the dots and update the summary article if

3404:

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in

1924:

I have not read the entire history of nominations; I trust other editors' characterizations of such. My comment regarding abuse is in response to your actions vis-à-vis the renominations etc., not the content of the previous FAC

1643:. I'm telling all the participants of WikiProject Years and everyone else who has shown an interest or participated in the discussion. If you could check it out it would be appreciated, and tell anyone you think may be interested. 3734:

did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and

3491:

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Knowledge's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at

1538: 1792: 3678:

This Edit-a-Thon is part of a larger Earth Day celebration, hosted by Brooklyn based recycling and community center Sure We Can, that runs from 1PM-7PM and is open to the public! See this flyer for more information:

1899:

Did you even read that? If you haven't read the entire page in the FA-nomination, then you are not persuasive to me -or Mark, if he thinks like me; and, he can rule against a unanimous decision, in case you haven't

1155:

Good luck with whatever it is you do, but perhaps you should stay out of mediation because you not only did not resolve any disputes, but you just upset me as well. I don't think you should give up your day job.

1904:

Come and read the entire page, before it gets too long, and then I will --if you certify, and give me your word that you've read it all, then I will respect your opinion as much as I respect your right to have it.

3113: 3567:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 2984: 1742:

Could you take a look at the article now and see whether your concerns (except the reorganization) have been addressed? If not, what is still missing, and what technical terms do you feel need explaining?

2935:

has been removed from the GAN list. If you want to re-nominate the article or take the decision to remove it to GAR, you may do so, or you can drop me a line at my talk page and we can discuss. Regards.

1135:

I don't want to play these psychological mind games with you any more. I only ever emailed you in the first place to be polite, even though according to you and David Brooks, I don't have any courtesy.

772:

collaboration just helps things go faster. It's very easy to get possessive and defensive, and I'm so glad you aren't. Regarding the rest of the subarticles, I think I'm going to try and tackle the

776:

article next. Not sure when I'll get to it though, hopefully by the next few days I'll put something together. And I'll be sure to swing by any big edits you put up; don't mind my (minor, minor,

2066:

Both me and the other supporter have no idea what you mean by "three out of six sections are one section". It doesn't make any sense; I only see two subsections, and there are eight sections. -

540:

Now, off to slowly blaze through another subarticle. I'll try to keep myself to one subarticle per day; I want this article to be featured by the end of April at the latest! *shakes pompoms* --

347:, which has to do with measured proportions and the imperfections of polish which necessarily are examined with a microscope. Anyway, I know you didn't write that bit. Just sharing my thoughts. 723:

So, yes.. rambling becomes us. I don't mind one bit. :) After I finish the simulants article I'll take a stab at one of the four C articles. As they are now they could all be merged into one

3690: 3664: 1453: 1067:

Just so I can have some clarity of the situation, would you be kind enough to tell me exactly what your position of the group is. What is your title and who appointed you to that position?

2498:

article because I do not know what would be the best way to deal with information on human vs animal teeth. Most of the information is about human teeth. So, should there be a separate "

2976:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " 2396:. There are instructions on that page (see "How to list pages for deletion") on how to nominate an article for deletion. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to help. All the best, -- 1935:"Abuse of the system" can be defined as following the letter, but not the spirit, of the rules. I feel that you are doing this, and your legalistic defenses are insufficient in my view. 228:

Hello, I really appreciated your comments about the MTR in the featured article discussion. I tried my best to address them, and would apprciate your re-evaluating the article. Thanks!

2659:. To me it seems that the topics are too similar and small to merit different articles--nobody would want to know the contents of one article without wanting both. Hope you don't mind. 3622: 2983:

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

2627: 2565: 1826: 662:

Hi again.. I haven't quite disappeared, but my free time (and energy) has been unexpectedly truncated. I've spent what free time I have working (offline, in fits and starts!) on the

3942: 2596: 1456:- got me there :) ) so I'm looking around for something else to do. Maybe I'll take it upon myself to shepherd some newbies into a collaborative effort on this. Baaah, baaah... :) 1980:

eventually happens to you, your defenses are not validly accepted by others. Have faith in the system of those who defend you, and gain the strength necessary to properly defend

1060:

Thank you very much for emailing me, but I did not see my message so much as a dispute as a complaint about the fact that one member of the group is sending inflammatory emails.

2170:

wanted was a simple note saying it was a misunderstanding; you are the one who has chosen to escalate it. This is making it hard for me to accept your actions as good faith. -

272:

Your featured article is scheduled to be shown on the main page on January 28! So congrats on a brilliant article and working so hard to get it to featured article status! -

1045:

should. I admire your patience, which accomplishes more in the long run than scolding, although in this particular case I'm afraid it's going to be an awfully long time. -

2868: 3107: 904:

I have done some analysis of the discussion. If anyone would like to see the work, please contact me. With the RFC aside, the discussion can be summarised as following

3323:. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. 1857:? Yes, I understand you have your opinion, and I respect that, but I don't respect your opinion if you have not actually read the entire page about the FA-nomination. 1364:

fairly recently, and when I read your article from DYK, I immediately recognized the black & white image as a copy of the original I knew of. Love the article! -

1327: 927:

We appreciate your authorship and desire to make this your own article, but it's public domain and you don't hold the copyright. Please follow the consensus decision.

2530: 158:

Thanks for the nice note. I'll pass by the article soon and give it a couple of minor tweaks. (You'll soon get used to that at Knowledge!) Cheers, and welcome. --

96: 1761: 1662: 1604: 1394: 1184: 2100:

Combative? I'm just being encouraging. Being combative would be to not give a second request. Anyway, you DID make edits after I sent you the first request. -

1504:

had the same first name, belonged to the same dynasty and died on the same year, but beside that they were two diffrent people - so I removed the merge tag. --

3851: 2537:

is currently in progress - your contribution (including whether you still favour the style you voted for or have changed your mind) would be appreciated! --

291:

BTW, this has happened twice before on 1951. It might have something to do with the "births" and "deaths" subsections having duplicate names; I don't know.

3335: 2157:

But then you're becoming combative, when you know that my assuming you edited Lakitu was a misunderstanding and continuing to say I was being combative. -

1262: 1730:

Thanks very much for your detailed comments! Could I ask you to help me address your concerns? I'm not sure I'll be able to address them all by myself. I

186:

long. Doh! Can we shift it to no more than three info packed paragraphs? I reckon after that give it a little longer on peer review and then submit it to

3394: 2459: 965: 288:. Most of the page got duplicated. I reverted the edit to clear this up, but I probably therefore dropped your intended edit. Can you look this over? 2533:. As I don't know if you've gathered, somebody has been fighting for a change to the house style on how to notate multiple events on the same date. A 3265: 1173: 2632:

to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

182:

taken all my suggestions on board! I think that's awesome :-) However, it almost makes me feel churlish for saying this, but now the lead section is

3261: 3256:

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Knowledge to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you

2599:

to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

2568:

to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

2425:

translation of an image description; just wanted to remind you that the diamond is ready. If there's anything I can do more, let me know. Regards -

2113:

period and for such an easily remedied offense is combative. 48 to 72 hours is a more reasonable time frame to give someone adequate time to reply.

3671: 3041: 2623: 2592: 2561: 1640: 3326:

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

2451: 836:

public in PDF form!), so all of my knowledge of the mine had been gleaned from passing references and asides. I feel much less ignorant now. ;)

4044: 3898: 3791: 3727: 3414: 3186: 2389: 1125:

employment. Any reprobate can fire off an inflammatory email, but it takes true courage to show tolerance and understanding for other people.

893:

If you diagree, please take it up with the wiki gnomes of Knowledge, don't change the diamonds page any longer.--05:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

1475:. He eventually listed it on that page of class projects, and that's when I found out that it wasn't just that article but five articles. 3592: 2895: 311:

has a great way of doing it. It is still in a bit of development, but works well now and any problems can be fixed in the future. Thanks -

1928:

I don't care what your father said, it carries less weight than the opinions of other editors who have earned my respect over many months.

166:

Hello again. I had some further thoughts regarding your excellent article and added them to the Nitrogen Cycle section. Hope they fit.

1848: 3422: 3349:, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter 242:

I've made some significant edits to this page which should address many of your concerns. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.

139: 2079:

Second request for you to clarify; if you don't, I'll request Raul to strike your objection on the grounds that it's not actionable. -

3938: 3922: 3618: 2816: 2633: 2491: 1382: 930:

Let's unlock the page. I believe that Bantman or Hadal should make the changes to AD & BC. Thanks. --06:46, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

2502:" article that the section should show as the main article or should the majority of the content in the tooth article be moved to a " 3269: 3163:

I noticed you are not really active on Knowledge anymore but, in case you still watch this page, I have propossed that your article

2600: 2455: 2447: 1542: 86: 1984:

no matter whose side that may be; your method of taking others' word is only slightly more reliable than throwing dice, lol. When

339:

standard, although the GIA's colour and clarity grades come closest to being universally accepted. I do know that Pagel-Theisen's

2760: 2728: 2693: 2665: 2534: 136:

is also a good place to go for quick answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

4048: 3795: 3588: 2951: 2889: 2852: 2838: 2393: 81: 1534: 1233:

I noticed that in June 2004 (!!!) you added the datum that Ibn Nafis discovered the circulatory system in 1242 in the article

3902: 3128: 3058: 2269: 828: 496: 443: 2236:

Uh, could you slash any objections that have been acted on? It's confusing to figure out what's still bad and what isn't. -

1880:

Then, why do you think the past three (3) reviews had many positive comments and suggestions for Fa-nomination? (Yes, there

1710:

house; I may also have to cancel my university application for this year, and use the student loan for more pressing needs.

3877: 3095: 3398: 3390: 2487: 2381: 76: 4023: 2380:

There's been a great amount of debate regarding notability concerns for schools (of all types). You might want to review

883:

BC vs. BCE has been discussed ad nauseam on the talk page, and the page should be left as-is in that stylistic selection.

3206: 851:

Thanks for the indent reset; I was about ready to do it myself. :) I've been agonizing for weeks now over the status of

17: 3579:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

1798:

Sorry about the references, They were mixed with the external links. I have fixed this. Please take another look. --

1281:

The date comes probably from The Penguin Book of Medicine and it is clearly not a very credible source of information.

387:

section (based mostly on the — in my opinion — excellent reference of the American Museum of Natural History's website)

4036: 3988: 3966: 3890: 3842: 3838: 3824: 3820: 3783: 3718: 3696: 3584: 3521: 3467: 56: 3984: 3970: 2091:

I think 12 hours is a little short to expect a response -- some of us sleep after all. No need to get combative. -

1408: 1029:

Perhaps I should just stick with what I know, which is a little bit of grammer and a little bit of everything else.

4040: 3894: 3787: 3418: 3383: 3376: 2969: 1782: 1683: 1625: 111: 2240: 2196: 2184: 2161: 2139: 2104: 2083: 2070: 3249: 2450:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to 101: 3089: 727:

article, but after I'm through they'll probably be much, much longer. Here's to hoping things stay on track. --

559:

What a couple of long winded fellows we are! :) You'll have to stop flattering me before my head gets too big!

3282: 3213: 3066: 46: 3048:

policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure

307:

wikipedia's critics have left. So do what you can to head that off at the pass by using inline citations. The

106: 2557: 2237: 2193: 2181: 2158: 2136: 2101: 2080: 2067: 1921:

My comment was made for the benefit of others, not for you; therefore I don't care if you respect my opinion.

433: 4060: 3653: 3511: 3493: 3471: 2941: 2045: 1994: 1909: 890:

is agreed upon in the Diamonds article. It's about CPU usage, not just style.--21:19, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

827:(Resetting indent): That diagram was a great find! I've translated it into English, uploaded it to Commons ( 121: 116: 61: 3168: 3085: 2604: 1884:

three prior reviews, two peer reviews and the recent FA-nom., in which the vote was closer than you imply.)

1821:

Hello, it's been five days since I addressed to objections you made, or tried to. Would you please look at

1265:. Not sure though .... Anyway, I'm glad that someone is checking all these little details. Thank you. -- 362:

Gregory, thank you for your generous offer! Any and all help would be greatly appreciated! I am actually

167: 2909: 2656: 2637: 2573: 2470: 2192:

PS: Sorry for any insulting comments. But I tend to do that when people are being combative towards me. -

1892:

not the page, which has improved much in the past months -and even then it was FA-worthy, many suggested.

1760: 1661: 1603: 1378: 133: 3726:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

2332:

Hi Bantman - yes, it is standard botanical format; what it is saying is that the aspens are in the genus

1216: 1195: 639:

can be even better. With your work I'm confident it will be. Onward and forward, forward and onward! -

3357: 2917: 2719:

If you want to take a crack at a rewording, have at it. Otherwise I may get around to it in a few days.

2392:

which easily apply in this case. The appropriate action to take (if any) is to submitted the article to

1767: 1668: 1610: 1562: 1501: 860:

I concur that this is by far the best collaboration I've been a party to here; it's very exciting! :) -

421:

unless the villagers come to the gates with torches and pitchforks, I'm happy to let it stand that long.

126: 91: 3680: 3008:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- 3945:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion.

3319: 3135: 437:

the subs. Of course, this rough redo of the main article can go simultaneously with the sub rewrites.

3474:. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Knowledge's readers. -- 3296: 3230: 3176: 3013: 2864: 2827: 2809: 2802: 2779: 2755: 2723: 2688: 2660: 1830: 1813: 1781:. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on 1682:. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on 1644: 1624:. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on 1545:. I'm telling you this because you talked me out of a similar idea during the FAC size discussion. -- 1449: 479:

Oh, right... a proper lead section needs to be written too, of course. I'm leaving that to the end.

273: 261: 199: 191: 66: 2778:

Thought you might be interested in the proposal I made based on your suggestion of an orphan ok tag

2743:

talk page, since I think it might be relevant to others sometime in the future - I'll see you there.

4052: 3956: 3906: 3799: 3614: 3603: 3580: 3273: 3222: 3190: 3121: 2931:

Following the absence of both nominator and reviewer from editing WP for over a month, the article

2913: 2619: 2588: 2431: 1497: 768: 668: 308: 295: 215: 51: 36: 3770: 3171:. If you would like to have a say, a discussion was started on the talk page. Hope you are fine, 2499: 2254:

something to do with his father's war against the Alphonso of Castile, her brother. I'll check. -

4056: 3997: 3331: 3053: 2937: 2514: 1799: 1674: 1570: 1445: 1401: 1238: 71: 31: 935: 760: 3056:. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2874:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

4019: 3873: 3808: 3766: 3744: 3556: 3547: 3537: 3479: 3350: 3149: 3049: 2973: 2955: 2569: 2463: 2385: 2359: 2351: 2309: 1822: 1177: 1046: 981: 970: 950: 806: 663: 3714: 3700: 1843:

I normally don't take the time to personally respond on a person's talk page about comments,

3731: 3576: 3560: 3264:. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see 3101: 2994:

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

2687:

Also occasioned my finding a glaring ambiguity (or outright error) in the original article.

2652: 2294: 2274: 1472: 852: 840: 773: 41: 3575:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 3630: 3292: 3172: 3009: 2932: 2879: 2823: 2787: 1546: 1541:

with the intent of finishing it up before FAC). Please add your input on this practice at

1485: 1476: 1331: 1161: 1129: 1076: 1033: 1002: 724: 236: 1908:

I certainly respect you as a person, based on my own belief system, whatever it may be.--

924:

Even before I weighed in, the consensus was 5 to 2 that we should stay with AD & BC.

402:

sections (I don't believe current references will have enough to do this satisfactorily).

3411:

Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

675:. (My apologies if I'm giving you praise-induced encephalitis, but it had to be said. ;) 3946: 3740: 3736: 3572: 3564: 3076: 2716:

discount prior to the cram down, so the "value" might be unaffected by the cram down.

2542: 2426: 1616: 1584: 1565:. Let me know if this is what you were looking for, or if you want anything changed. — 376:

by removing irrelevant links, moving to sub-articles when necessary, and moving to the

2968:

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for

2708:

Hi Bantman. I think the NYTimes definition is a little oddly formulated / inaccurate.

1829:, or abstain if you prefer, or at the very least explain what still needs to be done? 4006: 3860: 3753: 3568: 3226: 3045: 3033: 3005: 2998:

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

2995: 2988: 2977: 2893:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 2860: 2856: 2511: 2422: 2293:

Oh, no problem, I'm glad to help. Thank you for researching and making the changes.—

2255: 1868:

Then, you have no persuasive power for me to consider your views as arguably correct.

1566: 1558: 1457: 1434: 1424: 1398: 958: 922:

The real consensus is to not change the era markers from AD & BC to BCE & CE.

764: 631:

new perspective on things). As long as you're working on fish topics too, check out

257: 187: 4000:). Primary topic redirect points to an article with a hatnote to the only other use. 1337:

My apologies, I know I've left you all hanging! :) I will try to get to it soon. -

908:

AD: 6 (six) brian0918™ , Dewet , Doovinator , Gene Nygaard , Jasper , Walter Görlitz

3934: 3910: 3804: 3533: 3475: 3145: 2744: 2677: 2285: 2171: 2149: 2126: 2092: 2035:

Well, I admit you are right; it is more efficient sometimes to take shortcuts that

2032:"one's knowledge need not be encyclopedic to be able to make an informed decision." 2013: 1941: 1516: 1505: 1365: 1338: 1284:

It is indeed hard to dig out something on the net but I have succeeded, please see

1254: 1246: 1204: 977: 873:

I have read the debate and while discussion may be entirely academic, it is in the

861: 810: 640: 480: 469: 256:

Have made an attempt to fix the lead section. What do you think? Please respond on

207: 3504: 3447: 2780:

Template talk:Orphan#Proposal - add deorphan attempt option that hides message box

2709: 1287: 635:; I pushed that to FA a couple months ago. I'm quite proud of it... but I think 4005:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

3859:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

3752:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

3660: 3225:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

3164: 2855:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

2507: 2503: 2121:. So I am afraid you are incorrect in your understanding of the relevant facts. 1724: 1588: 1266: 832: 320: 312: 243: 159: 3397:

justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See

3246:. Knowledge takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators 2961: 2844: 2044:

is not for you, but that's only my opinion. I hope that helps; I did my best.--

1322:

When you have a spare moment and feel up to it, could you take another look at

3626: 3426: 3062:

article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the

2783: 2407: 2397: 1715: 1323: 1309: 844: 728: 541: 468:

were rambling... ha! Now, why do I have trouble keeping articles under 32k?

355: 229: 964:

There was an editing accident (probably MySQL error or cut-n-paste error) on

2740: 2538: 2367: 2041: 1778: 1773: 1744: 1735: 1679: 1621: 1529: 1351: 1234: 698: 21: 4029:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

3776:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

3532:

from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, --

3345:

Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to

1557:

Hi Bantman — I noticed you had put up an image request for a diagram of a

1393:. When you create new articles, it would be great if you could use these 839:

I'll eventually take a crack at creating a new image or two to illustrate

354:

I've rambled quite enough, so I'll wrap this up by saying: Great work! --

132:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. The

3205:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

2443: 2342: 2319: 1418:

on the live RC feed. There's stuff on "destructive fishing practices" in

1415: 632: 416:

material and gemological properties) and natural history, as the article

211: 175: 152: 3929: 3028: 3516: 3463: 1854: 1777:, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the 1678:, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the 1620:, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the 1539:

Knowledge:Peer review/2005 English cricket season (8-30 April)/archive1

1508: 1419: 1191: 756: 672: 636: 328: 2388:

for more information on this. In general, there are no criteria under

1793:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge

1639:

Hi. To get everybody thinking, I've created a survey about Year pages

1583:

Hi Bantman, I just wanted to let you know that an article you wrote,

1587:, is now featured in the Did you Know? category on the Main page. -- 1190:

Hi Bryan, thanks very much for your comments on my FAC nomination of

1026:

me an email back and said to feel free to edit, which is what I did.

897:

can convince me on a technical level. --06:43, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

4064: 3960: 3915: 3814: 3681:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CcGr4FyuqEa/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

3634: 3596: 3541: 3483: 3433: 3300: 3180: 3153: 3017: 2945: 2921: 2831: 2791: 2765: 2733: 2670: 2641: 2608: 2577: 2546: 2519: 2474: 2433: 2410: 2400: 2370: 2345: 2322: 2297: 2288: 2277: 2258: 2243: 2199: 2187: 2174: 2164: 2152: 2142: 2129: 2107: 2095: 2086: 2073: 2048: 1997: 1912: 1833: 1816: 1802: 1718: 1647: 1460: 1437: 1427: 1397:

whenever possible. Thanks, and continue contributing to Knowledge!

1354: 1312: 218: 3943:

Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 3#Belle France

2529:

Hello, I'm sending you this message since you were involved in the

2985:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Kimberly Caldwell (2nd nomination)

2495: 2480: 2406:

There certainly might be support for something thing like that. --

3563:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge

1350:

Thanks for the picture of Conradin, learned something new there.

1361: 1258: 453:

do with actual grading methodology. Of course I could be wrong.

285: 250: 3933:

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect

1298:

Ibn Al-Nafis and the pulmonary circulation. Lancet 1978;1:1148

1295:

Alternatively you could also try to consult a Lancet article

1215:

town, and never got near the west. Thanks for catching those!

805:

I only have one tank up now; I had a second set up to raise my

1965:

of persons who come here and -for free -try to improve things.

1714:

energetically focused feeling of writing articles. Cheers, --

2364:

Round 12 will begin at 11:00 UTC on Friday January 20. 2006.

3975: 3829: 3705: 3652: 3647:

You're invited! NYC Earth Day 2022 Edit-a-thon! April 22nd!

3309: 3260:

verify that externally by one of the processes explained at

3195: 2960: 2899:

explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for

2865:

see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

2843: 2819:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

2801: 1888:

I initially suggested that the edit war was a reflection on

901:

what history is for. Thanks. --14:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

3363:

to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

2651:

Hi Bantman, I copied most of your informative new text at

1237:. However, this disagrees with the date of 1268 given in 953:

17:56, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) (moved from Bantman's user page)

2358:

This is to invite you to participate in the next game of

2318:

Just to let you know, Round 11 begins today at 0900 GMT.

3674:

2pm - 4pm EST (April 22nd) online via Zoom and in person

3286:

to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for

3032:

Hello Bantman! Thank you for your contributions. I am a

914:

CrucifiedChrist and Taxman just want the debate to stop.

4047:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

3901:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

3883:

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing

3794:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

3406: 1827:

Knowledge:Featured article candidates/History of Alaska

4012:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

3866:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

3759:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

3401:

for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

3120: 2315:

Hi, I've noticed you've taken part in Wikifun before.

198:

Hey, I think it's ready for FAC now :-) Great work! -

2712:

I think is the most idiomatic one in my experience.

2618:

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

2587:

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

2556:

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered,

1976:"I have not read the entire history of nominations;" 1543:

Knowledge talk:Template namespace#transcluding prose

319:

I left a response on my talk page for continuity. -

3421:. If you have any questions please ask them at the 2869:

notability guideline for companies and corporations

2863:, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please 1849:

Knowledge:Featured_article_candidates/Terri_Schiavo

780:) cleanup -- "standing on the shoulders of giants". 3621:. You are invited to comment on the discussion at 3040:of the articles that you created is tagged as an 2506:" (or would this be an exception to have plural: " 3640:Earth Day 2022 Edit-a-thon - April 22nd - 2PM EST 3555:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current 1853:Have you actually read the last three reviews of 667:saving. You've obviously noticed my expansion of 1847:but you seem to think I have abused the system: 1825:and change your vote if I met the objections at 1328:Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Technetium 3496:. You're also welcome to display this userbox: 3375:If you believe the media meets the criteria at 3227:section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion 3203: 1897:My father weighed in on the edit warring issue: 1414:Hi there, I just spotted your edit summary for 1288:http://www.islamset.com/isc/nafis/iskandar.html 3623:the entry on the Templates for discussion page 2857:section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion 2774:WikiProject Orphanage - orphan ok tag followup 2284:source. Thanks for flagging me down on this! 1812:Still on? I tried to address your objections. 1174:Knowledge talk:What is a featured article#Size 97:Knowledge:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense 3306:File permission problem with File:Masratt.jpg 3134: 2890:the page that has been nominated for deletion 1537:(a page he is putting through peer review at 1292:There seems to be support for the 1242 date. 1185:Knowledge:Featured article candidates/Eldfell 613:sure we don't duplicate each other's efforts. 8: 3852:File:Tizian Portrait of Ranuccio Farnese.jpg 3466:(estimated annual readership: 2,024,000) to 3229:, because the article appears to be a clear 2552:Image:AB_Frost_stamp.jpg listed for deletion 1993:votes which I execute: Respect and wisdom.-- 327:Hii; I've been watching your rennovation of 2739:I'm going to move this conversation to the 2676:No problem, glad you found the text useful. 1263:Timeline of medicine and medical technology 911:CE: 2 (two) Bryan is Bantman/Bantman, Hadal 2912:the page or have a copy emailed to you. 2808:Hello, Bantman. You have new messages at 2417:Your image description translation request 1918:I will respond in brief to your comments. 1771:has been updated. A fact from the article 1755: 1672:has been updated. A fact from the article 1656: 1614:has been updated. A fact from the article 1598: 966:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates 869:BC/AD vs BCE/CE debate on the Diamond Page 432:think it's probably appropriate to have a 405:Figuring out what the heck to do with the 284:Something went wrong on your last edit of 3445: 3266:Knowledge:Requesting copyright permission 3042:Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person 3334:or another acceptable free license (see 3262:Knowledge:Donating copyrighted materials 1535:2005 English cricket season (8-30 April) 1301:but it is not available online I think. 1257:. I dunno... I think I copied that from 4018:notice, but please explain why in your 3872:notice, but please explain why in your 3765:notice, but please explain why in your 3691:Environment of New York City Task Force 3665:Environment of New York City Task Force 3417:. You may wish to read the Knowledge's 3340:at the site of the original publication 3330:make a note permitting reuse under the 3207:the guide to writing your first article 3004:This is an automatic notification by a 2624:Knowledge:Images and media for deletion 2593:Knowledge:Images and media for deletion 2562:Knowledge:Images and media for deletion 2525:Year page formatting of multiple events 2341:I'll see if I can think of something - 1304:I hope this is al least a bit helpful. 3728:Knowledge:General notability guideline 3391:Knowledge:File copyright tags#Fair use 2486:Hey, I noticed you were involved with 2390:Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion 1140:might turn out to be a nice person. 809:fry, but they're all grown up now. - 27:Here are some links I thought useful: 3805:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 3052:, all biographies should be based on 1506:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 7: 3499: 3272:for more details, or ask a question 2119:two minutes after the first FAC post 1533:container page. For an example see: 3850:Unused, low quality. Superseded by 3389:or one of the other tags listed at 3270:Knowledge's policies and guidelines 3212:You may want to consider using the 2490:, and I need some feedback! I had 2421:Hello! A while ago, you requested 2117:posts to the FAC page in question, 4007:deleted for any of several reasons 3996:Disambiguation page not required ( 3991:because of the following concern: 3861:deleted for any of several reasons 3845:because of the following concern: 3754:deleted for any of several reasons 3721:because of the following concern: 2904:does get deleted, you can contact 2867:, as well as our subject-specific 2614:Image:Name.ext listed for deletion 2583:Image:Name.ext listed for deletion 1385:, I have replaced the generalized 1383:Knowledge:WikiProject Stub sorting 14: 3886:{{proposed deletion/dated files}} 3869:{{proposed deletion/dated files}} 3581:review the candidates' statements 3470:status, I hereby present you the 1561:, so I put one together for you: 87:Knowledge:Pages needing attention 3941:. This discussion will occur at 3928: 3839:File:Ranuccio Farnese Titian.jpg 3825:File:Ranuccio Farnese Titian.jpg 3609: 3503: 3462:For your contributions to bring 3446: 3027: 2531:August 2005 survey on year pages 2125:that in the interests of all. - 1759: 1660: 1602: 390:Finding sources and writing the 2853:North American Coal Corporation 2839:North American Coal Corporation 2427: 2394:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 2135:statement didn't make sense. - 2016:04:53, September 10, 2005 (UTC) 1944:04:12, September 10, 2005 (UTC) 1571: 1226:Ibn Nafis & the circulation 918:The summary below was ignored. 341:Diamond Grading ABC: The Manual 82:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 3985:Murghab River (disambiguation) 3971:Murghab River (disambiguation) 3916:13:20, 25 September 2022 (UTC) 3587:. For the Election committee, 3557:Arbitration Committee election 3548:ArbCom elections are now open! 3423:Media copyright questions page 2336:(poplars), and in the section 2270:List of archaeological periods 2264:List of archaeological periods 2259:11:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC) 2244:15:58, 16 September 2005 (UTC) 2200:01:49, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2188:01:49, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2175:01:26, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2165:01:16, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2153:01:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2143:00:47, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2130:00:25, 15 September 2005 (UTC) 2108:23:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC) 2096:15:46, 14 September 2005 (UTC) 2087:12:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC) 2074:05:59, 14 September 2005 (UTC) 2049:05:03, 10 September 2005 (UTC) 2034: 1998:04:30, 10 September 2005 (UTC) 1978: 1963: 1951: 1913:02:24, 10 September 2005 (UTC) 1423:there's anything I can do... 1409:Destructive fishing techniques 1242:crazy!) Thanks for your help. 497:Material properties of diamond 444:material properties of diamond 174:Wow! That's fantastic work on 1: 3635:08:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC) 3597:12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC) 3399:Knowledge:File copyright tags 3353:. If you take this step, add 3283:the page's talk page directly 3046:biographies of living persons 2547:15:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 2488:Knowledge:WikiProject Anatomy 2434:06:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC) 2382:Knowledge:WikiProject Schools 1834:03:04, 8 September 2005 (UTC) 1817:01:56, 3 September 2005 (UTC) 1783:the "Did you know?" talk page 1738:07:28, August 16, 2005 (UTC) 1684:the "Did you know?" talk page 1626:the "Did you know?" talk page 1176:. Completely agree with you. 394:section, and filling out the 77:Knowledge:Conflict resolution 4065:17:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC) 3961:21:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC) 3415:criteria for speedy deletion 3370:permissions-en@wikimedia.org 3347:permissions-en@wikimedia.org 3301:09:49, 27 January 2012 (UTC) 3280:deleted. You can also visit 3268:. You might want to look at 3216:to help you create articles. 2861:criteria for speedy deletion 2766:23:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC) 2734:22:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC) 2671:21:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC) 2642:03:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC) 2578:12:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC) 2411:19:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC) 2401:18:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC) 2371:17:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC) 2346:00:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC) 2323:04:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC) 2298:04:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC) 2289:18:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC) 2278:16:35, 2 November 2005 (UTC) 1747:07:51, August 19, 2005 (UTC) 219:23:32, 20 October 2005 (UTC) 4051:allows discussion to reach 4032:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 4015:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 3905:allows discussion to reach 3815:05:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC) 3798:allows discussion to reach 3779:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 3762:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 3667:invite you to join us for: 3602:Nomination for deletion of 3583:and submit your choices on 3542:15:55, 28 August 2013 (UTC) 3484:15:55, 28 August 2013 (UTC) 3154:20:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC) 2972:. The nominated article is 2609:11:35, 23 August 2008 (UTC) 1803:08:32, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 1719:02:42, 15 August 2005 (UTC) 1591:16:07, July 11, 2005 (UTC) 392:Industrial diamond industry 145:] 18:41, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC) 57:Knowledge:Cite your sources 4080: 4043:exist. In particular, the 3897:exist. In particular, the 3790:exist. In particular, the 3672:2022 Earth Day Edit-a-thon 3589:MediaWiki message delivery 3377:Knowledge:Non-free content 3072:tag. Here is the article: 2922:19:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC) 2832:17:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC) 2475:22:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC) 2458:. Reviewers' concerns are 1479:18:55, May 31, 2005 (UTC) 1404:19:44, May 23, 2005 (UTC) 1180:22:21, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC) 210:, I've added a diagram to 112:Knowledge:Boilerplate text 4037:proposed deletion process 3921:"Belle France" listed at 3891:proposed deletion process 3784:proposed deletion process 3646: 3452: 3238:, but not as a source of 3221:A tag has been placed on 3181:08:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC) 3018:01:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC) 2991:with four tildes (~~~~). 2851:A tag has been placed on 2792:22:47, 3 March 2009 (UTC) 2520:13:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 2446:has been nominated for a 1648:03:17, 28 July 2005 (UTC) 1549:22:29, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) 1519:20:27, May 31, 2005 (UTC) 1488:18:58, May 31, 2005 (UTC) 1368:02:52, May 10, 2005 (UTC) 1360:Glad to help! I just did 1249:23:10, May 2, 2005 (UTC) 1207:17:05, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC) 1198:11:24, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) 1168:Size of featured articles 1164:20:57, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1132:19:11, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1079:06:07, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1049:19:16, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1036:19:10, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1005:13:38, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC) 984:20:52, 2005 Mar 29 (UTC) 934:Camel cigarettes slogan ( 864:00:24, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC) 847:05:14, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) 813:06:56, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC) 643:04:45, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC) 483:07:41, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) 472:06:32, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) 380:section when appropriate. 358:05:26, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 315:22:21, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) 276:23:32, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) 264:02:49, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC) 246:17:52, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC) 232:21:31, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC) 170:17:27, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC) 162:01:30, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC) 102:Knowledge:Brilliant prose 3923:Redirects for discussion 3743:or by leaving a note at 3434:16:10, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 3244:say it in your own words 3242:. This part is crucial: 2946:02:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC) 2748: 2681: 2655:to the original article 2558:Image:AB_Frost_stamp.jpg 1635:WikiProject Years Survey 1575:01:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC) 1509:19:09, 31 May 2005 (UTC) 1461:23:36, 26 May 2005 (UTC) 1438:23:06, 26 May 2005 (UTC) 1428:23:02, 26 May 2005 (UTC) 1355:00:46, 10 May 2005 (UTC) 1341:03:57, May 3, 2005 (UTC) 1219:18:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) 731:04:14, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) 544:07:30, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 323:23:39, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) 298:04:07, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC) 202:07:04, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC) 194:08:02, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC) 107:Knowledge:List of images 47:Knowledge:Policy Library 4024:the article's talk page 3937:and has thus listed it 3771:the article's talk page 3494:Knowledge:Million Award 2448:featured article review 2376:Re: Speedy deletion tag 1318:Unfinished FAC business 1313:00:05, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 1269:23:19, 2005 May 2 (UTC) 831:), and added it to the 434:diamond grading systems 212:Aquarium#Nitrogen cycle 122:Knowledge:Mailing lists 117:Knowledge:Current polls 62:Knowledge:Verifiability 4003: 3980: 3857: 3834: 3750: 3710: 3657: 3619:nominated for deletion 3314: 3218: 3200: 2965: 2908:to request that they 2848: 2810:Kelapstick's talk page 2806: 2657:Overnight indexed swap 1839:your comments about me 1563:Image:VolcanicPipe.jpg 1381:article. As part of 1379:Battle of Ngasaunggyan 1377:Thanks for adding the 1172:Liked your comment at 134:Knowledge:Village pump 4049:articles for deletion 3993: 3989:proposed for deletion 3979: 3847: 3843:proposed for deletion 3833: 3796:articles for deletion 3723: 3719:proposed for deletion 3709: 3656: 3561:Arbitration Committee 3317:Thanks for uploading 3313: 3199: 3169:Brasil Mineração Mine 2996:articles for deletion 2978:What Knowledge is not 2964: 2847: 2805: 2622:, has been listed at 2591:, has been listed at 2560:, has been listed at 1878:read the entire page: 1866:read the entire page: 1502:Boleslaus V of Poland 1433:Wow! That was quick. 1274:Pulmonary circulation 127:Knowledge:IRC channel 92:Knowledge:Peer review 3903:files for discussion 3878:the file's talk page 3510:This editor won the 3379:, use a tag such as 3250:blocked from editing 2987:. Please be sure to 1450:Myxobolus cerebralis 396:diamond supply chain 206:As you requested on 67:Knowledge:Wikiquette 3565:arbitration process 3223:Aga Khan University 3191:Aga Khan University 2906:one of these admins 2837:Speedy deletion of 1693:Re: Diamond infobox 1553:Volcanic Pipe image 1498:Boleslaus the Pious 936:N.W. Ayer & Son 769:Argyle diamond mine 761:N.W. Ayer & Son 669:diamond enhancement 309:Knowledge:Footnotes 52:Knowledge:Utilities 42:M:Foundation issues 37:Knowledge:Help desk 4041:deletion processes 3981: 3895:deletion processes 3835: 3788:deletion processes 3711: 3658: 3577:arbitration policy 3413:, as described on 3315: 3201: 3036:alerting you that 2989:sign your comments 2966: 2849: 2817:remove this notice 2807: 2238:A Link to the Past 2194:A Link to the Past 2182:A Link to the Past 2159:A Link to the Past 2137:A Link to the Past 2102:A Link to the Past 2081:A Link to the Past 2068:A Link to the Past 1675:Capitoline Museums 1395:more specific tags 1239:circulatory system 72:Knowledge:Civility 32:Knowledge:Tutorial 3967:Proposed deletion 3821:Proposed deletion 3745:User talk:Piotrus 3697:Proposed deletion 3687: 3686: 3528: 3527: 3489: 3488: 3456:The Million Award 3384:non-free fair use 3140: 3023:Unreferenced BLPs 2974:Kimberly Caldwell 2956:Kimberly Caldwell 2626:. Please see the 2595:. Please see the 2564:. Please see the 2386:Knowledge:Schools 2310:Knowledge:Wikifun 2046:GordonWattsDotCom 1995:GordonWattsDotCom 1910:GordonWattsDotCom 1823:History of Alaska 1808:History of Alaska 1789: 1788: 1690: 1689: 1632: 1631: 877:place. You wrote 807:corydoras sterbai 767:, and especially 664:diamond simulants 4071: 4034: 4033: 4017: 4016: 3978: 3953: 3932: 3913: 3909:for deletion. -- 3888: 3887: 3871: 3870: 3832: 3811: 3781: 3780: 3764: 3763: 3708: 3644: 3643: 3613: 3612: 3522:Featured Article 3507: 3500: 3468:Featured Article 3450: 3443: 3442: 3431: 3419:image use policy 3388: 3382: 3362: 3356: 3320:File:Masratt.jpg 3312: 3198: 3139: 3138: 3124: 3080: 3071: 3065: 3054:reliable sources 3031: 2885: 2884: 2878: 2820: 2763: 2758: 2731: 2726: 2696: 2691: 2668: 2663: 2653:Libor OIS spread 2647:Libor OIS spread 2517: 2492:asked a question 2467: 2452:featured quality 2429: 2233: 2232: 2228: 2051: 2000: 1966: 1954: 1763: 1756: 1664: 1657: 1606: 1599: 1573: 1517:Bryan is Bantman 1492: 1473:Talk:Puget Sound 1366:Bryan is Bantman 1339:Bryan is Bantman 1247:Bryan is Bantman 1205:Bryan is Bantman 853:diamond industry 841:diamond simulant 774:diamond industry 464:And you thought 4079: 4078: 4074: 4073: 4072: 4070: 4069: 4068: 4045:speedy deletion 4031: 4030: 4014: 4013: 3976: 3974: 3947: 3926: 3911: 3899:speedy deletion 3885: 3884: 3868: 3867: 3830: 3828: 3813: 3809: 3792:speedy deletion 3778: 3777: 3761: 3760: 3706: 3704: 3642: 3610: 3607: 3585:the voting page 3551: 3529: 3441: 3427: 3407:your upload log 3386: 3380: 3360: 3354: 3310: 3308: 3219: 3196: 3194: 3187:Speedy deletion 3161: 3081: 3069: 3067:unreferencedBLP 3063: 3025: 2959: 2933:Rio Tinto Group 2929: 2927:Rio Tinto Group 2882: 2876: 2875: 2842: 2821: 2814: 2799: 2776: 2761: 2756: 2729: 2724: 2710:This definition 2706: 2694: 2689: 2666: 2661: 2649: 2616: 2585: 2554: 2527: 2515: 2484: 2465: 2441: 2423:Russian2English 2419: 2378: 2356: 2330: 2313: 2266: 2251: 2234: 2230: 2226: 2224: 2223: 2064: 2062:Katamari Damacy 1841: 1810: 1796: 1754: 1734:use some help. 1728: 1695: 1655: 1645:Trevor macinnis 1637: 1597: 1581: 1555: 1526: 1524:container pages 1495: 1468: 1412: 1375: 1348: 1326:and comment at 1320: 1276: 1228: 1188: 1170: 1090: 1088:Personal Issues 1085: 1055: 1042: 1011: 990: 962: 940: 871: 725:diamond grading 304: 282: 274:Ta bu shi da yu 270: 262:Ta bu shi da yu 254: 240: 237:Steve Dalkowski 226: 200:Ta bu shi da yu 192:Ta bu shi da yu 178:... you really 156: 25: 12: 11: 5: 4077: 4075: 4055:for deletion. 4035:will stop the 3973: 3964: 3939:for discussion 3925: 3919: 3889:will stop the 3827: 3818: 3803: 3802:for deletion. 3782:will stop the 3703: 3694: 3685: 3684: 3676: 3675: 3649: 3648: 3641: 3638: 3606: 3600: 3554: 3550: 3545: 3526: 3525: 3508: 3498: 3487: 3486: 3459: 3458: 3453: 3451: 3440: 3437: 3365: 3364: 3343: 3307: 3304: 3214:Article Wizard 3202: 3193: 3189:nomination of 3184: 3167:be renamed to 3160: 3157: 3142: 3141: 3077:Sean Burroughs 3024: 3021: 2958: 2954:nomination of 2949: 2928: 2925: 2841: 2835: 2813: 2800: 2798: 2795: 2775: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2705: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2648: 2645: 2620:Image:Name.ext 2615: 2612: 2589:Image:Name.ext 2584: 2581: 2553: 2550: 2526: 2523: 2483: 2478: 2440: 2437: 2418: 2415: 2414: 2413: 2377: 2374: 2365: 2363: 2355: 2349: 2329: 2326: 2312: 2307: 2305: 2303: 2302: 2301: 2300: 2265: 2262: 2250: 2247: 2222: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2202: 2190: 2122: 2114: 2063: 2060: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1946: 1945: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1933: 1929: 1926: 1922: 1902: 1901: 1886: 1885: 1870: 1869: 1840: 1837: 1809: 1806: 1800:Samuel Wantman 1795: 1790: 1787: 1786: 1764: 1753: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1727: 1722: 1694: 1691: 1688: 1687: 1665: 1654: 1651: 1636: 1633: 1630: 1629: 1617:Kangaroo mouse 1607: 1596: 1593: 1585:kangaroo mouse 1580: 1579:Kangaroo mouse 1577: 1554: 1551: 1528:Hey Bantman - 1525: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1494: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1467: 1464: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1411: 1406: 1374: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1347: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1319: 1316: 1308: 1275: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1227: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1217:Worldtraveller 1209: 1208: 1196:Worldtraveller 1187: 1182: 1169: 1166: 1159: 1089: 1086: 1084: 1081: 1054: 1051: 1041: 1038: 1010: 1007: 989: 986: 961: 955: 939: 932: 916: 915: 912: 909: 887: 886: 885: 884: 870: 867: 866: 865: 857: 856: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 819: 818: 817: 816: 815: 814: 792: 791: 790: 789: 788: 787: 786: 785: 784: 783: 782: 781: 741: 740: 739: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 732: 712: 711: 710: 709: 708: 707: 706: 705: 704: 703: 685: 684: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 651: 650: 649: 648: 647: 646: 645: 644: 621: 620: 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 614: 603: 602: 601: 600: 599: 598: 597: 596: 585: 584: 583: 582: 581: 580: 579: 578: 567: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 561: 560: 550: 549: 548: 547: 546: 545: 533: 532: 531: 530: 529: 528: 519: 518: 517: 516: 515: 514: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 487: 486: 485: 484: 474: 473: 461: 460: 455: 454: 449: 448: 439: 438: 423: 422: 412: 411: 403: 388: 383:Reworking the 381: 374:External links 372:Clean out the 369: 368: 325: 324: 303: 300: 296:A D Monroe III 281: 278: 269: 266: 253: 248: 239: 234: 225: 222: 216:Ilmari Karonen 204: 203: 172: 171: 155: 150: 148: 130: 129: 124: 119: 114: 109: 104: 99: 94: 89: 84: 79: 74: 69: 64: 59: 54: 49: 44: 39: 34: 24: 15: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4076: 4067: 4066: 4062: 4058: 4057:Shhhnotsoloud 4054: 4050: 4046: 4042: 4038: 4027: 4025: 4021: 4010: 4008: 4002: 4001: 3999: 3992: 3990: 3986: 3972: 3968: 3965: 3963: 3962: 3958: 3954: 3952: 3951: 3944: 3940: 3936: 3931: 3924: 3920: 3918: 3917: 3914: 3908: 3904: 3900: 3896: 3892: 3881: 3879: 3875: 3864: 3862: 3856: 3855: 3853: 3846: 3844: 3840: 3826: 3822: 3819: 3817: 3816: 3812: 3806: 3801: 3797: 3793: 3789: 3785: 3774: 3772: 3768: 3757: 3755: 3749: 3748: 3746: 3742: 3738: 3733: 3729: 3722: 3720: 3716: 3702: 3698: 3695: 3693: 3692: 3683: 3682: 3673: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3666: 3662: 3655: 3651: 3650: 3645: 3639: 3637: 3636: 3632: 3628: 3624: 3620: 3616: 3615:Template:Area 3605: 3604:Template:Area 3601: 3599: 3598: 3594: 3590: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3570: 3566: 3562: 3558: 3549: 3546: 3544: 3543: 3539: 3535: 3523: 3519: 3518: 3514:for bringing 3513: 3512:Million Award 3509: 3506: 3502: 3501: 3497: 3495: 3485: 3481: 3477: 3473: 3472:Million Award 3469: 3465: 3461: 3460: 3457: 3454: 3449: 3444: 3439:Million Award 3438: 3436: 3435: 3432: 3430: 3425:. Thank you. 3424: 3420: 3416: 3412: 3408: 3402: 3400: 3396: 3392: 3385: 3378: 3373: 3371: 3359: 3352: 3348: 3344: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3329: 3328: 3327: 3324: 3322: 3321: 3305: 3303: 3302: 3298: 3294: 3289: 3285: 3284: 3277: 3275: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3259: 3254: 3252: 3251: 3245: 3241: 3237: 3232: 3228: 3224: 3217: 3215: 3210: 3208: 3192: 3188: 3185: 3183: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3166: 3158: 3156: 3155: 3151: 3147: 3137: 3133: 3130: 3127: 3123: 3119: 3115: 3112: 3109: 3106: 3103: 3100: 3097: 3094: 3091: 3087: 3084: 3083:Find sources: 3078: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3068: 3061: 3060: 3055: 3051: 3050:verifiability 3047: 3043: 3039: 3035: 3030: 3022: 3020: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3003: 2999: 2997: 2992: 2990: 2986: 2981: 2979: 2975: 2971: 2963: 2957: 2953: 2950: 2948: 2947: 2943: 2939: 2938:hamiltonstone 2934: 2926: 2924: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2902: 2898: 2897: 2896:the talk page 2892: 2891: 2881: 2872: 2870: 2866: 2862: 2858: 2854: 2846: 2840: 2836: 2834: 2833: 2829: 2825: 2818: 2811: 2804: 2796: 2794: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2773: 2767: 2764: 2759: 2753: 2752: 2750: 2746: 2742: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2732: 2727: 2720: 2717: 2713: 2711: 2703: 2697: 2692: 2686: 2685: 2683: 2679: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2669: 2664: 2658: 2654: 2646: 2644: 2643: 2639: 2635: 2631: 2630: 2625: 2621: 2613: 2611: 2610: 2606: 2602: 2598: 2594: 2590: 2582: 2580: 2579: 2575: 2571: 2567: 2563: 2559: 2551: 2549: 2548: 2544: 2540: 2536: 2532: 2524: 2522: 2521: 2518: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2489: 2482: 2479: 2477: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2461: 2457: 2453: 2449: 2445: 2438: 2436: 2435: 2432: 2430: 2424: 2416: 2412: 2409: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2399: 2395: 2391: 2387: 2383: 2375: 2373: 2372: 2369: 2361: 2353: 2350: 2348: 2347: 2344: 2339: 2335: 2327: 2325: 2324: 2321: 2316: 2311: 2308: 2306: 2299: 2296: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2287: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2276: 2271: 2268:I noticed in 2263: 2261: 2260: 2257: 2248: 2246: 2245: 2242: 2239: 2229: 2221: 2201: 2198: 2195: 2191: 2189: 2186: 2183: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2173: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2163: 2160: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2151: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2141: 2138: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2128: 2123: 2120: 2115: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2106: 2103: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2094: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2085: 2082: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2072: 2069: 2061: 2050: 2047: 2043: 2038: 2033: 2030: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2015: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2005: 1999: 1996: 1992: 1987: 1983: 1977: 1974: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1943: 1939: 1934: 1930: 1927: 1923: 1920: 1919: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1911: 1906: 1898: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1891: 1883: 1879: 1877: 1872: 1871: 1867: 1865: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1856: 1851: 1850: 1846: 1838: 1836: 1835: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1819: 1818: 1815: 1807: 1805: 1804: 1801: 1794: 1791: 1784: 1780: 1776: 1775: 1770: 1769: 1768:Did you know? 1765: 1762: 1758: 1757: 1751: 1746: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1737: 1733: 1726: 1723: 1721: 1720: 1717: 1711: 1707: 1703: 1699: 1692: 1685: 1681: 1677: 1676: 1671: 1670: 1669:Did you know? 1666: 1663: 1659: 1658: 1652: 1650: 1649: 1646: 1642: 1634: 1627: 1623: 1619: 1618: 1613: 1612: 1611:Did you know? 1608: 1605: 1601: 1600: 1594: 1592: 1590: 1586: 1578: 1576: 1574: 1568: 1564: 1560: 1559:volcanic pipe 1552: 1550: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1536: 1531: 1523: 1518: 1513: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1507: 1503: 1499: 1487: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1478: 1474: 1466:Case cracking 1465: 1463: 1462: 1459: 1455: 1451: 1447: 1446:your comments 1439: 1436: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1426: 1421: 1417: 1410: 1407: 1405: 1403: 1400: 1396: 1392: 1391:{{hist-stub}} 1388: 1384: 1380: 1372: 1367: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1353: 1345: 1340: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1317: 1315: 1314: 1311: 1305: 1302: 1299: 1296: 1293: 1290: 1289: 1285: 1282: 1279: 1273: 1268: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1248: 1243: 1240: 1236: 1231: 1225: 1218: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1206: 1201: 1200: 1199: 1197: 1193: 1186: 1183: 1181: 1179: 1175: 1167: 1165: 1163: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1131: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1110: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1087: 1082: 1080: 1078: 1072: 1068: 1065: 1061: 1058: 1052: 1050: 1048: 1039: 1037: 1035: 1030: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1009:Body Language 1008: 1006: 1004: 998: 994: 987: 985: 983: 982:Tim McCormack 979: 974: 972: 967: 960: 956: 954: 952: 948: 944: 937: 933: 931: 928: 925: 923: 919: 913: 910: 907: 906: 905: 902: 898: 894: 891: 882: 881: 880: 879: 878: 876: 868: 863: 859: 858: 854: 850: 849: 848: 846: 842: 837: 834: 830: 812: 808: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 799: 798: 797: 796: 795: 794: 793: 779: 775: 770: 766: 765:volcanic pipe 762: 758: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 747: 746: 745: 744: 743: 742: 730: 726: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 716: 715: 714: 713: 700: 695: 694: 693: 692: 691: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 674: 670: 665: 661: 660: 659: 658: 657: 656: 655: 654: 653: 652: 642: 638: 634: 629: 628: 627: 626: 625: 624: 623: 622: 611: 610: 609: 608: 607: 606: 605: 604: 593: 592: 591: 590: 589: 588: 587: 586: 575: 574: 573: 572: 571: 570: 569: 568: 558: 557: 556: 555: 554: 553: 552: 551: 543: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 525: 524: 523: 522: 521: 520: 511: 510: 509: 508: 507: 506: 498: 493: 492: 491: 490: 489: 488: 482: 478: 477: 476: 475: 471: 467: 463: 462: 457: 456: 451: 450: 445: 441: 440: 435: 430: 425: 424: 419: 414: 413: 408: 404: 401: 397: 393: 389: 386: 382: 379: 375: 371: 370: 365: 361: 360: 359: 357: 352: 348: 346: 342: 338: 332: 330: 322: 318: 317: 316: 314: 310: 301: 299: 297: 292: 289: 287: 279: 277: 275: 267: 265: 263: 259: 252: 249: 247: 245: 238: 235: 233: 231: 223: 221: 220: 217: 213: 209: 201: 197: 196: 195: 193: 189: 185: 181: 177: 169: 165: 164: 163: 161: 154: 151: 149: 146: 143: 141: 137: 135: 128: 125: 123: 120: 118: 115: 113: 110: 108: 105: 103: 100: 98: 95: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 78: 75: 73: 70: 68: 65: 63: 60: 58: 55: 53: 50: 48: 45: 43: 40: 38: 35: 33: 30: 29: 28: 23: 19: 16: 4039:, but other 4028: 4020:edit summary 4011: 4004: 3995: 3994: 3983:The article 3982: 3949: 3948: 3935:Belle France 3927: 3893:, but other 3882: 3874:edit summary 3865: 3858: 3849: 3848: 3836: 3786:, but other 3775: 3767:edit summary 3758: 3751: 3747:. Thank you. 3737:ping me back 3725: 3724: 3713:The article 3712: 3688: 3677: 3659: 3608: 3552: 3530: 3515: 3490: 3455: 3428: 3410: 3403: 3393:, and add a 3374: 3369: 3366: 3358:OTRS pending 3346: 3339: 3325: 3318: 3316: 3287: 3281: 3278: 3257: 3255: 3247: 3243: 3239: 3235: 3220: 3211: 3204: 3162: 3143: 3131: 3125: 3117: 3110: 3104: 3098: 3092: 3082: 3057: 3037: 3026: 3002:Please note: 3001: 3000: 2993: 2982: 2967: 2930: 2900: 2894: 2887: 2873: 2850: 2822: 2777: 2721: 2718: 2714: 2707: 2650: 2634:66.232.97.32 2628: 2617: 2586: 2570:Calliopejen1 2555: 2528: 2500:animal teeth 2485: 2442: 2439:Aquarium FAR 2420: 2379: 2357: 2337: 2333: 2331: 2317: 2314: 2304: 2267: 2252: 2235: 2118: 2065: 2036: 2031: 1990: 1985: 1981: 1975: 1925:nominations. 1907: 1903: 1896: 1890:the editors, 1889: 1887: 1881: 1875: 1873: 1863: 1862:If you have 1861: 1852: 1844: 1842: 1820: 1811: 1797: 1772: 1766: 1731: 1729: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1673: 1667: 1638: 1615: 1609: 1582: 1556: 1527: 1496: 1493:Boleslaus'es 1469: 1454:your comment 1443: 1413: 1390: 1386: 1376: 1349: 1321: 1306: 1303: 1300: 1297: 1294: 1291: 1286: 1283: 1280: 1277: 1255:User:Bantman 1244: 1232: 1229: 1189: 1178:Hydriotaphia 1171: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1146: 1142: 1138: 1134: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1073: 1069: 1066: 1062: 1059: 1056: 1047:DavidWBrooks 1043: 1031: 1028: 1024: 1020: 1016: 1012: 999: 995: 991: 988:Rude Messges 975: 963: 957:Accident at 949: 945: 941: 929: 926: 921: 920: 917: 903: 899: 895: 892: 888: 874: 872: 838: 826: 777: 465: 428: 417: 406: 399: 395: 391: 384: 377: 373: 363: 353: 349: 344: 340: 336: 333: 326: 305: 293: 290: 283: 271: 255: 241: 227: 205: 183: 179: 173: 157: 147: 144: 138: 131: 26: 3998:WP:ONEOTHER 3661:Sure We Can 3236:information 3165:Morro Velho 3159:Morro Velho 3108:free images 2888:the top of 2754:Good point! 2601:74.208.8.48 2508:human teeth 2504:human tooth 2295:GraemeMcRae 2275:GraemeMcRae 1725:Shrimp farm 1452:(I spotted 1444:Thanks for 833:diamond cut 280:1951 glitch 3810:reply here 3573:topic bans 3293:Epeefleche 3173:Calistemon 3010:Erwin85Bot 2824:kelapstick 2629:discussion 2597:discussion 2566:discussion 2535:discussion 2494:about the 1831:Toothpaste 1814:Toothpaste 1486:CryptoDerk 1477:CryptoDerk 1324:Technetium 1162:TracyRenee 1130:TracyRenee 1128:Regards,-- 1077:TracyRenee 1034:TracyRenee 1003:TracyRenee 973:. Thanks! 378:References 4053:consensus 3987:has been 3950:Steel1943 3907:consensus 3841:has been 3837:The file 3800:consensus 3732:WP:BEFORE 3717:has been 3617:has been 3569:site bans 3395:rationale 3336:this list 3240:sentences 3231:copyright 3144:Thanks!-- 2741:cram down 2704:Cram down 2428:Introvert 2042:Knowledge 1779:Main Page 1774:Nurek Dam 1680:Main Page 1622:Main Page 1399:Russ Blau 1389:tag with 1346:Caonradin 1235:Ibn Nafis 1083:Persona.l 971:talk page 699:corydoras 407:symbolism 22:Knowledge 3739:through 3663:and the 3517:Diamond 3332:CC-BY-SA 3248:will be 2970:deletion 2914:RadioFan 2815:You can 2797:Talkback 2512:Dozenist 2444:Aquarium 2354:round 12 2256:Skysmith 1845:Bantman, 1567:Asbestos 1458:Anilocra 1435:Anilocra 1425:Anilocra 1416:Aquarium 1387:{{stub}} 1307:Regards, 1105:issues. 1057:Bantam, 633:aquarium 337:de facto 268:Congrats 176:Aquarium 168:Red Goat 153:Aquarium 3912:Minorax 3741:WP:ECHO 3715:ISO 428 3701:ISO 428 3534:Khazar2 3524:status. 3476:Khazar2 3464:Diamond 3146:DASHBot 3114:WP refs 3102:scholar 2745:Bantman 2678:Bantman 2466:Georgia 2360:Wikifun 2352:Wikifun 2338:Populus 2334:Populus 2286:Bantman 2172:Bantman 2150:Bantman 2127:Bantman 2093:Bantman 2037:usually 2014:Bantman 1982:others, 1942:Bantman 1874:If you 1855:Schiavo 1698:sake.) 1420:Fishing 1330:. :) -- 1253:Hello, 1192:Eldfell 1053:A Query 978:Phyzome 862:Bantman 811:Bantman 757:diamond 702:found). 673:diamond 641:Bantman 637:diamond 595:needed. 481:Bantman 470:Bantman 400:sources 385:History 329:diamond 302:Diamond 140:Be Bold 20:to the 18:Welcome 4022:or on 3876:or on 3769:or on 3559:. The 3288:speedy 3086:Google 3044:. The 2910:userfy 2901:speedy 2880:hangon 2273:gaps?— 2241:(talk) 2225:": --> 2197:(talk) 2185:(talk) 2162:(talk) 2140:(talk) 2105:(talk) 2084:(talk) 2071:(talk) 1932:else). 1900:heard. 1589:Aranae 1402:(talk) 1267:PFHLai 1040:thanks 959:WP:FAC 447:here.) 321:Taxman 313:Taxman 258:WP:FAC 244:Zerbey 188:WP:FAC 160:Wetman 3627:Nigej 3429:Kelly 3129:JSTOR 3090:books 2784:Zodon 2762:matic 2757:Bongo 2730:matic 2725:Bongo 2722:Rgds 2695:matic 2690:Bongo 2667:matic 2662:Bongo 2496:Tooth 2481:Tooth 2464:Sandy 2408:Durin 2398:Durin 2328:Aspen 1732:could 1716:Hadal 1373:Stubs 1310:Kpjas 875:wrong 845:Hadal 778:minor 729:Hadal 542:Hadal 356:Hadal 208:WP:RP 4061:talk 3957:talk 3631:talk 3593:talk 3538:talk 3480:talk 3351:here 3342:; or 3297:talk 3274:here 3258:must 3177:talk 3150:talk 3122:FENS 3096:news 3014:talk 2980:"). 2942:talk 2918:talk 2828:talk 2788:talk 2749:talk 2682:talk 2638:talk 2605:talk 2574:talk 2543:talk 2539:Smjg 2516:talk 2471:Talk 2460:here 2456:here 2384:and 2368:Ravn 2249:1254 2227:edit 1882:were 1876:have 1745:Lupo 1736:Lupo 1641:here 1572:Talk 1530:Jguk 1500:and 1362:1268 1352:Eixo 1278:Hi, 1261:and 1259:1242 1230:Hi, 829:here 398:and 367:are: 286:1951 260::-) 251:CUPS 230:Páll 214:. — 190:. - 180:have 3969:of 3823:of 3699:of 3689:-- 3553:Hi, 3520:to 3372:. 3276:. 3136:TWL 3059:697 3034:bot 3006:bot 2952:AfD 2886:to 2871:. 2366:-- 2343:MPF 2320:Dmn 1991:all 1864:not 1752:DYK 1653:DYK 1595:DYK 1547:mav 1332:mav 980:is 976:-- 951:Pdn 759:-- 466:you 429:all 364:not 345:cut 224:MTR 184:too 4063:) 4026:. 4009:. 3959:) 3880:. 3863:. 3773:. 3756:. 3730:. 3633:) 3625:. 3595:) 3571:, 3540:) 3482:) 3409:. 3387:}} 3381:{{ 3361:}} 3355:{{ 3338:) 3299:) 3253:. 3179:) 3152:) 3116:) 3079:- 3070:}} 3064:{{ 3016:) 2944:) 2920:) 2883:}} 2877:{{ 2830:) 2790:) 2782:. 2751:) 2684:) 2640:) 2607:) 2576:) 2545:) 2473:) 2462:. 1785:. 1686:. 1628:. 1569:| 1245:- 1160:-- 1032:-- 763:, 418:is 294:-- 142:! 4059:( 3955:( 3854:. 3807:| 3629:( 3591:( 3536:( 3478:( 3295:( 3209:. 3175:( 3148:( 3132:· 3126:· 3118:· 3111:· 3105:· 3099:· 3093:· 3088:( 3038:1 3012:( 2940:( 2916:( 2826:( 2812:. 2786:( 2747:( 2680:( 2636:( 2603:( 2572:( 2541:( 2469:( 2362:. 2231:] 1986:I 1940:- 938:)

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

Index