User talk:Cowicide - Knowledge (XXG)

267:

login, I choose to not make one for several reasons, among which are the desire to avoid getting overly addicted. It's been a convenient situation that IPs have been further limited over the years - I don't have to feel obligated to start new articles or create new redirects, for instance. I also have made this choice due to certain beliefs on what the wikipedia community should be like. Among other things, I think day to day editors should have their edits and comments taken on the merits of their comments/edits, rather than what their edit count is, etc. For instance, while I certainly understand the valid opposing arguements, I think it'd be interesting to wipe out the ability for non-admins to see a user's edit history. I have indeed edited more articles than this one, on a wide range of subjects, although mainly trees, geology, and American cities. I will confess to following this article and several related ones (Pierce Bush, Ignite!) closely as I find them interesting and often the subject of occasional odd edit campaigns. I like to make sure I have a new DHCP IP every month or so, but one day I'll run out of new ones on the 67.101 subnet I suppose.--

3683:, truly want a fresh start, you need to restore the edits that Yobol and I worked on. If you bothered to read my edits and Talk Page, unlike you I worked with Yobol to severely edit my content and I added two sides of sources in each section based upon the sources. I also made ridiculous concessions in order to appease your misinterpretation of Knowledge (XXG) guidelines. It gave the article a better NPOV, but if you disagreed with that, all you had to do was finally stop your trite edit warring with profanity laced invective and joined me on the Talk Page and raise your concerns with them. Instead, you ignored my pleas and took a vindictive action that you now refuse to reverse and refuse to offer a fresh start. 80:

representatives explained, the company had agreed to purge its search results of any Web sites disapproved of by the Chinese government, including Web sites promoting Falun Gong, a government-banned spiritual movement; sites promoting free speech in China; or any mention of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. If you search for "Tibet" or "Falun Gong" most anywhere in the world on google.com, you'll find thousands of blog entries, news items and chat rooms on Chinese repression. Do the same search inside China on google.cn, and most, if not all, of these links will be gone. Google will have erased them completely.

4003:, edit warred and in the process repeatedly made edits that have a decidedly POV-pushing, anti-organic farming slant and was entirely hypocritical in his application (and misapplication) of sources, etc. that all bent towards his rather obvious anti-organic farming bias/agenda. Do you think I wouldn't notice that? I see that you're an entomologist who works with various agricultural pests. You claim on your User Page that you don't receive funding from private companies (i.e., pesticide companies), nor do you have any personal or financial connection to pesticides. 3974:) by what I've read above. When someone gets passionate on a topic, it's very easy to make the mistakes you've been making, but you really need to slow down if you want to contribute to the article. It's looking like this is all just a combination of you not liking that your edits were reverted and a misunderstanding about how we deal with scientific content. The more you pushed against that, the more other editors had to deal with you in a less and less friendly manner. Time to drop the stick and take a listen to what people are actually saying about 1307:

for NOT insulting me? You asshole!!! LOL!!!!! :P Now here you are just now saying that calling me a hypocrite (specifically) is not an insult at all. Ok, well then calling you an asshole or dick isn't either, ok? ROTFL!!!!!! As a matter of fact, for now on, whenever I meet people I'll say, "hello there, hypocrite!" as a universal greeting of friendship and understanding.... ROTFL!!!!!! Hahaaha. BTW, I saw your nice comment you interjected into my serveral year old conversation up there, NICE! LOL

257:

anything anywhere else? Seems like almost all your small amount of effort at Knowledge (XXG) simply goes into one small section of one article's Talk page in regards to one small issue. I'll give you one thing... you're very focused... kind of like a focus group who pushes POV on behalf of others, but that's not you... right? You just so happened... heh... I'll stop here... you get the point. Welp, I'm going to put on my socks, get dressed and head out to work. Have a nice day.

3594:" right next to your edit where you deleted literally all of my edits. Sorry, but your words there and actions speak louder than the backpedaling you're desperately attempting to do now. If you want to show some good faith. Show it now and restore my edits you deleted en masse. Otherwise, I have no faith that any and all edits I make in the future won't be deleted if you personally don't agree with them to suit your obvious bias, POV and anger management issues that utilizes 2261:

because he really is the best of Wikipedians. I want to worry about you now because I can see that these Koch edits might get under your skin. That results in a constant itching that fails to find relief as you scratch here and there, quite deeply, into the hide of Knowledge (XXG). Other editors, such as Rubin, Azrel, and myself will come by and make editing corrections to the article inspite of what you'd prefer. In the long run, with their edits

2039:

remain cool as well.) Cowicide, you are a relative newbie in the edit-count tally. That may not mean much overall, but edit counts have some validity. (For me, I've been transitioning more to mentoring type activities rather than gnomish article fixes and vandalism fights. At around 50k edits I might go for an administratorship. At 100k edits, I think I'll retire from WP. We will see.) For you, I advise taking some time to look at various

2122: 4407: 4078: 1997:, not Rubin. I only warned Arzel that if there was continued, rampant deletion of my edits without discussion that I would consider it vandalism of the article. In other words, destructive editing. But I apologize if that was speaking out of turn. Also, have you warned Arzel about good faith considering Arzel accused me of activism while deleting many edits without reasoning with me at all? Speaking of " 4330: 4257: 4184: 2474:

with that. Go give them some awards or something. Meanwhile, I'm going to work on the article and make it a better quality article with less whitewashing (not that whitewashing of Koch Industries bothers you obviously). You're not wanted or needed here, but I'm sure you'll continue to stalk me and my edits anyway (as long as I'm focusing on the Koch Industries article with anything critical).

3058: 3994:

trashed your own credibility with that kind of blatant hypocrisy. Well, what's good for the goose, is good for the gander... and I have a question about you below. And, I'm happy to say I do not accept money of any kind nor am I involved or associated with any entity that receives funding related to organic farming, pesticides, etc. whether they be pro-organic, con-organic or otherwise.

21: 3155: 1852: 4053:

attempts to show the pros and cons of organic farming and let the reader decide for themselves what they think of all of it. Unfortunately, the holidays are starting and I can't participate until next week. Anyway, thanks again for making a concession, and I will consider this a fresh start and will assume good faith on your part from here on out despite our differences. -

3947:

1412:: I think it is a good sign that you are willing to refocus on the article. I recommend that you follow that and keep an open mind towards any concerns or comments that appear in the discussion. Your name calling to Daedalus was uncivil as I warned you earlier, so please be careful in your choice of words when replying to other editors. I recommended to Daedalus that you " 2052:

improvements. My advice? Make small, helpful, useful, and well-grounded edits to each article that concerns you. That is the way to go. You must keep an objective view about Koch and company. Purely objective. (Recognizing that everyone has bias.) That is the way to go. "Who did what to whom first!" will not work. Rather, I hope my words to the wise will help. Thanks. –

3633: 735:

come back here and lets apply a far more peer reviewed strategy for "making this article better" based on your "trial by fire" consensus experience at the Pulp Fiction article. That way you can experience a wide variety of opinions on the matter, reach true consensus and apply it just the same here. Good luck with that and don't forget your flame resistant underwear.

3421:

you also ask Jytdog to relax? Hmmm? My advice is to address everyone's behavior equally instead of simply focusing on one person alone or you're simply going to become a part of the problem as your bias is exposed. If you're still not clear on this, I suggest you go for a nice, long walk yourself there and gather some perspective. I hope you had fun with Jytdog

2442: 3344:

without discussing it on the Talk Page first. You didn't bother to simply even try to work with me before repeatedly blanket deleting edits. I reached out to you to talk on the Talk Page during that time, now you rejected all that and have wiped out the entire page in anger and revenge. Now you're very obviously trying to wiggle your way back out of it.

2357: 2128: 2775: 2695: 2651: 725:

didn't come anywhere near the mainstream success of Pulp. But, is that how wikipedia works in your eyes? If a film garners more financial mainstream success you can "look the other way" when its article involves itself in tons of references, trivia, etc.? But, a lesser known work such as Repo Man should be ripped of its "Notable Motifs" off-hand?

1353: 326:

are sockpuppets. That was the problem in this case. Since you seem to have limitless amounts of free time, you should look into it further and then you might realize what an ass you just made out of yourself. LOL. I wonder... if you were one of the sockspuppets that got burned and this is your revenge? LOL, if so... LOL

1092:

and encourage contributions to Knowledge (XXG). Is your life truly that devoid of things to do? Sad. And, once again, please quit harassing me on my Talk Page, Dick (<----be sure to spend your time quoting me there too on the RFC instead of actually working on improving the article or wikipedia for that matter) LOL

2085:

only assumed I haven't done this. Maybe your bias against me clouded your vision on that one? Once again, if you truly want to keep Knowledge (XXG) less biased and have a more NPOV, then you too should be concerned with whitewashing and those that enable and/or contribute to the problem. Once again I ask you to

705:. There you'll see er, "references" found throughout the movie, etc. Everything from a combination code on a suitcase to how the film features scenes of bathrooms and toilets. This section in the Pulp Fiction article is just the tip of the iceberg in references, trivia, etc. found throughout the article. 1728:

that the edits you made are not warented. If you wish to dispute this, please read the talk page archives first, and then if you have something new, feel free to bring it up in a civil manner. Be warned, use of strong language as you have used here will not be tolerated on that talk page. Thank you. --

4083:

I see that you have been involved in controversy lately... completely unrelated to that, I was coming here to thank you for some of the noncontroversial contributions you have made years ago, that I just saw and liked. I appreciate your perspective on Knowledge (XXG) and I hope that you stick around.

3699:

from there to refine them and/or delete them as needed. Otherwise, this is simply a stale nonstarter you're trying to pass off as something else and I'll simply work with others that will come here to work with me on this article and make it encyclopedic instead of an industry public relations piece

3420:

Hi there, Roxy. I have some advice for you. When attempting to calm things down, don't pick sides or you may exacerbate the situation. All you've managed to do with Jytdog (who has used expletives and blanket deleted my edits in an act of revenge) is fix a link for him on this Talk Page. Shouldn't

3343:

Please stop being uncivil next to your edit comments and now on my Talk Page. If you had bothered to read the article's Talk Page, you would have seen where I made many concessions and changes to my edits even in the case while you were wrong about the guidelines and made blanket deletions of my work

3280:

advice and start using it and stop edit warring and deleting entire edits without discussion while also breaking Knowledge (XXG) guidelines in the process and resorting to vandalism of the article by removing all my edits at once in a hostile form of revenge that has no place at Knowledge (XXG). I'm

2066:

I hope you work on being less biased in your approach in the future. Calling me a newbie and favoring people with more edits isn't a good start and isn't in the true spirit of Knowledge (XXG). At Knowledge (XXG), we focus on the content, not how many edits a user has (or if you happen to agree with

1306:

On the article talk page you say, " ... I already apologized for insulting you once, and when I was using the word, I was not using it as an insult. ..." which is hilarious, because there in the same sentence you say you were sorry for insulting me, but, ah... you didn't insult me. So you apologized

1003:

Sorry, still not reading your spam. Thanks for ignoring my request again and again... Please stop continuously spamming my talk page after I continuously ask you NOT to...ok, DICK? If you have issues with the Repo Man article, bring them up in it's Talk Page. I have nothing to discuss with you here.

868:

I did not read your last entry above and I will not read anything you place here in the future. Quit spamming my talk page without READING what I say. If you want me to read what you have to say about the Repo Man article, then bring it up in the Repo Man Talk Page, NOT HERE. You are about to get

714:

I am NOT criticizing the Pulp Fiction article, but if you honestly want to make it your mission to clean up Knowledge (XXG) movie entries... based on your previous statements, I would think you would focus just as much effort or more deleting sections of the Pulp Fiction article. (Which I think would

170:

As long as the vandalism stops, I have no problem with alternative viewpoints and productive editing. We're never going to all agree on everything, but that's the nature of wikipedia. We need to come to a reasonable compromise instead of the nasty deletions of almost the entire section that's going

160:

I humbly suggest you entertain the possibility that, given that several editors appear to "act as one unit," perhaps there is an alternative viewpoint which should be taken into account in good faith. Although I'll note that if you read talk carefully you will notice that I am perhaps best considered

93:

On China TV: As Hu Jintao was speaking, as yells of protesters became audible, the screen went black. Feed then came back and once again went black when woman was once again audible. During CNN International's post-speech commentary, at mention of south lawn heckler, screen went black again... feed

79:

Yet Google's conduct in China has in recent months seemed considerably less than idealistic. In January, a few months after Lee opened the Beijing office, the company announced it would be introducing a new version of its search engine for the Chinese market. To obey China's censorship laws, Google's

3962:

Cowicide, it appears it was your edits and behavior that was mostly out of line here looking over the talk page and discussions. Remember that we focus on content, not contributors, and it's really starting to look like you've fallen into the same hole many others do when trying to tackle scientific

3858:

edits and blatant hypocrisies that continually POV push are obvious. You're not fooling me and you're not going to fool the community that's coming here to improve this article to have a NPOV beyond your disruptive tactics. This is my final offer for a fresh start. You know what to do. Otherwise,

3748:

However, none of the various DR tools are available to us until we have tried to work things out on the Talk page, and we have barely started talking there. The "fresh start" discussion on Talk is the kind of thing we do for content disputes - we back up and talk about the fundamentals of content -

3669:

Until you rectify this and revert my edits back for us to work on from there, you're just offering meaningless words and a fancy graphic from a person who acted in anger and very obviously deleted every one of my edits in a punitive, vindictive manner instead of working to collaborate with me. Your

3559:

And, speaking of a lack of self-awareness. You should read your own post back to yourself and take heed. It was you that edit warred instead of discussing things with me on the Talk Page. You simply deleted everything first and asked questions later (if you bothered to ask any at all). I was the

3113:

on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit

2537:

being forwarded. It should be unbiased. The various editors you are contacting are indeed quite experienced. And with that experience in mind, I surmise they are familiar with canvasing guidelines. Accordingly, they are likely to ignore your request. (If they do chose to respond, I am confident they

2473:

If you cannot contain your biases, you will continue to make yourself a very unhappy editor here on this Talk page. Obviously, everything I've said to you above means little or nothing to you because of your biases. You seem to only have nothing but praise for your libertarian buddies. Just stick

2375:

I'm sure I am. I hope you and the other libertarians find all kinds of ways to focus on me instead of the content of articles. Wee... It's getting close to time for me to get a bunch of unbiased administrators involved if this keeps up. You can't say you weren't warned once it happens. How about

2260:

You willingness to strike the 3RR comment validates your Wikipedian status. I commend you. Please don't think that the others are advocating or defending Koch. For instance, you wanted to add "claims to be", but Rubin correctly reverted your edit. Not because he is whitewashing the Koch article, but

2225:

My gosh, you've been here for years! Well, better late than .... Also, please take a few moments to read and refresh your recollection on these items. Let's get past this Koch nonsense. If you will consider yourself to be a Wikipedian first, and advocate second, you will enjoy being a member of the

1881:

1664:

In other words, even though there IS a dispute (over 36 percent of Americans consider it likely that government officials either allowed the 9/11 attacks to be carried out or perpetrated the attacks) Knowledge (XXG) cannot perform as an encyclopedia and must instead bend reality and must use wording

1235:

Yes, civil. Calling someone a hypocrite, is not an insult, but something meant to call attention to a person not following their own rules. The rules in this case being WP policy. After realizing you took it as an insult, I apologized, but you? No. You continue to call me a dick, and refuse to

1091:

Typical. Well, be aware that while you were screwing around with me preparing to waste time with this RFC. I posted more relevant info on the actual article's talk page. You want to make this issue about you and me while I just want to have a better article and not step all over the work of others

888:

No reall point in that since I'm not really talking about the article anymore. I don't know why you aren't bothering to read the above, especially since it's an apology and a request for you to do the same. Please read the above, as you jumped to false conclusions. If you read the above, you will

256:

67.101.66.89, BTW... speaking of single-purpose accounts and sock-puppets... I find it interesting that you, like Aunty... just appeared out of "nowhere" on Knowledge (XXG) and are suddenly full of insights into the dispute. Wow... you're amazing. How come you haven't used all that insight to edit

244:

And...don't worry, we'll get a checkuser of all you guys and we'll see for sure who is the sockpuppets or not. Also, once again... we need a disinterested 3rd party to add the POV tag, not someone who uses it as a weapon in their "battle". I stand by my removal of the POV tag and will gladly stand

150:

I was referring to "both" of you since you tend to act as one unit. I took another look and continue to see massive "blanking" with very minimal "rewording" of the section as opposed to "refactoring of the wording" and what's that other good one you use...? "consensus wording"...? Hmmm... all that

130:

I've read the Talk Page, have you? It's already been shown that this section belongs within the article according to wikiguidelines. I don't see an effort to make the article better, I see you going in and erasing huge chunks of a section without having consensus, policy, sources or good reasoning

75:

The small rooms were full of eager young Chinese men in hip sweatshirts clustered around enormous flat-panel monitors, debugging code for new Google projects. "The ideals that we uphold here are really just so important and noble," Lee told me. "How to build stuff that users like, and figure out how

3644:

good morning! well yesterday was intense, wasn't it? Let's try to reboot, and work together, slowly and gently, to improve the article. I made a proposal to come to a shared understanding about sourcing, so we can all be on the same page about that, in the hope of making things go smoother when

2319:

webpage came up in the related search results. One of Knowledge (XXG)'s goals is to keep the articles available for searching, but keep the other stuff out of search engine results. While I am putting this awkardly, WP does not allow editors to use WP as a host webpage. So that is why I have added

1614:

Thanks for the unwarranted threat right off the bat. You can go fuck yourself. I never alleged any conspiracies and the link you gave had nothing to do with trying to add the proper wording of "alleged" to the article. Threaten me and requests bans on me all you want, but I just would like to see

1212:

continue to stalk me on my Talk Page despite me asking you repeatedly to leave me alone. DICK, once again, please stop harrassing me on my talk page.(<----be sure to spend your time quoting me there too on the RFC instead of actually working on improving the article or wikipedia for that matter)

1211:

Well, geez... if you've been so civil this entire time then why on earth did you apologize for how you acted in the first place? You know, the part where you came in like an asshole and deleted everyones work and without any provocation called me a hypocrite to top it off? LOL Get real. OK, now

1106:

True, there is a small issue with the article, but the main issue is about you and me, since you keep insulting me, and refuse to see the truth that I posted the comment about us working together on the article a hour after I blanked the section, which makes sense considering my initial comment was

325:

Wow, stalking me on my talk page is not enough, now you are going to interject youself in years old conversations you (apparently) had nothing to do with? Ah, trying to pull my words out of context, are you? Pretty slimey... but it's only a nice try. IPs ARE, indeed, users too... but not when they

238:

There was no disinterested 3rd party and consensus to add the POV tag so it has been removed until it's inserted properly. The neutrality issue has been resolved as far as I'm concerned. If you don't think that I can remove the POV tag because I'm not a disinterested 3rd party and haven't reached

3688:

And, on top of everything else, your obviously hasty slash-and-burn edits are disingenuously labeled as well. It's not back to where I started editing, you brought the article back to a different starting point that made the article yet even more POV pushed against organic farming. So much for a

2646:

I like the "stalking like celery" phrase. Very good. As for nervousness, I assure you that looking at a computer screen does not phase me in the least. I've been in real situations were real nervousness was to be expected. As for Koch et al., they pay taxes and then I get a monthly cut. And if you

2460:

I’m not stupid, it's obvious that you are focusing on me and not the others in a fair and balanced manner. You don't just have a libertarian "outlook" you have a clear bias you can't seem to contain. You look the other way at others that are desperately trying to keep Koch Industries in the best

2084:

biases get in the way either. Once again, if you bother to look at my edits, I'm using factual events that are notable and well sourced. If you also look at my history, you'll see I've made scores of small, helpful, useful, and well-grounded edits throughout Knowledge (XXG). But, it appears you

2038:

Again, I haven't looked at the time-stamps. But I was concerned about Rubin. He is, in my opinion, an awesome Wikipedian. (And he has given me 3RR warnings.) The more important issue is for you to cool down. Rubin will remain cool 99% of the time. (I do not know about Arzel, but I suspect he will

1727:

In the future, please discuss any planned edits on the talk page first before implementing them. You will save yourself and the rest of us quite a bit of grief if you do so. You will also find that your concerns have been discussed repeatidly in the talk page archives. Consensus there has dictated

1299:

Man you are hilarious! It almost (but not quite) makes it worth it that you are going to try and trash everyone's work on that article! LOL Actually, the first thing you DID when you came in here was blank the section without talking it over with anyone and then sprinkled a nice insult over it to

752:

Also, seeing that you say one thing here then do another on the article and its talk page. Please stop cluttering up my talk page here. Any more issues you have should be discussed on the Article's talk page ONLY. Otherwise, I will simply start to copy and paste your words from here to there in

682:

Not sure if I understand the question. When I first started using Knowledge (XXG) you mean? I looked at that link and not sure what reaction you're referring to specifically. I got kinda bored reading through it since I had trouble figuring out who was talking to whom, etc. Either way, yes, I'm

3652:

Nice picture. Somehow it doesn't erase your actions that's led up to this situation, nor do anything to gain my trust. Why? Because there's no good faith action behind it, just words and I'm still looking at an article where you deleted every last one of my edits very obviously in anger. And,

3564:

edit warring, that's working with someone despite our differences. That's what I did. Your excuse that you went to work doesn't fly as you were repeatedly making reverts and blanket deletions without discussing it with me as you were doing them. You had time before and after work to spew these

3133:

You are the one guilty of an edit war, not me. The Talk Page will reflect that I've even offered compromise after compromise in the face of you and your partner outright deleting literally everything I edit. I will now go ahead and conclude it's necessary to bringing disinterested third parties

2902:

Ok, I hope it has become apparent to you that your approach to getting more attention on this situation is not exactly the right one. This is not to say you are wrong about what is happening, just that the way you are trying to draw in more users is not acceptable. I won't belabor the point about

1464:

While I appreciate the invitation to comment, Cowicide, my contributions to the Repo Man article were remarkably minor. Until checking the article's history, I was actually certain that I had not touched the article in question. I appreciate the diverse amount of material available through trivia

734:

The funny thing is, you initially launched an unprovoked insult calling me a hypocrite. With that in mind, I'd like to see you launch the same attack on the Pulp Fiction article (delete entire sections, etc. without consensus, etc.). Let's see how that goes, learn from that experience, and THEN

227:

It is considered very bad form to remove a POV tag added by another editor (Schlotzman on the Neil Bush article), *especially* when the editor who added it is not yet satisified and is actively participating in discussion. Also, please assume good faith and don't accuse other users (AuntEthel) of

3993:

Kingofaces43, you're a hypocrite who is talking out of both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, you say to focus on the content and not the User, but on the other hand you spend the majority of your post slamming me, a User, instead of focusing on the content I edited. In the process, you've

3835:

with Yobol to severely edit my content and I added two sides of sources in each section based upon the sources along with at least attempting to appease you in the process. Read it, please. I doubt that you bothered to read any of that in your haste to edit war. Unlike you, I'm flexible and I

724:

I have a feeling that due to the massive popularity of Pulp Fiction, you would find a swift and expansive attack against your efforts coming from many directions and you would end up crawling away with your tail between your legs. Unlike Pulp Fiction, Repo Man has a far more esoteric appeal and

140:

Having read the talk page you are of course aware that both BlazinBuggles and I (and others) have made quite an effort to generate a compromise. You should also have noticed I have not made any recent edits to the article itself. I've noticed that some of those that have made edits that you have

89:

4/20/06 Heckler disrupts Chinese President Hu's speech on south lawn at White House: 'President Bush, stop him from killing'... 'Stop persecuting the Falun Gong,' she yelled... She also shouted in Chinese, 'President Hu, your days are numbered, No more time for China's ruling party'... woman was

4052:

Thank you for at least bringing the article to a more balanced state of NPOV. However, I think removing the criticism section entirely is pretty drastic. I'm not here to push an all positive POV of organic farming, I'm here to help this article be encyclopedic and informative with a NPOV that

3946:

3349:

You are being incredibly disingenuous by saying that you reverted "so we could talk". You very obviously did it as an act of vandalism and revenge and you already basically admitted it within your notes I quoted above and elsewhere. Now you apparently want to backtrack and finally "talk", but

2816:. With that said, and as someone who has encountered similar situations in the past, I would also advise you to try really hard to keep your cool. The worst thing you can do is allow valuable information to be omitted simply because you get emotionally involved and earn sanctions. All the best, 266:

Well, I generally submit to answering this sort of personal attack about once a year, (some advice: normally the best response is to ignore it), but I haven't for 2006, so I'll give you the 2006 answer: I have been editing on wikipedia since 2002. While there are certainly some uses for using a

3903:

own this article, no one does. You can be a hostile stick in the mud, but you'll just end up banned in the end if you attempt to keep this article from progressing towards a NPOV worthy of Knowledge (XXG)'s standards. You don't want a fresh start, you want a skewed start with a POV slant that

2079:

brought up yourself (so please direct that to yourself next time). I see you haven't addressed the others in this fashion, so I guess I'm happy you've shown me your own biases so I know what to look forward to from you in the future. My advice? Stay objective despite who has more edits than

2437:

regarding the Koch Industries article. My two edits were to the talk page to keep the discussion civil. What else have I done? I offered a belated welcome message and some advice about overall editing. (In effect, I'm trying to repeat that effort with this message.) If you cannot accept such

3853:

If you want a fresh start, the ball is now in your court. If you don't offer a true fresh start and keep your malicious mass deletions in place, I'll work with others to make it encyclopedic instead of an industry "think tank" public relations hit piece against organic farming. Your very

2051:

edits, and yours alone, are appropriate, you will find consensus building against you. (Again, I am not looking at particular edits.) Whatever your opinion is about Koch et al is, it won't matter overall because someone will come along and "improve" the article even if you do not like the

4196:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2703:

want to imply that you were a tax evader, living on welfare, at home with parents, of simply having bags of money sitting around to dip into, etc. Much more importantly, I commend you for your most positive replies to the remarks below. WRT your remarks, you certainly have stirred the

239:

consensus then you must agree that it shouldn't have been added in the first place. You're locked into a catch-22. You have to either admit that an editor embroiled in the dispute without consensus shouldn't add the POV tag in the first place or you have to agree that I can remove it.

1668:

Well, I can tell by the hostility (threatened with a ban almost from the start) that this isn't going to go anywhere. So, I'll just join the masses that are coming to believe Knowledge (XXG) isn't a reliable source of information on topics and is biased towards uncomfortable issues.

753:

order to show others there your two-faced deceptions. I copied my last response to you from this talk page to the article's talk page. Let's cut out the redundant waste of time and focus the discussion at the proper place instead of scattering it between here and there as you have.

4342:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

4269:

2287:"that Rubin is the best of Wikipedians" and is therefore "correct". It's about the CONTENT, not how much you throughly enjoy a user or their conduct (or if you happen to agree with their libertarian politics as you mention on your User page, maybe?). This isn't my words, it's from 1480:

Thanks Couch, actaully I was just picking editors (of this article) at random so we can hopefully get an unbiased general consensus on what to do next. Hopefully, some more people will come here over time and add solid stances on the issue or "have a dog" one way or another... LOL

3565:

hostile edits, but not enough time to discuss them first and you've done this repeatedly until you finally decided to take the infantile act of simply deleting literally everything at once. You keep trying to backtrack from your statement, but we both know why you really did it:

2001:" of Koch Industries, have you looked at the others who are fighting fair, notable, truthful, sourced criticism that also make it clear they are libertarians who are "defending" Koch Industires? I have made it clear on the Talk page that I only want to stop the whitewashing and 54:

I strongly disagree with the Chinese govt. and its fascist practice of censorship of the internet from its own people. For those of you behind the great firewall of China, you can access boingboing.net (which is currently blocked by China's firewall) through this link here:

2811:

I took a moment to review the inquiry you left on my talk page. It is my opinion that, in the rare instance where a subject has generated such voluminous, disparate criticisms, the best solution is to create a standalone article that specifically addresses such details per

2881:

I think it's a little debatable about others "turning the other cheek", but nonetheless, thank you for taking a look at the article, etc. I've refrained from participating in the discussion to hopefully return focus on the article instead of my behavior. Thanks again.

2291:(please read). I suggest you put aside your obvious biases that go against the spirit of Knowledge (XXG) and let's work on making the articles better instead of stroking egos and perhaps teaming up against me. Thank you for the cookie, but I did it all for the nookie. 2005:

have the article serve as a "hit piece" or participate in blackwashing. Also, if you look at my edits I have also put in favorable information about Koch Industries and their environmental awards. I also see that my 3RR warning hasn't been striked out. Why is that?

871:

Please stop cluttering up my talk page here. Any more issues you have should be discussed on the Article's talk page ONLY. Let's cut out the redundant waste of time and focus the discussion at the proper place instead of scattering it between here and there as you

566:

I've been thinking on this in my head since my last edit. What if I just left the section for now, and we worked on moving small sections at a time into the body text, erasing them as they are moved until we are left with something smaller than what we have now?—

1543:

As you can clearly see by the information I provided, I posted the new section on your talk page more then an hour after I blanked the section. I have not been trying to bait you, I only want you to see that I was telling the truth when I posted that section.—

1322:

I apologized because you took it as an insult, not me. I didn't mean it as an insult, but you obiviously took it as one. You took it as an offensive comment, so I apologize for making that offense. Now, please stop calling me a coward, a liar, and a dick.—

1497:

Listen, I honestly want to start over/continue from where we left off, as in, before you accused me wrongly as being a liar. I never lied to you, and when I made the comment about a resolution to your talk page, that was an hour after I blanked the section.

3904:

obviously favors certain industries. That's, again, a stale nonstarter disguised as something else. If you have any more questions, finally read my edits on the article's Talk Page you previously ignored because you do not understand that talking is what

1966:

AGF. IOW, please don't think that because someone disagrees with you that vandalism is occurring, much less acuse them of it. One of your remarks to Rubin said "vandalism", and making such an unfounded remark can be very disruptive. (For more on this, see

211:

afraid to show your IP address range. If you have any further issues with me, take it up with an administrator and see if they'll help a sockpuppet. They won't, but you are welcome to try. AuntEthel, I wish you luck with your occular challenges.

2839:

Thank you for the advice, looking at the article and participating. I stopped editing the article page and its talk page to divert attention from me being cantankerous and allow editors to hopefully put more focus on the quality of the article. --

1571:

Wow, I hadn't read this in a long time and saw where Daedalus969 was still stalking like celery even after I stopped reading anything he had to say. Very sad. Then again, how sad is it I'm gong back and reading my old Talk page right now? Heh...

151:

ROTWing and CWing looks strangely enough like blanking (a.k.a. vandalism). Look, you can try to redefine reality all you want through talking points that mean nothing and confuse people, but it won't work on me. You're not smart enough. Later.

1137:

Are you still talking about.... "us"? LOL!! Seriously, your behaivor from the get-go helped set the tone and since then I haven't honestly given a fuck about "us". You go ahead and fret over "us" some more, I'll worry about the article. bye.

3822:

edit warring, not me. Once again, while you were busy mass deleting my edits without discussing it on the article's Talk Page at all, I kept pleading with you to talk with me there and even started a section on the Talk Page that you ignored

1465:

sections, but I also understand that expounding about trivia detracts from the Knowledge (XXG)'s overall seriousness and credibility. As the saying goes, "I have no dog in this fight". I hope the two of you reach a satisfactory conclusion.

889:

see by the evidence that I posted my response more then an hour after I blanked the section. So don't call my attempts at a resolution a 2-faced deception. You're taking this way to far. And to clarify, I have read everything you said.—

1416:

stay away from each other until the issue is settled". I recommend that you stay off each other's talk pages (and mine); move on over who didn't or did do whatever; and do what we're all here for: improve articles on Knowledge (XXG). --

161:

to be inbetween the positions of, on the one hand, BlazinBuggles, Shortcut.Road, Schlotzky, & co., and on the other hand, you, Wikipediatrix, & (I think based on edits, because this user hasn't commented in talk), CharoletteWeb.--

49: 2401:

Yes, after many years of service in local, state and federal government jobs I do have a libertarian outlook. And I post the fact on my userpage. But that does not mean I can't look at edits and see POVs. In this regard, your addition

206:

Please get real, you just created your "account" and the only thing you've been able to "focus" on since is the Neil Bush article and the biased harrassment of those who think the Boris section belongs there. You are very obviously a

3689:"fresh start" unless your idea of a fresh start is by disingenuously shifting the POV even further to one side as a radically skewed "starting point". Nice strategy to get the POV agenda you want, but it's not going to fly with me. 836:

as you may also note, takes place at 4/27/08 17:29. At least an hour after my blanking of the Repo Man section. So please understand, I mean what I say in my first message on your talk page. Go on, post this one there too.—

2241:

I already consider myself to be a Wikipedian first, thank you. You may want to take a harder look at the others there who seem to be focusing on advocating for and defending Koch Industries first and are Wikipedians second.

1688:, in clear violation of the ArbCom agreement. I can't find a templated warning with a neutral wording. There certainly should be one, as there are at least four "discretionary admin sanctions" rulings that I can recall, 2380:

and get off my back? In the meantime, I've been working on the article to make it less whitewashed while also ADDING Koch's side of things and positive press they've gotten to keep it balanced. Please don't ignore that.

2979:

From your posting of Indy w/o his pistol, I'd think you're pretty computer savvy and you could rescue them. Would the "wayback machine" work? Again, I don't know – I only learned how to turn on a computer 5 years ago. –

634:

Just an idle note/commet/question. I always try to remain civil, I never take the editing of an article personal, whether I created it(I haven't created anything yet, so that doesn't really matter), or contributed to

1593: 4370: 4297: 4224: 4031:

The article is now locked for three days at the restore point. I do hope you come and Talk during this time so we can establish some common ground. That's what this time is for. See you on the article Talk page!

2428:

appreciate your efforts and worthwhile contributions. Please keep them up. But your edit count is weighted in the talk page area compared to article contributions. Seems you are spending more time and energy on the

90:

taken away by uniformed secret service officers... right after Bush urged Hu to allow Chinese to 'speak freely'... She also unfurled a yellow 'Falun Gong' banner... She had a temporary pass with a big 'T' on it...

454:

describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Knowledge (XXG).

4142:. 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 2423:

comments about harassment and dispute resolution. I was acknowledging your very nice "Thank you", but your response was spiteful. Please, experience and proficiency in editing WP comes with time and effort. I

2903:

canvassing and forum shopping as I can see both policies have already been brought to your attention. I would suggest withdrawing the myriad conversations you have been opening and using proper channels for

2740:

Another excellent remark. But it depends upon whether you or your opponent has the banana. Me? I prefer the approach taken by Indiana Jones against the guy with a sword. He certainly did not use a banana. –

3694:

I saw your "proposal". It's not a fresh start, it's a list of demands without any good faith actions to back it up. I'm willing to have a fresh start once you are. Bring my edits back and then we can

3493:

I admit I find it rather humorous that you're asking me to "relax" while all I have to do is read your comments filled with expletives and your hostile blanket deletion editing to see that it is clearly

513:

The actor who first played Floyd Lawson was replaced by someone else. Then, the way I read it, they decided to make it more plausible by having the second actor say he was the first Floyd's son instead.

3313:

I have a fucking job and i was working tonight. I rejoined the conversation this evening and was dismayed to see the edit warring going on. I reverted to a version before all the nonsense started -

435:

has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

4354:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 4281:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 4208:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 3479:

at the Talk page discussion stage. (you will notice that i have not even had a chance to participate there yet much BECAUSE I WAS WORKING TONIGHT. So keep your pants on, slow down, and talk.

1596:. I believe that "alleged" has been considered and rejected in the lead of the article, on the grounds that, in fairness, we'd have to list the 1000s of reliable sources which are so alleging. 1944:

I was on the receiving end first. And, I should note this warning I received was in error. I've only made 1 revert to bring back my edits after Arzel blanket removed them without discussion.

3523:

I will give you this, your attempt to pretend to be the arbiter of "the calm" while SCREAMING IN ALL CAPS is giving me a chuckle. Your utter lack of self-awareness is amusing in this regard.

3134:

into this. I would have liked have avoided that, but you've been showing bad faith blanket deletion edits that show more of an agenda than a concern with an article that's encyclopedic.

1747:

Thanks for your contributions to the talk page. I've spent the last days overhauling the article and I hope you are more satisfied with the article now. Feel free to contribute yourself.

3350:

you've already broken enough guidelines, ignored my pleas to utilize the article's Talke Page and used plenty of hostile editing tactics that may very well get you a ban from the admins.

245:

by its addition by a DISINTERESTED 3rd party... not suspected sockpuppets and others who have been embroiled in this dispute. Is that civil enough for you/aunty/sockpuppets/whatever?

3022:

Cowicide The deletion of" he said" does not make this accurate, The cited article say that and there is no confirmation that Snowden worked for CIA. Please cite proof for your change.

2138: 2145:. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Knowledge (XXG): 1262:

You've been nothing but incivil since you decided you were right in your assumption that I blanked the section after talking to you, which, as any user can easily check, is wrong.—

505:. The discussion is mostly me and one other editor, and I think we are hitting deadlock time and again. I am not asking you to informally mediate, but another opion would be nice. 3251:

discuss content changes. Barrelling ahead and keeping making changes while the article is under discussion is just plain wrong. You can bring an admin action if you like but it

4517: 3463:

IT. THE BEHAVIOR. in wikipedia we talk about things and reach consensus. we don't just push and push and push and disrupt the article when there is a disagreement. there is

196:

I know you don't know me, but your comment about "my occular" was quite hurtful. I do have considerable vision limitations, but my reading and comprehension is still very good.

2047:

is the principle way that changes are made on WP. If you build consensus about a particular edit or approach to an article, it will go into the article. But if you think that

1386:

Comment on content, not on contributors? That will be fantastic! That's what I've bee asking for quite a while now. Thanks! Hopefully, it will finally be reciprocated as well.

76:

to make money later. And 'Don't Do Evil' " — he was referring to Google's bold motto, "Don't Be Evil" — "all of those things. I think I've always been an idealist in my heart."

4512: 3730:- , is to stop editing the article and start talking, and keep talking until there is agreement about what to do about content. Please keep these two kinds of issues distinct. 1993:

Like I said, I received the 3RR warning first. Can't you check the timestamps if you really want to get to the truth of the matter? My remarks about vandalism was meant for

2506:

To those who just sent the email threats against my life because of my Koch Industries edits, I'll have you know I enjoyed them and your IP address visits to our honeypots.

532:. It seems like you were joking, but just to make sure. Do you believe in conspiracy theory (I assume you already know what it is)? If so, would you mind joining me? Xia Xia. 1369: 3317:- so we could all discuss things on talk. This is a tactic I have used in the past to try to avoid going to drama boards. I suggest we try to work things out on Talk. 2419:. But the shouting is still in your remarks, and in your response to me, above.) Cowicide, as part our friendly discussion about no-indexing templates, you responded with 3891:

do here and now you want to blame me for your past actions instead of taking self-responsibility and setting things right. There will be progress on this article with or

3467:. i do not think any kind of impasse has been reached that we cannot work out over the next few days. THERE IS NO DEADLINE. BREATHE. SLOW DOWN. Also, admins are for 2043:. Those regarding civility are most important. They make for interesting reading, and you -- as a Wikipedian -- are free to add to and edit them. Please keep in mind that 1790:

Just a heads-up if you plan to be editing at the Palin articles - they've been on community probation for quite while. I'd recommend taking a quick glance at the terms at

2946:

FYI, the four links at the top of this page and your userpage came up with non-found or 404 errors. (Could this be the result of Chinese censorship? I haven't a clue.) –

1979:

and you will enjoy being a member of this community and project much more. I commend you for your ready willingness to strikeout the edit warning you gave to Rubin. –

3726:- namely edit-warring. People disagree about content all the time. What our policies and guidelines call us to do when there are disagreements about content - how to 3359:

utilize the Talk Page about the edits you disagree with, I'm all for it. It may at least show some good faith on your part for a fresh start. But, unless you do that

1031: 1714:

uncomfortable issues is right, although it's clearly not what you meant. We have a lot more material that is scientifically impossible than one would expect. —

438:

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the

498: 107:

Please stop the reverting of people trying to make the Neil Bush article better. It isn't vandalism, it's an attempt to come to some sort of concensus wording.

3966:

That is how we deal with NPOV in such articles, and it seems like you're moving too quickly to really grasp that concept. You're also getting quite a bit of a

2864:

which you have violated multiple times. I note most of those attacked have turned the other cheek and have not complained, but that doesn't make it right.--

3404:

Hello Cowicide. I offer some unsolicited advice. Walk away from your computer and don't come back for, say, six hours. then re-assess. It is good advice. -

3072:. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 683:

think you ended up handling our situation amicably and, once again, thanks. I'll help move stuff or whatever is needed when I get some time soon. Regards,

2586:

You are shooting yourself in the foot. Consider the contribution history of the editors that you contacted since I provided the guidance about canvasing:

1640: 1636: 1632: 2180: 701:

Daedalus, I have a proposition for you. Let's change the name from Trivia, etc. to "Notable Motifs". Observe that section in the Pulp Fiction article

3258:. I could have brought you to 3RR, but decided to hold back and see if you would be reasonable. I suggest you slow down and discuss things on Talk. 933:, what is your problem? You're calling me a liar is without base, as shown by the diffs I presented. I even apologized for calling you a hypocrite.— 4468: 428: 3081: 2712:

quite well. Just please be careful of where you poke the handle end of the spoon when done stirring. People don't want it poked in their eyes. –

963:

Thanks for ignoreing my request again and again... How civil is it to continously spam my talk page after I continuously ask you NOT to... DICK?

3802:

I'm done with talk from you, you had your chance and you blew it and I really resent you trying to continuously project your own actions upon me.

3299:

This isn't acceptable and I'm not going to put up with it. Do yourself a favor and knock it off along with the edit warring with hostile edits.

117:

I've got to agree with BlazinBuggles: please try to assume good faith and not refer to those edits with which you simply disagree as vandalism.--

3887:

That's incredibly hypocritical of you to say, but I'm finding that this kind of hypocrisy is par for the course for you. Talking is what you

131:

on your side. After the 10 millionth time or so this happens it's at that point beyond good faith and I'm going to call a vandal a vandal.

4384: 4311: 4238: 4167: 3281:

in the process of gathering admins to look at this page and your behavior. You also need to be civil in your comments next to your edits:

1707:

hijackers did it; the questions of whether the buildings also had explosives installed or whether they had help are subject to some debate.

772:

Please do not jump to conclusions, if you would bother to read the history of the article, you would see that I blanked the trivia section

802:

And I'm sorry for calling you a hypocrite alright, would you please stop calling me a coward? You aren't exactly being civil yourself.—

3931:

i looked through the edits from yesterday again, and chose a more proximal restore point, to just before the intense edit warring began.

3560:

one who repeatedly requested that you discuss it with me and even made concessions in your absence despite your hostile nature. That's

3459:

but rather a way to reset the board so that we don't fight over whose version stands while we talk about things. i hate editwarring.

4009:

Does the University you work for accept any funding, grants, etc. from companies involved in pesticides (i.e., Monsanto, DuPont, etc.)?

2631:. It interesting how you nervously watch my every move and even the people I contact. How much does Koch Industries pay you, anyway? 35:. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. 3999:

It's quite obvious you are taking a biased stance against me while completely brushing off the transgressions of Jytdog's actions who

3455:

cowicide, again, i reverted back to before this whole thing started, including edits i made that were completely independent of you.

2510:. It just inspires me even more to continue to unwash your whitewash and continue to work towards a Knowledge (XXG) with better NPOV 1791: 4472: 3206: 3073: 1061: 2169: 1767: 1364:, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to 1357: 141:

termed "vandalism" were actually not blind reverts but attempts at refactoring the wording. You may want to take another look.--

27: 4380: 4307: 4234: 4163: 4363: 4290: 4217: 3218: 3174: 3089: 2470: 2383: 2288: 2159: 2086: 1906: 2142: 439: 384: 4460: 4418: 4396: 3766:

and i will add that i apologize for using the word "motherfucking"; i would strike that but one cannot strike an edit note.

3399: 3222: 3093: 2861: 1910: 2269:

will guide you in that regard far more than andy worrying that I might spend on you. But please take my words to hear. –

415:

text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from

4464: 1661:" ... "Allegedly" is not neutral. It is an affirmation of doubt. ... The claim there is a dispute is not neutral. ... " 424: 1779: 4154:

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

3963:

topics for the first time. Jytdog summarized our standard approach for dealing with scientific topics here quite well.

3228: 3101: 1365: 4375: 4302: 4229: 4159: 2998:

that was spread everywhere, but I won't get into that. Things have had to get a bit more "subversive" since then. --

2566: 2246:

and the whitewashing continues. How about we work on the whitewashing of the article and then worry about me later?

2243: 461: 3873:

Talking is what we do here. You will do as you will, but refusing to Talk will not generate progress on the article.

3831:). Also, If you had bothered to read my edits and the article's Talk Page, you would have seen where (unlike you) I 2324:

and related guidiance.) The template will not show up on the page. But it may save some trouble later on. Thanks. –

446:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at 3978:

over at the article. If reliable sources say something, then we reflect that in content with appropriate weight.

477: 3967: 3896: 3214: 3186: 3162: 3106: 3085: 3069: 2430: 2154: 2149: 1902: 2594: 1561: 1340: 1279: 1253: 1195: 1169: 1128: 1081: 994: 950: 906: 854: 819: 793: 669: 625: 584: 310: 4351: 4278: 4205: 3653:

please stop insulting my intelligence, stop lying and have the dignity and self-respect to at least admit the

2321: 2187: 3970:

mentality from the looks of it and getting too focused on what you're thinking about other editors (remember

3780:

finally, i'll open a discussion on the Talk page about the "restore point" I chose. We can talk about that!

977:

Good thing this isn't spamming. If you would please read my messages, you would see what I am refering to.—

2670: 1775: 3464: 2377: 538: 412: 4447: 4092: 3983: 3409: 3084:

for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant

1921: 1821: 1718: 1603: 457: 4476: 4155: 3255: 3210: 3178: 3170: 3077: 2195: 2176: 2044: 1894: 2409:, they should be neutral. (That is why I revised it.) Also, you used subsection headings to, in effect, 2183:

using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

1752: 1551: 1330: 1269: 1243: 1185: 1159: 1118: 1071: 984: 940: 896: 844: 809: 783: 659: 615: 574: 388: 300: 162: 142: 118: 108: 3645:

we turn back to considering the article itself. i hope we can find a way to work together peacefully.

3290:

WHEN YOU SAID: "revert back to before cowicide started editing. stop it with motherfucking editwarring"

1648: 1057: 268: 229: 3836:

showed it with my good faith actions. It's time for you to show that same kind of good faith with an

1599:

If my interpretation is correct, you may be blocked by an uninvolved admin with no futher warning. —

1056:

has been filed concerning your conduct on Knowledge (XXG). The RFC entry can be found by your name in

4494: 4414: 4400: 2985: 2951: 2916: 2870: 2784: 2746: 2717: 2660: 2616: 2543: 2451: 2366: 2329: 2274: 2265:

yours, Knowledge (XXG) will improve. And it will improve as you become a more proficient editor. The

2231: 2216: 2191: 2057: 1984: 1935: 1703:

I don't think you'll find any measurable fraction of the population that doesn't believe that the 19

4338: 4265: 4192: 4131: 4122: 3023: 2813: 1968: 1863: 197: 3027: 1813: 1470: 1422: 1377: 4347: 4274: 4201: 4151: 4135: 3657:. I've got a picture for you that should refresh your memory as to why (we both know) you did it: 2530: 2040: 1930:

Looks like a template war is developing. I have not looked at who templated who first, but ... –

1878: 1644: 83: 1729: 363: 3181:

rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

3119: 2478:

You're not fooling anyone and I'm sure your libertarian buddies are very pleased. :) Back off.

2410: 1869: 930: 4484: 4443: 4085: 3979: 3405: 1918: 1817: 1715: 1600: 649: 515: 443: 46:我强烈不同意中国政府和互联网的审查它法西斯主义的实践从它自己的人民。为那些您在中国之后伟大的防火墙，您能访问由中国的防火墙当前阻拦) 的boingboing.net (通过这个链接这里: 4359: 4286: 4213: 4147: 4139: 1976: 1890: 1665:

that makes it appear that there is no dispute. That's a nice line of bullshit, right there.

349: 4037: 3936: 3878: 3785: 3771: 3757: 3484: 3322: 3276:

Unike you, I did discuss content changes on the Talk Page. I suggest you finally take your

3263: 3237: 2911:

may be able to help you achieve that. Just some free advice to take or leave as you please.

2589: 1748: 1733: 1546: 1325: 1264: 1238: 1180: 1154: 1113: 1066: 979: 935: 891: 839: 804: 778: 654: 610: 569: 295: 4430: 4362:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4355: 4289:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4282: 4216:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4209: 4150:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4143: 3971: 3752:

If you have a different proposal about sourcing, please make it on the Talk page. Thanks!

2908: 2420: 2406: 1972: 1971:.) It seems you have a certain opinion about Koch Industries. Don't come to WP in order to 1959: 1898: 1874: 1053: 648:

To the question, when you first got here, would you have reacted the same to what happened

4490: 3674:

are what matter at this point, because it's your very actions that's lead to this impasse.

3367:

and we've reached an impasse that regrettably only some admins can resolve at this point.

3166: 3123: 3065: 2981: 2947: 2912: 2865: 2780: 2742: 2713: 2656: 2612: 2599: 2539: 2447: 2362: 2325: 2270: 2227: 2212: 2202: 2053: 1980: 1931: 1859: 1027: 97: 3738: 3472: 2904: 2553:

Wouldn't it be awful if we ended up with some people aside from biased libertarians like

2266: 3598:

grudge edits instead of doing what's best for collaboration and Knowledge (XXG) itself.

2994:

China has made insidious changes to their "Great Firewall" since those days. There's a

1615:

the article appear more encyclopedic with proper wording. That is all. Later Reuben.

4047:

I've responded above, but it's very cluttered up there, so I'll just copypasta it here:

3110: 2121: 1466: 1418: 1373: 1236:

apologize for calling me a coward, and liar, which, might I add, is completely wrong.—

533: 353: 342: 4429:

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

4077: 3592:

revert back to before cowicide started editing. stop it with motherfucking editwarring

2141:, Cowicide. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for 476:

This is sorta related to the wikinews ticker, so I thought you may be interested. See

4506: 4107: 4054: 4012: 3948: 3909: 3860: 3701: 3599: 3524: 3426: 3368: 3300: 3135: 3038: 2999: 2966: 2927: 2883: 2841: 2759: 2727: 2678: 2632: 2573: 2511: 2479: 2388: 2340: 2292: 2247: 2164: 2090: 2007: 1945: 1832: 1670: 1616: 1573: 1482: 1444: 1387: 1308: 1213: 1139: 1093: 1049: 1005: 964: 916: 874: 754: 736: 684: 595: 552: 501:

on whether the article should be removed. Now we are discussing whether it should be

366: 327: 285: 258: 246: 213: 172: 152: 132: 2604: 1535:

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Daedalus969 (Talk | contribs) at

1515:

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Daedalus969 (Talk | contribs) at

481: 447: 432: 420: 408: 401: 58: 4329: 4256: 4183: 528:

You have in someways agreed to my comment that I made on the talk page of article

3118:—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 1889:

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's

1886:—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 4033: 3932: 3874: 3781: 3767: 3753: 3480: 3318: 3259: 3233: 3080:

among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See

2907:

if you want people to look at the content and not at you and your behavior. The

490: 3355:

If you revert back your vandalism and restore the edits you wiped out and then

3057: 1032:

Knowledge (XXG):Files_for_discussion/2019_January_23#File:Repo_Man_CD_cover.jpg

2320:

the "magic words"__NOINDEX__ to the top of your userpage. (For more info, see

1795: 1693: 1631:

To add to what the above user said, this issue has been discussed repeatedly (

1035: 529: 208: 20: 3498:

that really needs to chill out. And, sorry, SCREAMING doesn't convey calm. :D

2995: 2405:

had certain POV aspects. The main problem was the title of the section. Per

549: 2823: 1689: 1684:

I do apologize for threatening you with a block, but you added the material

702: 3632: 2565:. Don't worry, they're coming whether you like it or not. I'm wondering 2135: 869:

a request for a ban. Now, AGAIN (this time with fucking emphasis): " ...

3209:

to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents

2705: 2339:

I appreciate your detailed scrutiny of my user page. Thank you so much.

1704: 1594:

Knowledge (XXG):Requests for arbitration/September 11 conspiracy theories

1443:

Thank you for your guidance, Gogo, and I apologize for the name calling.

4483:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the

4366:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

4293:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

4220:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

3964: 2628: 1539:, April 27, 2008. It may differ significantly from the current revision. 1519:, April 27, 2008. It may differ significantly from the current revision. 1352: 362:

Just tell the hunnybunnies to be cool and everything will be all right.

4138:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)

3827:

you continued to vindictively blanket delete my edits in the meantime (

3194:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made

2669:

I wish I had come up with it myself, but I stole the celery quote from

2127: 4498: 4388: 4315: 4242: 4171: 4115: 4097: 4062: 4041: 4020: 3987: 3956: 3940: 3917: 3882: 3868: 3789: 3775: 3761: 3709: 3607: 3532: 3488: 3434: 3413: 3376: 3326: 3308: 3267: 3241: 3143: 3127: 3046: 3031: 3007: 2989: 2974: 2955: 2935: 2920: 2891: 2875: 2849: 2833: 2788: 2767: 2750: 2735: 2721: 2686: 2664: 2640: 2620: 2581: 2547: 2519: 2487: 2455: 2396: 2370: 2348: 2333: 2300: 2283:

Knowledge (XXG) is about consensus and notable facts. It's not about

2278: 2255: 2235: 2220: 2098: 2061: 2015: 1988: 1975:

in this regard. It won't work and it will frustrate you to no end. Be

1953: 1939: 1924: 1840: 1825: 1802: 1756: 1737: 1721: 1678: 1652: 1624: 1606: 1581: 1565: 1490: 1474: 1452: 1426: 1395: 1381: 1344: 1316: 1283: 1257: 1221: 1199: 1173: 1147: 1132: 1101: 1085: 1038: 1013: 998: 972: 954: 924: 910: 882: 858: 823: 797: 762: 744: 692: 673: 629: 603: 588: 555: 542: 518: 484: 464: 391: 369: 356: 335: 314: 288: 271: 261: 249: 232: 216: 200: 175: 165: 155: 145: 135: 121: 111: 2413:

your opinion about Koch. (I note you removed the subsectioning here

1901:

for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant

284:

You forgot to mention your other side benefit... no accountability.

1178:

I've been civil this entire time, but you continue to be incivil.—

828:

In case you won't bother to do that, and I'll make it easy. First

416: 3363:

you've crossed a line by literally deleting every one of my edits

2926:

Thank you, Beeblebrox. I'll take your advice into consideration.

1913:. . I haven't actually counted your reverts, but if the "top 10" 776:

I posted to your talk page. So please don't accuse me of lying.—

4000: 3828: 3662: 2755: 2507: 2709: 2438:

gestures for what they are, you will be a very unhappy editor.

2190:! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on 1958:

Like I said, I don't know who did what first. Keep in mind that

1697: 4369:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

4296:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

4223:

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review

3109:, which states that an editor must not perform more than three 2125:

Sorry for the belated welcome, but the cookies are still warm!

1877:, which states that an editor must not perform more than three 1658:

Thanks for the links that contain such brilliant arguments as:

348:

This is just an online encyclopedia you edit for a hobby, eh?

3205:

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's

2862:

Knowledge (XXG):Edits_not_editors#Discuss_Edits.2C_Not_Editors

84:

http://www.boingboing.net/2006/04/20/google_in_china_the_.html

15: 2089:

and not me. I hope my words to the wise will help. Thanks.

72:

Snip from an extensive feature by Clive Thompson in the NYT:

4405: 3631: 3153: 3056: 2779:! I LOL'd. One of the best moments of my day. Thank you. – 2677:

I pay my taxes?? Are you threatening to audit me now? ;) --

1850: 3221:. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary 2961:

I blame Mark Christian for not maintaining the site. He's

1692:, one on German vs. Polish language of border communities, 1917:

been in the article previously, you're at at least 3. —

1643:) and rejected. Stop adding it back into the article. -- 1152:

Actually, you set the tone by accusing me of falsities.—

2315:

Cowicide, I tried to translate your Chinese on Google.

4471:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

4453:

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing

4350:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

4277:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

4204:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

3100:

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being

2461:

light possible while cracking down on me who is adding

2417: 2414: 2403: 1994: 1771: 1525: 1505: 1409: 833: 832:

as you may note, takes place at 4/27/08 16:23. Second

829: 98:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/20/D8H3Q6104.html

4436:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

2384:

You know, focusing on the CONTENT instead of the user?

1868:

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being

3425:

screaming for me to RELAX below. :D Enjoy your walk.

3213:

among editors. You can post a request for help at an

608:

I am glad we were able to work this out peacefully.—

94:

returned when topic was no longer being discussed...

3092:. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary 1909:. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary 2860:I urge you to dial back the invective. Please read 2726:Bad analogies are like bananas in a swordfight. -- 1372:and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -- 1303:Now here's where you are getting funny as hell.... 3859:I have nothing more to say to you. Talk is cheap. 3745:, none of which involve going to the admin boards. 3475:procedures (please read that link). We are still 3200:Do not edit war even if you believe you are right. 2289:the very core of Knowledge (XXG)'s guidelines here 4130:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current 3037:UnPatriot, you're not fooling anyone. Fuck off. 3076:to work toward making a version that represents 1893:to work toward making a version that represents 383:Here's a heads up that you will want to comment 59:http://markchristian.org/projects/dbb/random.php 3733:Most admin boards (3RR, AIV, ANI, etc) are for 3116:even if you don't violate the three-revert rule 2208:on your talk page and ask your question there. 1884:even if you don't violate the three-revert rule 42:The Chinese Government needs to stop being evil 3829:until you finally deleted all of them in anger 2469:positive information to enhance the article. 1030:, I thought I'd alert you to this discussion, 293:IPs are users too, isn't that what you said?— 1062:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Cowicide 1044:RFC/USER discussion concerning you (Cowicide) 8: 4518:Wikipedians who opt out of template messages 2471:Oh yeah, the article? Remember the article? 1109:I've been thinking a bit after my last edit. 1060:, and the actual discussion can be found at 4513:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery 3068:shows that you are currently engaged in an 1862:shows that you are currently engaged in an 3165:according to the reverts you have made on 2186:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a 2073:Who did what to whom first!" will not work 1064:, where you may want to participate. -- — 31:. Cowicide has not edited Knowledge (XXG) 3161:You currently appear to be engaged in an 1814:Talk:Public_finance#Preference_revelation 3187:Knowledge (XXG)'s policy on edit warring 2120: 4442:notice, but please explain why in your 3471:issues. for content issues, we follow 1300:boot. Gawd, you are distorted, bro.... 478:n:Wikinews:Water_cooler#WikiNews_Widget 28:This user may have left Knowledge (XXG) 1831:Thank you! That's an interesting read. 2648: 715:ruin the article as it has done here) 407:Hello. Concerning your contribution, 7: 4487:of each individual file for details. 4339:2018 Arbitration Committee elections 4266:2018 Arbitration Committee elections 4193:2017 Arbitration Committee elections 3749:namely, sourcing - on the Talk page. 3225:. If you engage in an edit war, you 2772: 2692: 2354: 2075:", I was only trying to answer what 1710:As for Knowledge (XXG), It's biased 442:, you can comment to that effect on 4352:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process 4279:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process 4206:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process 2439: 2155:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG) 69:Google in China: The Big Disconnect 4431:deleted for any of several reasons 4421:because of the following concern: 4323:ArbCom 2018 election voter message 4250:ArbCom 2018 election voter message 4177:ArbCom 2017 election voter message 3185:Please be particularly aware that 2571:Koch Industries sockpuppets again? 1792:Talk:Sarah Palin/Article probation 14: 4456:{{proposed deletion/dated files}} 4439:{{proposed deletion/dated files}} 4156:review the candidates' statements 2533:. One criteria of concern is the 2071:leanings). And, when you say, " 1812:This might be of some interest... 4328: 4255: 4182: 4076: 3741:(DR) talks about how to resolve 2773: 2693: 2649: 2647:pay taxes, I thank you as well. 2557:here? It's telling that you're 2538:will provide valuable input.) – 2440: 2355: 2126: 1351: 417:http://amazonwatch.org/about_us/ 19: 4425:unused, low-res, no obvious use 4373:and submit your choices on the 4336:Hello, Cowicide. Voting in the 4300:and submit your choices on the 4263:Hello, Cowicide. Voting in the 4227:and submit your choices on the 4190:Hello, Cowicide. Voting in the 3718:what i was upset about was not 3105:—especially if you violate the 3064:Your recent editing history at 2629:Keep stalking like celery, Rich 2606:– no edits since September 2012 1873:—especially if you violate the 1858:Your recent editing history at 4162:. For the Election committee, 4132:Arbitration Committee election 4123:ArbCom elections are now open! 3663:http://i.imgur.com/zTMErFc.png 3173:with others, to avoid editing 2909:dispute resolution noticeboard 2898:How to pull out of a tailspin. 2756:http://i.imgur.com/YFy3MLR.gif 2080:another and perhaps don't let 519:03:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC) 497:Hi, I saw you participated in 1: 4389:18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) 4316:18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) 4172:13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC) 4116:20:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC) 4063:23:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC) 4042:20:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 4027:organic farming is now locked 4021:22:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC) 3988:19:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3957:23:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC) 3941:16:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3918:16:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3883:16:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3869:16:00, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3790:15:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3776:15:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3762:15:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3710:15:16, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3640:I'll extend the olive branch. 3608:08:53, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3533:08:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3489:07:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3435:08:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3414:07:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3377:07:29, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3327:07:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3309:07:01, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3268:06:53, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3242:05:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3144:04:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3128:04:09, 25 November 2014 (UTC) 3032:13:20, 3 September 2013 (UTC) 3008:08:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC) 2990:02:31, 24 February 2013 (UTC) 2975:03:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2956:03:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2936:01:43, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2921:21:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC) 2892:01:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2876:16:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC) 2850:01:37, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2834:01:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC) 2789:04:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2768:03:50, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2751:02:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2736:02:25, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2722:02:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2687:01:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC) 2665:00:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC) 2641:22:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2621:22:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2582:21:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2561:and now fear more input from 2548:21:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2520:07:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2488:19:37, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2456:19:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2397:06:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2371:05:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2349:05:16, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2334:05:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2301:06:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2279:05:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2256:05:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2236:04:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2221:04:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2099:06:05, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2062:05:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 2016:05:06, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1989:04:47, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1954:04:26, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1940:04:21, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1925:02:07, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1841:23:45, 20 February 2013 (UTC) 1826:23:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC) 1770:other editors, as you did at 1582:07:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC) 1356:Please see Knowledge (XXG)'s 594:That would be great, thanks! 485:06:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 465:11:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC) 392:13:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 370:02:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC) 357:23:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 289:23:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 272:23:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 262:17:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 250:16:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 233:16:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 217:15:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 201:15:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC) 4243:18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) 4098:19:58, 4 December 2014 (UTC) 3908:do here at Knowledge (XXG). 3047:09:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC) 2699:at the end. I certainly did 2170:How to write a great article 1803:18:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC) 1772:Talk:The Demon-Haunted World 1039:15:43, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 915:GTFO of my talk page, dick. 556:11:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC) 419:. As a copyright violation, 176:19:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 166:18:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 156:18:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 146:17:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 136:15:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 122:15:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 112:15:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC) 4475:allows discussion to reach 4158:and submit your choices on 3899:, fellow contributor. You 2563:disinterested third parties 543:16:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC) 4534: 4467:exist. In particular, the 4381:MediaWiki message delivery 4308:MediaWiki message delivery 4235:MediaWiki message delivery 4164:MediaWiki message delivery 3840:yourself, instead of talk. 2965:and not to be trusted. -- 2226:community much more. -- – 2139:welcome to Knowledge (XXG) 1757:08:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC) 1396:23:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1382:23:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1317:21:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1284:21:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1258:21:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1222:21:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1200:20:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1174:20:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1148:20:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1133:20:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1102:19:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1086:18:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 1014:18:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 999:18:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 973:18:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 955:18:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 925:17:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 911:15:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 883:07:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 859:17:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC) 824:17:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC) 798:17:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC) 763:10:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC) 745:10:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC) 693:06:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC) 674:05:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC) 630:05:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC) 604:04:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC) 589:17:29, 27 April 2008 (UTC) 336:21:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 315:20:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC) 4461:proposed deletion process 2856:Please heed some warnings 2596:– no edits since May 2012 2525:Messages to other editors 2244:It's been quite a problem 2196:Knowledge (XXG):Questions 1052:. Please be aware that a 4499:01:01, 27 May 2019 (UTC) 4111: 4069:A cup of coffee for you! 4058: 4016: 3952: 3913: 3864: 3705: 3603: 3528: 3430: 3372: 3304: 3179:try to reach a consensus 3169:. Users are expected to 3139: 3042: 3003: 2970: 2931: 2887: 2845: 2763: 2731: 2682: 2636: 2577: 2515: 2483: 2392: 2344: 2296: 2251: 2094: 2011: 1949: 1836: 1738:02:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC) 1722:21:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC) 1679:20:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC) 1674: 1653:19:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC) 1625:20:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC) 1620: 1607:19:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC) 1577: 1486: 1448: 1391: 1312: 1217: 1143: 1097: 1026:Seeing your work on the 1009: 968: 920: 878: 758: 740: 688: 599: 429:speedy deletion criteria 331: 66:Thursday, April 20, 2006 3215:appropriate noticeboard 2996:Chinese version of this 2353:You are quite welcome. 2175:Also, when you post on 1566:17:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC) 1491:03:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC) 1475:02:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC) 1453:03:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC) 1427:02:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC) 1368:for disruption. Please 1345:07:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC) 423:appears to qualify for 4427: 4410: 3636: 3315:including my own edits 3158: 3061: 2601:– no edits for 3 years 2591:– no edits for 5 years 2131: 1855: 1541: 1521: 509:The Andy Griffith Show 4423: 4419:proposed for deletion 4409: 4348:Arbitration Committee 4275:Arbitration Committee 4202:Arbitration Committee 4136:Arbitration Committee 3635: 3157: 3060: 2567:if it's time to check 2435:no dispute between us 2134:Here's wishing you a 2124: 1854: 1808:Preference revelation 1533: 1513: 541:comment was added at 400:Copyright issue with 33:since 3 December 2019 4473:files for discussion 4448:the file's talk page 3818:are responsible for 3457:it was not vandalism 3102:blocked from editing 2087:focus on the content 1962:always applies, and 1870:blocked from editing 1054:request for comments 228:being sockpuppets.-- 4140:arbitration process 2671:The Bloodhound Gang 2211:Again, welcome! – 1897:among editors. See 1360:policy. Comment on 1358:no personal attacks 1107:along the lines of 411:, we cannot accept 379:Neil Bush mediation 4465:deletion processes 4411: 4364:arbitration policy 4291:arbitration policy 4218:arbitration policy 4152:arbitration policy 4011:Please be honest. 3739:Dispute resolution 3637: 3473:dispute resolution 3365:without discussion 3219:dispute resolution 3159: 3090:dispute resolution 3062: 2905:dispute resolution 2160:How to edit a page 2143:your contributions 2132: 2117:A belated welcome! 1907:dispute resolution 1856: 539:signed but undated 223:Civility, POV tags 4397:Proposed deletion 4103: 4102: 3895:you. Read those 3400:talk page stalker 3107:three-revert rule 2559:still stalking me 2311:No index template 1875:three-revert rule 1794:. With respect - 1564: 1343: 1282: 1256: 1198: 1172: 1131: 1084: 997: 953: 909: 857: 822: 796: 672: 628: 587: 545: 460: 444:Talk:Amazon Watch 313: 39: 38: 4525: 4488: 4458: 4457: 4441: 4440: 4408: 4332: 4259: 4186: 4095: 4090: 4080: 4073: 4072: 4001:was clearly rude 3743:content disputes 3642: 3590:This was you: " 3465:no deadline here 3403: 3156: 2873: 2868: 2832: 2830: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2207: 2201: 2130: 1999:certain opinions 1853: 1800: 1762:Please be civil. 1560: 1549: 1531:Header of diff: 1511:Header of diff: 1355: 1339: 1328: 1278: 1267: 1252: 1241: 1194: 1183: 1168: 1157: 1127: 1116: 1080: 1069: 993: 982: 949: 938: 905: 894: 853: 842: 818: 807: 792: 781: 668: 657: 624: 613: 583: 572: 536: 456: 309: 298: 23: 16: 4533: 4532: 4528: 4527: 4526: 4524: 4523: 4522: 4503: 4502: 4482: 4469:speedy deletion 4455: 4454: 4438: 4437: 4415:File:Ticker.gif 4406: 4404: 4401:File:Ticker.gif 4393: 4392: 4333: 4325: 4320: 4319: 4260: 4252: 4247: 4246: 4187: 4179: 4160:the voting page 4126: 4093: 4086: 4071: 4029: 3968:WP:BATTLEGROUND 3897:5 pillars again 3700:you may fancy. 3646: 3638: 3629: 3397: 3223:page protection 3167:organic farming 3154: 3152: 3094:page protection 3066:Organic farming 3055: 3020: 2944: 2900: 2871: 2866: 2858: 2824: 2817: 2809: 2774: 2694: 2691:Thanks for the 2650: 2529:Please look at 2527: 2504: 2441: 2431:WP:BATTLEGROUND 2356: 2313: 2205: 2199: 2119: 1911:page protection 1860:Koch Industries 1851: 1849: 1810: 1796: 1788: 1764: 1745: 1743:Cloud computing 1590: 1559: 1547: 1338: 1326: 1277: 1265: 1251: 1239: 1193: 1181: 1167: 1155: 1126: 1114: 1079: 1067: 1046: 1028:Repo Man (film) 1024: 1022:Repo Man (film) 992: 980: 948: 936: 904: 892: 852: 840: 817: 805: 791: 779: 667: 655: 623: 611: 582: 570: 564: 526: 511: 499:this discussion 495: 472: 470:wikinews ticker 425:speedy deletion 405: 381: 346: 343:Talk: Neil Bush 308: 296: 225: 194: 192:Please be civil 105: 44: 12: 11: 5: 4531: 4529: 4521: 4520: 4515: 4505: 4504: 4479:for deletion. 4459:will stop the 4403: 4394: 4371:the candidates 4334: 4327: 4326: 4324: 4321: 4298:the candidates 4261: 4254: 4253: 4251: 4248: 4225:the candidates 4188: 4181: 4180: 4178: 4175: 4129: 4125: 4120: 4119: 4118: 4106:Thank you! :D 4101: 4100: 4088:Blue Rasberry 4081: 4070: 4067: 4066: 4065: 4049: 4048: 4028: 4025: 4024: 4023: 4006: 4004: 3997: 3995: 3960: 3959: 3929: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3922: 3921: 3920: 3846: 3845: 3844: 3843: 3842: 3841: 3808: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3803: 3795: 3794: 3793: 3792: 3778: 3764: 3750: 3746: 3731: 3713: 3712: 3691: 3690: 3685: 3684: 3676: 3675: 3666: 3665: 3659: 3658: 3648: 3643: 3630: 3628: 3625: 3623: 3621: 3620: 3619: 3618: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3614: 3613: 3612: 3611: 3610: 3577: 3576: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3570: 3569: 3568: 3567: 3566: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3539: 3538: 3537: 3536: 3535: 3510: 3509: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3499: 3444: 3443: 3442: 3441: 3440: 3439: 3438: 3437: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3353: 3351: 3347: 3345: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3329: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3285: 3284: 3283: 3282: 3271: 3270: 3247:Cowicide, you 3203: 3202: 3197: 3182: 3151: 3148: 3147: 3146: 3054: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3019: 3018:Edward Snonden 3016: 3015: 3014: 3013: 3012: 3011: 3010: 2943: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2899: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2857: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2808: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2795: 2794: 2793: 2792: 2791: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2609: 2608: 2607: 2602: 2597: 2592: 2526: 2523: 2503: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2322:WP:FAKEARTICLE 2312: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2181:sign your name 2173: 2172: 2167: 2162: 2157: 2152: 2118: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 1848: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1809: 1806: 1787: 1784: 1766:Please not to 1763: 1760: 1744: 1741: 1725: 1724: 1708: 1701: 1656: 1655: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1589: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1555: 1523: 1496: 1494: 1493: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1348: 1347: 1334: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1273: 1247: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1189: 1176: 1163: 1122: 1075: 1045: 1042: 1023: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1001: 988: 961: 960: 959: 958: 957: 944: 900: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 848: 826: 813: 800: 787: 750: 749: 748: 747: 729: 728: 727: 726: 719: 718: 717: 716: 709: 708: 707: 706: 696: 695: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 663: 641: 640: 639: 638: 637: 636: 619: 578: 563: 560: 559: 558: 525: 522: 510: 507: 494: 488: 471: 468: 404: 398: 396: 380: 377: 375: 373: 372: 345: 340: 339: 338: 323: 322: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 304: 277: 276: 275: 274: 253: 252: 241: 240: 224: 221: 220: 219: 193: 190: 189: 188: 187: 186: 185: 184: 183: 182: 181: 180: 179: 178: 171:on right now. 125: 124: 104: 101: 88: 71: 67: 63: 43: 40: 37: 36: 24: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4530: 4519: 4516: 4514: 4511: 4510: 4508: 4501: 4500: 4496: 4492: 4486: 4480: 4478: 4474: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4451: 4449: 4445: 4434: 4432: 4426: 4422: 4420: 4416: 4402: 4398: 4395: 4391: 4390: 4386: 4382: 4378: 4377: 4372: 4367: 4365: 4361: 4357: 4353: 4349: 4344: 4341: 4340: 4331: 4322: 4318: 4317: 4313: 4309: 4305: 4304: 4299: 4294: 4292: 4288: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4271: 4268: 4267: 4258: 4249: 4245: 4244: 4240: 4236: 4232: 4231: 4226: 4221: 4219: 4215: 4211: 4207: 4203: 4198: 4195: 4194: 4185: 4176: 4174: 4173: 4169: 4165: 4161: 4157: 4153: 4149: 4145: 4141: 4137: 4133: 4124: 4121: 4117: 4113: 4109: 4105: 4104: 4099: 4096: 4091: 4089: 4082: 4079: 4075: 4074: 4068: 4064: 4060: 4056: 4051: 4050: 4046: 4045: 4044: 4043: 4039: 4035: 4026: 4022: 4018: 4014: 4010: 4007: 4005: 4002: 3998: 3996: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3985: 3981: 3977: 3973: 3969: 3965: 3958: 3954: 3950: 3945: 3944: 3943: 3942: 3938: 3934: 3919: 3915: 3911: 3907: 3902: 3898: 3894: 3890: 3886: 3885: 3884: 3880: 3876: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3857: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3849: 3848: 3847: 3839: 3834: 3830: 3826: 3821: 3817: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3811: 3810: 3809: 3801: 3800: 3799: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3791: 3787: 3783: 3779: 3777: 3773: 3769: 3765: 3763: 3759: 3755: 3751: 3747: 3744: 3740: 3736: 3732: 3729: 3725: 3721: 3717: 3716: 3715: 3714: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3698: 3693: 3692: 3687: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3677: 3673: 3668: 3667: 3664: 3661: 3660: 3656: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3641: 3634: 3626: 3624: 3609: 3605: 3601: 3597: 3593: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3586: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3563: 3558: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3554: 3553: 3552: 3551: 3550: 3549: 3548: 3547: 3534: 3530: 3526: 3522: 3521: 3520: 3519: 3518: 3517: 3516: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3497: 3492: 3491: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3470: 3466: 3462: 3458: 3454: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3449: 3448: 3447: 3446: 3445: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3407: 3406:Roxy the dog™ 3401: 3396: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3378: 3374: 3370: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3354: 3352: 3348: 3346: 3342: 3341: 3340: 3339: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3328: 3324: 3320: 3316: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3279: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3269: 3265: 3261: 3257: 3254: 3250: 3246: 3245: 3244: 3243: 3239: 3235: 3232: 3231:from editing. 3230: 3224: 3220: 3216: 3212: 3208: 3201: 3198: 3195: 3192: 3191: 3190: 3188: 3183: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3168: 3164: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3137: 3132: 3131: 3130: 3129: 3125: 3121: 3117: 3112: 3108: 3104: 3103: 3097: 3095: 3091: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3075: 3071: 3067: 3059: 3053:November 2014 3052: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3029: 3025: 3017: 3009: 3005: 3001: 2997: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2987: 2983: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2964: 2960: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2953: 2949: 2941: 2937: 2933: 2929: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2906: 2897: 2893: 2889: 2885: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2874: 2869: 2863: 2855: 2851: 2847: 2843: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2831: 2829: 2828: 2822: 2821: 2815: 2806: 2790: 2786: 2782: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2765: 2761: 2757: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2748: 2744: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2733: 2729: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2702: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2684: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2662: 2658: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2630: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2610: 2605: 2603: 2600: 2598: 2595: 2593: 2590: 2588: 2587: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2579: 2575: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2536: 2532: 2524: 2522: 2521: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2501: 2489: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2476:It's obvious. 2472: 2468: 2464: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2453: 2449: 2436: 2432: 2427: 2422: 2418: 2415: 2412: 2408: 2404: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2386: 2385: 2379: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2368: 2364: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2346: 2342: 2338: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2331: 2327: 2323: 2318: 2310: 2302: 2298: 2294: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2253: 2249: 2245: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2223: 2222: 2218: 2214: 2209: 2204: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2184: 2182: 2178: 2171: 2168: 2166: 2163: 2161: 2158: 2156: 2153: 2151: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2144: 2140: 2137: 2129: 2123: 2116: 2100: 2096: 2092: 2088: 2083: 2078: 2074: 2070: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2059: 2055: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1942: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1923: 1920: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1904: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1887: 1885: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1871: 1865: 1861: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1807: 1805: 1804: 1801: 1799: 1793: 1785: 1783: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1761: 1759: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1742: 1740: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1723: 1720: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1706: 1702: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1687: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1666: 1662: 1659: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1622: 1618: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1605: 1602: 1597: 1595: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1575: 1570: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1563: 1558: 1554: 1553: 1550: 1540: 1538: 1532: 1529: 1527: 1520: 1518: 1512: 1509: 1507: 1502: 1499: 1492: 1488: 1484: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1454: 1450: 1446: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1363: 1359: 1354: 1350: 1349: 1346: 1342: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1329: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1314: 1310: 1304: 1301: 1285: 1281: 1276: 1272: 1271: 1268: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1255: 1250: 1246: 1245: 1242: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1219: 1215: 1201: 1197: 1192: 1188: 1187: 1184: 1177: 1175: 1171: 1166: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1136: 1135: 1134: 1130: 1125: 1121: 1120: 1117: 1110: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1083: 1078: 1074: 1073: 1070: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1043: 1041: 1040: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1021: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1002: 1000: 996: 991: 987: 986: 983: 976: 975: 974: 970: 966: 962: 956: 952: 947: 943: 942: 939: 932: 928: 927: 926: 922: 918: 914: 913: 912: 908: 903: 899: 898: 895: 887: 886: 885: 884: 880: 876: 873: 860: 856: 851: 847: 846: 843: 835: 831: 827: 825: 821: 816: 812: 811: 808: 801: 799: 795: 790: 786: 785: 782: 775: 771: 770: 769: 768: 767: 766: 765: 764: 760: 756: 746: 742: 738: 733: 732: 731: 730: 723: 722: 721: 720: 713: 712: 711: 710: 704: 700: 699: 698: 697: 694: 690: 686: 681: 675: 671: 666: 662: 661: 658: 651: 647: 646: 645: 644: 643: 642: 633: 632: 631: 627: 622: 618: 617: 614: 607: 606: 605: 601: 597: 593: 592: 591: 590: 586: 581: 577: 576: 573: 561: 557: 554: 551: 548: 547: 546: 544: 540: 535: 531: 523: 521: 520: 517: 508: 506: 504: 500: 492: 489: 487: 486: 483: 479: 474: 469: 467: 466: 463: 459: 453: 449: 445: 441: 436: 434: 430: 426: 422: 418: 414: 410: 403: 399: 397: 394: 393: 390: 389:67.101.67.107 386: 378: 376: 371: 368: 365: 361: 360: 359: 358: 355: 351: 344: 341: 337: 333: 329: 324: 316: 312: 307: 303: 302: 299: 292: 291: 290: 287: 283: 282: 281: 280: 279: 278: 273: 270: 265: 264: 263: 260: 255: 254: 251: 248: 243: 242: 237: 236: 235: 234: 231: 222: 218: 215: 210: 205: 204: 203: 202: 199: 191: 177: 174: 169: 168: 167: 164: 163:67.101.67.197 159: 158: 157: 154: 149: 148: 147: 144: 143:67.101.67.197 139: 138: 137: 134: 129: 128: 127: 126: 123: 120: 119:67.101.67.197 116: 115: 114: 113: 110: 109:BlazinBuggles 102: 100: 99: 95: 91: 86: 85: 81: 77: 73: 70: 64: 61: 60: 56: 52: 51: 47: 41: 34: 30: 29: 25: 22: 18: 17: 4485:page history 4481: 4463:, but other 4452: 4444:edit summary 4435: 4428: 4424: 4412: 4374: 4368: 4345: 4337: 4335: 4301: 4295: 4272: 4264: 4262: 4228: 4222: 4199: 4191: 4189: 4127: 4087: 4030: 4008: 3980:Kingofaces43 3975: 3961: 3930: 3905: 3900: 3892: 3888: 3855: 3837: 3833:collaborated 3832: 3824: 3819: 3815: 3742: 3734: 3727: 3723: 3719: 3696: 3680: 3671: 3654: 3647: 3639: 3622: 3596:very obvious 3595: 3591: 3561: 3495: 3476: 3468: 3460: 3456: 3422: 3364: 3360: 3356: 3314: 3277: 3256:WP:BOOMERANG 3252: 3248: 3226: 3204: 3199: 3193: 3184: 3175:disruptively 3160: 3150:edit warring 3115: 3099: 3098: 3063: 3021: 2962: 2945: 2942:FYI re links 2901: 2859: 2826: 2825: 2819: 2818: 2810: 2700: 2674: 2627: 2570: 2562: 2558: 2554: 2534: 2528: 2505: 2475: 2466: 2462: 2434: 2425: 2382: 2316: 2314: 2285:your opinion 2284: 2262: 2224: 2210: 2192:my talk page 2185: 2174: 2150:Introduction 2133: 2081: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2048: 2045:WP:CONSENSUS 2002: 1998: 1963: 1919:Arthur Rubin 1914: 1888: 1883: 1867: 1857: 1818:Xerographica 1811: 1797: 1789: 1778:, 2008-11-02 1765: 1746: 1726: 1716:Arthur Rubin 1711: 1685: 1667: 1663: 1660: 1657: 1601:Arthur Rubin 1598: 1591: 1556: 1545: 1542: 1536: 1534: 1530: 1522: 1516: 1514: 1510: 1503: 1500: 1495: 1463: 1413: 1410:your message 1361: 1335: 1324: 1305: 1302: 1298: 1274: 1263: 1248: 1237: 1210: 1190: 1179: 1164: 1153: 1123: 1112: 1108: 1076: 1065: 1047: 1034:. Cheers. -- 1025: 989: 978: 945: 934: 929:Please read 901: 890: 870: 867: 849: 838: 814: 803: 788: 777: 773: 751: 664: 653: 620: 609: 579: 568: 565: 527: 516:Clarityfiend 512: 502: 496: 475: 473: 451: 448:Amazon Watch 437: 433:Amazon Watch 421:Amazon Watch 409:Amazon Watch 406: 402:Amazon Watch 395: 382: 374: 347: 305: 294: 269:67.101.66.89 230:67.101.66.89 226: 195: 106: 96: 92: 87: 82: 78: 74: 68: 65: 62: 57: 53: 48: 45: 32: 26: 4376:voting page 4303:voting page 4230:voting page 3697:collaborate 3627:Fresh start 3171:collaborate 3086:noticeboard 2433:. There is 2198:, or place 2179:you should 2069:libertarian 1903:noticeboard 1847:3RR warning 562:Resolution? 537:—Preceding 491:Emo_(slang) 413:copyrighted 50:链接被翻译从英语到汉语 4507:Categories 4491:FastilyBot 4360:topic bans 4287:topic bans 4214:topic bans 4148:topic bans 3461:i hate it. 3361:right now, 2913:Beeblebrox 2867:SPhilbrick 2814:WP:SUMMARY 2194:, consult 2188:Wikipedian 2177:talk pages 2165:Help pages 1969:WP:NOTVAND 1694:Homeopathy 530:Blackwater 462:Journalist 427:under the 209:sockpuppet 4477:consensus 4417:has been 4413:The file 4356:site bans 4283:site bans 4210:site bans 4144:site bans 3856:selective 3737:issues. 3477:very much 3211:consensus 3207:talk page 3177:, and to 3078:consensus 3074:talk page 3024:Patroit22 2807:Greetings 2708:, I mean 2531:WP:CANVAS 2508:Expect Us 2465:critical 2416:and here 2041:WP:Essays 1895:consensus 1891:talk page 1690:Macedonia 1467:EvilCouch 1419:Gogo Dodo 1374:Gogo Dodo 1370:stay cool 1058:this list 534:Amphitere 354:JChap2007 198:AuntEthel 103:Neil Bush 4489:Thanks, 4108:Cowicide 4055:Cowicide 4013:Cowicide 3949:Cowicide 3910:Cowicide 3861:Cowicide 3735:behavior 3724:behavior 3702:Cowicide 3600:Cowicide 3525:Cowicide 3469:behavior 3427:Cowicide 3410:resonate 3369:Cowicide 3301:Cowicide 3217:or seek 3189:states: 3163:edit war 3136:Cowicide 3114:warring— 3088:or seek 3070:edit war 3039:Cowicide 3000:Cowicide 2967:Cowicide 2963:Canadian 2928:Cowicide 2884:Cowicide 2842:Cowicide 2760:Cowicide 2728:Cowicide 2706:crockpot 2679:Cowicide 2633:Cowicide 2574:Cowicide 2512:Cowicide 2480:Cowicide 2411:WP:SHOUT 2389:Cowicide 2387:Thanks. 2341:Cowicide 2293:Cowicide 2248:Cowicide 2091:Cowicide 2082:your own 2008:Cowicide 1946:Cowicide 1905:or seek 1882:warring— 1864:edit war 1833:Cowicide 1705:al Qaeda 1671:Cowicide 1617:Cowicide 1574:Cowicide 1524:Link to 1504:Link to 1483:Cowicide 1445:Cowicide 1388:Cowicide 1309:Cowicide 1214:Cowicide 1140:Cowicide 1094:Cowicide 1050:Cowicide 1006:Cowicide 965:Cowicide 931:WP:CIVIL 917:Cowicide 875:Cowicide 755:Cowicide 737:Cowicide 685:Cowicide 596:Cowicide 553:Cowicide 550:Hi there 367:Cowicide 328:Cowicide 286:Cowicide 259:Cowicide 247:Cowicide 214:Cowicide 173:Cowicide 153:Cowicide 133:Cowicide 3976:content 3893:without 3720:content 3679:If you 3672:actions 3655:obvious 3357:finally 3229:blocked 3227:may be 3111:reverts 2982:S. Rich 2948:S. Rich 2827:C M B J 2781:S. Rich 2743:S. Rich 2714:S. Rich 2710:Kochpot 2657:S. Rich 2613:S. Rich 2540:S. Rich 2535:message 2502:Threats 2448:S. Rich 2378:BE COOL 2363:S. Rich 2326:S. Rich 2271:S. Rich 2228:S. Rich 2213:S. Rich 2136:belated 2054:S. Rich 1981:S. Rich 1977:WP:COOL 1932:S. Rich 1879:reverts 1782:10:21z 1776:Jeandré 1645:VegitaU 1562:Improve 1362:content 1341:Improve 1280:Improve 1254:Improve 1196:Improve 1170:Improve 1129:Improve 1082:Improve 1048:Hello, 995:Improve 951:Improve 907:Improve 855:Improve 820:Improve 794:Improve 670:Improve 626:Improve 585:Improve 482:Bawolff 458:Budding 364:ya dig? 311:Improve 4446:or on 4134:. The 4094:(talk) 4034:Jytdog 3972:WP:AGF 3933:Jytdog 3901:do not 3889:didn't 3875:Jytdog 3838:action 3782:Jytdog 3768:Jytdog 3754:Jytdog 3728:behave 3681:really 3481:Jytdog 3423:asking 3319:Jytdog 3260:Jytdog 3234:Jytdog 2872:(Talk) 2421:WP:EGG 2407:WP:TPO 2203:helpme 2067:their 1973:WP:RGW 1964:always 1960:WP:BRD 1922:(talk) 1768:attack 1730:Tarage 1719:(talk) 1712:toward 1696:, and 1604:(talk) 1501:Here: 1366:blocks 774:before 524:Hello. 3825:while 3120:Yobol 2267:WP:5P 1995:Arzel 1798:Kelly 1774:. -- 1686:twice 1552:dαlus 1537:17:29 1517:16:23 1331:dαlus 1270:dαlus 1244:dαlus 1186:dαlus 1160:dαlus 1119:dαlus 1072:dαlus 1036:evrik 985:dαlus 941:dαlus 897:dαlus 872:have. 845:dαlus 810:dαlus 784:dαlus 660:dαlus 650:here? 616:dαlus 575:dαlus 503:moved 452:after 350:Chill 301:dαlus 4495:talk 4385:talk 4346:The 4312:talk 4273:The 4239:talk 4200:The 4168:talk 4112:talk 4059:talk 4038:talk 4017:talk 3984:talk 3953:talk 3937:talk 3914:talk 3879:talk 3865:talk 3820:your 3786:talk 3772:talk 3758:talk 3722:but 3706:talk 3604:talk 3529:talk 3485:talk 3431:talk 3373:talk 3323:talk 3305:talk 3264:talk 3253:will 3249:must 3238:talk 3140:talk 3124:talk 3043:talk 3028:talk 3004:talk 2986:talk 2971:talk 2952:talk 2932:talk 2917:talk 2888:talk 2846:talk 2785:talk 2764:talk 2747:talk 2732:talk 2718:talk 2683:talk 2661:talk 2637:talk 2617:talk 2578:talk 2569:for 2544:talk 2516:talk 2484:talk 2463:BOTH 2452:talk 2393:talk 2367:talk 2345:talk 2330:talk 2317:Your 2297:talk 2275:talk 2252:talk 2232:talk 2217:talk 2095:talk 2058:talk 2049:your 2012:talk 1985:talk 1950:talk 1936:talk 1837:talk 1822:talk 1753:talk 1749:samj 1734:talk 1698:9/11 1675:talk 1649:talk 1621:talk 1592:See 1588:9/11 1578:talk 1526:diff 1506:diff 1487:talk 1471:talk 1449:talk 1423:talk 1414:both 1392:talk 1378:talk 1313:talk 1218:talk 1144:talk 1098:talk 1010:talk 969:talk 921:talk 879:talk 834:diff 830:diff 759:talk 741:talk 703:here 689:talk 600:talk 493:move 440:GFDL 387:. -- 385:here 332:talk 4399:of 4128:Hi, 3816:You 3562:not 3496:you 3278:own 3096:. 3082:BRD 2758:-- 2701:not 2673:. 2555:you 2467:AND 2263:and 2077:YOU 2003:not 1915:had 1899:BRD 1786:FYI 1408:Re 635:it. 4509:: 4497:) 4450:. 4433:. 4387:) 4379:. 4358:, 4314:) 4306:. 4285:, 4241:) 4233:. 4212:, 4170:) 4146:, 4114:) 4061:) 4040:) 4019:) 3986:) 3955:) 3939:) 3916:) 3906:we 3881:) 3867:) 3788:) 3774:) 3760:) 3708:) 3606:) 3531:) 3487:) 3433:) 3412:) 3375:) 3325:) 3307:) 3266:) 3240:) 3142:) 3126:) 3045:) 3030:) 3006:) 2988:) 2973:) 2954:) 2934:) 2919:) 2890:) 2848:) 2820:— 2787:) 2766:) 2749:) 2734:) 2720:) 2685:) 2675:IF 2663:) 2655:– 2639:) 2619:) 2611:– 2580:) 2546:) 2518:) 2486:) 2454:) 2446:– 2426:do 2395:) 2369:) 2361:– 2347:) 2332:) 2299:) 2277:) 2254:) 2234:) 2219:) 2206:}} 2200:{{ 2097:) 2060:) 2014:) 1987:) 1952:) 1938:) 1866:. 1839:) 1824:) 1816:-- 1755:) 1736:) 1677:) 1651:) 1639:, 1635:, 1623:) 1580:) 1548:Dæ 1528:. 1508:. 1489:) 1473:) 1451:) 1425:) 1394:) 1380:) 1327:Dæ 1315:) 1266:Dæ 1240:Dæ 1220:) 1182:Dæ 1156:Dæ 1146:) 1115:Dæ 1111:— 1100:) 1068:Dæ 1012:) 981:Dæ 971:) 937:Dæ 923:) 893:Dæ 881:) 841:Dæ 806:Dæ 780:Dæ 761:) 743:) 691:) 656:Dæ 652:— 612:Dæ 602:) 571:Dæ 480:. 450:, 431:. 352:. 334:) 297:Dæ 4493:( 4383:( 4310:( 4237:( 4166:( 4110:( 4057:( 4036:( 4015:( 3982:( 3951:( 3935:( 3912:( 3877:( 3863:( 3784:( 3770:( 3756:( 3704:( 3602:( 3527:( 3483:( 3429:( 3408:( 3402:) 3398:( 3371:( 3321:( 3303:( 3262:( 3236:( 3196:. 3138:( 3122:( 3041:( 3026:( 3002:( 2984:( 2969:( 2950:( 2930:( 2915:( 2886:( 2844:( 2783:( 2762:( 2745:( 2730:( 2716:( 2681:( 2659:( 2635:( 2615:( 2576:( 2542:( 2514:( 2482:( 2450:( 2391:( 2365:( 2343:( 2328:( 2295:( 2273:( 2250:( 2230:( 2215:( 2093:( 2056:( 2010:( 1983:( 1948:( 1934:( 1835:( 1820:( 1780:t 1751:( 1732:( 1700:. 1673:( 1647:( 1641:3 1637:2 1633:1 1619:( 1576:( 1557:/ 1485:( 1469:( 1447:( 1421:( 1390:( 1376:( 1336:/ 1311:( 1275:/ 1249:/ 1216:( 1191:/ 1165:/ 1142:( 1124:/ 1096:( 1077:/ 1008:( 990:/ 967:( 946:/ 919:( 902:/ 877:( 850:/ 815:/ 789:/ 757:( 739:( 687:( 665:/ 621:/ 598:( 580:/ 330:( 306:/

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

Index