Knowledge (XXG)

User talk:Crispmuncher

Source đź“ť

278:
that being a from company X and pushing that site for commercial benefit. I am trying to "Discuss" this site and it's merits in light of the "rules", but engaging in that actual discussion is not how you responded. Didn't revert the scrollsawing link and haven't since I was "officially" clued in. My last submission didn't even have that link, although several others were evidently also outside the scope of the rules. As far as I can tell, I am engaging the issue the only way I know how. So we are not in a revert discussion as I'm not doing that. We are in a discussion over how these matters are communicated and discussed. If I had been approached the "first or second time" in a positive fashion, with comments that indicated the source of you contention, we wouldn't be having this discussion now.(Within the talkback section that is)
472:
entire structure of the article changing, there was no point in keeping an unavailable sunday-supplement reference listed only as "additional reading". Again, sunday supplements are almost invariably derivative - they are the wikipedias of print media. They are intended to be useful only that week and then discarded - not kept as useful sources of information three decades down the road. They won't have any new information, just (at best) pointers to where useful information is published. At worst, they will be so misleading as to be actively harmful. Since an entire cleanup of the article was in progress, it made no sense retaining a reference that is hard to obtain and almost certainly has no intrinsic value in itself - if it had, the article would have cited something specific telling us what was interesting.
244:
the admin page and started the talk page does indicate a vengencful response or you would have done that prior. That is indisputable or perhaps you have another reason for engaging after the fact. On the talk page, instead of focusing on the legality of the issue being brought up, you go back in to repremand mode. That is not appropriate by any stretch of the imagination, period. Your actions and communications are in doubt and you should be held to the same level of behavior as everyone else. I didn't cast myself as the victim, that is your judgement of me and my motives.
1192: 445:
looking this one up" is not a rationale to delete a reference. References are judged on their intrinsic merits, not on how easy they are to verify. If an authoritative reference takes some effort to track down so be it: that is not an excuse for substituting a lesser reference or deleting it entirely. Neither you no Sadalsuud claim to have read this reference but are still willing to erase the contributions of another editor because they are inconvenient to how
998: 33: 354: 274:
does not constitute a meaninful conversation, and you submitted that on the 20th by the way, most reverts back and forth changes and etc happed on the 19th, so, no, you did not engage in any meaningful conversation during the time of those reverts, nor was there any specific mention of the www.scrollsawer.com link nor any mention of their connection with the related publishing company.
179:, This site is a primary gathering location for a great many scroll saw hobbiest and professionals. Yes, there are banner adds (like there are on many many other sites liked within Knowledge (XXG)), but the focus of the site is strongly to the side of information and forums. Many many members do not subscribe or contribute to the sponsoring publisher in any way. 1272: 817: 312:; it shows how we need to approach new editors here. The first human communication with a new editor should not be hostile unless it's a given he isn't here in good faith, in other words, a vandal. This fellow wasn't that. Your attacks on his talkpage were frankly unwarranted. He should have been helped to understand his mistakes, not browbeaten. 155:
you don't think it is like an advertisement, I would appreciate hearing them and would make the changes. I did closely try to follow what was done on articles for similar types of software. Now I am struggling to learn how to add some images and logo for this article and think that would be under fair use. Thank you.
838:
is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us
670:
Thank you for reverting your initial revert. You may think there was a consensus but if you look back at thru the edits you will find that the material now in dispute was added by one editor without discussion. Acquiescence to an edit is not consensus. That editor has been reverting corrections and
481:
You seem to be taking the position that every reference must be retained until proven worthless, no matter how hard it is to determine if the reference even exists, even when rewriting an article. A more reasonable stance is that a reference has to demonstrate its value to be worth keeping. Now that
277:
Again, you initially indicated I should go to the talk page, which I did, but then you don't discuss the issues raised but come back now with the accusation of pushing a site. Saying I'm involved in a site because I posted a few threads in a forum and responded within a forum is distinctly different
243:
Yes, crispmuchner, you did not go the 3R rule until after the reverts had changed, and if you take a few minutes to look, the last revert/edit was to restore content minus the link that you mentioned in the admin page. The last revert was in spite of that edit. So yes, coming back after I engaged
154:
Hi. The article on Universe Sandbox was my first article for Wiki. I agree it did read somewhat like an advertisement. I have tried very hard to correct that impression by removing some adjectives, some lines and adding some of its limitations. If you have any other specific recommendations so that
471:
I must be missing something. Sadalsuud and Casliber have been making a major overhaul of that article, trying to clean it up and cleaning up references (in the process, adding around a hundred new references). In this particular case, with abundant peer-reviewed journal articles available, and the
210:
And you violated the priciple of politeness, as I was trying to figure out what was going on with my edits, the bots, and you, I kindly suggested you not revert, and was given a "smart remark" (we will quit reverting when you . . . . ) I was trying to do right, and I get attitude and disrespect
207:
did I read that wrong. you stated yourself that I was new, and obviosly hadn't go the hang of things yet, but you instead of engaging in any conversation, you go to "ban" mode? Is that in the spirit of how things are supposed to be conducted here. I think you are breaking some rules of your own.
206:
It is interesting that you added the three revert role to my page, after I stopped reverting, and after I explained, assuming you read it, what I thought was happening. And I might remind you, in the same guidelines of conduct, issues with edits should be discussed with the third party, right, or
920:
I read your points in the discussion on the Nemesis talk page (that many partially-charted red stars have not yet been parallaxed for distance from Earth, or even size). Do you know where I might find a reference to support this? I have been trying for weeks to convince others editing the article
564:
I noticed that you undid the minor changes that I amde in good faith to your posting. AS a result of the edit conflict, your posting lined up with the previous editor's posting. All that I did was to removing this lining up. Can I respectfully suggest that you look at teh page and reinstate the
273:
What you considered a meaning conversation said nothing about your concerns or even the specific link that was the source of your complaint in the admin page, so why would you say that constituded aything more that an boilerplate response? Since there are no specifics, like a bot response. That
247:
Regardless of the details of this immediate incident, you have also been involved in the fretwork article (a related craft) as a core content submitter, which indicates you have more than a passive interest in the topic matter. If you are making these kinds of judgement on topics you have had a
600:
Cripspmuncher, Will you please open up a discussion on the Core Memory discussion page for us to discuss my adds and modifies to the Core Memory. There is lots to fix, especially beginning with the first erroneous statement. I would like to iron out each of my additions point by point. I didn't
214:
You have a history of other reverts on the scroll saw forum going back and I am looking at the nature of those edit as well as they seem to show a trend of edititing that has been counter productive to fuller and more complete content within the article. Since you seem to be hoovering over this
182:
Other sites that would be "known" to anyone in the scrolling community would be Steve Goods site where he had video demonstrations on every aspect of the hobby. In scroll saw circles, he is a household name. Carole Rothman is the same for the segement of scrollsawer making bowls. She would be
444:
Firstly, apologies for the delay in responding. I wished to wait until I had obtained a copy of the article for myself. I have now done so. My reasoning for undoing that deletion was a simple one as I spelt out in the edit summary: the rationale for deletion was flawed. "I can't be bothered
85:
I have removed our xmodem CRC discussion from the Xmodem discussion page, FYI. Having my reference up there for so many years and then suddenly getting it removed was disappointing. It isn't worth the effort to correct the error, xmodem-crc has already been given credit to the right person
1544:
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the
482:
you have a copy of the article, is there anything of notable value to merit keeping the reference? Particularly given the difficulty (which you demonstrated) in even obtaining a copy? Do note that an unavailable reference without a specific citation is simply noise, not useful information.
183:
considered the definitive resourse for all things about bowl creation from the scroll saw. Her site does, again have banner adds for her book and such, but the focus of the site isn't commercial. The site name has blog in it, which will automacially flag those links.
1540:
or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
174:
The connection between a sponsoring site (with banner adds and all) and the predominate focus of the site (forums, genernal info, free resources, and etc) should be considered when determining the appropriatness of an external link. In the case of
707:
have more or less now been incorporated (with different wording) thanks to editors who have been willing to discuss the issues with the article. I haven't changed my behavior, but the editor who chose to revert rather than discuss is now silent.
428:
I reverted your edit in Betelgeuse, I don't see the value of a sunday supplement article from 28 years ago. Such article are normally derivative, having no information you can't find anywhere else. Why is this article of particular importance?
686:
In the round I would not agree. You do appear to be engaging more constructively in this current round of that argument but you have been accused on tendetious editing on several occasions on this very issue, and to my eyes with good reason.
620:
Crispmuncher, please stop changing the information, its obvious that you do not understand what you are talking about, if you do some research online you will find the correct information. This may be that you are wording this incorrectly.
308:, the fellow that was editing the scroll saw article might have ended up a productive editor about a subject on which we need experts. Unfortunately with your treatment of him, he will be editing here no more. Please review 702:
Well you are entitled to your opinion, but the accusation is easy to make and has not been proven. If you look back over two months of lack of discussion you will find that my originally proposed edits first reverted
1243: 1113:
Unfortunately you don't get to decide what will be used. It is unilateral widespread actions that I object to here. Yes, let the admins decide... I'll report this at AN/I if it is too bad when I arise tomorrow.
1185: 1587:. 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 1181: 649:
Actually, no, it is not me that is repeatedly adding an obvious tautology to a page, in opposition to what is now several editors, and believing it to be some hugely significant and profound assertion.
1282:
regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is
950:
In connection to an ongoing debate on which items can appear on the front page under "In The News", "Recurring Items" are nominated events which require very little debate in the nomination process.
1250: 186:
From the lack of feedback and communication, I'm not sure whether just the www.scrollsawer.com link was the only thing objectionable, or also the manufacturuing links, pattern links, and whatever.
890:
just because I reference individual sentences. Many of the references you removed are not "referring to the same source". Please do not confuse the dated-Nemesis theory with the different/newer
1423: 1313: 953:
I propose the following amendment to the current ITN/R list. In addition I will put this on the talk page of as many editors as I can find who are contributors to ITN/C
1561: 947:
and to comment at the talk page to discuss/vote on an amendment to the ITN/R list. I am posting this message on a number of editor's talk pages to encourage debate.
1427: 1368:
It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.
383:, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at 414: 1023: 189:
The talk page for the aricle has nothing concerning the reverts or the question over relevancy of the edits. My comments have been added to that section now.
1329:
discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.
215:
topic, it seems like your are trying to "own" the content. I could be wrong, it will take some time to see if there is a trend that reflects this intent.
1455: 1284: 1279: 1454:
I have opened a dispute over the decision to award this article FA status which you were to some extent involved. You may wish to comment on the case
535: 410: 957: 944: 1011: 1150: 332: 972:
Disputed states, dependent territories and the world's twenty smallest nations should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits.
1612: 1537: 925: 1060:
You should be apologizing for the outrageous hostility of your response to his oppose !vote on the "Transit of Venue, 2012" ITN nomination
864: 135:
Your assistance is requested on this page. A user has rekindled an argument you had over a year ago but more sources are still needed.
543: 136: 1180:(DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are 1362: 1130:
your just a prick... I will add every single bit of info you claim should be there but that page will use this new template :)
772:
So, are binary prefixes (MiB, KiB, etc.) now supposed to be replaced by their more common non-binary conterparts (MB, KB, etc.)?
601:
touch the ones on An Wang, where the implication that he was a cheat because Woo was ill. E.g. This has tto be sited or removed.
1505: 1608: 1556: 1546: 1135: 1103: 1409: 1508:
on that talk page to sort out whether or not the word 'comedienne' should be mentioned in the first sentence of the article '
103: 399: 637: 512: 264: 231: 38: 1599:
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
883: 403: 369: 1604: 1463: 891: 879: 1191: 1131: 1099: 758: 41: 376: 487: 434: 63: 1486: 929: 508: 500: 1552: 1004: 997: 843:
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
520: 140: 625: 449:
think the article should be. As the talk page comments show, the objective was to get rid of that section
252: 219: 91: 1500:
Hi there-- I saw that you voiced your opinion regarding the usage of the words comedian and comedienne on
1459: 894:
theory. Scientists do NOT support the 1984 theory of Nemesis. There has been NO support for Nemesis since
863:
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see
547: 384: 317: 55: 1600: 1351: 964:
At line 5, delete "and", and add after "territories" the words "and the world's twenty smallest nations".
788: 365: 1521: 1326: 754: 739: 606: 1379: 731: 368:
on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a
921:
that this is a valid point, and that the theory should not be described as "Fringe" or "Discounted".
602: 1098:
I will agree to your wishes and add the manufacturers of the chips but the new Template will be used
483: 430: 1576: 1567: 846:
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
409:
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —
1482: 1402: 1031: 982: 380: 156: 95: 1596: 1580: 629: 777: 713: 676: 570: 516: 160: 129: 99: 79: 69: 1426:, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located 1115: 1067: 903: 839:
in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
792: 688: 651: 633: 581: 454: 339: 313: 1592: 1584: 1387: 1383: 391: 309: 1517: 1081: 1050: 735: 291: 283: 260: 227: 196: 65: 32: 1595:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1588: 1395: 835: 395: 1339:
It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about
1398:. Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion. 1355: 1177: 1278:
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
1439: 1287:". Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! 1155: 1027: 978: 17: 1513: 1501: 773: 753:
Should we have a redirect for every juvenile nickname that TheRegister come up with?
709: 672: 566: 120: 1184:, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to 1063: 899: 335: 353: 1077: 1046: 305: 287: 279: 256: 223: 192: 580:
I note you've already seen the comment I left on your talk page on this issue.
398:, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see 379:
to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only
67: 1616: 1525: 1490: 1467: 1444: 1159: 1139: 1123: 1107: 1085: 1071: 1054: 1035: 986: 933: 907: 800: 781: 762: 743: 717: 696: 680: 671:
improvements to his edits claiming consensus but it never really existed.
659: 641: 610: 589: 574: 551: 524: 491: 462: 438: 418: 343: 321: 295: 268: 235: 200: 164: 144: 123: 107: 895: 1509: 852: 507:
As an FYI, there is a move discussion currently taking place relating to
816: 1583:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge (XXG)
1361:
It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been
732:
Wikipedia_talk:ITN#Events_are_not_required_to_affect_multiple_countries
1271: 248:
history in submitting content, then there might be a deeper problem.
1151:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Computing#User:Matthew Anthony Smith
1076:
Bullshit hiding behind artificially nice manners is still bullshit.
1176:. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in 1062:. What gives you the prerogative to communicate in such a manner?-- 1190: 858:
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
539: 390:
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious
1230:: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August 1401:
Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{
211:
with no attempt to reach out and determine what was going on?
70: 26: 176: 1270: 1014:
at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
996: 815: 352: 898:
and even that came from the guy who started the theory. --
402:). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found 1365:(not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN. 119:
No problem, I know it was accidental =p. Kindest regards,
1244:
Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard
331:
I have written an Editor review for you. You can see it
1478: 1236:: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate 1061: 887: 704: 87:
at other credible, peer reviewed locales. Thank you.
1325:
It is an early step to resolve content disputes after
1314:
Knowledge (XXG):Dispute resolution noticeboard/request
1224:: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums 1532:
Notification of automated file description generation
913:
Large Number of Unparallaxed Red Stars in Sky Surveys
375:
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not
1450:
Dispute over FA status Microsoft Security Essentials
1390:, and objective. Comment only about the article's 1316:for an easy to follow, step by step request form. 1218:: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey 960:, I propose the following amendment to section 3: 1575:You appear to be eligible to vote in the current 1024:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Wtshymanski 943:I am posting here to ask for editors to look at 787:That is correct, in changed some time ago. See 1350:It is not a place to discuss disputes that are 1003:Hello, Crispmuncher. You have new messages at 1280:Knowledge (XXG):Dispute resolution noticeboard 1306:If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the 8: 1481:several years ago and I noticed. For shame. 1168:: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1) 513:Talk:Tablet_personal_computer#Requested_move 958:Knowledge (XXG):In_the_news/Recurring_items 945:Knowledge (XXG):In_the_news/Recurring_items 1294: 360:Hello. Your account has been granted the " 424:Sunday Supplement reference in Betelgeuse 1267:Notice of Dispute resolution discussion 1206:: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem. 924:Thanks in advance for any suggestions. 726:ITN change regarding multiple countries 1422:If you ever need any help, ask one of 1045:Sorry. My stuffup. Biggest apologies. 534:You may be interested in the lists at 886:. I do not see why you are removing 7: 1538:File:CmosXORGate-Input as Output.png 1363:discussed extensively on a talk page 1195:Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow 968:Section 3, Line 5 would then read: 25: 1601:review the candidates' statements 1477:I just want you to know that you 1312:button below this guide or go to 1251:Read the entire first edition of 1026:(FYI only, no action required) -- 400:Knowledge (XXG):Reviewing process 372:scheduled to end 15 August 2010. 1172:Welcome to the first edition of 811: 31: 1607:. For the Election committee, 1577:Arbitration Committee election 1568:ArbCom elections are now open! 1408:Sign and date your posts with 1263:18:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC) 977:I look forward to the debate 801:19:46, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 782:19:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 763:11:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 596:Core Memory History Discussion 1: 1617:13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC) 1468:19:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC) 1445:19:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC) 1334:What this noticeboard is not: 1285:Microsoft Security Essentials 934:03:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC) 908:22:25, 26 November 2011 (UTC) 538:, such as the list including 439:22:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC) 364:" userright, allowing you to 286:) 16:03, 21 March 2010 (UTC) 1526:01:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC) 1479:removed another user's reply 1309:"Request dispute resolution" 525:18:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC) 492:20:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC) 463:19:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC) 165:16:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC) 124:21:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 1603:and submit your choices on 1516:. Thanks for your time! :) 1405:}} on their user talk page. 1160:21:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC) 1140:05:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC) 1124:05:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC) 1108:05:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC) 939:In The News/Recurring Items 892:Tyche (hypothetical planet) 145:22:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC) 1636: 1609:MediaWiki message delivery 987:07:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC) 611:03:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC) 552:16:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC) 536:WT:WikiProject Electronics 381:a small number of articles 322:23:39, 21 March 2010 (UTC) 296:16:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC) 269:15:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC) 236:05:54, 21 March 2010 (UTC) 201:19:34, 20 March 2010 (UTC) 177:http://www.scrollsawer.com 1491:23:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC) 1430:and on the DR/N talkpage. 1356:dispute resolution forums 1320:What this noticeboard is: 1242:: It's time to close the 1228:DR Noticeboard comparison 1212:: The most recent DR data 1005:Dondegroovily's talk page 744:17:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC) 590:18:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 575:16:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC) 419:21:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 366:review other users' edits 344:16:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 150:Any specific suggestions? 1562:14:52, 14 May 2014 (UTC) 1352:already under discussion 1119: 1086:00:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC) 1072:20:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 1055:04:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC) 834:Hello Crispmuncher! The 796: 718:22:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 697:21:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 692: 681:20:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC) 660:15:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 655: 642:10:30, 12 May 2011 (UTC) 585: 509:Tablet personal computer 501:Tablet personal computer 458: 385:Special:OldReviewedPages 108:18:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC) 1036:01:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 888:references from Nemesis 1378:Discussions should be 1299:Guide for participants 1275: 1196: 1001: 820: 808:New Page Patrol survey 357: 349:You are now a Reviewer 18:User talk:CrispMuncher 1581:Arbitration Committee 1551:Message delivered by 1343:, not disputes about 1274: 1246:. Agree or disagree? 1194: 1145:Matthew Anthony Smith 1000: 819: 666:HDD Article Revisions 565:colons that I added. 356: 301:Please be less bitey 1585:arbitration process 1506:Request for Comment 1496:Request for Comment 1373:Things to remember: 451:regardless of merit 1597:arbitration policy 1276: 1197: 1178:dispute resolution 1041:Deleting your post 1012:remove this notice 1002: 825:New page patrol – 821: 768:Binary prefixes... 730:Please comment at 358: 130:Talk:Intel 80486SX 1623: 1622: 1553:Theo's Little Bot 1473:A Good Day to you 1460:Quantumsilverfish 1436: 1435: 1396:the other editors 1234:Discussion update 1222:Activity analysis 1199:In this issue: 1094:New IntelTemplate 872: 871: 867: 827:Survey Invitation 645: 628:comment added by 530:active components 272: 255:comment added by 239: 222:comment added by 111: 94:comment added by 76: 75: 16:(Redirected from 1627: 1512:'. You can vote 1442: 1418: 1416: 1403:subst:drn-notice 1295: 1290: 1289: 1261:The Olive Branch 1253:The Olive Branch 1174:The Olive Branch 1166:The Olive Branch 1015: 862: 812: 755:AlistairMcMillan 734:if you wish. -- 644: 622: 561:Hi Crispmuncher 557:Comment Mangling 484:Tarl.Neustaedter 431:Tarl.Neustaedter 363: 271: 249: 238: 216: 110: 88: 71: 35: 27: 21: 1635: 1634: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1605:the voting page 1571: 1536:Your upload of 1534: 1498: 1475: 1452: 1447: 1440: 1437: 1414: 1412: 1375: 1341:article content 1336: 1322: 1300: 1269: 1257: 1170: 1147: 1096: 1043: 1021: 1016: 1009: 994: 985: 941: 915: 877: 830: 810: 770: 751: 728: 668: 623: 618: 598: 559: 532: 505: 426: 370:two-month trial 361: 351: 329: 303: 250: 217: 172: 152: 133: 117: 89: 83: 72: 66: 45: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 1633: 1631: 1621: 1620: 1574: 1570: 1565: 1533: 1530: 1504:. I started a 1497: 1494: 1483:Inanygivenhole 1474: 1471: 1451: 1448: 1438: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1424:our volunteers 1420: 1406: 1399: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1366: 1359: 1348: 1332: 1331: 1330: 1318: 1302: 1301: 1298: 1293: 1268: 1265: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1237: 1231: 1225: 1219: 1216:Survey results 1213: 1207: 1169: 1163: 1146: 1143: 1128: 1127: 1095: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1042: 1039: 1020: 1017: 1008: 995: 993: 990: 981: 976: 974: 973: 966: 965: 940: 937: 926:65.102.241.122 914: 911: 876: 873: 870: 869: 860: 857: 855:to take part. 848: 847: 844: 832: 823: 809: 806: 805: 804: 769: 766: 750: 747: 727: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 667: 664: 663: 662: 617: 616:Cat 5e Cabling 614: 597: 594: 593: 592: 558: 555: 531: 528: 504: 503:requested move 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 476: 475: 474: 473: 466: 465: 425: 422: 396:BLP violations 350: 347: 328: 325: 302: 299: 242: 205: 171: 168: 151: 148: 132: 127: 116: 113: 82: 77: 74: 73: 68: 64: 62: 59: 58: 51: 50: 47: 46: 36: 30: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1632: 1619: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1578: 1569: 1566: 1564: 1563: 1560: 1558: 1554: 1548: 1545:instructions 1542: 1539: 1531: 1529: 1527: 1523: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1502:Talk:Comedian 1495: 1493: 1492: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1472: 1470: 1469: 1465: 1461: 1457: 1449: 1446: 1443: 1429: 1425: 1421: 1411: 1407: 1404: 1400: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1376: 1374: 1367: 1364: 1360: 1357: 1353: 1349: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1337: 1335: 1328: 1324: 1323: 1321: 1317: 1315: 1311: 1310: 1304: 1303: 1297: 1296: 1292: 1291: 1288: 1286: 1281: 1273: 1266: 1264: 1262: 1256: 1254: 1245: 1241: 1238: 1235: 1232: 1229: 1226: 1223: 1220: 1217: 1214: 1211: 1208: 1205: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1193: 1189: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1167: 1164: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1157: 1152: 1144: 1142: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1132:Matthew Smith 1125: 1121: 1117: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1105: 1101: 1100:Matthew Smith 1093: 1087: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1040: 1038: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1018: 1013: 1006: 999: 991: 989: 988: 984: 980: 971: 970: 969: 963: 962: 961: 959: 954: 951: 948: 946: 938: 936: 935: 931: 927: 922: 918: 912: 910: 909: 905: 901: 897: 893: 889: 885: 884:fringe theory 881: 874: 868: 866: 859: 856: 854: 851:Please click 845: 842: 841: 840: 837: 831: 829: 828: 818: 814: 813: 807: 802: 798: 794: 790: 786: 785: 784: 783: 779: 775: 767: 765: 764: 760: 756: 748: 746: 745: 741: 737: 733: 725: 719: 715: 711: 706: 701: 700: 698: 694: 690: 685: 684: 683: 682: 678: 674: 665: 661: 657: 653: 648: 647: 646: 643: 639: 635: 631: 627: 615: 613: 612: 608: 604: 595: 591: 587: 583: 579: 578: 577: 576: 572: 568: 562: 556: 554: 553: 549: 545: 541: 537: 529: 527: 526: 522: 518: 517:Labattblueboy 514: 510: 502: 499: 493: 489: 485: 480: 479: 478: 477: 470: 469: 468: 467: 464: 460: 456: 452: 448: 443: 442: 441: 440: 436: 432: 423: 421: 420: 416: 412: 407: 405: 401: 397: 393: 388: 386: 382: 378: 377:autoconfirmed 373: 371: 367: 355: 348: 346: 345: 341: 337: 334: 327:Editor review 326: 324: 323: 319: 315: 311: 307: 300: 298: 297: 293: 289: 285: 281: 275: 270: 266: 262: 258: 254: 245: 240: 237: 233: 229: 225: 221: 212: 208: 203: 202: 198: 194: 190: 187: 184: 180: 178: 169: 167: 166: 162: 158: 149: 147: 146: 142: 138: 131: 128: 126: 125: 122: 114: 112: 109: 105: 101: 97: 93: 86:<wink: --> 81: 78: 61: 60: 57: 56: 53: 52: 49: 48: 44: 43: 40: 34: 29: 28: 19: 1572: 1550: 1543: 1535: 1528:Newyorkadam 1499: 1476: 1453: 1391: 1372: 1345:user conduct 1344: 1340: 1333: 1319: 1308: 1307: 1305: 1277: 1260: 1258: 1252: 1239: 1233: 1227: 1221: 1215: 1209: 1203: 1198: 1182:active in DR 1173: 1171: 1165: 1154: 1148: 1129: 1116:Crispmuncher 1097: 1044: 1022: 975: 967: 955: 952: 949: 942: 923: 919: 916: 878: 861: 850: 849: 833: 826: 824: 822: 793:Crispmuncher 789:WP:COMPUNITS 771: 752: 729: 689:Crispmuncher 669: 652:Crispmuncher 619: 599: 582:Crispmuncher 563: 560: 544:65.93.12.101 533: 506: 455:Crispmuncher 450: 446: 427: 408: 389: 374: 359: 330: 304: 276: 246: 241: 213: 209: 204: 191: 188: 185: 181: 173: 153: 137:87.112.2.151 134: 118: 84: 54: 37: 1518:Newyorkadam 1410:four tildes 749:Jesus phone 736:Eraserhead1 624:—Preceding 603:Cgordonbell 251:—Preceding 218:—Preceding 90:—Preceding 80:Talk:Xmodem 1593:topic bans 1549:. Thanks! 1204:Background 865:NPP Survey 170:Scroll Saw 1589:site bans 1441:EarwigBot 1354:at other 1327:talk page 1186:this page 1028:Guy Macon 392:vandalism 314:Auntie E. 1510:Comedian 1382:, calm, 1240:Proposal 1210:Research 1010:You can 992:talkback 774:Magus732 710:Tom94022 705:April 26 673:Tom94022 638:contribs 626:unsigned 567:Martinvl 362:reviewer 265:contribs 253:unsigned 232:contribs 220:unsigned 157:Galodw13 121:Spitfire 115:RE: Oops 104:contribs 96:Bwilcutt 92:unsigned 42:Archives 1557:opt-out 1392:content 1388:neutral 1384:concise 1255:--: --> 1064:WaltCip 979:doktorb 900:Kheider 882:, is a 880:Nemesis 875:Nemesis 630:Sgeeves 336:Acebulf 310:WP:BITE 39:My Talk 1579:. The 1394:, not 1078:HiLo48 1047:HiLo48 306:Gloden 288:Gloden 280:Gloden 257:Gloden 224:Gloden 193:Gloden 1380:civil 983:words 917:Hi, 896:2002, 742:: --> 540:BS170 1613:talk 1547:here 1522:talk 1514:here 1487:talk 1464:talk 1456:here 1428:here 1415:~~~~ 1156:Ruud 1149:See 1136:talk 1120:talk 1104:talk 1082:talk 1068:talk 1051:talk 1032:talk 930:talk 904:talk 853:HERE 797:talk 778:talk 759:talk 740:talk 738:< 714:talk 693:talk 677:talk 656:talk 634:talk 607:talk 586:talk 571:talk 548:talk 521:talk 515:. -- 488:talk 459:talk 435:talk 415:talk 411:DoRD 404:here 340:talk 333:here 318:talk 292:talk 284:talk 261:talk 228:talk 197:talk 161:talk 141:talk 100:talk 1573:Hi, 1153:. — 1019:FYI 956:At 836:WMF 511:at 447:you 394:or 1615:) 1591:, 1524:) 1489:) 1466:) 1458:. 1386:, 1259:-- 1188:. 1138:) 1122:) 1106:) 1084:) 1070:) 1053:) 1034:) 932:) 906:) 799:) 791:. 780:) 761:) 716:) 703:on 699:. 695:) 679:) 658:) 640:) 636:• 609:) 588:) 573:) 550:) 542:. 523:) 490:) 461:) 453:. 437:) 417:) 406:. 387:. 342:) 320:) 294:) 267:) 263:• 234:) 230:• 199:) 163:) 143:) 106:) 102:• 1611:( 1559:) 1555:( 1520:( 1485:( 1462:( 1419:. 1417:" 1413:" 1358:. 1347:. 1283:" 1134:( 1126:. 1118:( 1102:( 1080:( 1066:( 1049:( 1030:( 1007:. 928:( 902:( 803:. 795:( 776:( 757:( 712:( 691:( 675:( 654:( 632:( 605:( 584:( 569:( 546:( 519:( 486:( 457:( 433:( 413:( 338:( 316:( 290:( 282:( 259:( 226:( 195:( 159:( 139:( 98:( 20:)

Index

User talk:CrispMuncher

My Talk
Archives
 
Talk:Xmodem
unsigned
Bwilcutt
talk
contribs
18:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Spitfire
21:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Intel 80486SX
87.112.2.151
talk
22:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Galodw13
talk
16:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
http://www.scrollsawer.com
Gloden
talk
19:34, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
unsigned
Gloden
talk
contribs
05:54, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
unsigned

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

↑