1419:. I took a look at the article and most closely examined the section on the Vigano letter since that's what I am most familiar with. First of all, why is it called a "Rift statement?" I don't understand what that means. Secondly, Vigano alleged that Benedict XVI placed some sort of sanctions or informal restrictions on McCarrick. The article doesn't say that, and I think it could do with a little bit more background there, maybe a sentence or less, just making clear that Benedict authorized the restrictions and Francis did not enforce them. Finally, the article says that "Towey characterized the Viganò allegations as baseless, calculated to harm the reputation of the pope, and founded upon a flawed understanding of religious conservatism." Everything after "as" reads like a quote. If it is a direct quote or contains actual language that he made us of, it obviously needs quotation marks. If it isn't, I think it would be best to replace some or all of that with specific words or phrases that he used in order to give the reader the best impression. I'd also like to hear if there were any supportive reactions to his statement, and if you can include direct quotes from people either supporting or criticizing his letter, that would be very good.
1679:, I did not mean to imply with the revert that your edits to the article were not of value. Quite the contrary. Over the past week or so, you have made probably dozens of edits to the article. This is the first one that I had any problem with at all. I looked over some of the other ones and I found all of them to be improvements. In numerous cases, I didn't check your edits at all because, having interacted with you before, I trusted that they would be beneficial. In this case, I simply found that the copyediting left the content slightly worse off than before. I absolutely want you to continue your edits to the Adams article because it is clear that they have made it better. One edit that I found slightly problematic out of probably the 30 or 40 that you have made over the past month is really no big deal. And for the record, the policy that you linked to says that the revert can be used against good-faith edits as long as their is a detailed summary and careful consideration. But to the point, your edits to the article have had significant value. If they are to cease, I don't want this to be the cause of it.
876:, thank you for the note. I deeply appreciate it, especially after being subjected to an unprovoked attack on my editing at the article talk page despite all my hard work. Anyway, I nominated Adams for FAC yesterday and am receiving a lot of complaints about the length. I don't entirely agree with them, but the fact is that I'm going to have to shorten the article in order to have it pass the review. I'm afraid the "Conservatism" section you added about a week or so ago might have to go. In trying to shorten the article to meet the demands of the reviewers, I think it's best to retain the more substantive analysis of Adams's political writings and let that speak for itself and keep quotations from historians to a minimum. I do like the part about "ordered liberty" and am in favor of moving an abbreviated version of that into the "Accusations of monarchism" section. It could do well to counterbalance the accusations that he was a monarchist by stressing a more moderate theme of both republican liberty and order. I just thought I'd let you know and receive your input.
2073:. This is incorrect. Jackson launched an invasion of Spanish Florida in 1818 without official authorization, which was highly controversial and caused a diplomatic dispute with Spain. In a meeting of Monroe's cabinet, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams supported Jackson's cause. Secretary of War Calhoun advocated that he be censured. Jackson however was led to believe that Treasury Secretary Crawford, one of three men whom he ran against for president in 1824, was the one who advocated censure. He and Calhoun meanwhile became allies, and Calhoun was elected as his vice president in 1828. Jackson didn't discover the truth until he became president, which was just one of many factors that led to their relationship being destroyed. I've gone ahead and changed this because I don't want people reading the article to get the wrong impression. There's more information on this elsewhere in the Calhoun article as well as in
2644:, I only wish that you or PluniaZ directed me there earlier. I had looked at Hyerbolick's talk page before in response to accusations made by PluniaZ. But not seeing much there and not bothering to check the history, I didn't pay any attention to it. Examining the history demonstrates that Epi has a history of notifying this specific user of discussions, and the fact that they always seem to agree does indicate that he is probably doing it to influence the outcome. Hyper is probably in on it or else they wouldn't keep blanking their page. I think that this fits the definition of spamming as described in the canvassing article. I'll hold off on saying this at the talk page, but I now agree with discounting Hyerbolick's vote. I still favor keeping Epi's because he came here on his own. I'll also go ahead and post notifications at the Catholicism and Biography Wikiproject pages. Pinging
2956:, other editors have weighed in, but none of them have voted on the current version of the paragraphs. In the last RfC, only PluniaZ and I voted. PluniaZ even argued that the only other editor to make an official vote in the RfC prior to this one should have his vote discounted on the basis of some misconduct on his part. While Manannan67 has weighed in, he hasn't voted in either of the last two RfCs and seems to have refrained from taking any definitive positions lately. I've tried DRN previously. We have had three RfCs at this point. I'm not up for a fourth one. 3O was just my latest failed attempt to find a resolution to this disagreement. Oh, and my comments to Matglot were not personal attacks. That editor made three comments on the talk page, and I gave my honest opinion that they weren't helpful, which is hardly exceptionally strong language.
3092:- any statements by any of these people needs to be taken with more than a teaspoon of salt. They all have their underlying interests As to the media: Oftentimes a purported news site will print a story from the AP or another service virtually verbatim. A google search however, shows a fascinating difference in how various outlets caption their headlines demonstrating their own editorial spin. The institutional bias is there. If you cannot see it, look again. CNA falls far short of CNS. National Catholic Register and National Catholic Reporter are at opposite ends of the spectrum. LATimes is better than NY. Crux is a spinoff of the Boston Globe and has some interest in being perceived as impartial. As I've said before the local Jersey papers are not bad, nor Commonweal or America. Know to whom you are listening and where they're coming from.
1798:, Calhoun did not directly advocate secession. He threatened it repeatedly but at no point plainly said "This is the time to do it." I think there are some historians who even make the argument that Calhoun would have actually preferred for the South to remain in the Union, but used secession as a tactic, thinking that by threatening it, he could get the North to consent to Southern demands. As for the Lost Cause category, I did not know that he was listed in that category and have decided to remove him. The Lost Cause is a post-Civil war phenomenon and all other individuals listed in that category are people who wrote about the Antebellum South and the Civil War after the war was already over. Just looking over the list of people in the category, it's obvious that Calhoun's name does not go with the rest.
2360:, in which you say that "Wuerl faced questions regarding how much he knew about McCarrick's activities." In the McCarrick article, we can say, "Donald Wuerl, McCarrick's successor as Archbishop of Washington, faced questions regarding how much he knew about McCarrick's activities. Through a spokesman, he denied that he was aware of McCarrick's misconduct prior to his removal from ministry, which took place on June 20, 2018. However, on January 10, 2019, The Washington Post published a story stating that Wuerl, despite his past denials, was aware of allegations against McCarrick in 2004 and reported them to the Vatican." This would be an immediate fix to comply with
1400:. Towey worked as a Florida politician and volunteered as Mother Teresa's lawyer in the eighties and nineties; he worked in the White House as director of the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives during the Bush presidency, overseeing federal support of religious social services; he currently works as a Catholic university president. He also played a small part in the McCarrick/Vigano affair: he issued a statement strongly condemning the first Vigano letter, which caused some turmoil among Catholics. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on improving the article's presentation of both his political record and his religious involvement. Cheers,
3344:, no, I did not find that I was mistaken. I request no "special favor" to offensive content nor do I want to include it simply because it is offensive. I only demand that it receive no peculiar disfavor. There is a distinction. The policy said that offensive material is not "exempt from normal inclusion guidelines," which is what I maintained when I said that it was subject to the same scrutiny as other content. Meanwhile, I suggest you take note of the second sentence in the first paragraph: "Knowledge (XXG) editors should not remove material solely because it may be offensive, unpleasant, or unsuitable for some readers."
1852:, I understand that making arguments on a talk page when they cannot be rebutted with reason will now be censured as "disruptive." Since when did that happen? I have violated no policy. I did not re-revert. Since my edit was reverted, I have restricted my changes to the talk page. I also did not add commentary and personal analysis to the article. In fact, I removed it. This warning is therefore entirely inappropriate. I have not done anything outside of Knowledge (XXG) rules and you ascribe to me behavior which you and others are actually guilty of.
2386:, would you mind changing the first sentence of the first Wuerl paragraph from "Donald Wuerl, McCarrick's successor as Archbishop of Washington, was suspected by some of having knowledge of McCarrick's activities, allegations which he repeatedly denied." to "Wuerl faced questions regarding how much he knew about McCarrick's activities."? There are still disputed sections of the article, but this would solve one of the issues at least. My only condition as it relates to this section is that the rest of the material be kept where it is.
2332:, I don't think there's anything wrong with adding a little bit about it to the "Cathar theology" section. It certainly was considered a strange practice, both then and now, and serves as just one more detail to help the reader understand why Cathars were so alienated from Catholic Europe. I agree that the Catharism article should have more on it and that the primary focus of this article should be on the crusade itself, which you are welcome to add to should you wish. You're clearly knowledgeable enough about the subject. Thanks.
2170:, "a South Carolina statesman who held a number of high political offices in the United States during the early 19th century, including that of Vice President. He began his career as a modernizer who supported various programs that would increase the power of the Federal government. However, as the sectional divide between the North and South increased, he changed course. He became a strong opponent of protective tariffs, which were harmful to the Southern economy, and a major proponent of nullification and slavery."! --
3117:
the purposes of editing this encyclopedia, I don't care what you believe. But you shouldn't allow your own opinions to cause you to want to remove content which is supported by reliable sources and relevant to the articles in which they appear. In attempting to discredit him, you've ignored the numerous instances in which at least parts of his allegations seem to match the claims made independently by others. In the case of the article on
Cardinal Tobin, you assisted in removing mention of one such case.
1996:
not - Costen is the only person I know who calls him Henry the
Petrobrusian - everyone else calls him Henry of Lausanne, and some older books Henry the Monk or Deacon - the citation probably isn't needed, but I wanted people unfamiliar with the name to know where it came from and that I wasn't making it up or vandalizing the page - if the citation cannot go inside the brackets, it's probably best to remove it altogether to avoid misunderstanding as to the sources of the other names - cheers -
2482:"Speaking in Oxford after the May 2015 same-sex marriage referendum in Ireland, Burke said that he struggled to understand "any nation redefining marriage ... I mean, this is a defiance of God. It's just incredible. Pagans may have tolerated homosexual behaviours, they never dared to say this was marriage." Archbishop Eamon Martin of Armagh rebuked Burke and called his comments offensive and urged individuals "to try to be respectful and inoffensive in language" wherever possible.
3513:
1274:
31:
653:"Please be more careful about insulting the intelligence of other editors by expecting them to believe that you obviously intended to say is somehow not really what you meant. Thanks." Why do I need to be careful about insulting someone's intelligence? Is there wikipedia guidance on that? Don't second guess anything - please keep to the facts, and ensure your interactions remain civil. I won't continue to be threatened or intimidated.
124:
396:
1820:
3220:
1199:
2477:. Knowledge (XXG) doesn't take sides. We report on what people do and say and that's it. The article includes the quote from Burke, and it's left up to the reader to determine whether that fits the definition of "bigoted." It's fine to include information about what other people say about a person's comment. For example, take these sentences in the "Opposition to homosexuality and same-sex marriage" section:
3317:
offensive, nor does it mean that offensive content is exempted from regular inclusion guidelines. Material that could be considered vulgar, obscene or offensive should not be included unless it is treated in an encyclopedic manner. Offensive material should be used only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available.
1586:
1513:
599:
1133:
your own article during your previous 1,000 edits (you haven't disputed that as far as I can tell) is highly questionable and might be the beginnings of a pattern of hounding. The final decision on whether to give a warning or enforce sanctions is left to any uninvolved admin, but in an ANI thread such as this it's anyone's legitimate right to offer their thoughts and you can't force me to stop.
3464:
3177:
792:
252:
1955:
953:. Thank you for your note and compliment. If you look at the bottom of the article, you'll see that it cites the John Adams article on Knowledge (XXG) as its source. The entire article is a copy of a version of the main John Adams page. There are some websites which for whatever reason copy Knowledge (XXG) articles word for word, and this appears to be one of them.
2424:
3413:
3042:
741:
548:
201:
2314:- I don't think this needs to be in the article on the Crusade, it's not pertinent to the Crusade itself - I thought you were correct to remove the bit about starvation from the Albigensian Crusade article since the endura, as far as we know, was not a common practice and is not relevant to the Crusade - but do what you think is best - cheers -
478:
looking a little bit like what we're seeing at the Hogg bio. I think I'll mostly leave this one alone, but thank you for bringing it to my attention. If you or somebody else nominates it for deletion or tries to add something to balance out the coverage, there's a good chance I'd support it. Not sure how successful you'd be though.
340:, I normally use edit summaries, but in this case didn't because I had done the same thing in that exact article before. I guess I should've included one. My apologies. Basically, you have guessed correctly. A caption that is not a complete sentence should not have punctuation. If you want this verified, please go to
3123:
except statements made by individuals, and should never be used to assert controversial claims as true. I consider CNA, CNS, Crux, NC Reporter, NC Register, and the
Catholic Herald as reliable sources. Some of them do have ideological orientations, but I think it's been shown that they can be depended on for facts.
3289:, whether the content is undue or not is a matter of personal opinion, but there is no penalty for adding offensive or hurtful content to articles when it is reliably sourced. Knowledge (XXG) is not censored; hence, content that is offensive and hurtful is subject to the same scrutiny as content that isn't.
3316:
A cornerstone of
Knowledge (XXG) policy is that the project is not censored. Knowledge (XXG) editors should not remove material solely because it may be offensive, unpleasant, or unsuitable for some readers. However, this does not mean that Knowledge (XXG) should include material simply because it is
3122:
I am familiar with the reliability and orientation of the different sources. I'm not sure why you say that LA Times is better than NY. Like its counterparts on the opposite end of the spectrum, Church
Militant and LSN, America is too heavily ideologically oriented to be relied on for much of anything
2487:
So, it is fine to include a quote from someone else commenting on whether something that a person said or did was acceptable or not. But we at
Knowledge (XXG) cannot take a position, no matter how obvious it may seem to you. We could quote certain people describing Hitler's views to be xenophobic and
2454:
I understand people have different opinions and some people may think they are bigoted and some may not. But where is the line? It obviously would not be controversial to say a statement by Adolf Hitler was bigoted. That would not be removed. But why can a statement by a catholic priest that fits the
1693:
No problem, Pal. Thanks for your very thoughtful reply—it is indeed my intent only to help. You know better than I, but I would hold the revert in your quiver for when it’s really needed, despite it’s efficiency. Grow up and get back to work! Just teasing. My wife saw your self-descriptions and wants
1656:
I know you’re trying to get this to FA. I was just trying in good faith to make an edit in the Stamp Act section—my poor attempt to improve the reading. I don’t want to create more work for you; that’s a challenge in copy editing, trying to tweak the reading while maintaining accuracy. I am reluctant
1092:
If small changes can be made in attempts to have some consistency on articles then to me that is a good thing. On GA and FA articles I have been addressing appendices, mostly "External links" that seems to me to be getting out of hand, but also some improvements in the appendices sections in general.
1067:
but it is. To avoid confusion it seems far more appropriate, if "Bibliography" is used relating to sourcing, that it be a subsection. I suppose we could start changing "Bibliography" sections (concerning biographical works) to "Works" (per MOS) to effect incremental changes but that would likely be a
1009:
with the "reflist" included, but is sometimes presented as "Notes", Sources, or by various other names. The confusion comes in when the footnotes are expanded to include a multitude of listings including "Primary sources", "secondary sources", and others that follow no consistent formatting and often
1132:
Any editor, administrator or not, is free to offer his or her thoughts on ANI pages or anywhere else. My opinion is that the fact that you showed up to propose a "Strong delete" on an article despite the fact that, according to
Briancua, you haven't participated in any AfD discussions other than for
1082:
My goal is not to "degrade" any article and work within consensus. You can look at edits on the talk page of Horace
Greeley where I think new additions in the lead can be corrected. I have been working in the area of appendices a long time. Right, wrong, or indifferent, this has helped result in the
1000:
Hello, I just wanted to clarify some apparent misunderstandings. I would first like to commend you on keeping a watch on these "higher grade" articles. I have seen too many that have been delisted because of continued edits that eventually degrade the article. You also seem to be open to discussions
833:
I just wanted to express my appreciation for your contributions to that article. I was always dumbstruck why it was so short in comparison with that of
Washington and Jefferson and you've added much information of great value. Obviously you received some flack and I'm no stranger to controversy over
3271:
Are you accusing me of bias again? You can't help yourself can you? Adding offensive and hurtful content when it is not due violates
Knowledge (XXG) policy, as does accusing others of biased editing and suggesting they should not contribute also violates policy. I've violated no policy, however you
3116:
an obvious RS, apparently disagrees with you. The claims made against Vigano by his brother are mere allegations, unproven so far as I know, and totally unrelated to his allegations regarding sexual abuse in the Church. You've made it clear by now that you don't believe that Vigano is credible. For
3079:
Figueiredo - personal secretary to a bishop who had been engaging in some manner of inappropriate conduct for over fifteen years, yet inexplicably apparently ceased for the nine months Figueiredo worked for him; or else was so incredibly discreet that his own secretary was totally unaware of rumors
2507:
I understand what ou are saying. However, when it comes to inddiviuals who are not famous, yet noteworthy enough to warrant a page, what is he criteria for a quality source for a reference? For example, obviously a New York Times article describing somebody in a negative fashion would qualify as a
1779:
I thought if Lost Cause of the Confederacy is an OK category, why isn’t pro-confederate writers also OK, since the years after his death are less? Please explain. Also, can’t someone be pro-Confederate before the Confederacy was created? Blacks could be pro-freedom without ever experiencing it. One
1218:
for more information on uploading your material to Knowledge (XXG). For legal reasons, Knowledge (XXG) cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted.
1176:
I could've added "Removing maintenance tags" to the beginning to explain what I did. But that is comparatively inconsequential. More importantly, any time an editor reverts another editor, it is that editor's responsibility to provide a valid reason. My edit summary explained WHY I made the change,
477:
Thanks for your comment. After looking it over, I'm not certain that this even needs its own article. The article itself is definitely one-sided. I don't think I'll worry about it right now. I don't even make major edits to contemporary political articles very often. And when I do, it often ends up
3111:
treated his claims as credible, so we can hardly ignore him. There are plenty of people who have been sexually abused who weren't minors. McCarrick targeted minors but most of his victims seem to have been adult seminarians. The fact that he states that abuse happened when he was no longer a minor
2930:
When I look at the Talk page I see that other editors have weighed in on both RfCs. In any event, it seems clear to me that more than two editors have been involved in this dispute. I also note that you've made what could be considered personal attacks in the course of those RfCs (your comments to
2258:
Many believers would receive the Consolamentum as death drew near, performing the ritual of liberation at a moment when the heavy obligations of purity required of Perfecti would be temporally short. Some of those who received the sacrament of the consolamentum upon their death-beds may thereafter
1995:
Hi, I noticed you changed a citation to outside the brackets - the reason it was inside the brackets was because the citation to Costen p. 84 was only for one name, Henry the Petrobrusian - outside the brackets makes it appear that the citation is for all the names within the brackets, which it is
1490:
Although it has been hatted, archiving is probably best. It’s what happens at ANI when a discussion has been closed, and there is no benefit to anyone in having it hanging round the talk page. If there is a need for it to teams in, its best that an FA co-ord makes the decision on whether to do it.
2434:
regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to
1424:
As for the rest of the article, parts of it, especially the first two sections under "Political career," look like they could do with some expansion, although this isn't really something I know much about. I also think that the St. Vincent biography webpage is perfectly fine to use and therefore
1869:
I disagree strongly, you've run headlong into a consensus, have been attempting to skew the page in favour of your own personally beliefs on the matter, you called another editor a Marxist in a derogatory manner, and the debate you are now forcing us to engage in for the umpteenth time has been
3087:
Vigano - accusations against him for misappropriation of funds by his siblings; accusations by him of corruption at the Vatican Governorate because he didn't want to leave for America; allegations against everyone re McCarrick wildly inconsistent with his own handling of the matter when he was
1096:
If you run across any articles I edit I am always open to discussion so please don't think any of my comments (possibly dry) as meaning to be rude or disrespectful. I hope I have given sufficient reasoning for my edits and comments but feel free to approach me with any concerns. questions, or
2267:. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-820539-2) It was claimed by some of the church writers that when a Cathar, after receiving the Consolamentum, began to show signs of recovery he or she would be smothered in order to ensure his or her entry into paradise. Other than at such moments of
2242:. It was only undertaken when death was clearly inevitable. It was a form of purification and separation from the material world which was controlled by the evil one. They believed that this final sacrifice ensured their reunification with the Good God. (Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie (1975).
890:
the two main reasons Adams deserves a long article are his work for independence and his establishing moderate conservative policies (in opposition to Hamilton & Jefferson). I suggest: Cut the diplomacy instead--or spin that off into a new article on the Diplomacy of John Adams.
362:
in the same edit as your ping.) You can go through your preferences so the interface will warn you about broken pings. Your explanation is what I figured, which is why I didn't revert you. Others doing countervandalism are inherently drive-by editors, so they might not be so careful.
1598:
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.
1525:
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.
1031:
My comments were in agreement (considering your edit) that "subsections" be used under "References" that should be a section (you used biography that I guess is fine) and as such that "Bibliography" as a subsection would not be out of place or confused with a "Works" (Bibliography)
1333:
It's unfortunate that there is an entire generation of children and young adults who were raised to believe that everything they do is right. Someone needs to provide guidance to this generation to let them know they aren't the center of the universe. Listen to your wiser elders.
925:. I'm not the best with copyright info and usually pass it off to someone else, and was hoping whoever reviewed your article yesterday would have addressed this, but in any case I figured I'd let you know. (And if I'm wrong about this please ping me back and let me know!)
2916:, Manannan67 declined to vote in the latest RfC. I asked whether he had anything to add before requesting the third opinion, and he said nothing. PluniaZ, when I suggested making a request to WP:Third opinion, you voiced no objection. Your response was incredibly vague.
1017:
uses "Notes and references" section with source related subsections that seems well laid out. To me there is an issue with the "Books by Greeley" section placed above the "Further reading" section though. If readers expect to find this listed first in the appendices per
683:, because it is a common noun and not a proper noun, like Republican. Should it be capitalized in an infobox or when it's abreviated in parentheses, i.e. Bernie Sanders (i) vs Bernie Sanders (I)? I look forward to your thoughts at the talk page, above. Sincerely,
1004:
A problem I have been running into is not the citation "styles", that are broadly acceptable on individual articles, but the presentations in sections and subsections. You misinterpreted the comments on "References". It is a section, and should be as exampled by
1093:
I have found GA and FA articles with up to 30 "Further readings" and "External links", usually the result of incremental additions, with no cleanup. The Andrew Jackson article has 10. To me that is too many but I have mostly been focusing on severely long lists.
3366:
if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available." I've nothing more to say on the subject, we'll have to agree to disgree. Don't make personal attacks in the future please.
2810:, sorry for the delayed response. Yes, that diff is fine. Thanks. I guess the only thing that we can agree on now is that hopefully, this new RfC will generate more responses than the first one and lead to a clearer consensus so that we can finally end this.
967:
Thanks for the clarification! I noticed that page cited Knowledge (XXG) as well, was just unfamiliar with the name. Usually I see similar pages like Revolvy, etc, hopefully the writer of the copyvio detector whitelists that site so it doesn't show up again.
636:"Contaldo80 first inferred, with no evidence, that the IP user was my sockpuppet." At what stage did I infer that a particular IP User was YOUR sockpuppet? Please be careful about making accusations and claims that are not supported by the facts.
2508:
good source. Would a small town paper that has less editorial judgement be allowed as a source? What about a website that purports to be a news source? Where is the wiki guidelines on what is considered a legtamte reference to use as a citation?
1037:"Another problem is that you have yet to show how there is a type of bibliography which does not include sources, which means that it's unnecessary to specific that a Bibliography is for sources, because that's the only kind that exists."
2400:
I'll be glad to. Happy to see some discussion and consensus going on; keep it up! But it would be better if you held these discussions at the article talk page (which is not protected) so that they are part of the article's history. --
99:
Thank you very much. Really I thought it will take months for someone to take it for a review. Much appreciate it. Thanks! And for sure, I will repeat the nomination for DYK, as it failed to pass since it wasn't a 5x expansion. :)
2382:, yes, I am fine with changing this sentence. I honestly don't why it's necessary. It means pretty much the same thing and does not substantially change the meaning of the sentence, but if it stops the bickering, I'll go for it.
2895:. Plunia, FWIW, there wasn't really a need to request the removal of the request either. 3O requests with regards to disputes with more than two editors should be rejected without any further review being needed. Cheers.
3083:
Ciolek - files three separate claims, against three different individuals in three separate diocese, at least two which allegedly occurred when he could hardly have been considered a minor. Is this some kind of cottage
2931:
Mathglot). I would encourage you not to re-file at 3O, though I certainly can't stop you from doing so if you believe it may result in a different outcome. If I were in your shoes I might consider opening a case at
1626:
1553:
2791:
page before sending the new one. It seems like Legobot is the only user that is supposed to be editing that page. Hopefully by this time tomorrow the old RfC will be taken down and I can send the new one.
1711:
I put JA’s Massacre quote to work a couple weeks ago—sent it to a newspaper editor I know and he used it in commentary re recent events. Way to go JA, right on point. Thought you’d like hearing about that.
1743:, thank you very much. As the one responsible for bringing the article to GA status, you deserve a substantial amount of the credit yourself. Thank you for leaving me such a solid foundation to start.
676:
1610:. 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
1537:. 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
494:
I agree that the article probably shouldn't exist. The editing of it and reversions of edits by particular editors does show a pattern, when you take another particular article into consideration.
2682:
which believes Francis is the Anti-Christ. You can appreciate that some editors have come to be somewhat cautious regarding his input. As a wise one once said, "AGF is not a suicide pact." -Cheers.
1071:
The entire purpose of section headings and subsections (hierarchy) is to group related subjects but Knowledge (XXG) is vague on this especially concerning sourcing footnotes. To avoid confusion and
3112:
hardly discounts him. You might think that the number of people whom Ciolek has accused makes him unreliable. But that's your own personal opinion and should have no reflection on Knowledge (XXG).
1245:
3536:
3531:
1306:
2735:" on the McCarrick dispute. I am happy to defer to the input of the broader community, but not to someone who is simply following me around seeking revenge for the time I deleted his articles. --
1725:
I just noticed the FA promotion, and I want to congratulate you on your hard work making it happen. I am proud to have been a part of it and glad you are around to lead the way. Merry Christmas!
3257:, that was a little strong but the point is valid. Removing content because you find it offensive and hurtful violates Knowledge (XXG) policy with regard to neutrality and unbiased editing.
2116:
in case there are queries about it on the day they run, as well as the previous day. If you have questions or concerns, feel free to post on my talk. Thanks for building quality content!--
2935:, or perhaps sculpting a less contentious RfC cooperatively with the editors you disagree with. For what it's worth, I don't think I've ever seen an instance of an editor requesting 3O
1117:
You can't do that Display name 99. You are not an administrator. It's not up to you to police pages. My contribution to that discussion is perfectly valid. I have not broken any rules.
1905:
And you used it against him or her in a derisive and derogatory manner, don't be so disingenuous. Looks like you are falling into old habits to me, walk away from the argument mate.
2104:
Hi, this is to let you know that the above articles will appear as Today's Featured Article on March 4, 2019 (Adams) and March 18, 2019 (Calhoun). The blurb to be used can be found
1657:
to contribute with this revert though, so I will leave you to it. If I can help with a particular issue, of course I am happy to. Just let me know. Good luck with the nom. See
1296:
3236:
1084:
922:
1026:(Appendix sections), under a "Works or publications" section but many times a "Bibliography" section is used. Considering this then the "Books by Greeley" is out of place.
1450:
2297:, thank you very much for making me aware of this. This is important and it's good for me to know. I undid my edit and will add some of this information to the article.
1249:
2560:
2473:, thank you for your question. Actually, a statement describing something said by Adolf Hitler as bigoted would probably be removed in my view because it violates
1050:. This is commonly placed in a "Works" section (for biographies only) per MOS/layout, but also common as a "Bibliography" section, and not related to sourcing.
2887:
because, as Plunia noted, there are more than two involved editors in this dispute. As implied by the name, the Third Opinion Noticeboard is for requesting a
2563:, but in case it interests you I am wikilinking to it. The issue which forced my hand towards the split option was the misuse of rollback. (I will be pinging
1235:
1211:
136:
I know I've been a bit of a bother, but I wanted you to know that your work and great patience with me and overall on Knowledge (XXG) does not go unnoticed
2431:
2259:
have shunned further food or drink and, more often and in addition, expose themselves to extreme cold, in order to speed death. This has been termed the
1397:
1215:
2749:
I’d no knowledge of the dispute before being asked to look at the article, presumedly for my experience. Not to be somebody’s “buddy.” All I know of it.
2527:
for factual information. But the NYT like other newspapers, also has opinion pieces which are less than fully reliable. I encourage you to read the page
2532:
160:, you've been fine. It's been a pleasure working with you as both a reviewer and a nominator. I look forward to hopefully doing so again in the future.
2678:
as that might seem rude. Epiphyllumlover has been recognized for his contributions to Lutheranism-related articles. He also seems to cite as a RS the
2619:
articles. This is not something of recent origin. I considered forwarding diffs, but Hyperbolick's frequently blanked Talk page should be sufficient.
1227:, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Knowledge (XXG) takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators
3471:
for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
3184:
for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
799:
for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
259:
for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
2824:
Let's also mutually agree to avoid replying to each other's posts in the thread in order to make it easier for people to discern what's going on.
2223:, "The body of the article never says that Cathars starved themselves. I haven't encountered any such statement in the sources that I've read."
3458:
3171:
786:
606:
for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.
593:
341:
246:
2679:
1640:
1567:
845:, thank you for the message. I appreciate it. Adams always seems to get the short straw, even on this wiki. Hopefully we can change that.
2523:
Please try to keep everything in the same section. It makes things easier to navigate. We could rely on journalistic pieces publisher in
677:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government#Stylistic question about capitalization of "independent" in an infobox
1335:
1023:
86:
81:
76:
64:
59:
2488:
evil, but we wouldn't come right out and say that ourselves. It is also Knowledge (XXG) policy that all information must be cited to a
1019:
1828:
1087:
to help stop the inundation of certain sites in the external links, as well as "external links sourcing only" and long runaway lists.
1874:
long before you came along. Keep at it if you want and we can let an arbitrator decide. I'm not discussing it with you any further.
3107:
I don't know much about Figueiredo and am not sure when I have ever relied on him. Whatever your personal judgments of Ciolek, the
1888:
The editor said on his own userpage that he subscribed to a Marxian interpretation of economics. I don't make the things I say up.
2608:
3416:
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
3224:
3045:
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
1832:
1425:
disagree with the decision to add cleanup banners to those two citations. That's about all I have time for but I hope it helps.
744:
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
551:
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
204:
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.
1636:
1563:
1824:
1619:
1546:
507:
467:
143:
1453:. Whichever side you are on, I value your opinion based on your excellent edits to the pages we've both been working on. —
679:. It's clear that "independent" should not be capitalized in a sentence (except if it's the first word), as is the usage in
420:
3333:
3248:
2234:
According to a few known cases in the latter years of Catharism, the terminally ill would voluntarily undertake a complete
1157:, if you dedicate the edit summary to summarize what you did instead of addressing other editors as you did in the article
2861:
1048:"A list of the books of a specific author or publisher, or on a specific subject. ("a bibliography of his publications")"
2616:
2489:
1840:
1230:
2056:
1631:
1558:
1405:
917:
Hey! Your new page is awesome (Adams is one of my favorite presidents!), but I think you need to give attribution to
2973:, referring to me being "smart enough" to read into your intentions is absolutely a personal attack. Cut it out. --
3472:
3185:
800:
260:
38:
3443:
3388:
3156:
3017:
2528:
2109:
1063:
The confusion is that "Bibliography" probably shouldn't be used in the "Works" section and is not recommended per
771:
716:
578:
523:
424:
328:
231:
176:
3570:
3349:
3294:
3262:
3128:
2995:
2961:
2921:
2829:
2815:
2653:
2594:
2572:
2544:
2497:
2391:
2337:
2302:
2139:
2082:
2019:
1936:
1893:
1857:
1803:
1748:
1684:
1430:
1354:
1182:
1138:
958:
881:
850:
819:
760:
483:
349:
279:
220:
165:
47:
17:
2105:
2531:, especially the "Neutrality" paragaph. Also, please realize that the standards are stricter when dealing with
2353:
2152:, "an American Founding Father who served as the second President of the United States", long and excellent. --
371:
311:
105:
3565:, thank you for your note. I actually had no idea that I'd gotten that, but I appreciate you letting me know.
3308:
Don't accuse others of bias. In regard to publishing offensive material and censorship - read the guidelines:
2727:
to whine about the time I deleted several articles he had created, and a minute later he pings his good buddy
1607:
1534:
1013:
I am not advocating changing any "style" just following some standards so there is not confusion. The article
3204:
3061:
2074:
1339:
3309:
2586:
1241:
1207:
3552:
3468:
2175:
2157:
1416:
1401:
1319:
978:
935:
706:
680:
622:
567:
427:. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Knowledge (XXG)'s readers! —
2719:
at 03:09 26 June 2019. His very next edit 23 minutes later is to the Theodore Edgar McCarrick Talk Page
2474:
3181:
2754:
256:
1072:
2788:
842:
835:
3566:
3345:
3290:
3258:
3142:
3124:
3097:
2991:
2970:
2957:
2917:
2864:. Third opinions are only for disputes between two editors, but this dispute is between you, me and
2825:
2811:
2712:
2687:
2649:
2624:
2590:
2582:
2568:
2540:
2493:
2387:
2333:
2298:
2205:
2135:
2078:
2015:
1932:
1902:
1889:
1866:
1853:
1799:
1744:
1680:
1426:
1387:
1350:
1284:
1178:
1134:
1122:
954:
877:
846:
815:
810:
756:
751:
688:
658:
641:
479:
345:
303:
this looks like unexplained blanking and I normally hand out templated warnings for stuff like that.
275:
270:
216:
211:
161:
3368:
3341:
3325:
3286:
3273:
3254:
3240:
1906:
1875:
1849:
1594:
1521:
3372:
3329:
3277:
3244:
2220:
1978:
1910:
1879:
1166:
796:
365:
337:
305:
101:
2470:
2113:
1603:
1530:
3491:
3432:
3200:
3195:
3057:
3052:
2509:
2456:
2406:
1785:
1496:
1473:
1455:
504:
464:
3512:
3407:
3322:
3036:
1871:
1273:
735:
542:
300:
195:
2271:, little evidence exists to suggest this was a common Cathar practice.(Barber, Malcolm (2000),
1467:
Since you made an eloquent argument for "keep", you might find the following article helpful!
3562:
3548:
3454:
3447:
3399:
3392:
3228:
2978:
2944:
2900:
2873:
2843:
2797:
2740:
2492:. I do not believe that any of the three sources for that statement describe it as "bigoted."
2440:
2369:
2319:
2285:
2171:
2153:
2121:
2077:, which I nominated for GA, and the Andrew Jackson article, which I nominated for FA. Thanks.
2001:
1836:
1315:
1154:
969:
950:
926:
896:
864:
703:
618:
613:
563:
558:
435:
2675:
2535:, such as which Burke is. For general information about what qualifies as a reliable source,
1615:
1542:
1468:
359:
3574:
3556:
3495:
3436:
3376:
3353:
3298:
3281:
3266:
3208:
3167:
3160:
3146:
3132:
3101:
3065:
3028:
3021:
2999:
2982:
2965:
2948:
2925:
2904:
2877:
2847:
2833:
2819:
2801:
2758:
2750:
2744:
2728:
2691:
2657:
2628:
2598:
2576:
2564:
2548:
2517:
2513:
2501:
2464:
2460:
2444:
2410:
2395:
2373:
2341:
2323:
2306:
2289:
2209:
2179:
2161:
2143:
2125:
2086:
2063:
2023:
2005:
1982:
1940:
1914:
1897:
1883:
1861:
1807:
1789:
1766:
1762:
1752:
1734:
1730:
1720:
1716:
1703:
1699:
1688:
1670:
1666:
1644:
1571:
1500:
1477:
1459:
1434:
1409:
1372:
1368:
1358:
1343:
1323:
1253:
1186:
1170:
1142:
1126:
1106:
1102:
986:
962:
943:
900:
885:
868:
854:
823:
764:
709:
692:
662:
645:
626:
571:
511:
487:
471:
439:
378:
353:
318:
283:
242:
235:
224:
187:
180:
169:
149:
109:
2932:
2361:
1618:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
1611:
1545:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
1538:
1392:
Hi, I was wondering if you'd be willing to take a look at an article I've been working on,
1006:
3138:
3093:
3075:
I encourage you to take a closer look at some of the sources on which you choose to rely:
2865:
2838:
Yes, please. It is my hope that we never reply to each other on that talk page again :p --
2683:
2641:
2620:
2201:
2167:
2098:
2050:
2035:
1446:
1280:
1203:
1118:
859:
Indeed you've done an excellent job with Adams! I especially like the lede. keep it up!
702:
I'd already posted on the talk page before you reverted...perhaps join in the discussion?
684:
654:
637:
3403:
3362:
use of offensive, unpleasant, or unsuitable material. "Offensive material should be used
3032:
2892:
2884:
2536:
1658:
731:
538:
191:
123:
3321:
No hard feelings, just stop accusing others of bias, it's a clear violation of policy:
1974:
1970:
1288:
1162:
1076:
1014:
782:
775:
727:
720:
409:
324:
1055:"A list of the books referred to in a scholarly work, usually printed as an appendix."
3487:
3482:
3428:
3423:
3235:, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
2612:
2561:
Talk:Criticism_of_the_Catholic_Church/Archive_3#All_five_split_articles_are_published
2402:
2383:
2228:
2112:. You are free to edit the blurbs, and may want to watchlist those pagse, as well as
1795:
1781:
1780:
could be pro-independence (of a colony) but still die before that dream is realized.
1492:
603:
497:
457:
157:
137:
1363:
That is weird. I want to thank you for your work on the Presidents. Well done, pal.
453:
3478:
3463:
3419:
3191:
3176:
3048:
2987:
2974:
2953:
2940:
2913:
2909:
2896:
2869:
2839:
2807:
2793:
2736:
2645:
2436:
2379:
2365:
2357:
2329:
2315:
2294:
2281:
2131:
2117:
2011:
1997:
892:
873:
860:
806:
791:
747:
609:
554:
428:
266:
251:
207:
3219:
2364:, subject to the ongoing RfC on whether to remove the paragraph in its entirey. --
1585:
1512:
1449:
article for deletion. If you have an opinion on this, I hope you will comment at
598:
395:
1758:
1740:
1726:
1712:
1695:
1676:
1662:
1364:
1198:
1098:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
2193:
2149:
2094:
2070:
2044:
1292:
1835:
by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at
2779:
Hey, let me know if you are ok with this Diff being used for the next RfC:
2252:
1393:
1010:
times conflict with other known formatting styles that are largely followed.
344:
and then "Formatting and punctuation." Hopefully that clarifies everything.
1954:
1471:
It clarifies some points and even has some biographical info about B.R. —
3398:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
3027:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
726:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
533:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
186:
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
589:
582:
534:
527:
1622:
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
1549:
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
1214:
from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read
2235:
1064:
3412:
3041:
2423:
740:
547:
200:
1661:(the revert is reserved for vandalous or bad faith edits). Cheers.
918:
2723:
at 03:32 26 June 2019. 30 minutes later he pings Display Name 99
2674:
I was attempting to be somewhat discrete and specifically avoided
2430:
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the
2273:
The Cathars: Dualist heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages
2715:
rejected my arguments on the WikiProject Catholicism Talk Page
1625:
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review
1552:
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review
2607:
In reference to the above, you will find the interplay at the
25:
1219:
You may use external websites or publications as a source of
296:
that this isn't a sentence, so a terminal period isn't needed
2422:
1043:
Multiple dictionaries give the definitions of bibliography:
675:
Hi, you may be able to provide insight on the discussion at
2787:. I will wait for the existing RfC to be removed from the
2559:
Hi, I'm not sure if you followed the recent controversy at
1469:
https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/case-theodore-mccarrick
1097:
comments. You may know of or consider a better approach.
1973:
you are hereby awarded The Biography Barnstar. Congrats!
1113:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Frank J. Vondersaar
671:
Request for consensus on capitalization of "independent"
2782:
2732:
2724:
2720:
2716:
2189:
2039:
1606:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
1533:
is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
1301:
1158:
295:
1085:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:External links/Perennial websites
1079:(this seems to be rare) which would be more practical.
2868:, and other users have already weighed in as well. --
2246:. Random House/editions Gilmard. ISBN 978-0807615980)
2275:, Harlow: Longman, ISBN 978-0582256620, pp =103–104)
1297:
Saint Paul Catholic Church (Ellicott City, Maryland)
3519:
2860:Please remove your request for a third opinion for
2419:
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
3137:that just shows your own admitted political bias.
2891:opinion. You are welcome to pursue other forms of
2455:definition of islamaphobia not be called bigoted?
3239:and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
1210:material to Knowledge (XXG) without evidence of
1022:, and new users are directed by examples in the
2990:, the portion of that comment has been struck.
2480:
1827:. If you continue to violate Knowledge (XXG)'s
1757:Thanks, pal. My wife still wants to adopt you.
1305:and dedicated reviewing, - William, you are an
1236:Knowledge (XXG):Copying text from other sources
3080:that had made it across the river to O'Connor;
2432:Knowledge (XXG):Dispute resolution noticeboard
1216:Knowledge (XXG):Donating copyrighted materials
1206:has been removed, as it appears to have added
834:adding content, but keep doing your thing. -
8:
3505:
3213:
2611:(which involved a totally separate editor),
2648:so that they are aware of this discussion.
3511:
3504:
1239:
2034:Since you were the person who nominated
342:Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style/Captions
2038:for FA, could you tell me if my revert
1441:Deletion nomination for Boniface Ramsey
1279:Thank you for quality articles such as
1246:2600:8800:1880:1084:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26
2244:Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error
1592:Hello, Display name 99. Voting in the
1519:Hello, Display name 99. Voting in the
1020:Knowledge (XXG):Manual of Style/Layout
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
2585:, doing this isn't a good habit. See
1694:to adopt you as her 10th grandchild.
7:
2883:FWIW, I have removed the request at
2680:Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
2435:help form a consensus. Thank you! --
1595:2018 Arbitration Committee elections
1522:2018 Arbitration Committee elections
1445:Display name 99, I've nominated the
358:Your ping didn't work. (You have to
3272:have. Don't make personal attacks.
1608:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process
1535:Knowledge (XXG) arbitration process
3214:Don't accuse other editors of bias
2200:ToC stands for Table of Contents.
1579:ArbCom 2018 election voter message
1506:ArbCom 2018 election voter message
24:
3312:, you'll find you are mistaken.
2215:Cathars, consolamentum and endura
2014:, this change has been reverted.
1177:which is what is most important.
423:status, I hereby present you the
3462:
3411:
3218:
3175:
3040:
2609:Criticism of the Catholic Church
2533:WP:Biographies of living persons
1953:
1818:
1584:
1511:
1272:
1197:
919:https://alchetron.com/John-Adams
913:Diplomatic service of John Adams
790:
739:
597:
546:
408:For your contributions to bring
394:
250:
199:
122:
29:
1629:and submit your choices on the
1556:and submit your choices on the
1153:Hi. It would be good, also per
452:Are you aware of this article?
3496:22:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
3227:other editors, as you did at
2134:, thanks for letting me know.
1460:23:13, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
1254:19:35, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
412:(estimated annual readership:
1:
3437:22:01, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
3377:00:11, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
3354:00:02, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
3334:23:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3299:23:48, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3282:23:37, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3267:23:28, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3249:23:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
2862:Talk:Theodore_Edgar_McCarrick
2356:to the revisions you made to
2144:14:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
2126:12:41, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
2024:22:51, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
2006:22:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
1941:01:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
1915:22:57, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
1898:22:37, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
1884:22:33, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
1862:22:18, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
1808:17:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
1790:15:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
1767:00:59, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
1645:18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
1572:18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
1501:19:57, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
1187:02:58, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
1171:02:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
1001:that could make improvements.
3358:I removed it because it was
2617:Catholic Church and Pandeism
1829:neutral point of view policy
1753:23:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
1735:22:25, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
1721:17:42, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
1704:12:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
1689:00:25, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
1671:00:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
1478:21:35, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
1435:15:41, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
1410:12:57, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
1373:13:27, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
284:05:01, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
225:09:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
170:03:11, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
150:02:07, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
110:02:12, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
3575:22:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
3557:21:54, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
3475:to appear in Did you know.
3209:15:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
3188:to appear in Did you know.
3147:02:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
3133:01:31, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
3102:01:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
3066:21:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
1983:19:16, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
1324:16:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
803:to appear in Did you know.
263:to appear in Did you know.
3591:
3000:22:07, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2983:21:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2966:20:58, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2949:20:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2926:19:46, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2905:18:38, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2878:17:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
2539:is a good place to start.
2342:00:50, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
2324:00:39, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
2307:00:31, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
2290:23:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
2265:Suicide in the Middle Ages
2210:16:50, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
2180:12:15, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
2087:02:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
2064:01:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
1931:Thank you for fixing it.--
1637:MediaWiki message delivery
1564:MediaWiki message delivery
1359:19:21, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
1344:19:00, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
1143:12:12, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
1127:10:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
379:22:03, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
354:15:45, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
331:if you want my attention.)
319:14:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
3526:
3510:
3406:-status according to the
3035:-status according to the
2848:00:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
2834:18:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
2820:18:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
2802:04:17, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
2759:04:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
2745:21:13, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
2692:20:43, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
2658:20:28, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
2629:19:58, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
2599:14:01, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
2577:04:01, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
2567:about the current rfc.)--
2549:18:59, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
2518:18:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
2502:17:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
2465:17:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
2445:04:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
2162:07:10, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
1959:
1952:
1223:, but not as a source of
1107:16:39, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
987:12:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
963:01:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
944:00:50, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
855:12:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
824:23:41, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
765:11:40, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
734:-status according to the
710:17:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
541:-status according to the
512:17:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
488:17:05, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
472:16:19, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
440:17:51, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
393:
194:-status according to the
121:
18:User talk:Display name 99
2411:16:40, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
2396:03:37, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
2374:03:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
2354:Theodore Edgar McCarrick
2219:Re: your recent edit to
1238:for more information.
901:19:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
886:17:38, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
869:15:44, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
693:22:07, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
663:13:07, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
646:11:55, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
2075:John Eaton (politician)
1267:19th-century US history
627:17:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
572:12:40, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
3527:... you were recipient
3469:Talk:Raymond Leo Burke
3319:
2484:
2427:
2280:- just fyi - cheers -
2166:... and thank you for
2030:Possible factual error
1963:The Biography Barnstar
1302:precise edit summaries
1024:beginners guide to MOS
681:Independent politician
3477:Message delivered by
3418:Message delivered by
3314:
3190:Message delivered by
3182:Talk:Robert V. Remini
3047:Message delivered by
2426:
2263:.(Murray, Alexander.
1604:Arbitration Committee
1531:Arbitration Committee
1396:, which is currently
921:via CC BY-SA 3.0 per
805:Message delivered by
746:Message delivered by
608:Message delivered by
553:Message delivered by
327:this page, so please
299:? Because without an
265:Message delivered by
257:Talk:Siege of Minerve
206:Message delivered by
130:The Original Barnstar
42:of past discussions.
3501:Precious anniversary
3114:The Washington Post,
1841:blocked from editing
1486:That FAC talk thread
1285:John C. Breckinridge
1231:blocked from editing
415:7006270000000000000♠
3507:
3457:you nominated as a
3170:you nominated as a
2221:Albigensian Crusade
2093:TFA appearances of
1946:2018 Year in Review
1833:tendentious editing
1349:Ummm...whaaaat????
923:this copyvio search
797:Talk:Photian schism
785:you nominated as a
592:you nominated as a
245:you nominated as a
115:A barnstar for you!
3402:you nominated for
3031:you nominated for
2893:dispute resolution
2525:The New York Times
2490:WP:Reliable source
2428:
1825:disruptive editing
1620:arbitration policy
1547:arbitration policy
1398:up for peer review
1307:awesome Wikipedian
1159:Carlo Maria Viganò
730:you nominated for
537:you nominated for
402:The Million Award
190:you nominated for
3545:
3544:
3485:
3455:Raymond Leo Burke
3448:Raymond Leo Burke
3426:
3400:Raymond Leo Burke
3393:Raymond Leo Burke
3229:Milo Yiannopoulos
3198:
3055:
2251:This is from the
2227:This is from the
2190:this edit summary
1991:Henry of Lausanne
1988:
1987:
1969:For your work on
1837:Milo Yiannopoulos
1823:Please stop your
1814:Milo Yiannopoulos
1417:Genericusername57
1402:Genericusername57
1256:
1244:comment added by
1202:Your addition to
1155:Help:Edit summary
982:
974:
939:
931:
813:
754:
616:
561:
445:
444:
360:sign your comment
333:
293:Are you positing
273:
214:
155:
154:
148:
92:
91:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
3582:
3515:
3508:
3476:
3466:
3417:
3415:
3222:
3189:
3179:
3168:Robert V. Remini
3161:Robert V. Remini
3046:
3044:
3029:Robert V. Remini
3022:Robert V. Remini
2939:an RfC. Cheers.
2785:
2565:User:Hyperbolick
2529:WP:Verifiability
2062:
1957:
1950:
1949:
1872:flogged to death
1831:and engaging in
1822:
1821:
1588:
1515:
1476:
1458:
1391:
1304:
1276:
1201:
1068:lot of articles.
980:
972:
937:
929:
829:John Adams again
804:
794:
745:
743:
607:
601:
552:
550:
510:
500:
470:
460:
433:
421:Featured Article
418:
416:
398:
391:
390:
377:
374:
368:
321:
317:
314:
308:
298:
264:
254:
243:Siege of Minerve
236:Siege of Minerve
205:
203:
188:Siege of Minerve
181:Siege of Minerve
140:
126:
119:
118:
73:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
3590:
3589:
3585:
3584:
3583:
3581:
3580:
3579:
3567:Display name 99
3541:a prize of QAI!
3503:
3481:, on behalf of
3451:
3422:, on behalf of
3396:
3346:Display name 99
3291:Display name 99
3259:Display name 99
3216:
3194:, on behalf of
3164:
3125:Display name 99
3109:Washington Post
3073:
3051:, on behalf of
3025:
2992:Display name 99
2971:Display name 99
2958:Display name 99
2918:Display name 99
2866:User:Manannan67
2858:
2826:Display name 99
2812:Display name 99
2781:
2777:
2713:Epiphyllumlover
2650:Display name 99
2591:Display name 99
2583:Epiphyllumlover
2569:Epiphyllumlover
2557:
2541:Display name 99
2494:Display name 99
2452:
2421:
2388:Display name 99
2352:Can we conform
2350:
2334:Display name 99
2299:Display name 99
2217:
2198:
2168:John C. Calhoun
2136:Display name 99
2102:
2099:John C. Calhoun
2079:Display name 99
2043:
2036:John C. Calhoun
2032:
2016:Display name 99
1993:
1948:
1933:Epiphyllumlover
1929:
1903:Display name 99
1890:Display name 99
1867:Display name 99
1854:Display name 99
1819:
1816:
1800:Display name 99
1777:
1745:Display name 99
1681:Display name 99
1654:
1649:
1648:
1589:
1581:
1576:
1575:
1516:
1508:
1488:
1472:
1454:
1447:Boniface Ramsey
1443:
1427:Display name 99
1388:Display name 99
1385:
1383:
1351:Display name 99
1331:
1312:
1311:
1300:
1281:John C. Calhoun
1277:
1262:
1204:William E. Lori
1195:
1179:Display name 99
1151:
1135:Display name 99
1115:
1077:group footnotes
997:
955:Display name 99
915:
878:Display name 99
847:Display name 99
831:
816:Farang Rak Tham
811:Farang Rak Tham
809:, on behalf of
779:
757:Farang Rak Tham
752:Farang Rak Tham
750:, on behalf of
724:
700:
673:
634:
612:, on behalf of
586:
557:, on behalf of
531:
503:
496:
480:Display name 99
463:
456:
450:
431:
414:
413:
389:
372:
366:
364:
346:Display name 99
312:
306:
304:
294:
291:
276:Wilhelmina Will
271:Wilhelmina Will
269:, on behalf of
239:
217:Wilhelmina Will
212:Wilhelmina Will
210:, on behalf of
184:
162:Display name 99
146:
117:
97:
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
3588:
3586:
3578:
3577:
3543:
3542:
3540:
3528:
3524:
3523:
3521:
3517:
3516:
3506:A year ago ...
3502:
3499:
3450:
3446:nomination of
3440:
3395:
3391:nomination of
3385:
3384:
3383:
3382:
3381:
3380:
3379:
3306:
3305:
3304:
3303:
3302:
3301:
3223:Please do not
3215:
3212:
3163:
3159:nomination of
3153:
3152:
3151:
3150:
3149:
3119:
3118:
3090:
3089:
3085:
3081:
3072:
3069:
3024:
3020:nomination of
3014:
3013:
3012:
3011:
3010:
3009:
3008:
3007:
3006:
3005:
3004:
3003:
3002:
2857:
2854:
2853:
2852:
2851:
2850:
2822:
2776:
2773:
2772:
2771:
2770:
2769:
2768:
2767:
2766:
2765:
2764:
2763:
2762:
2761:
2701:
2700:
2699:
2698:
2697:
2696:
2695:
2694:
2665:
2664:
2663:
2662:
2661:
2660:
2634:
2633:
2632:
2631:
2602:
2601:
2556:
2553:
2552:
2551:
2505:
2504:
2479:
2478:
2451:
2448:
2420:
2417:
2416:
2415:
2414:
2413:
2349:
2346:
2345:
2344:
2312:
2311:
2310:
2309:
2278:
2277:
2276:
2249:
2248:
2247:
2216:
2213:
2197:
2186:
2185:
2184:
2183:
2182:
2164:
2148:Thank you for
2101:
2091:
2090:
2089:
2031:
2028:
2027:
2026:
1992:
1989:
1986:
1985:
1971:Andrew Jackson
1966:
1965:
1960:
1958:
1947:
1944:
1928:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1921:
1920:
1919:
1918:
1917:
1815:
1812:
1811:
1810:
1776:
1773:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1709:
1708:
1707:
1706:
1653:
1650:
1627:the candidates
1590:
1583:
1582:
1580:
1577:
1554:the candidates
1517:
1510:
1509:
1507:
1504:
1487:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1442:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1421:
1420:
1382:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1330:
1327:
1289:Andrew Jackson
1271:
1269:
1264:
1263:
1261:
1258:
1194:
1193:September 2018
1191:
1190:
1189:
1150:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1114:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1094:
1089:
1088:
1080:
1069:
1060:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1051:
1040:
1039:
1033:
1028:
1027:
1015:Horace Greeley
1011:
1002:
996:
995:Andrew Jackson
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
914:
911:
910:
909:
908:
907:
906:
905:
904:
903:
838:June 28, 2018
830:
827:
783:Photian schism
778:
776:Photian schism
774:nomination of
768:
728:Photian schism
723:
721:Photian schism
719:nomination of
713:
699:
696:
672:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
633:
630:
585:
581:nomination of
575:
530:
526:nomination of
520:
519:
518:
517:
516:
515:
514:
449:
446:
443:
442:
410:Andrew Jackson
405:
404:
399:
388:
385:
384:
383:
382:
381:
367:Chris Troutman
338:Chris troutman
307:Chris Troutman
290:
287:
238:
234:nomination of
228:
183:
179:nomination of
173:
153:
152:
142:
133:
132:
127:
116:
113:
102:Governor Sheng
96:
95:Pope Miltiades
93:
90:
89:
84:
79:
74:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3587:
3576:
3572:
3568:
3564:
3561:
3560:
3559:
3558:
3554:
3550:
3538:
3534:
3533:
3525:
3518:
3514:
3509:
3500:
3498:
3497:
3493:
3489:
3484:
3480:
3474:
3470:
3465:
3460:
3456:
3449:
3445:
3441:
3439:
3438:
3434:
3430:
3425:
3421:
3414:
3409:
3405:
3401:
3394:
3390:
3386:
3378:
3374:
3370:
3365:
3361:
3357:
3356:
3355:
3351:
3347:
3343:
3340:
3339:
3338:
3337:
3336:
3335:
3331:
3327:
3324:
3318:
3313:
3311:
3310:WP:GRATUITOUS
3300:
3296:
3292:
3288:
3285:
3284:
3283:
3279:
3275:
3270:
3269:
3268:
3264:
3260:
3256:
3253:
3252:
3251:
3250:
3246:
3242:
3238:
3234:
3231:. Comment on
3230:
3226:
3221:
3211:
3210:
3206:
3202:
3201:Kaiser matias
3197:
3196:Kaiser matias
3193:
3187:
3183:
3178:
3173:
3169:
3162:
3158:
3154:
3148:
3144:
3140:
3136:
3135:
3134:
3130:
3126:
3121:
3120:
3115:
3110:
3106:
3105:
3104:
3103:
3099:
3095:
3086:
3082:
3078:
3077:
3076:
3070:
3068:
3067:
3063:
3059:
3058:Kaiser matias
3054:
3053:Kaiser matias
3050:
3043:
3038:
3034:
3030:
3023:
3019:
3015:
3001:
2997:
2993:
2989:
2986:
2985:
2984:
2980:
2976:
2972:
2969:
2968:
2967:
2963:
2959:
2955:
2952:
2951:
2950:
2946:
2942:
2938:
2934:
2929:
2928:
2927:
2923:
2919:
2915:
2911:
2908:
2907:
2906:
2902:
2898:
2894:
2890:
2886:
2882:
2881:
2880:
2879:
2875:
2871:
2867:
2863:
2856:Third Opinion
2855:
2849:
2845:
2841:
2837:
2836:
2835:
2831:
2827:
2823:
2821:
2817:
2813:
2809:
2806:
2805:
2804:
2803:
2799:
2795:
2790:
2786:
2784:
2783:Proposed Diff
2775:McCarrick RfC
2774:
2760:
2756:
2752:
2748:
2747:
2746:
2742:
2738:
2734:
2730:
2726:
2722:
2718:
2714:
2711:
2710:
2709:
2708:
2707:
2706:
2705:
2704:
2703:
2702:
2693:
2689:
2685:
2681:
2677:
2673:
2672:
2671:
2670:
2669:
2668:
2667:
2666:
2659:
2655:
2651:
2647:
2643:
2640:
2639:
2638:
2637:
2636:
2635:
2630:
2626:
2622:
2618:
2614:
2613:Anthony Bliss
2610:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2600:
2596:
2592:
2588:
2587:WP:Canvassing
2584:
2581:
2580:
2579:
2578:
2574:
2570:
2566:
2562:
2554:
2550:
2546:
2542:
2538:
2534:
2530:
2526:
2522:
2521:
2520:
2519:
2515:
2511:
2503:
2499:
2495:
2491:
2486:
2485:
2483:
2476:
2472:
2469:
2468:
2467:
2466:
2462:
2458:
2449:
2447:
2446:
2442:
2438:
2433:
2425:
2418:
2412:
2408:
2404:
2399:
2398:
2397:
2393:
2389:
2385:
2381:
2378:
2377:
2376:
2375:
2371:
2367:
2363:
2359:
2355:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2335:
2331:
2328:
2327:
2326:
2325:
2321:
2317:
2308:
2304:
2300:
2296:
2293:
2292:
2291:
2287:
2283:
2279:
2274:
2270:
2266:
2262:
2257:
2256:
2254:
2250:
2245:
2241:
2238:known as the
2237:
2233:
2232:
2230:
2229:Consolamentum
2226:
2225:
2224:
2222:
2214:
2212:
2211:
2207:
2203:
2195:
2191:
2187:
2181:
2177:
2173:
2169:
2165:
2163:
2159:
2155:
2151:
2147:
2146:
2145:
2141:
2137:
2133:
2130:
2129:
2128:
2127:
2123:
2119:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2100:
2096:
2092:
2088:
2084:
2080:
2076:
2072:
2068:
2067:
2066:
2065:
2060:
2059:
2054:
2053:
2048:
2047:
2042:was correct?
2041:
2037:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2017:
2013:
2010:
2009:
2008:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1990:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1968:
1967:
1964:
1961:
1956:
1951:
1945:
1943:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1926:
1916:
1912:
1908:
1904:
1901:
1900:
1899:
1895:
1891:
1887:
1886:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1873:
1868:
1865:
1864:
1863:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1848:
1847:
1846:
1845:
1842:
1839:, you may be
1838:
1834:
1830:
1826:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1797:
1794:
1793:
1792:
1791:
1787:
1783:
1774:
1768:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1755:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1742:
1739:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1732:
1728:
1723:
1722:
1718:
1714:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1686:
1682:
1678:
1675:
1674:
1673:
1672:
1668:
1664:
1660:
1651:
1647:
1646:
1642:
1638:
1634:
1633:
1628:
1623:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1600:
1597:
1596:
1587:
1578:
1574:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1560:
1555:
1550:
1548:
1544:
1540:
1536:
1532:
1527:
1524:
1523:
1514:
1505:
1503:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1485:
1479:
1475:
1474:Lawrence King
1470:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1457:
1456:Lawrence King
1452:
1448:
1440:
1436:
1432:
1428:
1423:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1395:
1389:
1380:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1347:
1346:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1336:32.218.43.187
1328:
1326:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1310:
1308:
1303:
1298:
1294:
1290:
1286:
1282:
1275:
1270:
1268:
1259:
1257:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1237:
1233:
1232:
1226:
1222:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1200:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1148:
1144:
1140:
1136:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1100:
1095:
1091:
1090:
1086:
1081:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1061:
1056:
1052:
1049:
1045:
1044:
1042:
1041:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1016:
1012:
1008:
1003:
999:
998:
994:
988:
984:
983:
976:
975:
966:
965:
964:
960:
956:
952:
948:
947:
946:
945:
941:
940:
933:
932:
924:
920:
912:
902:
898:
894:
889:
888:
887:
883:
879:
875:
872:
871:
870:
866:
862:
858:
857:
856:
852:
848:
844:
841:
840:
839:
837:
828:
826:
825:
821:
817:
812:
808:
802:
798:
793:
788:
784:
777:
773:
769:
767:
766:
762:
758:
753:
749:
742:
737:
733:
729:
722:
718:
714:
712:
711:
708:
705:
697:
695:
694:
690:
686:
682:
678:
670:
664:
660:
656:
652:
651:
650:
649:
648:
647:
643:
639:
631:
629:
628:
624:
620:
615:
611:
605:
604:Talk:Bank War
600:
595:
591:
584:
580:
576:
574:
573:
569:
565:
560:
556:
549:
544:
540:
536:
529:
525:
521:
513:
509:
506:
501:
499:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
485:
481:
476:
475:
474:
473:
469:
466:
461:
459:
454:
447:
441:
437:
430:
426:
425:Million Award
422:
411:
407:
406:
403:
400:
397:
392:
387:Million Award
386:
380:
375:
369:
361:
357:
356:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
336:
335:
334:
332:
330:
326:
320:
315:
309:
302:
297:
288:
286:
285:
281:
277:
272:
268:
262:
258:
253:
248:
244:
237:
233:
229:
227:
226:
222:
218:
213:
209:
202:
197:
193:
189:
182:
178:
174:
172:
171:
167:
163:
159:
151:
147:
145:
139:
135:
134:
131:
128:
125:
120:
114:
112:
111:
107:
103:
94:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
72:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
3563:Gerda Arendt
3549:Gerda Arendt
3546:
3530:
3520:19th-century
3459:good article
3453:The article
3452:
3397:
3363:
3359:
3320:
3315:
3307:
3232:
3217:
3172:good article
3166:The article
3165:
3113:
3108:
3091:
3074:
3026:
2936:
2888:
2859:
2780:
2778:
2558:
2524:
2506:
2481:
2475:WP:IMPARTIAL
2453:
2429:
2358:Donald Wuerl
2351:
2313:
2272:
2268:
2264:
2260:
2243:
2239:
2218:
2199:
2172:Gerda Arendt
2154:Gerda Arendt
2103:
2057:
2051:
2045:
2033:
1994:
1962:
1930:
1844:
1817:
1778:
1724:
1710:
1655:
1652:Adams revert
1630:
1624:
1601:
1593:
1591:
1557:
1551:
1528:
1520:
1518:
1489:
1451:its AFD page
1444:
1384:
1332:
1316:Gerda Arendt
1313:
1278:
1266:
1265:
1240:— Preceding
1228:
1224:
1220:
1196:
1152:
1149:Edit summary
1116:
1083:creation of
1054:
1047:
1036:
1035:You stated,
979:
970:
951:Semmendinger
936:
927:
916:
832:
787:good article
781:The article
780:
725:
701:
674:
635:
619:GreenMeansGo
614:GreenMeansGo
594:good article
588:The article
587:
564:GreenMeansGo
559:GreenMeansGo
532:
495:
455:
451:
401:
322:
301:edit summary
292:
247:good article
241:The article
240:
185:
156:
141:
129:
98:
70:
43:
37:
3473:nominate it
3461:has passed
3186:nominate it
3174:has passed
2789:Biographies
2751:Hyperbolick
2729:Hyperbolick
2348:Wuerl Issue
1632:voting page
1559:voting page
1221:information
1208:copyrighted
973:EMMENDINGER
930:EMMENDINGER
843:Informant16
836:Informant16
801:nominate it
789:has passed
632:Sockpuppet?
596:has failed
261:nominate it
249:has passed
36:This is an
3522:US history
3139:Manannan67
3094:Manannan67
2684:Manannan67
2642:Manannan67
2621:Manannan67
2589:. Thanks.
2202:Shearonink
2194:John Adams
2150:John Adams
2095:John Adams
1927:John Adams
1616:topic bans
1543:topic bans
1293:John Adams
1212:permission
1119:Contaldo80
698:John Adams
685:HopsonRoad
655:Contaldo80
638:Contaldo80
323:(I am not
3369:Bacondrum
3342:Bacondrum
3326:Bacondrum
3287:Bacondrum
3274:Bacondrum
3255:Bacondrum
3241:Bacondrum
3237:stay cool
3084:industry?
2255:article:
2253:Catharism
2231:article:
2114:WP:ERRORS
1975:TomStar81
1907:Bacondrum
1876:Bacondrum
1850:Bacondrum
1612:site bans
1539:site bans
1491:Cheers -
1394:Jim Towey
1381:Jim Towey
1163:Thinker78
1075:we could
417:2,700,000
87:Archive 6
82:Archive 5
77:Archive 4
71:Archive 3
65:Archive 2
60:Archive 1
3537:Precious
3488:Lingzhi2
3483:Lingzhi2
3429:Lingzhi2
3424:Lingzhi2
3408:criteria
3323:WP:CIVIL
3037:criteria
2450:Question
2403:MelanieN
2384:MelanieN
2269:extremis
1796:Deisenbe
1782:deisenbe
1493:SchroCat
1260:Precious
1242:unsigned
1229:will be
1032:section.
736:criteria
590:Bank War
583:Bank War
543:criteria
535:Bank War
528:Bank War
325:watching
196:criteria
158:Eddie891
138:Eddie891
3479:Legobot
3420:Legobot
3233:content
3192:Legobot
3088:nuncio.
3071:Sources
3049:Legobot
2988:PluniaZ
2975:PluniaZ
2954:Doniago
2941:DonIago
2914:Doniago
2910:PluniaZ
2897:DonIago
2870:PluniaZ
2840:PluniaZ
2808:PluniaZ
2794:PluniaZ
2737:PluniaZ
2676:WP:Meat
2646:PluniaZ
2555:Comment
2471:Clegg88
2437:PluniaZ
2380:PluniaZ
2366:PluniaZ
2330:Epinoia
2316:Epinoia
2295:Epinoia
2282:Epinoia
2132:Wehwalt
2118:Wehwalt
2012:Epinoia
1998:Epinoia
1775:Calhoun
1329:Grow up
1225:content
1073:clutter
1065:MOS:BIB
893:Rjensen
874:Rjensen
861:Rjensen
807:Legobot
748:Legobot
707:Snowman
610:Legobot
555:Legobot
429:Diannaa
329:ping me
267:Legobot
208:Legobot
39:archive
3467:; see
3225:attack
3180:; see
2933:WP:DRN
2615:, and
2510:Cleg88
2457:Cleg88
2362:WP:BLP
2261:endura
2240:endura
2069:Hello
1759:Hoppyh
1741:Hoppyh
1727:Hoppyh
1713:Hoppyh
1696:Hoppyh
1677:Hoppyh
1663:Hoppyh
1415:Hello
1365:Hoppyh
1299:, for
1295:, for
1234:. See
1099:Otr500
1007:WP:ASL
949:Hello
795:; see
602:; see
255:; see
3442:Your
3387:Your
3360:undue
3155:Your
3016:Your
2937:after
2889:third
2885:WP:3O
2537:WP:RS
2071:L293D
2046:L293D
1659:WP:RV
770:Your
715:Your
704:Giant
577:Your
522:Your
498:-- ψλ
458:-- ψλ
419:) to
230:Your
175:Your
16:<
3571:talk
3553:talk
3532:2034
3529:no.
3492:talk
3433:talk
3373:talk
3364:only
3350:talk
3330:talk
3295:talk
3278:talk
3263:talk
3245:talk
3205:talk
3143:talk
3129:talk
3098:talk
3062:talk
2996:talk
2979:talk
2962:talk
2945:talk
2922:talk
2912:and
2901:talk
2874:talk
2844:talk
2830:talk
2816:talk
2798:talk
2755:talk
2741:talk
2733:vote
2731:to "
2725:here
2721:here
2717:here
2688:talk
2654:talk
2625:talk
2595:talk
2573:talk
2545:talk
2514:talk
2498:talk
2461:talk
2441:talk
2407:talk
2392:talk
2370:talk
2338:talk
2320:talk
2303:talk
2286:talk
2236:fast
2206:talk
2176:talk
2158:talk
2140:talk
2122:talk
2110:here
2108:and
2106:here
2097:and
2083:talk
2040:here
2020:talk
2002:talk
1979:Talk
1937:talk
1911:talk
1894:talk
1880:talk
1858:talk
1804:talk
1786:talk
1763:talk
1749:talk
1731:talk
1717:talk
1700:talk
1685:talk
1667:talk
1641:talk
1602:The
1568:talk
1529:The
1497:talk
1431:talk
1406:talk
1369:talk
1355:talk
1340:talk
1320:talk
1291:and
1250:talk
1183:talk
1167:talk
1139:talk
1123:talk
1103:talk
1053:2)-
981:talk
959:talk
938:talk
897:talk
882:talk
865:talk
851:talk
820:talk
761:talk
689:talk
659:talk
642:talk
623:talk
568:talk
484:talk
436:talk
373:talk
350:talk
313:talk
289:huh?
280:talk
221:talk
166:talk
144:Work
106:talk
3535:of
3486:--
3427:--
3199:--
3056:--
2196:...
2192:at
2188:Re
1843:.
1287:,
1046:1)-
814:--
755:--
617:--
562:--
448:FYI
274:--
215:--
3573:)
3555:)
3547:--
3494:)
3444:GA
3435:)
3410:.
3404:GA
3389:GA
3375:)
3352:)
3332:)
3297:)
3280:)
3265:)
3247:)
3207:)
3157:GA
3145:)
3131:)
3100:)
3064:)
3039:.
3033:GA
3018:GA
2998:)
2981:)
2964:)
2947:)
2924:)
2903:)
2876:)
2846:)
2832:)
2818:)
2800:)
2792:--
2757:)
2743:)
2690:)
2656:)
2627:)
2597:)
2575:)
2547:)
2516:)
2500:)
2463:)
2443:)
2409:)
2394:)
2372:)
2340:)
2322:)
2305:)
2288:)
2208:)
2178:)
2160:)
2142:)
2124:)
2085:)
2055:•
2022:)
2004:)
1981:)
1939:)
1913:)
1896:)
1882:)
1860:)
1806:)
1788:)
1765:)
1751:)
1733:)
1719:)
1702:)
1687:)
1669:)
1643:)
1635:.
1614:,
1570:)
1562:.
1541:,
1499:)
1433:)
1408:)
1371:)
1357:)
1342:)
1322:)
1314:--
1309:!
1283:,
1252:)
1185:)
1169:)
1161:.
1141:)
1125:)
1105:)
985:)
961:)
942:)
899:)
884:)
867:)
853:)
822:)
772:GA
763:)
738:.
732:GA
717:GA
691:)
661:)
644:)
625:)
579:GA
570:)
545:.
539:GA
524:GA
502:●
486:)
462:●
438:)
432:🍁
352:)
282:)
232:GA
223:)
198:.
192:GA
177:GA
168:)
108:)
100:--
3569:(
3551:(
3539:,
3490:(
3431:(
3371:(
3348:(
3328:(
3293:(
3276:(
3261:(
3243:(
3203:(
3141:(
3127:(
3096:(
3060:(
2994:(
2977:(
2960:(
2943:(
2920:(
2899:(
2872:(
2842:(
2828:(
2814:(
2796:(
2753:(
2739:(
2686:(
2652:(
2623:(
2593:(
2571:(
2543:(
2512:(
2496:(
2459:(
2439:(
2405:(
2390:(
2368:(
2336:(
2318:(
2301:(
2284:(
2204:(
2174:(
2156:(
2138:(
2120:(
2081:(
2061:)
2058:✎
2052:☎
2049:(
2018:(
2000:(
1977:(
1935:(
1909:(
1892:(
1878:(
1856:(
1802:(
1784:(
1761:(
1747:(
1729:(
1715:(
1698:(
1683:(
1665:(
1639:(
1566:(
1495:(
1429:(
1404:(
1390::
1386:@
1367:(
1353:(
1338:(
1318:(
1248:(
1181:(
1165:(
1137:(
1121:(
1101:(
977:(
971:S
957:(
934:(
928:S
895:(
880:(
863:(
849:(
818:(
759:(
687:(
657:(
640:(
621:(
566:(
508:✓
505:✉
482:(
468:✓
465:✉
434:(
376:)
370:(
348:(
316:)
310:(
278:(
219:(
164:(
104:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.