User talk:Dooyar - Knowledge (XXG)

744:

communicate with you over style and content issues. You referred to me as unstable in your editor assistance request and called me ignorant on the Karyn Kupcinet talk page and further implied that if no one replies to your attack on this talk page that it is my fault. Other editors have taken a break from working on this article because of the stress that is involved with it, long before I arrived at it. You have even accused me of reverting edits made (and can be verified from the page's history) by persons who edited before I started work on it and implied it was my fault that they left. You referred to my comments regarding issues as spouting garbage. Finally, you accused me of threatening you even though what I did was remind you of Knowledge (XXG) policies that can be grounds for blocking, as you were before (see above). This all constitutes personal attacks that are totally and completely unacceptable behavior on your part. Please be advised that if these personal attacks do not stop, I will take further steps to assure that it does not continue, through the appropriately ascribed Knowledge (XXG) procedures and policies.

1129:

at least bring up such an extensive rewrite on the talk page before you dived right in to it? That is what collaboration and cooperation in working on an article is all about. It's what Knowledge (XXG) asks of its editors. We've tried, over and over, to establish such an atmosphere on this page, but to no avail. After the rework last week, the other two of us were quite satisfied with what the page had to say. We had discussed depending so heavily on James Ellroy's book and hoping for outside sources besides his. If you'd looked on the talk page you would have seen that we had agreed that we were happy with it as it was until other sources could be found. By simply ignoring us and delving into this rework, you have again circumvented consensus on the progress of the page. What is it going to take to get you to work with us instead of around us, behind us, and independently of any collaboration on this article?

1416:. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. When you roll back an article over several intermediate edits, 7 in this case, with the flimsy edit summary addressing only one small point in the intervening edits, is unacceptable and is not something new that you've just started doing. If you want to add back some of this material, it will need better citations than what most of it has. Meanwhile, some of it is not relevant to this particle article. I'd be glad to open a dispute resolution over this article. Meanwhile, add things systematically and desist from rolling back articles on a blanket basis. You ignore other changes on the page when you do this, and with no justification. Others have the right to make edits on articles and no one is obliged to retain the last version you approve. 1143:

implying. Please read it before you object. For example, I preserved the "Personal life" section but added a subheading of "Issues with relationships" above the paragraph on her obsession with Andrew Prine. Without that subheading, you have just the one subheading of "Drug abuse." One subheading looks bad. I changed "Drug abuse" to "Possible eating disorder" because "Drug abuse" can imply narcotics, and no evidence exists that Karyn had a stoner mentality. Evidence, including the block quote I added from her 1962 Los Angeles Times interview, points more to her wanting to please everybody with a thin body. That's the classic litany of an "eating disordered actress" (as Ellroy called her on the first page of his chapter on her), but I made sure to say "

1297:& punctuation corrections, corrections to the formats in the bibliography section and bot added maintenance tag corrections. This is unacceptable and cannot continue. Instead of rolling back to YOUR earlier version, I encourage you to take a moment to address the issues that were raised on the article's talk page regarding the material. Again, I removed NOTHING from the article at this time, so your actions can be viewed as nothing more than arbitrary tendentious editing with no consideration for the integrity of the article. Please desist from such disruptive editing. 371:

come back is charge in and change it again. You are still trying to imply an air of animosity between Joplin and the rest of the musicians of the time. Making a statement doesn't imply "passionate disagreement." We are trying to keep a neutral point of view in this article and using words that cannot be verified is not neutral. I got out my copies of Janis bios and check the references. The word passionate does not exist in it. The title, as you've changed it, generalizes one or two issues to cover everything about the two sides, which also does not exist.

765:

you that you can put anything you like in an article as long as you put a source on it. Sources have to be specific. I looked at the sources you noted, and I didn't see anything about Kade making a mistake on Karyn Kupcinet's autopsy and I didn't see anything saying that her autopsy was called into question, not to mention how many other hundreds of autopsies he did around the time she died and before. That's what you have to put in as a source if you want to suggest he screwd up hers: something that says he might have. Anything else is just guessing.

776:

officers against the charge that their hard work consists of gossip. Maybe they never solved the Kupcinet case, but their hard work has made the world safer for you and me and our parents. If I were defending an extremist like a Ku Klux Klan member, then I would understand you pointing out that I ain't in the Klan. But sheriffs aren't extremists. Some make mistakes and commit crimes, but they are highly regarded by crime victims who get the satisfaction of seeing their tormentors get locked up.

1044:. There is no published source explaining why she would have been there in view of the fact that she could not drive a car. The Ellroy book says that in 1962 she dated one David Wallerstein who lived in Pomona. Ellroy says his love for her was unrequited, but he doesn't connect her presence in Wallerstein's hometown to the shoplifting. My doing that would be original research. His name never has been in the article as far I can determine. 718:

working on this article, and I am working on this article, I will be where you are. I am not communicating with you in order to get close to you or be buddies. I am communicating regarding problems inherent in the edits you are making on this article. I'm not in the least confused, I am attempting to adhere to Knowledge (XXG) guidelines in regards to this article. Further, statements like the last two that you have above simply violate

267: 180: 101: 1536: 1495: 957: 544:

Stone interview, then it has to be properly referenced. What I'm trying to explain to you is that the way you formatted the reference isn't proper. If you got the material from Dalton's book, then you can't put Rolling Stone in the reference, just Dalton's book. The same goes for the rest of it. If you heard a conversation on the Biography show, then cite it, but present it properly.

1155:

of last week. I changed one source from another journalist's take on Ellroy's words to Ellroy's actual words in his book. Everything he ever said about Kupcinet can be found in his book and in an online interview with him from 2001 that someone removed from this article many edits ago, and I won't put that one back. (In the online interview he denounced the JFK connection.)

1011:

justify your arguments when I've made no comment or an unrelated comment on the matter. I see that you have been blocked by two other administrators for your conduct. I don't wish be the third administrator to block you, nor do I wish to continue to play chaperone to this minor article, so I really wish you would start to restrain yourself when it comes to other editors.

246:. In fact, I left it as it was until consensus was reached regarding the content. Report if you want, working on an article that took several edits is not the same thing as deliberately violating the 3RR rule. I am, in a very nice way, reminding you that Knowledge (XXG) has a policy regarding conduct towards other editors and you were cautioned about 1139:

save one that misquoted James Ellroy. In the section for "Accidental death," someone used a source other than Ellroy's book for his supposed claim that Karyn could have "clipped her hyoid bone on a coffee table." The primary source for Ellroy's claims is his book, and if you check it you find that he said "chair," not "coffee table."

683:

1984 isn't one either. This borders on original research since you are working from memory 23 years old. This just isn't enough information to make it encyclopedic. Any material written for an objectively based must be verifiable. You can explain all this until you are blue in the face and it still isn't providing acceptable citations.

802:

it on the basis that as long as it had nothing to do with China, anything Nixon said about others' flaws was a lie. That's good enough for me, but you're just going to say Watergate was a separate entity that had nothing to do with Kennedy or Monroe, therefore Nixon could have said they were both transsexuals and that's legitimate.

1468:

against me anymore. Because you have been blocked in the past for incivility and hostility towards me and you have difficulty containing your comments now, perhaps it is time that a user behavior inquiry be opened regarding your behavior towards me while using this username and the others which you have used on Knowledge (XXG).

392:

Despite Others Saying 'Without.' " As for your dispute of the word "passionately," what word would you use instead to summarize Janis' yelling at people for slacking and for dosing people with LSD without consent ? "Yelling" becomes repetitive. Begging a man for love was NOT the only issue about which she was passionate.

754:

about coroner Harold Kade contradicts what Gamaliel, whose position in Knowledge (XXG) is higher than yours, said about it. He/she said it can stay in the article as long as it is sourced. It is. Harold Kade performed the autopsy on Karyn Kupcinet, therefore negative information about his job performance is relevant.

1154:

Of course, you can collaborate. And again, I only changed one footnote because the source misquoted James Ellroy. If you're sick and tired of his book, you can't use a magazine article that misquotes him (a coffee table versus a chair). I did not remove a single sourced statement from your version

1128:

I haven't read over the changes you've made to this article yet, but that isn't necessary to ask the question I have. What I'm wondering, after everything that has has transpired with this page, and you knowing that there are two other editors who have worked quite diligently on it, is why you didn't

805:

Someone's going to tell gullible kids who read Knowledge (XXG) what that great man said about an emotionally fragile actress he never met. Again, your logic is cockeyed. Unlike Monroe, whose autopsy was performed by a relatively competent doctor named Noguchi, Karyn Kupcinet was permanently screwed

775:

No, I'm not a member of the Los Angeles County Sheriffs' Office. I'm not a member of the Mormon Church, either. Yet I have the right to feel offended when someone says every single Mormon man is a misogynist who sees every woman as a baby - making machine. I have the right to defend law enforcement

717:

I am not doubting that you saw it or your memory of it. That isn't the problem. The problem is that in order to use it, it has to be verifiable, and a person's memory isn't quantifiable. The article needs a verifiable reference for the show if mention of the show is in the article. So long as you are

705:

I said it was a news magazine produced by NBC and broadcast by NBC. I said it originated in 1971. I saw it more than once in the 1980s. How would you like it if someone doubted your memory of watching a TV documentary ? I know what I saw and heard. I never claimed to remember every word of it.

596:

The sentence you wrote says: "Several weeks later the parents gave long interviews to Rolling Stone, the NBC news magazine First Tuesday and Joplin's publicist-turned-biographer Myra Friedman." So, you lumped the citations for the entire sentence into one massive reference. There should be a citation

490:

television magazine that ran briefly on NBC so many years ago ? Do you want to know the exact date of the Joplin segment, which I suspect was the first Tuesday in January or February of 1971 ? The Nielsen rating it got ? The only thing worse than trying to write about a very old television show is

1296:

article was tagged for improved references, not simply one section. As I have said to you on more than one occasion, if you do not want to see your contributions edited, then don't make them. You have given no rationale for removing all of the work done to the article, again, which includes spelling

1168:

Dispute resolution. In my experience, articles get better through such disputes. There is a reason why there is a dispute, and that is usually because the article is not balanced enough. There are going to be decisions I recommend that you will support, and some that you will not support. Somehow we

1142:

Why didn't I "bring up such an extensive rewrite on the talk page before" I dove into it ? Because that's impossible. Someone planning to make several changes can't possibly announce, "I'm going to do this, this and this ..." As I said, the new version is not as radical a change as you seem to be

890:

Please show us where Gamamiel directly disputes that Kade is irrelevant to the article. There's nothing in the history that shows that he said that. Gamamiel said that citations are needed. He didn't say that you can just put a citation up and make it say that something happened that didn't. None of

879:

That's right, Knowledge (XXG) is a collaborative (sic) environment, and one of the collaborators is named "Gamaliel." Maybe you've heard of this person, who disputes Wildhartlivie's claim that Harold Kade is irrelevant to the Kupcinet article. Gamaliel has said he is relevant as long as the claims

764:

If you aren't a member of the Los Angeles County sheriffs department and didn't work on the Kupcinet case, then you can't be personally offended. How do you know that WHL hasn't had a member of the family murdered and had people talk about it? I read what Gamamiel said about this too. He didn't tell

688:

You keep taking examples I offer as a demand to give the reference in that way. I am not asking that. But, what I am saying is that if there is a 16 mm film out there that you saw, then somewhere, there is information about what it was, where it appeared, who did it, or specifically, when it was. It

639:

I will try to split up those footnotes, but I can't guarantee it. This article is so popular that I could be 90 percent done with typing the changes and then the system tells me I am in an "edit war." The next time that happens, I am going to give up and let people assume that Janis, like everyone

601:

tells you that you must tell where you got this information so that others can verify it. For First Tuesday, you tell the reader to go to the library in Baltimore, MD. If you saw it at that library, there is a card/computer entry, which gives all the info necessary to cite it. If you just read it in

522:

And where did Myra Friedman get her interviews with Mr. and Mrs. Joplin that she cites many times in the early chapters of her book ? Where do you think ? She lived far away from Port Arthur, but she traveled there with a tape recorder. She didn't need a rock music promoter to accompany her to the

495:

in Baltimore. I know what I saw and heard, and it was many years after its 1971 broadcast. Both of Janis' parents were on the screen talking inside their Port Arthur home. I can't pay for your plane fare to Baltimore, and 16 millimeter projectors are no longer manufactured. The ones that are still

370:

The issue is not whether the information itself is factual, the issue is the way in which it is being presented, which is POV and sensationalized. The request for comments consensus was to keep the "Points of view" title and opening that was there. It's a problem when the first thing you do when you

801:

in 1984, ten years after he resigned. Video and audio of it exist, but I, for one, never will add it to Knowledge (XXG). If I did, Wildhartlivie would want a footnote citation that identifies the producer of the segment and what he ate for breakfast on the day it aired. Someone else would remove

753:

I find your comments about the Los Angeles County sheriffs to be personally offensive. You said they engage in "gossip" when investigating a murder. How would you like it if someone in your family was murdered and someone labeled what people said about it "gossip?" Also, your removal of my stuff

635:

segment from shortly after Janis' death. Laura corrected him, saying it came from a primitive NBC news magazine show titled "First Tuesday." They both remembered the same comment I remember Janis' mother making, that Janis chose the blues out of several vocal styles she was capable of performing.

626:

Since you evidently never have been to the Baltimore library, then don't assume it has a "card/computer entry." I checked out the reel of 16 millimeter film in 1984 after finding the title "Janis Joplin" in the film catalog. I told the film clerk (it wasn't a librarian) that I wanted to check out

476:

Rolling Stone. 26 November 1970. Specifics on the First Tuesday segment itself, not where it's housed. Then the Friedman citation. But the way these are presented, all in all, it's sort of saying "Here's where you can find it, go look it up." It's detailed, but not specific enough. Instead, partly,

1138:

Well, please read it before you change it back entirely to your version of last week. It does not depend more heavily on Ellroy's book than yours. After consolidating all the Ellroy footnotes into A, B, C, etc. the dependence might seem heavy, but you will note I left all the other sources intact

796:

With your cockeyed logic, I can add a comment Richard Nixon made about Robert Kennedy's alleged relationship with Marilyn Monroe to the articles about Kennedy and Monroe, and anyone who adds a few words about Nixon's dishonesty can get banned from Knowledge (XXG) for 48 hours. Nixon did, in fact,

779:

You point out that newspaper articles reporting Dr. Harold Kade's egregious mistakes, one of which put an innocent man in jail for five months, say nothing about Kupcinet, therefore they aren't relevant to her case. If the articles said he was a careless driver who got off work one night and then

694:

Next, there is absolutely no excuse for you to make sensationalistic statements about what people will think about Janis Joplin or her parents if you, personally, don't take it upon yourself to correct them. You aren't the only person in the world to have taken an interest in Joplin over the years

571:

I cited the television show: "First Tuesday." You will find that in the footnote. I know it aired in early 1971, but I don't know the exact date. Obviously, it was the first Tuesday of a month. What else do you want ? The Nielsen rating it got ? I give up. If people want to, they can believe

554:

guidelines. Tell me one other article on here that has citations the way these two were written. You cannot cite something that you yourself did not read, but heard on a tv show, without citing the TV show. And the particulars of when a specific episode on Biography can be found. Otherwise, you're

466:

Rolling Stone issue # 71 dated November 26, 1970, a 16 millimeter film of the First Tuesday segment is available at the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, Maryland and possibly in other libraries, and finally, Myra Friedman cites interviews with both Joplin parents in the early chapters of her

213:

First, a request for outside comment has been filed on this section. Secondly, WP policy does NOT require 10 or 15 other editors to be a consensus. Your work is not being destroyed and contributions to WP are no longer your property. If you can't take having your contributions edited, then perhaps

1246:

This newspaper archive covers the papers in small towns only, not a big city like Toronto or Dallas. At least two small newspapers ran that AP item. So far, in the keyword search I did after some brainstorming, I got hits in two small California papers: the Long Beach Independent (later merged

1010:

Please refrain from making such statements like "If you enjoy acting without compassion for a dead person who is largely unknown today, please feel free to add it." There's no call for a remark like that, regardless of how heated discussion is getting. Also, please refrain from using my name to

738:

I have moved this issue from the article's talk page because that is the recommended procedure. While I realize that you feel passionately about some of the topics that you edit on, please don't confuse my editing or issues that I bring up about edits as a personal matter. It isn't personal. As I

682:

First of all, there is little vandalism on this article. There are several editors making changes, and if they don't happen to agree with you, it doesn't make them vandals. Next, stating that you watched a television segment is not sufficient referencing. And saying you watched it in Baltimore in

510:

interviews. I gave you the date of the magazine along with the issue number, which is how the magazine refers to its old issues. RS71 is the one. David Dalton wasn't the one who interviewed the singer's father. Mr. Dalton is the person who has a tape recording of Janis' conversation with Bonnie

1283:

Please do not simply rollback this article again. You do not hold the copyright on this material and your actions are arbitrary and do not take into consideration the editing, corrections, maintenance tags, book reference corrections and other work that has been done on it. The Mike Douglas Show

543:

You have to be flexible here. The mandate isn't that an author be mentioned, but most articles in Rolling Stone DO have an author. The issue is the format in which you are presenting what you are submitting as references. If you put material in the article which you yourself got from the Rolling

391:

I came up with a new compromise for that heading. "Points of view" is bland and it ignores all the hard work Janis did and the encouragement she gave to others who worked hard such as a young aspiring album cover artist named Phil Hartman. I changed it to "Belief In Freedom With Responsibility

150:

article. I just wanted to let you know that it isn't so much that you were working on the article from the library as it was that you weren't signed in. There has been a LOT of vandalism from the LA Public Library that I'm always wary of anonymous edits from there. Keep up the good work and just

743:

to be offensive. They constitute personal attacks and I will not accept that. You accused me of vandalism when instead I was making edits with which you don't agree, both in edit summaries, on talk pages and in your editor assistance request. You refer to me as a confused person when I tried to

461:

A reference needs to tell specific things. The tag on the Biography channel inclusion is asking for information on the Biography special. For example (and I'm making it up): Biography Channel: Janis Joplin. "Kozmic Blue." Aired 14 September 2003. Or in this case, maybe just the reference in the

1467:

Please desist from using edit summaries to convey hostile personal messages. Such a summary implies that I had been involved in editing the article in question and that you expect that I would arbitrarily revert your edits. Please contain your animosity and do not use edit summaries personally

1350:

sounds fine. No, I don't think you should remove the sentence about the merger when she was seven. If you say her father was a sportswriter when she was born, you have to devote a few words to upgrading him to his important position as the preeminent Chicago gossip columnist. That high rank

670:

album, which got a lot of publicity because she was recently dead at the time. If this is not good enough, I give up. You won't hear from me again. Other stuff I put in this very popular article was deleted by Knowledge (XXG) regulars -- are they considered vandals ? I don't care anymore.

456:

You can hear this audio segment whenever the Biography channel repeats the Biography (TV series) episode on Janis Joplin. What you hear her and Bonnie Bramlett say matches exactly what David Dalton quotes them as saying in his book Piece Of My Heart, published by St. Martin's Press in 1985. He

527:

Port Arthur residents, including the parents, was dead at the time. There were no concerts, just storytelling and electronic recordings. This is getting to be like reinventing the wheel. I'm starting to envy people who can afford excellent car sound systems that do justice to Janis and other

358:

I didn't say, "I won't back down." I am reporting facts in both Kupcinet and Joplin articles. The coroner who said Kupcinet had been strangled was a screwed - up doctor. That's a fact. Janis Joplin said people had no right to dose others with LSD without their permission. That's a fact.

869:

exist if a dispute is not being resolved by talk page discussion with the other user. I apologise if you feel that Wildhartlivie should be the one being blocked, but over the past couple of weeks two impartial administrators have come to the conclusion that it is you that needs to change. –

780:

crashed his car into a truck carrying tissue samples to another lab for analysis, thereby making that person's death a total mystery, then your point would be valid. An accident that Dr. Kade might have caused when he wasn't on the timeclock tells us nothing about his competence while he

627:

that title, and he returned with it a few minutes later. All he needed was the title. I supplied the 16 millimeter projector, which I no longer own. (Do YOU know anyone who owns one ?) Several years later (1992), I heard a radio interview with Janis' sister Laura, promoting her book

572:

that everyone who ever died young of a drug overdose believed, "Everybody must get stoned" and they were survived by inarticulate, stupid, cocktail-gulping parents. Just like on Jack Webb's TV show "Dragnet." Webb was a documentary filmmaker, right ? Write what you want. I give up.

559:

as references because the source you read used them. But overall, my point is that the citations have to be put forth in the proper format. I'm sorry that you find this so tiresome, but this isn't an essay. It's an encyclopedia article and there are specific guidelines for these things.

1077:

The additions you made to this article were quite good, and as you said in the edit summary, quite NPOV. I wondered if you had more information on a point you added to the lead, which was about the roles she played (characters that dealt with the controversial topics of race relations,

588:. I don't know what First Tuesday is. Apparently it's a TV show. Where did this information come from? Did you see First Tuesday? If so, where? What channel. If you didn't, where did you find mention of it? If it's a tv show, then you'd cite it something to the effect of: "Duet". 381:. The consensus was garnered the correct way, through the proper channels. An article should be written in a NPOV way. These new changes to the same thing that just went through consensus is arbitrary. My next step will be to take it to dispute resolution with no hesitation. 1169:

will work our way through to a hardened and brilliant article. I would strongly urge you to focus entirely on the article and refrain from commenting on the other editors involved no matter what they say or do. I will give this message to the other editors as well. Regards

549:

It's not a matter of lightening up. It's a matter of properly presenting sources in a format that is approved by Knowledge (XXG). The long explanation of all the different places its been, presented as a paragraph with a reference tag, isn't according to

1027:

Alright then, a fact-finding person, who easily can be compassionate, is welcome to add Karyn Kupcinet's 1962 shoplifting arrest and conviction to the article. I won't do it. It never has been there -- not in any of the hundreds of edits I have read.

430:

aren't WP approved references and styles. Also, there are no spaces between the end of a word/punctuation/etc. and where the reference < starts. Someone will have to come along after you and correct those things, which is a huge effort. Thanks.

191:

prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the

112:

602:

a book, then you must cite the book. Until then, this information needs to come out. I am trying to guide you into being a better editor with this. I don't have to, I could just take it out and not even try to guide you on how to cite things.

1150:

Again, please read this version before you change it back entirely to your version of last week. Some of the edits were minor, such as my moving a comma from outside the end quotation mark to inside it, and my moving a period the same way.

471:

In this case, you're lumping what would 3 or 4 separate citations into one, yet still not giving specifics on it. If you got info from the Rolling Stone issue, it needs to be written out in the correct format: Author's name by last, first.

1055:

dangle a philosophy book or a police station in Pomona (far away from the LAPD) in front of anyone. I'm letting the 45-year-old minor incident rest in peace. Many people have shoplifted, including Janis Joplin, whose Wiki article omits

376:

I did not report the 3RR issue regarding Karyn Kupcinet, that issue was discovered by the administrator when checking my report. However, you, in fact, did say you would not back down, on your revision of Janis Joplin on your edit here:

810:. How do you know your body will be treated fairly the next time you visit a medical doctor ? You don't. If you're dead you don't complain. Deal with it. Life sucks. People screw up everywhere, even in a room full of fresh corpses. 722:

which could get you blocked again. I am trying to explain to you a very simple process, which is correct formats of citation. It comes down to this. Put your references in the correct format or it's highly likely they will be removed.

986:

Just a few paragraphs above yours, Steel busted me for accusing Wildhartlivie of sockpuppetry. Now you're accusing me of it. You don't want to get banned for 24 hours, do you? This paragraph that I'm writing now consists of seven

1251:

in Hayward, which has the same name today. Here are the first three paragraphs. Do any contributors want more ? We won't put it in the article, but maybe it would help to know which Associated Press article you are citing in it.

784:

on the clock. We know he was on the clock when he put an innocent man in jail for five months. We know he was on the clock when he screwed up another case that was unrelated to that unfortunate man. Therefore his screwy actions

640:

else who used hard drugs in the late 1960s, was a lot like a "Dragnet" character, and her parents were that dumb, too. I will stick with her music. You can make friends by talking about someone's music, but not by talking about

891:

the sources I looked at said that Kade's autopsy of Kupcinet was questioned when he left his position. None of them said that it was questioned at all. So how does that translate into him making a mistake 2 years earlier?

793:. If they didn't cut open her dead body, then they knew nothing, right? The woman's father didn't see the autopsy, either, and he actually was considered a gossiper by some people, so to hell with him, too. Right ? 519:, and I cited that in a footnote. The Biography hour on Joplin has been repeated so many times, on two different basic cable channels, that finding its first broadcast would be difficult. Again, lighten up, please. 583:

No, you didn't cite it. You lumped it into a statement with other things. If you had cited it, you would have given more than that. There's no point in being sarcastic about it. This is the reason I asked you to read

491:

trying to write about a very old television show that nobody watches, remembers or cares about in the era of 500 cable channels. I saw a 16 millimeter film copy of the Joplin segment that is available from the

880:

about him are sourced. They are. If you've read the article you would know Dr. Kade performed the autopsy on Kupcinet. You don't have to be passionately invested in the subject to know that. Just read it.

1240:

Here is a succinct update on that part of the mystery. I got it for free today at a branch of the Los Angeles City library system. You can get it online by paying with your credit card at this site.

1381:

I have made the Kupcinet working document available to folks so that final adjustments can be made before unlocking the main article. Please have a look and make the adjustments you feel are needed:

623:

tell the reader to go to the library in Baltimore. I said there is a 16 millimeter film copy of it there, which doesn't mean it's the only library that has it. It could be in a lot of libraries.

340:. If you are not willing to have your words edited mercilessly by others, you should not edit Knowledge (XXG). Please return in 24 hours ready to compromise and work with other editors. Thank you. - 169:

violations. An editor is not free to continually revert good faith edits of others in order to maintain the material he or she has added, especially in the context of dispute over POV and content.

1436: 1568:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge (XXG) page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1047:

Oh, and #4 -- One of the items Karyn shoplifted, according to a 1963 Los Angeles Times article, was a book on philosophy that cost something like two dollars. So, out of compassion

555:

putting forth original research. Dalton and Freidman and the man on the moon can have tapes of those things, but you can only cite sources that you have or have read. You can't use

1508: 1564:

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

1359:. The merger created a new paper that featured the 36 - year - old columnist prominently. Without her father's influence, Karyn would not have gotten the acting jobs she got. 218:

and have been reported for it. Such violations can result in your being banned from Knowledge (XXG). We have both made good faith efforts to discuss this with you to no avail.

739:

said, so long as I am working on an article that you are, we will cross paths and as it seems, bump heads on issues. That being said, I do find your recent comments about me

242:

You seem to think that I'm out to get you, which is in no way the truth. I am trying to make this a good article. As it stands, it doesn't qualify as one. I did not violate

689:

is in some file, somewhere. I appreciate the fact that you can recall it, but that isn't good enough to give in a citation, and if it can't be verified, it can't be used.

1512: 974: 789:

to yet another mysterious death that he was supposed to solve but didn't (Kupcinet). At least he didn't solve it to the satisfaction of those gossip queens known as

1557:

if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (XXG) (see

1553:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge (XXG). If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 611:

Then take it out if you want. This is a very popular article that is attracting many vandals, several of whom have changed other stuff I put in it. I told you

619:

read a summary of it in a book or magazine. I saw and heard it. I remember what Janis' parents were wearing and what their eyeglass frames were like. I did

1264:

Ray Sheehan said the woman "seemed to be a little bit disturbed." Besides predicting the President's death, he said, she "mumbled several incoherent things."

1258:

OXNARD (AP) -- A telephone company executive said Friday that 20 minutes before President Kennedy was assassinated a woman caller was overheard whispering:

970: 65: 1112:. It would be difficult to summarize in the "Career" section of the article how those plays treated those topics that were controversial in that era. 1573: 25:

to Knowledge (XXG)! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

917:. That's right, she could have died from something unrelated to that "injury," then Dr. Kade could have broken her neck himself and then cited 506:

Why would the 1970 interview with Seth Joplin, done a short time after he lost his daughter, need an author ? It's one of those long, verbatim

227:

Same goes for you, Wildhartlivie. If you can't accept my latest changes, then perhaps you shouldn't make anymore. You are in violation of

840: 1459:

I added more details from Yahoo news dispatches. "Wildhartlivie," please say something on the Discussion page before you revert them

336:

containing statements such as "I won't back down" and "I can keep this up as long as you can", which are not helpful and border on

865:

Knowledge (XXG) is a collaborate environment. Please rethink your attitudes towards other users on this site. Various avenues of

695:

and read and researched her. The difference is, some of us are trying to present this article within Knowledge (XXG) guidelines.

49: 34: 22: 303: 200:

from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a

193: 188: 121:

from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a

114: 109: 68:

on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out

706:

I said it had soundbite interviews with both of Janis' parents. You seem like a confused person. Please leave me alone.

1060:

arrest even though a police mug shot of her before she became famous can be found in an old book that is still in print.

1558: 1565: 1451: 403:

See the talk page. :) Though I didn't address "passionately." I know it will seem weak to you, but I suggest "firmly".

283: 274: 197: 118: 54: 1545:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge (XXG) under a 90:

page. Calling it a compromise version is meaningless. Neither you nor the other party have a claim to the article.

1541: 1225:

Yes, those words seem fine to me. You know how our article, under the heading "Alleged connection to JFK," says

806:

up by a klutz. Deal with it. If you keep banning his klutziness, maybe you can delete the entire article about

29: 1326:

When she was seven, a merger created the Chicago Sun-Times and her father's column helped launch the newspaper.

492: 1504: 1483: 966: 945: 440:

I read it. I am not using Harvard referencing even though it is allowed. Is that what you think I'm doing ?

61: 1382: 1520: 1473: 1421: 1302: 1091: 834: 348: 318: 1440: 849:

Don't let this unstable Knowledge (XXG) contributor revert your edits. After all the garbage spouted (...)

201: 122: 69: 512: 184: 105: 44: 515:

hour on Janis. It matches exactly the transcript of their dialogue that he reprints in his 1985 book

422:, which tells what types of material is used for references and how they are supposed to be written. 77: 892: 766: 1550: 654:

Update a few minutes later: Alright, I split up the footnote into three separate ones. There is

1516: 1469: 1417: 1395: 1338: 1298: 1211: 1179: 1130: 1087: 1041: 1017: 830: 745: 724: 696: 603: 561: 478: 432: 404: 382: 341: 311: 251: 219: 205: 170: 152: 131: 719: 337: 247: 829:

I have blocked you for 48 hours for personal attacks, incivility and general hostility against

1385:. If you are happy with this version, let me know and we can unlock the article. Best wishes. 991:

sentences. I'm not longwinded, so what's the problem ? I'm cutting to the chase. Try it. --

636:

She could have even tried opera. That's the same TV documentary, and it wasn't "60 Minutes."

91: 1554: 923:

It's in James Ellroy's book. His sources are the sheriffs who held that belief about Dr. Kade

852: 598: 585: 551: 457:

explains that he didn't plan on taping their conversation until Janis yelled at him to do it.

1322:, a sportswriter for the Chicago Daily Times, and his wife, Esther "Essee" Solomon Kupcinet. 1230: 1109: 978: 1409: 419: 287: 243: 228: 215: 166: 1581: 1226: 266: 1546: 866: 299: 295: 1037:-- The article already delineates negative stuff she did in 1963, closer to her death. 1122: 1101: 1083: 807: 333: 87: 1063:

Bye now. Didn't mean to provoke you. Have you read the latest version of Kupcinet ?

179: 100: 1388: 1331: 1204: 1172: 1105: 1012: 871: 507: 126: 39: 1319: 1248: 329: 291: 147: 1535: 666:. It was broadcast shortly after the January 1971 release of Joplin's posthumous 1494: 1457:

On February 14, at 21:37, you made an edit and used the following edit summary:

1413: 1360: 1265: 1156: 1113: 1064: 992: 956: 926: 881: 811: 755: 707: 672: 645: 573: 533: 529: 497: 441: 393: 360: 232: 1577: 798: 597:

after Rolling Stone, after First Tuesday and after Friedman. This is because

528:

singers. Time to get a second job. Anything would be better than THIS crap.

1292:

removed from the article. It was moved up to the personal life section. The

1199:

Kupcinet's death, which the coroner ruled a homicide, has never been solved

477:

you're telling us where Dalton and Friedman got it. Does this make sense?

1031:

Here are my reasons for omitting that example of her negative behavior.

1318:

Roberta Lynn Kupcinet was born on 6 March 1941 in Chicago, Illinois to

1079: 462:

Dalton book is enough with leaving the Biography reference off of it.

797:

make a brief comment about Kennedy-Monroe when he was interviewed for

379:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Janis_Joplin&oldid=166925481

905:

on Kade. It, too, keeps getting removed. It's James Ellroy's book

1585: 1524: 1477: 1445: 1425: 1398: 1368: 1341: 1306: 1273: 1217: 1185: 1159: 1133: 1116: 1095: 1067: 1022: 1000: 981: 934: 925:. Did you ever meet Dr. Harold Kade ? You can't now. He's dead. 895: 884: 874: 819: 769: 758: 748: 727: 710: 699: 675: 648: 606: 576: 564: 536: 500: 481: 444: 435: 407: 396: 385: 363: 353: 323: 254: 235: 222: 214:

you shouldn't be making them. Thirdly, you are now in violation of

208: 173: 155: 136: 94: 80: 294:. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek 662:

NBC television segment. Just go to the film library and ask for

76:

on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

1511:

for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with

973:

for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with

1412:

and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on

265: 467:

book. Myra also interviewed other residents of Port Arthur.

451:

No, no. Let's look at what you put in your two references.

1509:

Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Nyannrunning (2nd)

631:, in which a phone caller asked her if she recalled that 511:

Bramlett, a portion of which I heard while I watched the

1086:) that could round out her career section more. Thanks. 1530:

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ann-Margret In 1976.jpg)

1462: 915:

could have been the one who broke Karyn Kupcinet's neck

860: 856: 848: 844: 427: 423: 378: 851:". General incivility and hostility include baseless 845:

Please get some counselling. (...) You need some help

86:

Please do not continue making uncited changes to the

418:

We must talk!! I would love it if you would go read

302:. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may 523:interview. The rock singer she was discussing with 496:in use don't work very well. Lighten up, please. 486:Not totally. What do you want me to say about the 1572:will be deleted after seven days, as described on 1324:" be acceptable? And to remove this sentence: " 615:that I watched this television segment. I did 971:Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Dooyar 8: 921:as the cause of death. Don't believe me ? 913:thought Kade was an incompetent doctor who 901:It translates because I keep trying to add 1040:-- She did her shoplifting in the town of 165:Please be advised I am reporting this for 60:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a 1034:-- The article is long enough as it is. 658:number for the 16 millimeter film of the 183:You currently appear to be engaged in an 146:Hi, and thanks for your additions to the 104:You currently appear to be engaged in an 1328:" as not directly related to Kupcinet. 1261:"The President is going to be killed." 1197:Hi Dooyar. Do you accept the wording " 1051:as well as for Karyn's memory, I will 231:because I have reported you for it. 7: 1435:We would love to hear your comments 1100:Race relations had a lot to do with 532:01:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC) dooyar 843:). Unacceptable comments include " 72:, ask me on my talk page, or place 30:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG) 1515:before editing the evidence page. 863:. These are not exhaustive lists. 664:Janis Joplin: Portrait of a Ripoff 14: 977:before editing the evidence page. 787:while he was working are relevant 284:Knowledge (XXG)'s blocking policy 1534: 1493: 1316:Hi Dooya. Would this sentence: " 955: 328:You have made edit summaries at 178: 99: 592:5 August 2005. No. 4, season 2. 1351:depended on the merger of the 196:. If you continue, you may be 137:02:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC) 117:. If you continue, you may be 95:02:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC) 1: 1559:our policy for non-free media 1542:Image:Ann-Margret In 1976.jpg 1489: 1478:09:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC) 1399:08:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC) 1369:23:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 1096:04:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC) 1023:18:04, 27 November 2007 (UTC) 1001:22:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC) 982:11:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC) 951: 935:23:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC) 896:03:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC) 885:21:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC) 820:22:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC) 770:03:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC) 759:21:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC) 306:by adding the text {{unblock| 278:from editing for a period of 1574:criteria for speedy deletion 1452:Northern Illinois University 1446:19:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC) 1426:16:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC) 1346:The sentence containing the 1342:11:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 1307:03:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC) 1274:01:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC) 1218:00:28, 5 December 2007 (UTC) 1186:10:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC) 1160:11:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 1134:06:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 1117:11:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 1068:12:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC) 911:more than one county sheriff 875:14:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC) 749:02:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC) 728:08:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 711:07:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 700:02:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 676:01:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 649:00:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 607:00:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC) 577:21:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC) 565:02:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC) 537:00:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC) 501:00:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC) 482:00:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC) 445:22:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC) 436:00:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC) 408:08:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC) 397:04:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC) 386:04:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC) 364:03:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC) 354:13:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC) 324:13:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC) 255:04:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC) 236:03:37, 28 October 2007 (UTC) 223:06:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC) 209:06:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC) 174:05:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC) 156:02:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC) 50:How to write a great article 1586:05:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC) 1549:. However, it is currently 1255:Caller Predicted Slaying 1049:for Knowledge (XXG) readers 298:rather than engaging in an 1601: 1312:Next stage - Irv Kupcinet 1503:You have been accused of 1431:Johnnie Ray / "mediation" 1243:www.NewspaperArchive.com 1229:connected Kupcinet to an 1108:. Psychoanalysis was in 965:You have been accused of 81:09:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 70:Knowledge (XXG):Questions 1525:03:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC) 1364: 1247:with another paper) and 493:Enoch Pratt Free Library 1383:User:SilkTork/Cambridge 1233:story that ran in the 469: 459: 270: 151:remember to sign in!! 1539:Thanks for uploading 1513:notes for the suspect 1235:Toronto Star-Telegram 975:notes for the suspect 513:Biography (TV series) 464: 454: 269: 1018:Angry Mastodon! Run! 132:Angry Mastodon! Run! 1555:You may add it back 1410:do not own articles 1348:Chicago Daily Times 1147:eating disorder." 282:in accordance with 21:Hello, Dooyar, and 1507:. Please refer to 1042:Pomona, California 969:. Please refer to 867:dispute resolution 590:Stargate Atlantis. 296:dispute resolution 286:for violating the 271: 248:showing incivility 35:How to edit a page 1547:claim of fair use 1501: 1500: 1442:Revolving Bugbear 1279:Dorothy Dandridge 1104:. Atheism was in 1073:Gertrude Lawrence 1021: 963: 962: 517:Piece Of My Heart 304:contest the block 288:three-revert rule 194:three-revert rule 189:three-revert rule 135: 115:three-revert rule 110:three-revert rule 1592: 1566:my contributions 1538: 1497: 1490: 1443: 1397: 1391: 1377:Working document 1340: 1334: 1231:Associated Press 1216: 1214: 1207: 1184: 1182: 1175: 1110:Lady In The Dark 1015: 959: 952: 351: 346: 321: 316: 308:your reason here 204:among editors. 187:. Note that the 182: 129: 125:among editors. 108:. Note that the 103: 75: 1600: 1599: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1532: 1488: 1455: 1441: 1433: 1406: 1389: 1386: 1379: 1332: 1329: 1314: 1281: 1227:Penn Jones, Jr. 1212: 1205: 1202: 1180: 1173: 1170: 1126: 1075: 1008: 950: 942: 903:a second source 827: 736: 734:Personal attack 656:no card catalog 416: 349: 342: 326: 319: 312: 263: 163: 144: 73: 55:Manual of Style 12: 11: 5: 1598: 1596: 1531: 1528: 1499: 1498: 1487: 1481: 1454: 1449: 1432: 1429: 1405: 1402: 1378: 1375: 1373: 1313: 1310: 1280: 1277: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1191: 1189: 1188: 1164: 1125: 1123:Karyn Kupcinet 1120: 1102:The King and I 1084:psychoanalysis 1074: 1071: 1007: 1004: 961: 960: 949: 943: 941: 938: 899: 898: 864: 826: 823: 808:Jack Kevorkian 773: 772: 735: 732: 731: 730: 703: 702: 691: 690: 685: 684: 594: 593: 569: 568: 546: 545: 474:Article Title. 453: 452: 415: 412: 411: 410: 389: 388: 373: 372: 334:Karyn Kupcinet 272:You have been 264: 262: 259: 258: 257: 162: 159: 143: 140: 88:Karyn Kupcinet 85: 66:sign your name 58: 57: 52: 47: 42: 37: 32: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1597: 1588: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1576:. Thank you. 1575: 1571: 1567: 1562: 1560: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1543: 1537: 1529: 1527: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1517:Wildhartlivie 1514: 1510: 1506: 1496: 1492: 1491: 1485: 1482: 1480: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1470:Wildhartlivie 1465: 1464: 1460: 1453: 1450: 1448: 1447: 1444: 1438: 1430: 1428: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1418:Wildhartlivie 1415: 1411: 1403: 1401: 1400: 1396: 1393: 1392: 1384: 1376: 1374: 1371: 1370: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1354: 1349: 1344: 1343: 1339: 1336: 1335: 1327: 1323: 1321: 1311: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1299:Wildhartlivie 1295: 1291: 1287: 1284:material was 1278: 1276: 1275: 1271: 1267: 1262: 1259: 1256: 1253: 1250: 1244: 1241: 1238: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1219: 1215: 1209: 1208: 1200: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1187: 1183: 1177: 1176: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1152: 1148: 1146: 1140: 1136: 1135: 1132: 1131:Wildhartlivie 1124: 1121: 1119: 1118: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1106:Susan and God 1103: 1098: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1088:Wildhartlivie 1085: 1081: 1072: 1070: 1069: 1066: 1061: 1059: 1054: 1050: 1045: 1043: 1038: 1035: 1032: 1029: 1025: 1024: 1019: 1014: 1005: 1003: 1002: 998: 994: 990: 984: 983: 980: 976: 972: 968: 958: 954: 953: 947: 944: 939: 937: 936: 932: 928: 924: 920: 916: 912: 908: 904: 897: 894: 889: 888: 887: 886: 883: 877: 876: 873: 868: 862: 858: 855:accusations, 854: 850: 846: 842: 839: 836: 832: 831:Wildhartlivie 824: 822: 821: 817: 813: 809: 803: 800: 794: 792: 788: 783: 777: 771: 768: 763: 762: 761: 760: 757: 751: 750: 747: 746:Wildhartlivie 742: 733: 729: 726: 725:Wildhartlivie 721: 716: 715: 714: 712: 709: 701: 698: 697:Wildhartlivie 693: 692: 687: 686: 681: 680: 679: 677: 674: 669: 665: 661: 660:First Tuesday 657: 652: 650: 647: 643: 642:First Tuesday 637: 634: 630: 624: 622: 618: 614: 609: 608: 605: 604:Wildhartlivie 600: 591: 587: 582: 581: 580: 578: 575: 566: 563: 562:Wildhartlivie 558: 553: 548: 547: 542: 541: 540: 538: 535: 531: 526: 520: 518: 514: 509: 508:Rolling Stone 504: 502: 499: 494: 489: 488:First Tuesday 484: 483: 480: 479:Wildhartlivie 475: 468: 463: 458: 450: 449: 448: 446: 443: 438: 437: 434: 433:Wildhartlivie 429: 425: 421: 413: 409: 406: 405:Wildhartlivie 402: 401: 400: 398: 395: 387: 384: 383:Wildhartlivie 380: 375: 374: 369: 368: 367: 365: 362: 356: 355: 352: 347: 345: 339: 335: 331: 325: 322: 317: 315: 309: 305: 301: 297: 293: 289: 285: 281: 277: 276: 268: 260: 256: 253: 252:Wildhartlivie 249: 245: 241: 240: 239: 237: 234: 230: 225: 224: 221: 220:Wildhartlivie 217: 211: 210: 207: 206:Wildhartlivie 203: 199: 195: 190: 186: 181: 176: 175: 172: 171:Wildhartlivie 168: 160: 158: 157: 154: 153:Wildhartlivie 149: 141: 139: 138: 133: 128: 124: 120: 116: 111: 107: 102: 97: 96: 93: 89: 83: 82: 79: 71: 67: 63: 56: 53: 51: 48: 46: 43: 41: 38: 36: 33: 31: 28: 27: 26: 24: 19: 18: 1569: 1563: 1540: 1533: 1505:sockpuppetry 1502: 1484:Sockpuppetry 1466: 1458: 1456: 1434: 1407: 1404:January 2008 1387: 1380: 1372: 1356: 1352: 1347: 1345: 1330: 1325: 1320:Irv Kupcinet 1317: 1315: 1293: 1289: 1288:, I repeat, 1285: 1282: 1269: 1263: 1260: 1257: 1254: 1249:Daily Review 1245: 1242: 1239: 1234: 1224: 1203: 1198: 1190: 1171: 1163: 1153: 1149: 1144: 1141: 1137: 1127: 1099: 1076: 1062: 1057: 1052: 1048: 1046: 1039: 1036: 1033: 1030: 1026: 1009: 996: 988: 985: 967:sockpuppetry 964: 946:Sockpuppetry 930: 922: 918: 914: 910: 906: 902: 900: 878: 853:sockpuppetry 837: 828: 815: 804: 795: 790: 786: 781: 778: 774: 752: 740: 737: 704: 667: 663: 659: 655: 653: 641: 638: 632: 628: 625: 620: 616: 612: 610: 595: 589: 570: 556: 524: 521: 516: 505: 487: 485: 473: 470: 465: 460: 455: 439: 417: 390: 357: 343: 330:Janis Joplin 327: 313: 307: 292:Janis Joplin 279: 273: 226: 212: 177: 164: 161:Janis Joplin 148:Gilda Radner 145: 98: 92:BillyJoelFan 84: 59: 20: 16: 15: 1414:Johnnie Ray 1353:Daily Times 1201:"? Regards 979:Pinkadelica 825:Blocked (2) 629:Love, Janis 613:three times 78:Harlowraman 909:. It says 907:Crime Wave 893:AndToToToo 799:60 Minutes 767:AndToToToo 741:personally 633:60 Minutes 414:References 338:incivility 310:}} below. 142:Signing in 74:{{helpme}} 62:Wikipedian 40:Help pages 1355:with the 1213:SilkyTalk 1181:SilkyTalk 861:this diff 857:this diff 202:consensus 123:consensus 64:! Please 1570:articles 1551:orphaned 1408:Editors 1390:SilkTork 1333:SilkTork 1206:SilkTork 1174:SilkTork 1145:Possible 1013:Gamaliel 1006:Civility 841:contribs 791:sheriffs 720:WP:CIVIL 344:Krakatoa 314:Krakatoa 300:edit war 280:24 hours 185:edit war 127:Gamaliel 106:edit war 45:Tutorial 17:Welcome! 1080:atheism 713:dooyar 678:dooyar 651:dooyar 599:WP:CITE 586:WP:CITE 579:dooyar 552:WP:CITE 539:dooyar 525:several 503:dooyar 447:dooyar 399:dooyar 275:blocked 261:Blocked 238:dooyar 198:blocked 119:blocked 23:welcome 1361:Dooyar 1294:ENTIRE 1266:Dooyar 1157:Dooyar 1114:Dooyar 1065:Dooyar 993:Dooyar 940:Notice 927:Dooyar 882:Dooyar 812:Dooyar 756:Dooyar 708:Dooyar 673:Dooyar 646:Dooyar 574:Dooyar 534:Dooyar 530:Dooyar 498:Dooyar 442:Dooyar 420:WP:REF 394:Dooyar 366:dooya 361:Dooyar 244:WP:3RR 233:Dooyar 229:WP:3RR 216:WP:3RR 167:WP:3RR 1578:BJBot 989:short 872:Steel 668:Pearl 426:and 350:Katie 320:Katie 1582:talk 1521:talk 1486:case 1474:talk 1463:diff 1439:. - 1437:here 1422:talk 1365:talk 1303:talk 1270:talk 1092:talk 1082:and 997:talk 948:case 931:talk 919:that 859:and 847:", " 835:talk 816:talk 557:them 428:this 424:This 332:and 1561:). 1357:Sun 1290:NOT 1286:NOT 1058:her 1053:not 782:was 621:not 617:not 290:at 1584:) 1523:) 1476:) 1461:. 1424:) 1367:) 1305:) 1272:) 1237:? 1094:) 999:) 933:) 818:) 644:. 250:. 1580:( 1519:( 1472:( 1420:( 1394:* 1363:( 1337:* 1301:( 1268:( 1210:* 1178:* 1090:( 1020:) 1016:( 995:( 929:( 838:· 833:( 814:( 567:\ 134:) 130:(

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

Index